//  4/5/18  //  Quick Reactions

While at Harvard Law School on Tuesday, I delivered a talk entitled "The Legal Resistance to Trump."  You can watch it here.  I am grateful to the HLS Forum for hosting this event. 

I had five primary goals in my talk:

(1) to describe respects in which the legal response to Trump is unique; 

(2) to explain why we've already seen such an extraordinary barrage of litigation against Trump;

(3) to identify strategic objectives common to many Trump-related lawsuits; 

(4) to evaluate the judicial response to suits against the Trump Administration; and 

(5) to warn against fantastical expectations that lawyers will save American democracy.

As you'll see, I was less interested in the details of any single litigation than in extrapolating cross-cutting themes, lessons, and strategies from several dozen lawsuits. The talk is a reflection of my ever-evolving perspective on the role that lawyers can (and should) play in seeking to defend democracy in the age of Trump. I hope you enjoy it and I welcome your feedback


No, Presidential Elector Litigation Will Not Lead To Chaos

9/4/19  //  Commentary

In Slate, Rick Hasen claims that litigation over the independence of presidential electors could "backfire spectacularly." I respectfully disagree.

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

How Many Bullets Do You Need?

9/4/19  //  Commentary

Various jurisdictions that have banned large-capacity magazines define large-capacity differently. So how many bullets are enough under the Second Amendment?

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

The Trump Administration’s Assault on Fair Housing

8/19/19  //  Commentary

Today, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published a proposed rule that would substantially limit enforcement of the 1968 Fair Housing Act. This rule is deeply flawed.

Olatunde Johnson

Columbia Law School

Michelle Aronowitz

Private Practice