Reversed by the Supreme Court:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-67/124161/20191202184433375_19-67tsUnitedStates.pdf
2. The court of appeals’ parade of hypotheticals
does not justify facially invalidating the
statute ....................................................................... 32
3. As-applied challenges, not facial overbreadth
claims, are the appropriate way to address any
constitutional concerns with the prohibition ........ 37
D. The court of appeals erred in reaching out to
facially invalidate Section 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) ................ 37
Conclusion ............................................................. 44
That's funny. How can the court reverse a lower court 2 years before the lower court rules on the case?
US v Hanson was Argued and Submitted November 15, 2021
9th circuit appeals court
US v SINENENG-SMITH was ruled on in 2018 and didn't uphold the law. It only said the case couldn't be decided on standards only brought up in amicus briefs so remanded it. It avoided the question entirely.
Your link is not to the case but to the government's brief in the case.
https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-sineneng-smith-12
