The Supreme Court Is Creating a King

The conservative justices deferred once again to the Trump administration. “The Government, at this early stage, has made a sufficient showing that the Impoundment Control Act precludes respondents’ suit, brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, to enforce the appropriations at issue here,” the court wrote in its brief, unsigned order in the case. It also deferred to the administration’s claims that other forms of judicial relief were unavailable.

Justice Elena Kagan, writing in dissent, easily refuted the conservatives’ interpretation of the law by quoting the law itself. “In its very first section, titled ‘Disclaimer,’ the ICA declares: ‘Nothing contained in this Act … shall be construed’ as ‘affecting in any way the claims or defenses of any party to litigation concerning any impoundment,’” she explained, joined by the other two liberal justices. “It is hard to write a clearer and more emphatic non-preclusion provision than that.” (Emphasis hers.)

Just as troubling as the Supreme Court’s sudden bout of illiteracy was its third and final reason for deferring to the executive branch. “On the record before the court, the asserted harms to the Executive’s conduct of foreign affairs appear to outweigh the potential harm faced by respondents,” it claimed. Presidents do have certain powers to represent and negotiate on behalf of the United States, of course, but those powers also have limits.