US judge blocks Biden's new immigration regulations.

It is an established fact that the controversial Trump was completely defeated in the 2020 US election. Whether Trump admits it or not, he will give up his seat to the current President-elect Biden on October 20, 20021year/kloc-0. But even if he is a loser, he will not become president soon, but before this election, he made a very important decision, which played a great role and also buried a cancer in the epidemic prevention work in the United States. This so-called legacy is that Trump and his party appointed a Supreme Court judge through the power of the president. This man's name is Barrett. According to The New York Times, Barrett played a very important role and even became a decision maker.

Looking at this case from The New York Times, I want to express whether it is against the US Constitution to restrict the activities of some religious sites for the sake of national defense policy. From June to July, 2020, there has been such a dispute between California and Nevada, and the matter has been brought to court. The Supreme Court consists of nine judges. Liberal judges believe that this activity is not wrong and should be implemented. Similarly, four conservative judges thought this was extremely wrong. There is such a neutral judge on the liberal side, but in September 2020, Ginsburg, one of the liberal justices, unfortunately passed away, so Trump, his * * * and his party took immediate action.

Before the presidential election, he was sent to fill the vacancy of liberal judges. Therefore, this has directly led to great changes in the forms of liberals and conservatives. Many people can make decisions. In the face of new york's case similar to the previous two weeks, the Supreme Court gave the opposite ruling, because Roberts still chose to stand on the side of liberals, but there were only four of them, and with Barrett's participation, the number of people here increased instantly, because there were many people, so they could only obey the majority decision.

In the end, it was ruled that New York State had to cancel the event with a result of 5:4. These restrictions were very wrong. Many netizens who care about epidemic prevention are very dissatisfied with this ruling. In their view, these people are deliberately stealing concepts, but these religious sites are the most prone to outbreaks and overcrowding. But Trump's supporters and conservatives are very excited about this ruling and think that it defends the dignity of the motherland.