#SCOTUS [shockingly /s] sides with #Trump in fight tied to #speech curbs on #immigration judges
SCOTUS sided on Tuesday with Trump's admin in a dispute involving a #FreeSpeech challenge by federal #ImmigrationJudges to a #US government policy restricting what they can publicly say about immigration.
The justices, in an unsigned ruling, reversed a lower court's decision & returned the case to that court for further proceedings.
#law #PartisanCourt #ActivistCourt
https://www.reuters.com/world/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-fight-tied-speech-curbs-immigration-judges-2026-05-26/?utm_source=braze&utm_medium=notifications&utm_campaign=2025_engagement
The ruling did not address the legal merits of the #speech restraint, which was enacted during Trump's first term.
The #Trump admin had appealed to #SCOTUS after a lower court ordered findings on whether his firings of the heads of agencies overseeing federal worker complaints had stripped these agencies of the #independence from White House control that #Congress had intended. Such a finding, the lower court said, might entitle the #immigration judges to their day in court.
A group representing the #immigration #judges had also appealed the lower court's determination that the challenge to the #speech restraint belongs before the agencies - so long as they are functional - instead of in court. That appeal was denied Tuesday.
The policy requires #immigration #judges to get prior approval before any "official" speech. Such speaking engagements are those in which a judge "is invited to participate in an event because of their official position, is expected to discuss agency policies, programs or a subject matter that directly relates to their official duties or otherwise appear on behalf of the agency," according to court records.
@Nonilex
Lemme guess, these rules would never apply to SCOTUS
... why in the world would they?
SCOTUS is a completely different branch of government with a completely different chain of command doing a completely different job.
@volkris disregard