UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

After all, there have been nationwide injunctions against unconstitutional or unlawful ATF decisions, and the Right has needed those decisions to check an otherwise unchecked POTUS/bureaucracy making up rules that Congress never authorized them to make. So, even if Trump wins on this approach, it is not a clear victory for the Right. So, it really isn't a partisan left vs. right issue. It is a structural/process issue regarding how our Republic operates.

So, the issue is, unchecked elected POTUS / bureaucrats vs. unchecked, unelected regional judges having national effect with their pronouncements coupled with forum shopping / a race to the most favorable courthouses.

Seems like there should be room for compromise. Maybe injunctions which are immediately appealable to SCOTUS?...requiring their decision to make it national or to restrict POTUS, and limiting it to local effect if not ratified by SCOTUS. But, wow, that would substantially increase the workload for SCOTUS. I don't know the answer. I do know that I would like POTUS to be implementing policy, and the courts to be implementing process limitations. But, given the race to the favorable courthouse, we have unelected judges implementing policy, and that seems like a bad idea. At lease we can vote POTUS out of office.

I'm open to other ideas on this. I'm not trying to take a partisan stand here.