Rivkin is probably right. I can’t see the Supreme Court treating this case as anything other than a political question. I can understand Judge Edwards’ point, but this case is too unique really for the courts to try anything funny here.
This is clearly one of the cases where the president should have more say, that’s what makes the case so interesting—it’s an anomaly that the Supremes really need to decide. We’ve been consistent on the Jerusalem issue, as Rivkin duly notes.