Daily Update

Commentary and analysis about the Supreme Court's decision to modify the stay of the travel ban continues. In particular, commentators debate whether the decision was a good result for the Trump Administration, and they wonder how the limits articulated by the Supreme Court will be enforced. And the end of the Supreme Court's term also gave rise to several other decisions that have generated commentary, especially Hernandez v. Mesa and Pavan v. Smith.

The Department of Education’s Troubling Opacity on Sexual Harassment

6/28/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Alexandra Brodsky on how the Department of Education has retreated from civil rights enforcement and hid behind unlawful opacity.

Take Care

Unlocking the Mysteries of the Supreme Court’s Entry Ban Case

6/27/17  //  Commentary

Many close observers of the Court are still scratching their heads, trying to figure out just exactly what the Court did yesterday in Trump v. IRAP–and why. With the luxury of a few hours to ponder the mysteries, here are some tentative speculations on the most commonly posed questions.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

No, the Chief Justice Did Not Just Embrace Obergefell

6/27/17  //  Commentary

Many commentators have misunderstood the significance of a per curiam ruling by the Supreme Court yesterday.

Joshua Matz


The Supreme Court's Contribution to the Offense of Flying While Muslim

6/27/17  //  Commentary

By making fine distinctions between who Trump can or cannot ban from the US, the Supreme Court has opened the door to greater discrimination against Muslims at the border.

Amir Ali

Roderick & Solange MacArthur Justice Center

Lower Courts: Don’t Try This at Home

6/27/17  //  Commentary

The Supreme Court’s travel ban order deviates sharply from well-established standards for the granting of a stay. For better or for worse, the spirit of compromise trumped the letter of the law.

Daniel Hemel

University of Chicago Law School

Supreme Court Border-Shooting Non-Decision Confirms My Fears Regarding Bivens Actions

6/27/17  //  Commentary

Yesterday's SCOTUS ruling in Hernandez v. Mesa decided one question and punted on two. After explaining what the case decided and what it did not, I'll explain why one of the punts confirms my fear that federal civil rights actions against federal officers are practically a dead letter.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School