The Supremes Stop Trump. For Now.

Plus: Why are we doing this?

Holy Saturday is a moment when we are suspended between tragedy and hope. As we are this morning.

We’re waking up the news that an evidently aroused Supreme Court — by a vote of 7-2 — blocked the Trump Administration from renditioning more Venezuelans under the Alien Enemies Act.

“The government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this court,” the court said in a brief, unsigned order.

The move is temporary and the usual caveats about irrational exuberance apply. But it might be a BFD — a sign that the Court has decided that this is the moment, and this is the case to draw some bright red lines. Perhaps (one hopes) they were inspired by Judge Harvie Wilkson’s scathing opinion; or perhaps Trump’s contumely, insults, and juvenile gaslighting have had the effect of focusing the minds of the justices on the magnitude of the moment.

A note to readers

We’ll get into the details in a moment, but first, some quick Saturday notes: Why are we even doing this?

I had an interesting discussion with a fellow Substack writer the other day, who was wondering whether we’ve done a sufficient job explaining what we’re doing here and… why. I suspect that readers of Substack understand the extraordinary shifts and transformation in the media: how many important voices have moved from major legacy media to this island of independent journalism. But he wondered whether folks fully grasped the economics of reader-supported publications. There are hard-working writers — eloquent and passionate voices —who have made this their job, but also (he said) spend much of their time working for free.

Some of my colleagues have paywalls. Some (like this newsletter) have none. But we all rely on the kindness of strangers.

There are no ads. No salaries. No writer fees. No benefits. For many of these writers, including my friend, there is no safety net. Just reader support. If a writer spends days crafting an important post that exposes the outrages of the current regime, they may actually make nothing. Zero. Zip. Bupkus. Unless readers step up and subscribe.

Why are we doing this? Because the moment demands it. And the writers on Substack simply can’t stay silent. But only you can decide whether you think it is worth supporting them.

I’m frequently asked: What can we do? How can we fight back? How can we get through this? How can we stay sane?

One answer: Subscribe to the independent voices out there. (BTW: You may have noticed that I have begun cross posting some of them here.)

I know that there are a lot of claims on your time and your wallet, but this should be on your list:

Support the voices that are supporting democracy, the rule of law, free speech, and fundamental decency.

And once again, I want to thank all of you who helped drag me back into this fight. Your generosity has been life changing both for the dogs and for me. In the last 30 days, we’ve had more than 4 million views of “To the Contrary,” and are headed toward 75,000 subscribers.

As you know: You may disagree with me from time to time (and I expect you will, because I’m not promising you a safe space here). But I’ll always try to give it to you straight. And to remind you every day that you are not the crazy ones.

Heads up: Subscribers will get a special Easter “Sum of All Fears” podcast/video with Tom Nichols tomorrow morning.

**

Back to the SCOTUS BFD

In his invaluable Substack, Steve Vladeck breaks down what happened at 1 a.m. this morning, when “the justices (aggressively) stepped back into the Alien Enemy Act litigation—in a decision suggesting that a majority understands that these are no longer normal circumstances.”

Obviously, there’s still a lot we don’t know. But at least initially, this strikes me as a massively important—and revealing—intervention by the Supreme Court, for at least three reasons:

First, the full Court didn’t wait for the Fifth Circuit—or act through the individual Circuit Justice (Justice Alito).² Even in other fast-moving emergency applications, the Court has often made a show out of at least appearing to wait for the lower courts to rule before intervening—even if that ruling might not have influenced the outcome. Here, though, the Court didn’t wait at all; indeed, the order specifically invites the government to respond once the Fifth Circuit weighed in—acknowledging that the Fifth Circuit hadn’t ruled (and, indeed, that the government hadn’t responded to the application in the Supreme Court) yet. This may seem like a technical point, but it underscores how seriously the Court, or at least a majority of it, took the urgency of the matter. (More on that in a moment.)

Second, the Court didn’t hide behind any procedural technicalities…. Here, though, the Court jumped right to the substantive relief the applicants sought—again, reinforcing not just the urgency of the issue, but its gravity.

Third, and perhaps most significantly, the Court seemed to not be content with relying upon representations by the government’s lawyers. In the hearing before Chief Judge Boasberg, Drew Ensign had specifically stated, on behalf of the government, that “no planes” would be leaving either Friday or Saturday…. In a world in which a majority of the justices were willing to take these kinds of representations at face value, there might’ve been no need to intervene overnight Friday evening; the justices could’ve taken at least all day Saturday to try to sort things out before handing down their decision.

But this case arose only because of the Trump administration’s attempt to play Calvinball with detainees it’s seeking to remove under the Alien Enemy Act. The Court appears to be finally getting the message—and, in turn, handing down rulings with none of the wiggle room we saw in the J.G.G. and Abrego Garcia decisions last week. That’s a massively significant development unto itself—especially if it turns out to be more than a one-off.

ICYMI

Sunday

Denver Riggleman & Amy McGrath: Truth in the Barrel

Monday

UPDATED: We're (Way) Past the Tipping Point

Tuesday

Tim O'Brien: When the Law No Longer Matters

Wednesday

How Alarmed Should We Be?

Thursday

Julian Zelizer: The Rule of Law vs. the Trump Doctrine

Connecting the Authoritarian Dots

Friday

“Give Us Barabbas”

"This should be shocking..."

**

Saturday dogs

Three years ago, we got some bad news about Pete. But we brought him home from the vet to give him as much love as we could. He ended up having a wonderful spring; and was a happy boy right up until the end.