Trump v. Slaughter · ¶247

The case for retaining Humphrey’s becomes even stronger when compared against the majority’s theory, which itself promises to unleash only chaos. With remarkable steadfastness, the majority simply refuses to explain where its theory leads or where it ends. See, e.g., ante, at 27. Although declining to consider the consequences of its decision might make it easier for the majority to cast Humphrey’s aside, it leaves courts, agencies, and Congress with little guidance, and many new questions, on how they are supposed to assess removal questions going forward.

slip opinion, revised 7/07/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.