A hypothesis

Publius has a hypothesis:

A question for ya. Let’s say you’re the Bush administration. Let’s say you have no real interest in cracking down on illegal immigration. But, you’re getting a lot of heat from parts of the base. What do you do? This is a cynical interpretation for sure, but maybe you write administrative rules so draconian that you know (and secretly hope) a court will strike them down. When the court does so, you get the best of both worlds – it appears like you’ve done something, but your actions have actually accomplished nothing.

Just a thought.

I was going to leave a comment saying, "yeah, and they can also complain about activist judges, making it a threefer," but when I went to leave the comment, I saw that several others had already said it before me.