Animus, Past and Present

5/9/17  //  Commentary

In a new op-ed, Erwin Chemerinsky and I argue that the entry ban is unconstitutional because it was driven by animus toward Muslims.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

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 Under-Inclusive Theory Of Discrimination (It's Not Going To Happen)

5/8/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Trump administration has repeatedly (and incorrectly) argued that a policy does not constitute discrimination unless the policy discriminates against all members of a particular group.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Trump Is Responsible For What ICE Is Doing To the Dreamers

5/5/17  //  Commentary

Basic principles of constitutional structure mean Trump is, and should be held, personally responsible for ICE’s egregious treatment of the DREAM-ers.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Trump And His Administration Are A Nightmare For The Dreamers

5/4/17  //  Commentary

ICE Continues To Undermine DACA Despite Trump’s Protestations To the Contrary

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

What Is Dead May Never Die: An AHCA Update

5/3/17  //  Commentary

With the AHCA back on the table, it's time to remember that the GOP really doesn’t like the constitutional arguments it made against the ACA

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

On Standing In CREW v. Trump Part II: More Distinctions Without A Difference To Competitor Standing Cases

4/28/17  //  Commentary

The various ways that standing skeptics have distinguished cases supporting standing in CREW are unpersuasive.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

On Standing In CREW v. Trump Part I: Defining The Injury

4/27/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Critics of the standing arguments in CREW v. Trump are defining the new plaintiffs’ injury in the wrong way.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Standing Up For Standing in CREW v. Trump

4/26/17  //  Quick Reactions

Everyone should give a tip of the hat to the new plaintiffs in the CREW v. Trump lawsuit.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Echoes of History in Objections to Federal Enforcement of Voting Rights

4/21/17  //  Commentary

A letter about how to fix DOJ’s Civil Rights Division has some interesting parallels to a recent voting rights dissent.

Leah Litman

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

Real Reasons To Worry About Filibuster Repeal

4/10/17  //  Commentary

The filibuster repeal itself is ultimately far less important than some deeper trends it reflects concerning partisanship, institutional norms, and the separation of powers in our constitutional order.

Zachary Price

U.C. Hastings College of the Law

The Nuclear Option and Democratic Deterioration

4/10/17  //  Commentary

The Gorsuch nomination battle illustrates and exacerbates the dynamics of democratic deterioration. Reversing these trends will require elected officials to act with courage. It will also require significant structural changes to our political system.

Daniel P. Tokaji

Ohio State, Moritz College of Law

The Trump Administration’s Immigration-Related Detentions

3/24/17  //  Commentary

The Supreme Court is considering a major constitutional challenge to federal immigration detention policies. Trump’s recent executive orders make that case even more significant.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

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

Michigan Law School