Trump v. California · ¶29

Fighting this Court’s precedent, JUSTICE JACKSON maintains that “[t]he Government is not injured in the slightest” because the Order contemplates that the Government will engage in “patently unlawful conduct.” Post, at 7. That, however, remains to be seen. And though JUSTICE JACKSON wishes it were otherwise, an applicant can show “irreparable harm from a threshold error without also showing that, at the end of the day, it will prevail on the underlying merits.” CASA, 606 U. S., at 860. Such harm exists here because the injunction meddles in “the workings of ” the Executive Branch, preventing it from even trying to lawfully implement the Order. Legalization Assistance Project, 510 U. S., at 1306.

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.