Justice Jackson Questions Universal Injunctions in Birthright Citizenship Case

Understanding Universal Injunctions

• ❓ Justice Jackson questioned the attorney on the nature of universal injunctions, specifically whether non-parties benefit from such orders.
• 💡 The core of the confusion lies in whether non-parties are truly receiving relief or are merely incidental beneficiaries of an order directed at the government.
• ⚖️ Jackson noted that non-parties typically cannot seek contempt rulings if the government violates the order, differentiating them from parties in class actions who have an enforceable judgment.

Attorney's Argument on Non-Party Relief

• 🎯 The attorney argued that universal injunctions are conceptually different from class actions and do not grant enforceable rights to everyone in the world.
• 🏛️ The aim is to tell a defendant, over whom the court has personal jurisdiction, to stop an unlawful action, which naturally benefits those who would be harmed by that action.
• ⚠️ A concern was raised that if non-parties could enforce the injunction (potentially via Rule 71), it would place them in a similar position to class action plaintiffs, raising legitimate concerns about universal injunctions.

Historical Precedent and Rule 71

• 📜 The attorney acknowledged that the argument aligns with historical precedent and practice, citing classic REM cases and the instinct seen in cases like Barnett and Pierce.
• 🤝 Reference was made to Professor Fanders' amicus brief, which discusses patent laws and similar judicial instincts.
• 📜 The attorney also touched upon Rule 71, which originated in equity rules from 1842, suggesting it might allow non-parties to enforce orders that provide them with relief, though this point caused further confusion.

Clarifying Enforcement and Application

• ❓ Justice Jackson pressed on whether someone not named as a plaintiff could enforce a universal injunction if the government violated it.
• 🗣️ The attorney expressed hesitation to give a definitive 'no' due to the existence of Rule 71 and the need for the universal injunction for their clients.
• 🧐 The discussion highlighted the tension between the traditional view of injunctions and the potential application of rules like Rule 71 in the context of universal injunctions.