In the 10th Circuit decision last year, Gorsuch pointedly criticized government agencies’ broad power. In response to an attempt by a federal agency to alter the procedure by which undocumented immigrants seek legal status, Gorsuch wrote for the unanimous panel of judges, “If the agency were free to change the law retroactively based on shifting political winds, it could use that power to punish politically disfavored groups or individuals for conduct they can no longer alter.” In other words, courts should be able to stop government agencies from overreaching or acting unfairly, especially in situations where they hold significant power over vulnerable people like immigrants.

The legal issues in the two cases aren’t exactly the same, Kagan noted, and Gorsuch isn’t bound to follow the same logic he used in his lower-court decisions. But the ruling indicated that Gorsuch is unlikely to be friendly to what he perceives as state overreach. That can be applied to conservative targets like the Environmental Protection Agency or the National Labor Relations Board, but it also shows that he is “sensitive to the needs and struggles of immigrants battling against the government,” Kagan said. “This is a situation where skepticism of government power ends up being good for liberals.”