A traffic camera caught his car speeding, but he got the police to admit they had no way to prove he was the driver at the time. And, if no one is injured, the city has no standing to punish you.

Border Patrol, apparently under orders only from the top, is spawning panic from some who take their refusal to cooperate with court-mandated Federal Marshals as a sign for existential concern. But will the confusion trigger a constitutional crisis? Here's a good rundown of the cross-cutting legal ramifications of the travel ban. In short, there are plenty of reasons to think SCOTUS will eventually strike the order down. Some, such as the writ of habeas corpus filed at Dulles for two teens held without explanation and under coercion, hinge on pointing out how the implementation of the ban violated rights. Other lawsuits will strike to the core of the issue by arguing the order violates the Equal Protections Clause of the 14th Amendment.

It could take months, if not years, to play out, but in short the center of the Court is unlikely to side with Trump on this one.

Contrary to what you remember from civics, the courts are not an autonomous domain untainted by public opinion. And the idea that they naturally safeguard our rights is just historically wrong. It's when courts feel the pressure of social movements that they've issued their most enlightened opinions.