logo
US Supreme Court keeps ruling in Trump's favour, but doesn't say why

US Supreme Court keeps ruling in Trump's favour, but doesn't say why

Straits Times17-07-2025
In the past 10 weeks alone, the court has granted emergency relief to the Trump administration without explanation seven times.
WASHINGTON – In clearing the way for President Donald Trump's efforts to transform American government, the Supreme Court has issued a series of orders that often lacked a fundamental characteristic of most judicial work: an explanation of the court's rationale.
On July 14, for instance, in letting Mr Trump dismantle the Education Department, the majority's unsigned order was a single four-sentence paragraph entirely devoted to the procedural mechanics of pausing a lower court's ruling.
What the order did not include was any explanation of why the court had ruled as it did. It was an exercise of power, not reason.
The silence was even more striking in the face of a 19-page dissent by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
'The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive,' Ms Sotomayor wrote, 'but either way the threat to our Constitution's separation of powers is grave'.
The question of whether the nation's highest court owes the public an explanation for its actions has grown along with the rise of the 'emergency docket,' which uses truncated procedures to produce terse provisional orders meant to remain in effect only while the courts consider the lawfulness of the challenged actions. In practice, the orders often effectively resolve the case.
The court has allowed the administration to fire tens of thousands of government workers, discharge transgender troops, end protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants from war-torn countries and fundamentally shift power from Congress to the president – often with scant or no explanation of how it arrived at those results.
Top stories
Swipe. Select. Stay informed.
Singapore HSA launches anti-vaping checks near 5 institutes of higher learning
Singapore Over 600 Telegram groups in Singapore selling, advertising vapes removed by HSA
Business Singapore key exports surprise with 13% rebound in June amid tariff uncertainty
Business Market versus mission: What will Income Insurance choose?
Life First look at the new Singapore Oceanarium at Resorts World Sentosa
Opinion AI and education: We need to know where this sudden marriage is heading
Singapore Coffee Meets Bagel's Singpass check: Why I'll swipe right on that
Singapore Jail for man who fatally hit his daughter, 2, while driving van without licence
In the past 10 weeks alone, the court has granted emergency relief to the Trump administration without explanation seven times, according to a tally by Mr Stephen I. Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown and the author of a book about the court's emergency work called 'The Shadow Docket.'
The ruling on July 14, Mr Vladeck wrote this week in his newsletter, was the latest 'completely unexplained' ruling 'that is going to have massive real-world effects long before the justices ever confront whether what the government is doing is actually lawful'.
All of this is in stark contrast with cases on the court's merits docket, which unfold over about a year and include two rounds of briefs, oral arguments, painstaking deliberations and the exchange of draft opinions. The end result is often a comprehensive set of opinions that can be as long as a short novel.
The court usually rules on emergency applications in a matter of weeks.
Critics call the emergency docket 'the shadow docket,' and its use was on the rise even before it was turbocharged with the arrival of Trump's second administration. Justice Elena Kagan used that term in 2021 in criticising the court's work.
The majority had just issued a midnight ruling that left in place a Texas law effectively overturning Roe v. Wade in the state – as the court would do nationwide in 2026. In dissent, Ms Kagan wrote that 'the majority's decision is emblematic of too much of this court's shadow-docket decision making – which every day becomes more unreasoned, inconsistent and impossible to defend'.
A month later, Justice Samuel Alito returned fire in a speech at Notre Dame defending the court's approach to emergency applications.
'The catchy and sinister term 'shadow docket' has been used to portray the court as having been captured by a dangerous cabal that resorts to sneaky and improper methods to get its ways,' he said. 'This portrayal feeds unprecedented efforts to intimidate the court and to damage it as an independent institution.'
He compared the court's procedures to the ones used by emergency medical technicians called to the scene of an accident. 'You can't expect the EMTs and the emergency rooms to do the same thing that a team of physicians and nurses will do when they are handling a matter when time is not of the essence in the same way,' he said.
On the question of scant or absent reasoning, Mr Alito argued that sometimes it is better to say less.
'Journalists may think that we can just dash off an opinion the way they dash off articles,' he said, but 'when we issue an opinion, we are aware that every word that we write can have consequences, sometimes enormous consequences, so we have to be careful about every single thing that we say.'
That argument has some weight, said Mr Daniel Epps, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis.
'Whether the court should explain its emergency orders presents a difficult trade-off,' he said. 'On the one hand, whenever the court writes any kind of majority opinion, even one only a few sentences long, it creates precedent that courts and lawyers feel bound to follow.'
That must be done with care and consideration, he said. On the other hand, he said, 'unexplained orders expose the court to suspicion and criticism.'
'In a highly polarised climate where the court is often accused of acting politically,' he said, 'the justices should feel a heightened obligation to explain their decisions to the public.'
Mr Epps said he favored providing some explanation, pointing to an order in May that allowed Trump to fire two leaders of independent agencies. The two-page majority opinion was, he said, long enough to provide some explanation but 'tentative enough to leave some wiggle room.'
As it happened, the meaning of that opinion has been contested, and it is the subject of a new application pending before the court.
Orders without any reasoning at all can create confusion in the lower courts. In June, for instance, the court allowed the Trump administration to deport migrants to countries other than their own without giving them a chance to show that they would face the risk of torture. The order gave no reasons, and the dissent said it did not apply to men held at an American military base in Djibouti.
The court's silence led to a new application days later seeking clarification. The court then issued an order this month with more than two pages of reasons, enough to allow the administration to send the men to South Sudan. NYTIMES
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Epstein furor undermining public trust, Republican election hopes, two US lawmakers say
Epstein furor undermining public trust, Republican election hopes, two US lawmakers say

Straits Times

time3 minutes ago

  • Straits Times

Epstein furor undermining public trust, Republican election hopes, two US lawmakers say

FILE PHOTO: A screen about the Jeffrey Epstein files is displayed at Times Square in New York City, U.S., July 23, 2025. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon/File Photo WASHINGTON - The uproar over disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein could undermine public trust in the Trump administration, as well as Republican hopes of retaining control of Congress in the 2026 midterm elections, two U.S. lawmakers said on Sunday. Republican Representative Thomas Massie and Democratic Representative Ro Khanna, who want the House of Representatives to vote on their bipartisan resolution requiring full release of the government's Epstein files, said the lack of transparency is reinforcing public perceptions that the rich and powerful live beyond the reach of the judicial system. "This is going to hurt Republicans in the midterms. The voters will be apathetic if we don't hold the rich and powerful accountable," Massie, a hardline conservative from Kentucky, told NBC's "Meet the Press" program. Republicans hope to add to their current 219-212 House majority -- with four seats currently vacant -- and 53-47 Senate majority in November 2026, although the U.S. political cycle traditionally punishes the party of the sitting president during midterm elections. Khanna said Attorney General Pam Bondi triggered "a crisis of trust" by saying there was no list of Epstein clients after previously implying that one existed. The change in position unleashed a tsunami of calls for her resignation from Trump's MAGA base. "This is about trust in government," the California Democrat told "Meet the Press." "This is about being a reform agent of transparency." President Donald Trump, who is playing golf and holding bilateral trade talks in Scotland, has been frustrated by continued questions about his administration's handling of investigative files related to Epstein's criminal charges and 2019 death by suicide in prison. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Sewage shaft failure linked to sinkhole; PUB calling safety time-out on similar works islandwide Singapore Tanjong Katong Road sinkhole did not happen overnight: Experts Singapore Workers used nylon rope to rescue driver of car that fell into Tanjong Katong Road sinkhole Asia Singapore-only car washes will get business licences revoked, says Johor govt World Food airdropped into Gaza as Israel opens aid routes Sport Arsenal beat Newcastle in five-goal thriller to bring Singapore Festival of Football to a close Singapore Benchmark barrier: Six of her homeschooled kids had to retake the PSLE Asia S'porean trainee doctor in Melbourne arrested for allegedly filming colleagues in toilets since 2021 Massie and Khanna believe they can win enough support from fellow lawmakers to force a vote on their resolution when Congress returns from its summer recess in September. But they face opposition from Republican leaders including House Speaker Mike Johnson, who sent lawmakers home a day early to stymie Democratic efforts to force a vote before the break. Johnson, who also appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press," said he favors a non-binding alternative resolution that calls for release of "credible" evidence, but which he said would better protect victims including minors. "The Massie and Khanna discharge petition is reckless in the way that it is drafted and presented," Johnson said. "It does not adequately include those protections." Massie dismissed Johnson's claim as "a straw man" excuse. "Ro and I carefully crafted this legislation so that the victims' names will be redacted," he said. "They're hiding behind that." Trump, who weathered two impeachments and a federal probe into contacts between his 2016 campaign and Russia during his first presidential term, has tried and failed so far to distract attention from the Epstein controversy six months into his second term. On Saturday, Trump repeated his claims without evidence that 2024 Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris and other Democrats should be prosecuted over payment for endorsements from celebrities including Oprah Winfrey, Beyonce and the Reverend Al Sharpton. "Kamala, and all of those that received Endorsement money, BROKE THE LAW. They should all be prosecuted!" Trump said on social media. Last week he accused former President Barack Obama of "treason" over how the Obama administration treated intelligence about Russian interference in U.S. elections nine years ago, drawing a rebuke from an Obama spokesperson. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a staunch Trump ally, said on Sunday that Tulsi Gabbard, Trump's director of national intelligence, had found new information that investigators initially discovered no evidence of Russian election interference but changed their position after Obama told them to keep looking. "I'm not alleging he committed treason, but I am saying it bothers me," Graham told "Meet the Press." "The best way to handle this is if there is evidence of a crime being committed, or suspected evidence of a crime being committed, create a special counsel to look at it," Graham added. Democratic Representative Jason Crow dismissed Gabbard's claims, telling the "Fox News Sunday" program that the national intelligence director had turned herself into "a weapon of mass distraction." The Department of Justice has said it is forming a strike force to assess Gabbard's claims. REUTERS

Trump, EU chief seek deal in transatlantic trade standoff
Trump, EU chief seek deal in transatlantic trade standoff

CNA

time3 minutes ago

  • CNA

Trump, EU chief seek deal in transatlantic trade standoff

TURNBERRY, United Kingdom: US President Donald Trump and EU chief Ursula von der Leyen met Sunday (Jul 27) for make-or-break talks in Scotland, aimed at ending a months-long transatlantic trade standoff, as negotiations went down to the wire. Trump again told reporters he felt the two sides had a 50-50 chance of a deal with the European Union. The bloc faces an across-the-board US levy of 30 percent unless it strikes a trade pact by Aug 1. Washington warned Sunday there would be "no extensions" and Trump confirmed "the deals all start on August 1". Von der Leyen's European Commission, negotiating on behalf of EU countries, is pushing hard for a deal to salvage a trading relationship worth an annual US$1.9 trillion in goods and services. The EU chief said at the start of the talks at Trump's luxury golf resort in southwestern Turnberry that if they reached a deal "I think it would be the biggest deal each of us has ever" made. According to an EU diplomat briefed ahead of the meeting, the contours of a deal are in place, but key issues still need settling. "A political deal is on the table -- but it needs the sign-off from Trump, who wants to negotiate this down to the very last moment," the diplomat told AFP. The proposal, they said, involves a baseline levy of around 15 percent on EU exports to the United States, the level secured by Japan, with carve-outs for critical sectors including aircraft and spirits, though not for wine. Any deal will also need to be approved by EU member states, whose ambassadors, on a visit to Greenland, were updated by the commission Sunday morning. They would meet again after any accord. According to the EU diplomat, the 27 countries broadly endorsed the deal as envisaged, while recalling their negotiating red lines. Baseline 15 percent The Trump-von der Leyen meeting was taking place in the president's luxury golf resort in Turnberry on Scotland's southwestern coast. The 79-year-old Trump said Friday he hoped to strike "the biggest deal of them all" with the EU. The EU is focused on getting a deal to avoid sweeping tariffs that would further harm its sluggish economy, while holding out retaliation as a last resort. Under the proposal described to AFP, the EU would commit to ramp up purchases of US liquefied natural gas, along with other investment pledges. Pharmaceuticals, a key export for Ireland, would also face a 15-percent levy, as would semi-conductors. The EU also appears to have secured a compromise on steel that could allow a certain quota into the United States before tariffs would apply, the diplomat said. But Trump said Sunday trade tariffs with the EU would not be lower than 15 percent. Auto sector The EU has been hit by multiple waves of tariffs since Trump reclaimed the White House. It is currently subject to a 25 percent levy on cars, 50 percent on steel and aluminium, and an across-the-board tariff of 10 percent, which Washington threatens to hike to 30 percent in a no-deal scenario. It was unclear how the proposed deal would impact tariff levels on the auto industry, crucial for France and Germany. Carmakers are already reeling from the levies imposed so far. While 15 percent would be much higher than pre-existing US tariffs on European goods, which average around 4.8 percent, it would mirror the status quo, with companies currently facing an additional flat rate of 10 percent. Should talks fail, EU states have greenlit counter tariffs on US$109 billion of US goods including aircraft and cars to take effect in stages from Aug 7. Brussels is also drawing up a list of US services to potentially target. Beyond that, countries including France say Brussels should not be afraid to deploy a so-called trade "bazooka", EU legislation designed to counter coercion that can involve restricting access to its market and public contracts. But such a step would mark a major escalation with Washington. Ratings dropping Trump has embarked on a campaign to reshape US trade with the world, and has vowed to hit dozens of countries with punitive tariffs if they do not reach a pact with Washington by Aug 1. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Sunday the Aug 1 deadline was firm and there will be "no extensions, no more grace periods." Polls suggest however the American public is unconvinced by the White House strategy, with a recent Gallup survey showing his approval rating at 37 percent, down 10 points from January.

Trump's Meme Mocking Obama Backfires as JD Vance Steals Spotlight Again
Trump's Meme Mocking Obama Backfires as JD Vance Steals Spotlight Again

International Business Times

time19 minutes ago

  • International Business Times

Trump's Meme Mocking Obama Backfires as JD Vance Steals Spotlight Again

In a fresh jab at former President Barack Obama, Donald Trump stirred the internet with a meme, only to have Senator JD Vance unexpectedly steal the spotlight. Trump reposted an edited image originally shared by his son, Donald Trump Jr., spoofing the notorious 1994 O.J. Simpson police chase. In the meme, Obama is shown riding in the iconic white Ford Bronco, cast as a fugitive. Trump appears behind the wheel of a pursuing police cruiser. Yet the image's viral appeal didn't come from the main figures—it was JD Vance who drew the internet's attention. Trailing behind in a second squad car is Vance, humorously portrayed with long hair and a youthful, clean-shaven face, resembling his college-era appearance. This version of "long-haired JD Vance" has been a recurring meme ever since his emergence on the national stage, and it once again dominated social media discussions. The meme followed another provocative post by Trump—an AI-generated video that depicted Obama being arrested in the Oval Office by FBI agents while Trump watched smugly. Shared on Truth Social, the video quickly gained traction and stirred controversy. These meme-based attacks come as former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard has leveled serious allegations against the Obama administration. Gabbard claims she has "overwhelming" evidence that top officials under Obama fabricated the Trump-Russia collusion story following the 2016 election. She states over 100 documents implicate Obama in directing the effort, and she intends to present them to the Department of Justice and FBI. Though Trump's intent was likely to fuel political criticism of Obama, the internet seems more captivated by JD Vance's retro look, turning a targeted meme into yet another viral distraction.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store