During a recent talk at Yale Law School, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson delivered a critical assessment of her conservative colleagues' use of emergency orders that have favored the Trump administration. She described these orders as 'scratch-paper musings' that often lack sufficient explanation and fail to consider the real-life implications for individuals affected by controversial policies. Jackson highlighted that these orders have allowed Trump to implement significant changes on immigration and federal funding despite lower courts deeming them likely illegal. She expressed concern over the Supreme Court's increasingly aggressive stance on emergency applications, noting that it has sided with Trump in most of the 34 emergency applications filed by his administration. Jackson pointed out that the court's rationale for prioritizing the president's perceived harm over the potential illegal nature of his policies is flawed. She aims to spark a discussion on the need for a more restrained approach to emergency orders, emphasizing the importance of considering the human impact of such decisions.