The Muslim Ban: Answering Tough Questions About Motive

4/21/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The opinion by then-Justice Rehnquist in Hunter v. Underwood (1985), a case about denying the right to vote for racist reasons, offers thoughtful answers to many of the hardest questions that you might ask about motive and the Muslim Ban.

Richard Primus

University of Michigan Law School

There’s Unquestionably Standing in the CREW Case. Here’s Why.

4/19/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The additional plaintiffs in the CREW case unquestionably have standing.

Jonathan Taylor

Gupta Wessler PLLC

The Trump Administration May Already Have What It Needs for a Serviceable (and Unconstitutional) “Muslim Registry”

4/19/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Trump Administration may already have the tools it would need to predict with high accuracy the religious identity of a significant percentage of U.S. citizens and visiting Muslims. And software engineers, not lawyers, may be our first line of alarm and defense.

Will Trump’s Lawyers Rewrite and Invert the Emoluments Clause?

4/18/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

NYT has leaked one of DOJ's theories in the emoluments clause case: that this is a "political question." Any such argument, however, would be exceptionally weak as a matter of text, precedent, and purpose, and would completely invert the basic operation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause.

Joshua Matz

Publisher

Alternative Facts & History, and Alarming Implications, in DOJ's CFPB Brief.

4/17/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

DOJ's brief attacking the CFPB is riddled with alternative facts and offers a fictional history of the separation of powers. It may inflict lasting damage on DOJ's credibility. And the implications of DOJ's position for the SEC, Federal Reserve, and U.S. Postal Service, among other federal agencies, are alarming.

Neil J. Kinkopf

George State University College of Law

That Time When Republicans Re-Regulated Retirement Savings

4/11/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Congressional Republicans care about one thing far more than their professed values and far more than the American people they claim to represent: protecting the financial services industry. This was recently made clear when they undid two key DOL rules.

Danielle D'Onfro

Washington University Law School

States Can Require Financial Disclosure by Presidential Candidates to Safeguard Electoral Transparency

4/6/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Many states are considering bills requiring future federal presidential candidates to release tax returns, or comparable information, in order to be listed on the ballot. Such requirements are good policy and should be upheld under the Constitution.

Danielle Lang

The Campaign Legal Center

A Lurking Threat to LGBT Rights & Religious Freedom

4/3/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Today, the Fifth Circuit hears argument in a major case about the future of religious liberty and LGBT rights. The law under review, HB 1523, is flagrantly unconstitutional. And the result of this appeal may profoundly influence Trump's still-evolving policies.

Joshua Matz

Publisher

The Imperatives of Structure: The Travel Ban, the Establishment Clause, and Standing to Sue

4/3/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

In the Fourth Circuit travel ban appeal, DOJ contends that the plaintiffs lack standing. But a deeper examination of the Establishment Clause proves that the plaintiffs’ claims must be heard on the merits.

Ira C. Lupu

George Washington University Law School

Peter J. Smith

George Washington University Law School

Robert W. Tuttle

George Washington University Law School

International Human Rights Law in the Trump Era

3/29/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Trump Administration’s actions thus far are not just an attack on human rights norms. And they’re not merely a rejection of international law. They’re also an assault on our national security and foreign policy.

Deep Problems with the Proposed Executive Order on Religious Freedom

3/28/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

There are major constitutional problems with the leaked draft of a "religious freedom" executive order, which singles out for protection only traditional and conservative religious views on sex, marriage, sexual relations, gender identity, and pregnancy.

Ira C. Lupu

George Washington University Law School

Robert W. Tuttle

George Washington University Law School

The Fiduciary Rule: Triaging Quality for “Access” and Small Business at All Costs

3/28/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Ultimately, this Administration’s re-examination of the Obama-era Department of Labor fiduciary rule looks like little more than a gift to the retirement services industry at the expense of workers and retirees.

Danielle D'Onfro

Washington University Law School

The Contingency of Partisanship

3/27/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Both history and recent events make clear that President Trump can’t rely on partisan allegiance alone to save his presidency.

Josh Chafetz

Cornell Law School

McKayla Maroney Is Not Impressed (With DOJ's Brief in the Fourth Circuit)

3/27/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Department of Justice has filed a brief in the Fourth Circuit defending President Trump's revised entry ban. This is not an impressive brief: it is rife with misstatements of fact and incorrect legal arguments.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

NFIB v. Sebelius As Anti-Canon (a.k.a. This Administration’s Galling Constitutional Hypocrisy)

3/23/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Trump administration is engaged in stunning constitutional hypocrisy. Measured against conservatives' professed commitment to "liberty" and "freedom," there is no serious distinction to be drawn between Obamacare and Trump's American Health Care Act.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law