2 ms·

So they allowed it. And it will continue to happen. They could have stopped it but chose not to. So no, it isn’t dishonest as this is materially the consequenc

by dttze 1y ago

So they allowed it. And it will continue to happen. They could have stopped it but chose not to. So no, it isn’t dishonest as this is materially the consequence of their decision. Hypothetical future challenges are not real.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> they allowed it No, within the context of the Supreme Court they didn’t allow it any more than that one district court ruling stopped it. It’s this sort of misinterpretation of what lifting a stay really means for folks on the ground that poisons a lot of lay discussion.
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  The district court did stop it. The material reality is that yesterday the government could not implement this policy and tomorrow they can.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > district court did stop it Do we have a source for behavior having changed on the ground? My understanding is it hadn’t during the appeals process.