//  6/14/17  //  Commentary

This morning I published an op-ed in The Guardian discussing Emoluments Clause lawsuits filed by CREW, DC & Maryland, and 196 Members of Congress.  I touch on both standing and merits issues, and set the cases in a broader framework.

Here's an excerpt from the introduction:

When President Donald Trump announced his Muslim Ban on January 27, pandemonium erupted. Lawyers everywhere raced to airports. Galvanized by Trump’s threat to liberty, they rapidly assembled legal theories and commenced a still-unbroken siege of Trump’s bigoted policy. As attorneys stockpiled caffeine, the American people rallied by moonlight outside terminals and federal courts.

The legal response to Trump’s Emoluments Clause violations has taken shape more slowly. And understandably so. Until recently, most Americans had never heard of “emoluments.” Only in the past few months – aided by creative public artand a high-profile lawsuit – has the public come to appreciate that Trump’s conflicts are forbidden by the Constitution.

It’s no coincidence that this arcane issue has newfound salience. We’re now witnessing kleptocracy on an unprecedented scale in America. And there’s barely even a fig leaf of cover. Trump has openly enmeshed his private financial interests in national policy. To say that this creates an appearance of corruption would be far too polite. This is the real deal: sketchy dealings all the way down.

Until recently, a rough bipartisan consensus would have thwarted such open corruption. But it’s now clear that the Republican Party has made a deal with the Devil, trading integrity (their own and the government’s) for a shot at long-held dreams. Surprising nobody, the Devil is already far ahead in this stupid, crooked bargain.

But if recent events are any sign, the public will not stand idly by as Trump turns our nation into a banana republic ... 

You can read the full op-ed here.


The 'All of the Above' Approach to Justice Kavanaugh

10/7/18  //  In-Depth Analysis

Do progressives give up on the Court? Declare war on it? Pretend nothing has changed? Each of us will have to decide for ourselves. There is no 'right way' to respond to our new reality.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

The Vicious Entrenchment Circle: Thoughts on a Lifetime with a Republican-Controlled Court

10/7/18  //  In-Depth Analysis

By the time the Supreme Court’s current Term ends in June, it will have been more than 50 years of GOP-appointed control, even though Democrats have won a majority or plurality of the popular vote in seven of the twelve elections in that period.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

The Blumenthal & Nadler Decision: A Watershed in the Effort to Combat Presidential Corruption

10/3/18  //  Commentary

On Friday, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that the plaintiffs in Blumenthal, Nadler, et al. v. Trump have standing to sue the President for violating the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause.