Amy Coney Barrett Grills Trump Official on Obeying Court Decisions

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett pressed Trump Solicitor General John Sauer on whether or not the Trump Department of Justice believes it needs to follow federal court decisions.

The questioning was part of the oral arguments in Trump v. CASA, Trump v. Washington, and Trump v. New Jersey, the case challenging injunctions stopping President Donald Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship.

“General Sauer, I want to ask you about a potential tension, well no, not potential tension. An actual tension that I see in answers that you gave to Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Kagan. You resisted Justice Kagan when she asked you whether the government would obey within the Second Circuit a precedent, distinguishing between opinions and judgments here,” began Coney Barrett, adding:

Did I understand you correctly to tell Justice Kagan that the government wanted to reserve its right to maybe not follow a Second Circuit precedent, say in New York, because you might disagree with the opinion?

“General practice is to respect those precedents, but there are circumstances when it is not a categorical practice, and that is not just a new policy,” Sauer replied.

“This administration’s practice or the long-standing practice of the federal government? And I’m not talking about in the Fourth Circuit, are you going to respect a Second Circuit [ruling]? I’m talking about within the Second Circuit. And can you say, is that this administration’s practice or a long-standing one?” Coney Barrett questioned.

“As I understand it, long-standing policy of the Department of Justice, yes, that we generally, as it was phrased to me, generally respect circuit precedent, but not necessarily in every case. And some examples might be a situation where we’re litigating to try and get that circuit precedent overruled and so forth,” Sauer explained.

“Well, okay, so I’m not talking about a situation in which, you know, the Second Circuit has a case from 1955 and you think it’s time for it to be challenged. That’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about this kind of situation. I’m talking about this week the Second Circuit holds that the executive order is unconstitutional and then what do you do the next day or the next week?” clarified Coney Barrett, who was appointed by Trump but has joined the liberals on the court in some recent decisions.

“Generally we follow–” Sauer replied as Coney Barrett added, “So you’re still saying generally. Yes. And you still think that it’s generally the policy, long-standing policy of the federal government to take that approach?”

“That is my understanding,” Sauer confirmed.

“Okay. So but it sounds to me like you accept a Cooper versus Aaron kind of situation for the Supreme Court, but not for, say, the Second Circuit. Where you would respect the opinions and the judgments of the Supreme Court and you’re saying you would respect the judgment, but not necessarily the opinion of a lower court,” Coney Barrett observed.

“And again, and I think in the vast majority of instances, our practice has been to respect the opinion as well, in the circuits as well. But my understanding is that has not been a categorical practice in the way respect for the precedents and the judgments of the Supreme Court has been,” Sauer responded.

“So you’re not hedging at all with respect to the precedent of this court?” Coney Barrett asked directly.

“That is correct, I believe the quotation from our application directly addresses that and we stand by that completely,” Sauer affirmed.

Watch the clip above via CNN.