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

Publisher

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

On The Travel Ban The Supreme Court Says: Stay Tuned

6/26/17  //  Quick Reactions

Some quick thoughts on the Supreme Court's actions on the travel ban.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

It's All About that Stay (and Its Surprising Limits)

6/26/17  //  Quick Reactions

Preliminary thoughts on the Supreme Court's travel ban order.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

From Big Waiver to Waiver Unlimited

6/26/17  //  Quick Reactions

Perhaps the biggest concern with BCRA is that state waivers could degrade the financial protections available for employer-sponsored coverage

Nick Bagley

University of Michigan Law School

Emoluments and Justiciability

6/26/17  //  Commentary

Zachary Clopton offers a new spin on questions of standing and justiciability at the heart of recent emoluments litigation.

Take Care

Members of Congress Have Standing in the Emoluments Suit

6/24/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Eric Segall explains why the emoluments suit by 196 Members of Congress must be decided on the merits.

Take Care

Animus Revisited: DOJ Fails To Explain Change in Position on Relevance of Campaign Statements

6/23/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

DOJ can't distinguish a case from 1995 in which it took a diametrically opposed view on the relevance of campaign statements.

Jim Oleske

Lewis & Clark Law School

Limiting Citizenship Inequality

6/23/17  //  Quick Reactions

Yesterday, the Supreme Court wisely rejected a position that would have furthered President Trump's interest in reinforcing the hierarchy between immigrants and “real” Americans.

Bijal Shah

Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law

Why Not All Crimes by Immigrants Should Lead to Deportation

6/23/17  //  Commentary

Thoughts on criminality, immigration, and justice from Professor Chelsey Kivland of Dartmouth College.

Take Care

Versus Trump: Protecting The Right To Counsel In Immigration Courts, With Glenda Aldana Madrid

6/22/17  //  Uncategorized

On a new, interview-only episode of Versus Trump, Take Care's podcast, Jason has an interview with Glenda Aldana Madrid, of the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project (NWIRP), about a case in which her organization has so far successfully blocked the Administration's attempt to curb the right to counsel in immigration courts. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Easha Anand

San Francisco

An Updated Guide to Our Analyses of the Travel Ban

6/22/17  //  Latest Developments

Take Care hereby presents in a single, updated post all commentary we have published about the revised travel ban.

Take Care

UPDATE: The President’s Twitter Account & the First Amendment

6/22/17  //  Commentary

Recent developments bolster claims that President Trump has violated the First Amendment by blocking people on Twitter.

Amanda Shanor

Yale Law School