|
David Noll@david.noll.org |
The court thinks that any judicial reexamination of presidential decision-making impermissibly threatens his Article II powers, but I'd certainly try to distinguish the case on this basis if I were filing a habeas petition.
1 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
robert p. baird
@bobbybaird.bsky.social
[ View ] |
That's what I'm trying to wrap my head around. The logic of the decision seems to suggest that it's not just the president's personal orders but any downstream attempts to enact them that must be protected from "undue" influence. But where, if anywhere, does that stop?
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes