Still Unclear About The Process

Walks out of class to see what #SCOTUS did.

Umm…

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 19, 2024

Yes, the Court in that case *denied* the plaintiffs' application to vacate the Fifth Circuit's administrative stay. But no one suggested it was *because* it was framed as "administrative." (And Chief Justice Roberts, who's publicly silent here, was one of the four dissenters.)

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 19, 2024

And although I (but not the Fifth Circuit) am of the view that the standard for an injunction pending appeal is *higher* than it is for vacating an appellate stay, there's a very good argument that it's met here (so long as Arizona v. United States is still the law of the land).

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 19, 2024

That’s literally as much as I’d found out this morning, which set up this afternoon:

https://t.co/6U8hxXPq3h pic.twitter.com/yR1m6DrMR7

— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) March 19, 2024

What could go wrong? pic.twitter.com/XswOcDJWZy

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) March 19, 2024

And then the shit really hit the reality fan.

Well, the Fifth Circuit seems to have received Justice Barrett’s not-so-subtle message to hustle:

It just announced that it will hold a (Zoom) argument on Texas’s application for a stay of SB4 pending appeal *tomorrow* at 10 CT. pic.twitter.com/djOXJeEDzy

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 19, 2024

Panel is richman, Oldham, Ramirez https://t.co/jlF8tkvlwF

— Raffi Melkonian (@RMFifthCircuit) March 19, 2024

Which meant the lower court could remove the administrative stay as early as tomorrow.

For folks outside of Texas who might be struggling to understand why allowing #SB4 to go into effect for even a short period of time could have dramatic consequences, consider what it means to live somewhere where local law enforcement has a ... different view than the Austin PD. https://t.co/TYM3TGhQ5x

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 20, 2024

So it needed to happen sooner rather than later.

And then:

#BREAKING: #SB4 is blocked again.

A majority of the Fifth Circuit panel hearing argument on Texas's stay application *tomorrow morning* just issued an order "dissolving" the "administrative stay" that a different panel imposed on March 2. So the injunction goes back into effect.

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 20, 2024

Among other things, this sends a *very strong* signal that the panel is likely to *deny* Texas's application for a stay pending appeal. So #SB4 will remain blocked *indefinitely,* unless *Texas* persuades #SCOTUS to put it back into effect.

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 20, 2024

#SB4 Timeline:

Before 4:00 CT yesterday: Not in effect.

From 4:00 to 4:04: In effect.

From 4:04 yesterday to 1:05 today: Not in effect.

From 1:05 today to 9:44 tonight: In effect.

Currently: Not in effect.

This is *no* way to run a railroad.

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 20, 2024

I still don’t agree with the Barrett/Kavanaugh concurrence in the #SB4 case (more on that in the next “One First”), but I’d say that it produced the *precise* effect for which it was aiming.

I’m really curious if they the day before all this happened.knew who was on the Fifth Circuit merits panel…

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 20, 2024

 🛤️ 

A little helpful context from 

There is less than 90 minutes until Texas's unprecedented effort to create a state-law deportation system will go into effect—unless Justice Alito extends, again, his administrative stays, or the full Supreme Court steps in to put the district court's injunction back into effect.

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 18, 2024

Roughly five minutes after he allowed SB4 to go into effect, Justice Alito has extended his administrative stays of Texas’s new immigration regime indefinitely.

The law remains blocked until #SCOTUS rules further.

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 18, 2024

Riding on a railroad 🛤️