Chris Geidner: TEXAS S.B. 4 PROCEDURAL WTF FAQ. Now at the top of my story at Law Dork: www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-tex...

TEXAS S.B. 4 PROCEDURAL WTF FAQ. Now at the top of my story at Law Dork: www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-tex...

Here’s my follow-up report on where things stand — with a hopefully understandable explanation of what’s happened: www.lawdork.com/p/texass-sb-...

Texas's S.B. 4 immigration enforcement law appears likely to remain on hold for nowwww.lawdork.com Chief Judge Priscilla Richman of the Fifth Circuit, a George W. Bush appointee, was skeptical of Texas's arguments to enforce the law immediately.

I’m a lawyer and this case’s procedural history makes my head hurt.

Truly.

This is extremely helpful (and also very scary stuff, considering the lives at stake). Thanks!

You're welcome.

It’s even scarier here in the Lone Star State. Everyone is going to have to carry their papers with them. Just like Nazi occupied countries in 1934.

If they want you in the truck and you have your papers they would throw away your papers and put you in the truck. That's how papersplease laws work anyway.

You think we don’t know that?? Law enforcement has been harassing Black and Brown people here for at least 200 years. Not to mention murdering them. Or burning their homes & businesses. James Byrd was dragged to death by white supremacists in Jasper TX in 1998. 2 of his killers were executed. ⬇️

The 3rd serving life in prison and eligible for parole in 2038. There are so many Black and Brown people here who have been killed by police. For no good reason. And little accountability. Residents in border towns have been harassed by Border Patrol and now DPS. This is Abbott at his worst.

Just the way they want it.

Thank you so much. So to be clear, Texas is *not* yet able/allowed to deport people (shockingly thanks to the 5th circuit, which never gives us any gifts we don't immediately regret) - is that right?

Correct, as of this moment.

“check back in five minutes” absurd nonsense case

Surely we will love to regret it, probably tomorrow 😒

(live, ha)

"Rabbit season!" "Duck season!" "Rabbit season!" "Duck season!" "Rabbit season!" "Duck season!"

But it's always human season

what the fuck chris

Sometimes when the lawyers explain procedural stuff for laypeople the explanations make a lot of sense and it seems like a lot of thought went into that system. And sometimes it's this kind of shit.

This broke my brain. Thank you for explaining it in non-lawyer language.

I salute you for your service

Okay, so this is all as ridiculous as it sounds, right?

Wait is that new-new-new? Or just the fucking fifth putting in the temp one day stay from (an hour?) ago

Sorry for borrow/stealing from aave, I just don't know a better way to express the emphasis

Yes.

In this volley, 5th has blocked SB4 pending a hearing and decision. This case needs a play-by-play by a sports announcer to follow it.

I know you’re saying words I just don’t understand any of them.

That’s fair. It’s legible to experienced readers but definitely not transparent otherwise. Mike helpfully clarified, I think: bsky.app/profile/ques...

Chris has a very good summary, but there is too much, so let me sum up in 2 skeets: 1: Texas passed a law that goes against the plain language of the Constitution. 2: District court says, no, Texas, law on hold. 3: 5th Circuit says nah, Texas's law can go into effect because LEEEEEROY JENKINS!!!

Are you saying I’m bad at reading? 🤣 Thank you for the link 👍

You’re probably great at English. But CG wrote in a very different language, with a jargon and grammar all its own.

I’m just giving you a hard time 😂 Yeah I can never seem to follow anything written by a lawyer. There are phrases that just seem plucked out of Ye Olde English that don’t offer great context.

I used the legal language, because that's what words people are going to be saying so I wanted people to see them, but then, in parentheses, laid out what it meant, in effect. It is a mess, though, even for those of us who deal with this daily, so you shouldn't feel bad at all.

Well, to be perfectly fair, some of it is old, bad French, too.

Literally yes. Also Latin, law French, and some other specialized terminology (statutes, case names, concepts).

This is what happens when you put radical politicians with subpar legal skills on important federal benches! They know innately that they'd be absolutely destroying the authority of any future Republican president to deal with immigration, but don't want to give Biden a win. It's ABSURD.

This reminds me of the end of Sleeping Beauty, when the two fairies keep changing her dress from pink to blue. Except, you know... with people's lives at stake.

So the stay that was struck down is on the injunction and not on the law itself. Gotcha.

This is very clearly written and I still had to read it three times. What the…?!

Surprise! My daughter has decided to go to law school. 😎

The US legal system is fucking stupid

I don't know if it's inherently stupid but the privatisation is making it stupid. If you let an obscure group of billionaires decide the fate of a country. You don't have a democracy anymore. It's what The Federalist Society is.

An obscurely funded and operated organisation picking the justices and more.

So basically tug of war where no matter what, the innocent immigrants lose.

Can we call this a WTFAQ, is that a thing.

...Mornington Crescent!

Post