The Supreme Court, in its one-sentence decision, had simply instructed an appeals court to dismiss the motion by the Republican-led states as “moot” likely because the health emergency used to justify Title 42 expired earlier this month. The administration of President Joe Biden has previously pushed to end Title 42.

Gorsuch, who was nominated to the high court by Trump, seemed to take umbrage with the Republican states for having argued against ending Title 42, not because of any public health-related reason, but because the decrees were “worth the fight.”

“Worth it because, in their judgment, a new and different crisis had emerged at the border and the federal government had done too little to address it,” Gorsuch wrote.

Gorsuch noted that, in a different district court, a group of asylum seekers had filed a class-action lawsuit that argued the government did not have the legal authority to issue Title 42 in the first place. That court sided with the asylum seekers.

The justice said the federal government and court system found itself at odds because the federal district court in Louisiana had agreed with the arguments from the Republican-led states — pitting that district court’s decision against the decision in the case of the asylum seekers.

“So it is that the federal government found itself in an unenviable spot — bound by two inconsistent nationwide commands, one requiring it to enforce the Title 42 orders and another practically forbidding it from doing so,” Gorsuch said. “If these head-spinning developments were not enough, more followed.”

Gorsuch added that he had previously noted nearly five months ago that “the current border crisis is not a COVID crisis.”

“The history of this case illustrates the disruption we have experienced over the last three years in how our laws are made and our freedoms observed,” Gorsuch wrote Thursday.

“Since March 2020, we may have experienced the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.”

Gorsuch specifically blasted local and state governments for issued “emergency decrees at a breathtaking scale” and for imposing lockdown orders that forced people to remain in their homes.

“They shuttered businesses and schools, public and private. They closed churches even as they allowed casinos and other favored businesses to carry on. They threatened violators not just with civil penalties but with criminal sanctions too,” Gorsuch said.

“They surveilled church parking lots, recorded license plates, and issued notices and warned that attendance at even outdoor services satisfying all state social distancing and hygiene requirements could amount to criminal conduct.”

Gorsuch said that he hopes “many lessons” can be learned from the pandemic and that”serious efforts will be made to study it.”

“Fear and the desire for safety are powerful forces. They can lead to a clamor for action – almost any action — as long as someone does something to address a perceived threat,” Gorsuch said.

“A leader or an expert who claims he can fix everything, if only we do exactly as he says, can prove an irresistible force. We do not need to confront a bayonet, we need only a nudge, before we willingly abandon the nicety of requiring laws to be adopted by our legislative representatives and accept rule by decree.”