While former President George W. Bush has hardly been shy in his rather obvious disapproval of the Trump administration, it appears that more than one of his past decisions has unwittingly helped the current president.
And this particular type of help is quite significant, given that it comes in the form of a
Supreme Court justice he appointed during his presidency – Samuel Alito.
Indeed, after the Supreme Court stunned the nation with an unprecedented 1:00 a.m. decision – the 5-2 decision that barred Trump from deporting any additional migrants – Alito, one of the dissenters, issued a blistering dissent shortly thereafter.
“Shortly after midnight yesterday, the Court hastily and prematurely granted unprecedented emergency relief,” Alito began.
That’s one way of putting it.
After all, it is rare indeed for the Supreme Court to issue 1:00 a.m. decisions.
Particularly over the Easter holiday.
“When this Court rushed to enter its order, the Court of Appeals was considering the issue of emergency relief, and we were informed that a decision would be forthcoming. This Court, however, refused to wait,” Alito continued.
That’s putting it mildly. When was the last time the Supreme Court made any decision in the middle of the night?
Alito then cited the Court’s Rule 23.3 as justification for his criticism of his colleagues’ “[refusal] to wait.”
“Except in the most extraordinary circumstances, an application for a stay will not be entertained unless the relief requested was first sought in the appropriate court or courts below or from a judge or judges thereof,” Rule 23.3 states.
Apparently, the other five Supreme Court justices found the situation involving Venezuelan migrants to be amongst “the most extraordinary circumstances.”
Alito also criticized the apparent lack of evidence provided to support migrants’ cases.
“The only papers before this Court were those submitted by the applicants. The Court had not ordered or received a response by the Government regarding either the applicants’ factual allegations or any of the legal issues presented by the application. And the Court did not have the benefit of a Government response filed in any of the lower courts either,” Alito continued.
Well, it’s no surprise that there was no response from the government … after all, the ACLU had filed its emergency appeal for migrants all of a few hours before the Supreme Court’s decision.
When exactly would the government have had the time to put together a response in a few hours’ time, especially during a holiday weekend?
“The papers before us, while alleging that the applicants were in imminent danger of removal, provided little concrete support for that allegation,” Alito added, further underscoring the apparent lack of evidence presented.
“In sum, literally in the middle of the night, the Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule, without hearing
from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order,” Alito concluded.
That is quite the blistering rebuke.
The entirety of Alito’s dissent may be reviewed here.
Alito was not alone in dissent either, as he received open support from another explicit dissenter.
The other dissenter – Justice Clarence Thomas – was also appointed by former President George H.W. Bush.
Naturally, the Bush appointees’ helping hand to Trump is a bit awkward, given that the same former presidents have hardly been filled with praise towards the current president.
On the contrary, outright criticism has been issued, which has amplified in recent months.
According to a report from Times Now, the George W. Bush Presidential Center has hardly been in support of many policies undertaken under the second Trump administration.
Indeed, the center “has published multiple articles” that have opposed the administration’s position on Ukraine, including articles that directly suggest that Trump is collaborating more closely with authoritarian regimes than representative governments.
One rebuke was especially clear in an article published on March 2: “For the good of both countries and for the cause of freedom, it is vital that the United States and Ukraine get back on track.”
Well, apparently, a Bush appointee believes that “it is vital” for the Supreme Court to get back on track, as he perceives it, which was made especially clear in the final line of his dissent.
“Both the Executive and the Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law. The Executive must proceed under the terms of our order in Trump v. J. G. G., 604 U. S. ___ (2025) (per curiam), and this Court should follow established procedures,” Alito proclaimed.
What will happen next in the ongoing tussle between the Trump administration and the Supreme Court?
Time remains to tell, but it is reasonable to assume that many battles are looming on the immediate horizon.
Author: Ofelia Thornton
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
