Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

onenote

(46,164 posts)

26. Probably because the justices want to resolve the issue for sake of judicial economy

Reply to boston bean (Reply #25)

Thu Apr 2, 2026, 02:29 PM

Apr 2

There have been several challenges to the birthright citizenship executive order brought in various courts. One has made it through the court of appeals. At least one other has made it through the district court. Others are still ongoing.

Rather than wait and let these cases address the issue one by one, I suspect the justices figured taking up the issue now was the most efficient way to deal with the situation. A key thing to remember: a denial of certiorari does not have precedential value, so simply refusing to take the case, and letting one court's decision stand wouldn't necessarily resolve the other cases.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why are they even hearing this case? [View all] boston bean Apr 1 OP

At least they are giving Sauer the drumming he deserves--no matter how quickly & emphatically hlthe2b Apr 1 #1

Natural born Gish Galloper... haele Apr 1 #7

They are hearing it Boo1 Apr 1 #2

Only sitting president to ever sit in on scotus oral arguments... spanone Apr 1 #3

You can thank the creators and backers of the Project 2025.... FarPoint Apr 1 #4

Agreed JustAnotherGen Apr 1 #5

I agree. I don't know what THF is, but this obsession with Israel is tearing up apart. LeftInTX Apr 1 #13

THF - The Heritage Foundation JustAnotherGen Apr 2 #23

The government's argument is all about intent of the parent to stay in the US Buckeyeblue Apr 1 #6

Well, there goes selling those special expensive vacation packages haele Apr 1 #8

Not to mention the pregnant wives and mistresses B.See Apr 1 #17

Admittedly, I never went to law school EnergizedLib Apr 1 #9

probably for the same reason they took up the immunity case...... lastlib Apr 1 #10

exactly. B.See Apr 1 #12

Why are they using a Civil War era supremacist's B.See Apr 1 #11

14th was ratified in 1868. maxsolomon Apr 1 #14

Thank you. H2O Man Apr 1 #15

I know when the 14th was ratified B.See Apr 1 #16

Sorry if I offended you. I was trying to agree with you. maxsolomon Apr 1 #18

Wasn't offended because B.See Apr 1 #20

It's a matter of how slippery slopes are. maxsolomon Apr 1 #21

Yes. Certain citizens. Denaturalize B.See Apr 1 #22

Because various braying Nazi horses' behinds on the court think they'll seem brilliant and powerful struggle4progress Apr 1 #19

Why? Because at least four members of the Court agreed that the case should be heard onenote Apr 2 #24

D'uh. That is missing the question. boston bean Apr 2 #25

Probably because the justices want to resolve the issue for sake of judicial economy onenote Apr 2 #26

Agreed. n/t Ms. Toad Apr 2 #27