Trump's (Apparent) DACA Position Is At Odds With His Travel Ban Brief

9/4/17  //  Commentary

The Trump administration will invoke whatever views of statutes and executive power maximize cruelty towards the foreign nationals he and his supporters most despise.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

A Reprieve for Texas’s Sanctuary Cities

8/31/17  //  Commentary

Cities need to be recognized as constitutional actors in their own right, worthy of protection and capable of self-determination.

Richard C. Schragger

UVA School of Law

The Problem(s) With The Arpaio Pardon

8/29/17  //  Commentary

Like so much of what Trump has done, the Arpaio pardon raises multiple challenges to our constitutional system.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

The Arpaio Pardon Through the Lens of Trump Exceptionalism

8/26/17  //  Commentary

This pardon by this most abnormal president threatens the rule of law

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

Arizona’s Problems with Immigration Federalism

8/4/17  //  Quick Reactions

State officials are seeking out ways to intensify federal efforts to enforce immigration law, but they are thereby intensifying larger problems plaguing our national immigration system

Bijal Shah

Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law

The Highest Court in Massachusetts Declares the Commonwealth a Sanctuary State

7/24/17  //  Commentary

A landmark opinion turns Massachusetts into a sanctuary state, setting up a legal and political battle with DOJ.

Nikolas Bowie

Harvard Law School

The Supreme Court’s Travel Ban

7/19/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Supreme Court is now a co-owner and co-author of the travel ban. That grows truer every time it tinkers with minutiae of this cruel, unjustified policy. And with that position comes major institutional risk to the Supreme Court’s public legitimacy.

Joshua Matz

Publisher

Litigating the Supreme Court’s Entry Ban Opinion: What’s the Required Connection?

7/19/17  //  Commentary

All of the briefs are now in on the government’s motion to the Supreme Court for clarification of its order in Trump v. Hawaii.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

Back to the Supreme Court on the Scope of the Entry Ban Injunction: First Thoughts

7/15/17  //  Commentary

Now that the travel ban is back in the Supreme Court, here are four additional, preliminary thoughts on where things stand.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

Latest Travel Ban Ruling Helps A Lot But Not Enough

7/14/17  //  Quick Reactions

It is likely that the Trump administration will simply seize on whatever ambiguity there is in the latest injunction to deny entry to as many people as it can. Why? Because that is the point of the Travel Ban.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

Domestic Adherence to the Gender Binary

7/7/17  //  Quick Reactions

Three former Surgeons General have called for an end to involuntary medical procedures on intersex babies and children. U.S. immigration law sheds light on why this is such an important development.

Bijal Shah

Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law

Vagueness in 'Aggravated Felony'

6/30/17  //  Quick Reactions

It is the federal government’s responsibility to define immigration violations—and in particular, aggravated felonies—precisely.

Bijal Shah

Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law

Seriously? The Court Intended to Exclude Grandmas from the Preliminary Injunctions?

6/29/17  //  Commentary

A post on the absurdity of the Administration’s interpretation of the Supreme Court’s modification of the travel-ban/refugee-limit preliminary injunctions.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

The Administration's Travel Ban Guidance Falls Short of Good Faith

6/29/17  //  Quick Reactions

As reported by the New York Times, the Administration's travel ban guidance shows a lack of respect for the Supreme Court's directive.

Amir Ali

Roderick & Solange MacArthur Justice Center

Unlocking the Mysteries of the Supreme Court’s Entry Ban Case

6/27/17  //  Commentary

Many close observers of the Court are still scratching their heads, trying to figure out just exactly what the Court did yesterday in Trump v. IRAP–and why. With the luxury of a few hours to ponder the mysteries, here are some tentative speculations on the most commonly posed questions.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law