Quote from the dissent of Justice Jackson regarding the government's "application for stay" on lower-court rulings that it may not enforce the new passport policy. "The documented real-world harms to these plaintiffs obviously outweigh the Government’s unexplained (and inexplicable) interest in immediate implementation of the Passport Policy. That incongruity is where equity comes in. Because granting the stay application will be “of little advantage” to the Government, Di Giovanni, 296 U. S., at 71, while needlessly and significantly burdening the plaintiffs, equity cannot justify the Court’s intervention. But, today, the Court refuses to answer equity’s call. In my view, the Court’s failure to acknowledge the basic norms of equity jurisdiction is more than merely regrettable. It is an abdication of the Court’s duty to ensure that equitable standards apply equally to all litigants—to transgender people and the Government alike."
[uspol, passport policy, scotus dissent]
This #dissent written by #JusticeJackson about the government's new #PassportPolicy is a good read. The majority just decided to grant a stay, allowing the government to enforce these new policies. Dissenters argue that such a […]
[Original post on mas.to]
