Jessica Levinson

There's this inclination to say, oh, this is the end of the ceasefire.

This is the end of the peace plan.

It's not the end.

It is, in fact, exactly how this is going to have to happen when you have people who hate each other, who have been fighting against each other for a very long time.

Judges owe the president great deference in that area.

And what a majority of the panel concluded is that the district court judge had essentially substituted her judgment for the president's judgment in an inappropriate way.

It basically means that the Supreme Court isn't going to parachute in and stop what's happening in the lower court.

It basically means that the Supreme Court isn't going to parachute in and stop what's happening in the lower court.

Yeah, what we're talking about here isn't very broadly, can the Trump administration push pause on foreign aid? What we're talking about here is something much, much narrower. It's a district court judge's temporary decision, a TRO, saying to the Trump administration, pay $2 billion of money that's for work that was already completed prior to the Trump administration.

Yeah, what we're talking about here isn't very broadly, can the Trump administration push pause on foreign aid? What we're talking about here is something much, much narrower. It's a district court judge's temporary decision, a TRO, saying to the Trump administration, pay $2 billion of money that's for work that was already completed prior to the Trump administration.

Now, absolutely, this is a part of a bigger case that deals with whether or not the Trump administration has the power to push pause either temporarily or long term on foreign aid. But this particular Supreme Court decision is really much narrower. There's a lot more kind of weediness with respect to what type of order was appealed and issues like sovereign immunity.

Now, absolutely, this is a part of a bigger case that deals with whether or not the Trump administration has the power to push pause either temporarily or long term on foreign aid. But this particular Supreme Court decision is really much narrower. There's a lot more kind of weediness with respect to what type of order was appealed and issues like sovereign immunity.

But I think the basics are the Supreme Court is not going to get involved in an emergency basis right now.

But I think the basics are the Supreme Court is not going to get involved in an emergency basis right now.

Justice Alito brought up a couple of points, and you pointed out one of them with respect to the power of a federal judge to say you have to pay this money. And what Justice Alito felt is that the order that was being appealed, which is, again, a temporary restraining order and is typically not appealable here.

Justice Alito brought up a couple of points, and you pointed out one of them with respect to the power of a federal judge to say you have to pay this money. And what Justice Alito felt is that the order that was being appealed, which is, again, a temporary restraining order and is typically not appealable here.

He said that actually should be viewed as a preliminary injunction, which could be appealed. He also said there's important issues here dealing with sovereign immunity and whether or not this case could even proceed and who's likely to succeed. So is this a case where the Supreme Court has set new precedent, laid down new legal standards? I would say it's not.

He said that actually should be viewed as a preliminary injunction, which could be appealed. He also said there's important issues here dealing with sovereign immunity and whether or not this case could even proceed and who's likely to succeed. So is this a case where the Supreme Court has set new precedent, laid down new legal standards? I would say it's not.

This is a short order by the court that says your emergency appeal for relief is not granted.

This is a short order by the court that says your emergency appeal for relief is not granted.