//  6/8/18  //  Commentary

After the Court handed down Masterpiece Cakeshop, I wrote a quick post on this blog in which I argued that "several aspects of the Court’s opinion in Masterpiece Cakeshop that, if taken seriously, would dispose of several of the government’s arguments in the entry ban litigation (Trump v. Hawaii).  I recently expanded on the post in a piece for the National Law Journal, which you can read here.  I noted the caveat that:

The court is not always consistent in its reasoning.  And there are ways one could distinguish the entry ban case from Masterpiece Cakeshop, though none of them are especially persuasive.  Yes, the entry ban pertains to immigration, but immigration is not a Constitution-free zone.  Likewise, the entry ban challenge involves the president rather than a state official, but the president is bound by the First Amendment to the Constitution just as state officials are. And while some of the president’s animus-laden statements happened before the entry ban, he never disavowed them, and instead implicitly affirmed them by insisting that the entry ban fulfills promises he had made.

 

@LeahLitman


Versus Trump: Trump Loses On Family Planning, Wins In The Ninth, and More

5/16/19  //  Uncategorized

This week on Versus Trump, Jason and Easha go through a few updates to cases involving Title X, which provides money for family planning; the Administration's policy to have many asylum applicants removed to Mexico; and the controversial border wall. Trump lost one, won one—for now, and hasn't yet gotten a decision in the third. Listen now!

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Versus Trump: Stop The Wall!

2/21/19  //  Uncategorized

On this week's episode of Versus Trump, Charlie, Jason, and Easha discuss the early lawsuits that seek to stop the new sections of border wall that President Trump authorized through executive action. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Immigration Lies And The Supreme Court

1/23/19  //  Commentary

A recently leaked document highlights the perils of government lawyering on behalf of the Trump administration.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law