Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/22-58_i425.pdf
Page Number: 3

Cite as:  599 U. S. ____ (2023) 

3 

Syllabus 

to make arrests or bring prosecutions are rare.  This case is different 
from those in which the Federal Judiciary decides justiciable cases in-
volving  statutory requirements  or  prohibitions  on  the  Executive,  be-
cause it implicates the Executive Branch’s enforcement discretion and 
raises the distinct question of whether the Federal Judiciary may in
effect  order  the  Executive  Branch  to  take  enforcement  actions.    The 
Court’s decision does not indicate any view on whether the Executive 
is complying with its statutory obligations.  Nor does the Court’s nar-
row holding signal any change in the balance of powers between Con-
gress and the Executive.  Pp. 12–14. 

606 F. Supp. 3d 437, reversed. 

KAVANAUGH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, 
C. J., and SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, and JACKSON, JJ., joined.  GORSUCH, J., 
filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which THOMAS and BAR-
RETT, JJ., joined.  BARRETT, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judg-
ment, in which GORSUCH, J., joined.  ALITO, J., filed a dissenting opinion.