...but not unexpected or reflecting a significant change. The court set yesterday for the deadline to do this. The hearing on this motion will, effectively, be the trial of the case, especially as the relief sought is a declaratory judgement. Trump has to show a likelihood his legal argument will prevail at trial to win the injunction.Trump attorneys file motion to block two banks from handing over financial records https://t.co/rT73j1lcLk pic.twitter.com/91Sz07ewo8— The Hill (@thehill) May 4, 2019
Winning at trial means a declaratory judgement, means he deserves the injunction. The distinction between a temporary and a permanent injunction is almost meaningless in this case, especially since a declaratory judgment would declare Trump is entitled to the protection sought. If he can't get the temporary, hard to see what changes to win the permanent. And if he can't get the temporary, hard to see how he wins the judgment he's asking for.
This is all over but the crying before the month is out. Can he get the appellate court to issue an injunction (which is what has to happen if the trial court doesn't)? Probably not. Without that, he'll have to get the Supremes to issue one. Will they? Not without a major re-write of the governing law. Rather hard to see that happening on a temporary basis and without oral arguments. Then again, if the Supremes did approve an injunction over the rejection of the lower courts, that would already signal at least a Trump-sized exception in the law. Not impossible to imagine, but damned difficult to justify.
And the Court's authority as a third branch really rests on its ability to justify its decisions. It might not be anxious to wade into this just to upset the precedential apple cart.
Believing that the Court and its ability to overturn duly passed legislation needs to be changed, drastically, most definitely legislation passed to protect the most important part of the government, the vote, I'm almost hoping that they outrageously discredit themselves in the way Trump expects. It would be in the same vein as Bush v Gore in proving that all of the remaining Republicans on the Court are Republican hacks and the servants of the billionaires, domestic and, as Citizens United and its predicted aftermath proves, foreign, as well.
ReplyDelete