Versus Trump Podcast: Prosecuting Trump FAQ + James Williams

5/17/17  //  Commentary

On today's two-part episode of Versus Trump, Take Care's podcast, we answer three burning questions related to whether the sitting President can face criminal charges, and how that prosecution could be started. We also have an interview with James Williams, the County Counsel for Santa Clara County, where he discusses his County's lawsuit against Trump Administration that has so far successfully prevented the Trump Administration from enforcing an executive order that would have withdrawn federal funding from so-called sanctuary cities.

Charlie Gerstein

Gerstein Harrow LLP

Jason Harrow

Gerstein Harrow LLP

First Tragedy, Now Farce

5/15/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Those who forget history are indeed doomed to repeat it. But when history repeats, it often shifts in the repetition: first acts come as tragedy and then return as farce. By many measures, Nixon was a tragic figure. Trump, by contrast, is pure farce. And unlike tragedies, farces don’t end with a flash of recognition—a moment of self-awareness like King Lear’s on the heath. Farces just keep going until someone cries "enough!"

Jon D. Michaels

UCLA School of Law

The Comey Firing - Legal Analyses From Around the Web

5/15/17  //  Latest Developments

A day-by-day guide to legal analysis of the many questions raised by Trump's abrupt firing of FBI Director James Comey.

Take Care

Our (Ongoing) Coverage of the Comey Firing

5/11/17  //  Uncategorized

An organized guide to all Take Care coverage and analysis of President Trump's abrupt termination of FBI Director Comey

Take Care

The Comey Firing in (Comparative) Context

5/11/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

President Trump’s abrupt firing of FBI Director James Comey prompted two immediate questions: Is the firing legal, and is this a constitutional crisis? But are these even the right questions to pose?

Aziz Huq

University of Chicago Law School

Why Trump’s Firing of Comey is Terrifying

5/10/17  //  Commentary

Our country has a very strong, very important norm of apolitical law enforcement. But this norm, ironically, is enforced mostly by politics, not law—and Trump’s action has risked doing it irreparable damage. Going forward, here's what to watch at the state and federal levels.

Zachary Price

U.C. Hastings College of the Law

Why Firing Comey Guts DOJ's Main Defense of the Muslim Ban 

5/10/17  //  Commentary

Sometimes, when an emissary of the President asks courts to “trust us,” things the President does elsewhere can fatally undermine judicial confidence in the President’s respect for rule of law values. We’ve seen it before and we’re about to see it again.

It Was Legal for the President to Fire Comey. That’s the Problem.

5/10/17  //  Commentary

It’s already too late in the day to trust the executive branch to police itself. That lack of trust should extend to a special prosecutor, independent counsel, or whatever other nice terms you want to call it. At this point, only Congress can credibly investigate the President.

Nikolas Bowie

Harvard Law School

Dark Money and Judicial Nominations Under Trump (And Beyond)

5/9/17  //  Commentary

Our treasure of an independent judiciary is built upon an assumption of independence, of transparency about influence and potential conflicts, and accountability to the democratic process. When massive amounts of dark corporate money can affect those political processes, we are in grave danger of damaging that national treasure.

Dawn Johnsen

Indiana University Maurer School of Law

Judicial Deference to President Trump

5/8/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

It is time to ask: Has Trump in effect forfeited some measure of judicial deference across contexts and cases, through his disrespect for the courts and the rule of law and his displays of prejudice and arbitrary decisionmaking? And if he has not yet reached that point, what more would it take?

Dawn Johnsen

Indiana University Maurer School of Law

The Attorney General, Hawaii Statehood, and National Injunctions

4/21/17  //  Quick Reactions

The AG's comments denigrating Hawaii statehood are objectionable for many reasons. But don't overlook his underlying complaint about national injunctions—which conservatives spent years developing and have suddenly, painfully discovered can be used against them.

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.

Information Wars Part III: Climate Changing the Facts

4/18/17  //  Commentary

The Trump administration is engaging in climate denial by concealing information relevant to environmental policy.

Helen Klein Murillo

Harvard Law School '17

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

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