The Clarifying Memorandum Is Not A Reason For A Stay

6/21/17  //  Quick Reactions

An analysis of DOJ's latest filing at SCOTUS in the travel ban cases.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Donald Trump’s Say-So is Not a Presidential “National Security Judgment”

6/21/17  //  Quick Reactions

Analysis of DOJ's filing at SCOTUS today in the travel ban cases.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

It’s Long Past Time to Take a Harder Look: The Latest in the DAPL Litigation

6/19/17  //  Quick Reactions

An important ruling against the Trump Administration's position on the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL).

Seth Davis

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Opposing Trump's Muslim Ban at the Supreme Court

6/16/17  //  Quick Reactions

President Trump has asked the Supreme Court to lift the stay preventing him from implementing his travel ban. Nelson Tebbe, Micah Schwartzman and I, along with a large group of constitutional law scholars, have filed a brief opposing Trump's motion.

Corey Brettschneider

Brown University

See You In Court: Ninth Circuit Round 2

6/12/17  //  Quick Reactions

A quick recap of the Ninth Circuit's decision in Hawaii v. Trump with thoughts about what it portends for the Supreme Court.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

The Two Sides Of Donald Trump, As Reflected in The Government's Motion to Dismiss in the CREW Emoluments Case

6/12/17  //  Quick Reactions

The government's motion to dismiss alternately characterizes CREW's lawsuit as a case involving "official action" and a case involving solely a private "business venture." The different descriptions go to the core of CREW's lawsuit, which is that given the President's business affairs, we don't know when he's acting as President or as a businessman.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Two Thoughts on the Government's Motion to Dismiss in the CREW Emoluments Case

6/10/17  //  Quick Reactions

Here’s a brief note on two things that struck me on a quick read of the government’s motion to dismiss in CREW v. Trump, filed yesterday. The first is about Mississippi v. Johnson, which the government cites as limiting the power of courts to grant injunctions against the President. The second is about the government’s more general claim that the only proper relief for an emoluments violation is political rather than judicial.

Richard Primus

University of Michigan Law School

The Comey Hearing: Lots of Big News

6/8/17  //  Quick Reactions

No GOP attack dogs; Lynch, Sessions, Rosenstein in trouble; McCain’s health

Jed Shugerman

Fordham Law School

Seven Reactions to Today’s Coats/Rogers Testimony

6/7/17  //  Quick Reactions

Jed Shugerman analyzes today's live testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Jed Shugerman

Fordham Law School

The Muslim Ban and Trump's Latest Tweets

6/5/17  //  Quick Reactions

Thanks in part to the President's own recent tweets and public comments, the case for concluding that his revised travel ban is unconstitutional has now become overwhelming.

Corey Brettschneider

Brown University

The Travel Ban And The Supreme Court

6/2/17  //  Quick Reactions

The government's petition for certiorari and stay requests raise some difficult timing issues in the travel ban litigation.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

A Deportation That "Diminishes Not Only Our Country But Our Courts"

5/31/17  //  Quick Reactions

An extraordinary concurrence by Judge Reinhardt of the Ninth Circuit condemns inhumanity and injustice in our immigration system.

Joshua Matz

Publisher

The Fourth Circuit & Animus Under Mandel

5/25/17  //  Quick Reactions

By Corey Brettschneider: As the Fourth Circuit recognized today, even if Kleindanst v. Mandel supplies the rule of decision and requires rationality review, animus is fatal to the Muslim Ban even under that standard.

Take Care

See You In Court 3.0

5/25/17  //  Quick Reactions

A quick recap of the Fourth Circuit's decision in IRAP v. Trump.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

An Update in House v. Price: When Inaction Masks Turmoil

5/24/17  //  Quick Reactions

Insurance companies are filing their applications for 2018 plans and rates now, with the last deadline in some states coming on June 21, and with many having passed already. If you’re an insurer and you don't know what the rules of the game will be, how can you play it?

Rachel Sachs

Washington University Law School