If that was their issue, then they could have issued a stay as to the nationwide scope of the injunction while leaving it in effect as to the named plaintiffs. DOJ actually offered that up as an alternative argument if the court didn’t want to grant a full stay. But, the court did not do that. Instead, the majority issued a full stay — even as to the named plaintiffs.
Chris, could another possible reason for the stay be because a district court issued a nationwide injunction?
If that was their issue, then they could have issued a stay as to the nationwide scope of the injunction while leaving it in effect as to the named plaintiffs. DOJ actually offered that up as an alternative argument if the court didn’t want to grant a full stay. But, the court did not do that. Instead, the majority issued a full stay — even as to the named plaintiffs.