2 ms·

> What makes no sense is the newly possible situation in which an action violates the U.S. Constitution in one district but not another That's not new. It's ca

• nobody9999 1y ago
  >That's not new. It's called a circuit split, and generally results in the cases being combined when SCOTUS hears them to sort out the difference. Absolutely. As it should be. The problem here is that the SCOTUS decision under discussion here makes it less likely (perhaps quite unlikely) that the SCOTUS will even be asked to "sort out the difference." That's because their ruling today made it clear that if you're not a named plaintiff in a suit against the government, you are not subject to/protected by any ruling on that case, unless and until, a SCOTUS ruling sorts it out. And since the prevailing party has no standing to appeal (only the "losing" party -- party as in plaintiff/defendant, not political party), if the Executive Branch doesn't appeal, SCOTUS will never see such cases -- thus leaving the Executive branch to do literally anything with impunity outside the realm of the circuit court involved.