How To Decide A Very Close Election For Presidential Electors: Part 1
Could a partial result from the very first contested presidential election provide us a path to handling a close election in 2020? Probably not—but the lessons from 1796 are revealing. This is Part 1 in a multi-part series that will help understand how close elections for presidential elector have been decided, good or bad, and how they should be decided this year.
Versus Trump: Versus The Post Office
On this week’s Versus Trump, Jason and Charlie are joined by Matthew Seligman of Public Citizen to discuss several lawsuits—including one in which he is counsel, NAACP v. USPS—where plaintiffs have challenged the cuts by the postal service that may slow down election mail. Listen now!
Freeing Purcell from the Shadows
The Supreme Court will soon hear a flood of election-related cases, yet one if its most important doctrines for deciding these cases remains remarkably opaque. So I will try to unpack and explain it.
Versus Trump: Blurring Public and Private Conduct
On this week’s Versus Trump, Jason and Charlie discuss two new legal filings by the Trump DOJ that blur the line between the President as government official and the President as private citizen. In the first case, the government argues that the President's twitter feed is not an official public forum, so he can block people with whom he disagrees. In the second, the government argues that the President's denials that he sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll were made in his official capacity as President. Listen now!
The Real Problem with Seila
Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that tenure protection for the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unconstitutional. The decision’s reasoning may be more important—and worrisome—than the holding itself.
Roberts’ Rules: How the Chief Justice Could Rein in Police Abuse of Power
A theme of Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinions this past term is that courts should not employ open-ended balancing tests to protect fundamental constitutional rights. Yet there is one area of the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence that is rife with such amorphous balancing tests: policing. It is long past time for the Court to revisit this area of law.