There does seem to be something wrong with the system when some extremely minor official, like for example, the never heard of before, attorney general of Wyoming, a state with a smaller population than Gold Coast/Tweed Heads, should be able to go to federal court and put a temporary stay on a Presidential directive, such as Trump in his first term trying to stop immigration from Islamic countries with a history of exporting terrorists.

As much as all government officials, from the President down, should always follow the law and be answerable to legal challenges, surely a better way would be to have the default position, when waiting for the issue to come to court, to align with the intentions of the officer of the higher status. Thus the AG is challenging the constitutionality of discriminating against Islamic countries, and while waiting for the issue to come to court, the federal court should grant the status of the superior officer, the president, and allow the discrimination to continue until court day.

If the chief executive wins, nothing is lost, and if the chief executive loses, all those Muslims who previously applied to enter the US, can still now enter.

Obviously there would be some situations where practicality would dictate the status aligns with the minor official, as in requesting a last minute stay of the state execution of a felon.

Could Trump take it direct to the US Supreme court ?