Contributors

Leah Litman

Assistant Professor of Law

University of California, Irvine, School of Law

Prof. Leah Litman researches and writes on constitutional law with a particular focus on federalism and federal post-conviction review.  Her recent work has appeared or will appear in the Michigan Law Review, the Virginia Law Review, the Duke Law Journal, the Northwestern Law Review, and the Federal Sentencing Reporter as well as several online journals including the Columbia Law Review Sidebar.

After graduating from the University of Michigan Law School, she clerked for Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy on the U.S. Supreme Court.  Following her clerkships, she worked at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, where she specialized in appellate litigation. Prof. Litman was also a Climenko Fellow & Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School and received one of the inaugural HLS Student Government Teaching & Advising Awards.

Prof. Litman maintains an active pro bono practice.  Most recently, she was on an amicus brief in Beckles v. United States. She was also on the merits briefs in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt and an amicus brief in Welch v. United States. She also assisted arguing counsel in DeBoer v. Snyder and assisted with drafting the opening brief in Obergefell v. Hodges.

READ OFFICIAL BIO

Subscribe For Updates

Stare Decisis, The Supreme Court, And Roe

7/9/18  //  Commentary

Some further evidence that a mere belief in stare decisis and judicial precedent does not mean a judge will not overrule cases, as Susan Collins has (falsely) suggested.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Getting To No On Roe

7/5/18  //  In-Depth Analysis

The question is not whether the reconstituted Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade. The only question is how the Supreme Court will do so.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Senator Collins's Shell Game On Roe v. Wade

7/3/18  //  Quick Reactions

Susan Collins claimed that there is no reason to worry about Justice Kennedy's replacement because the Chief Justice (!!!) and Justice Gorsuch (¯\_(ツ)_/¯) would never overturn Roe v. Wade. That's wrong.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Religious Animus or Reality?

7/2/18  //  Commentary

In a recent case, the Court suggested that calling out an attempt to use religion to justify harming others was evidence of animus. That’s wrong.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Abigail DeHart

Michigan Law School

On The Entry Ban, The Supreme Court Says It’s Up To Us

6/26/18  //  Quick Reactions

In Trump v. Hawaii, the Court reminded us that the courts will not be there to save us. It is up to us, instead.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Entry Ban Animus Revisited

6/25/18  //  In-Depth Analysis

Many of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions tell us what we need to know: Under any meaningful standard for assessing government motives, the entry ban must fail.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Abigail DeHart

Michigan Law School