No, the Chief Justice Did Not Just Embrace Obergefell

6/27/17  //  Commentary

Many commentators have misunderstood the significance of a per curiam ruling by the Supreme Court yesterday.

Joshua Matz


The Supreme Court's Contribution to the Offense of Flying While Muslim

6/27/17  //  Commentary

By making fine distinctions between who Trump can or cannot ban from the US, the Supreme Court has opened the door to greater discrimination against Muslims at the border.

Amir Ali

Roderick & Solange MacArthur Justice Center

Lower Courts: Don’t Try This at Home

6/27/17  //  Commentary

The Supreme Court’s travel ban order deviates sharply from well-established standards for the granting of a stay. For better or for worse, the spirit of compromise trumped the letter of the law.

Daniel Hemel

University of Chicago Law School

Supreme Court Border-Shooting Non-Decision Confirms My Fears Regarding Bivens Actions

6/27/17  //  Commentary

Yesterday's SCOTUS ruling in Hernandez v. Mesa decided one question and punted on two. After explaining what the case decided and what it did not, I'll explain why one of the punts confirms my fear that federal civil rights actions against federal officers are practically a dead letter.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

Emoluments and Justiciability

6/26/17  //  Commentary

Zachary Clopton offers a new spin on questions of standing and justiciability at the heart of recent emoluments litigation.

Take Care

Why Not All Crimes by Immigrants Should Lead to Deportation

6/23/17  //  Commentary

Thoughts on criminality, immigration, and justice from Professor Chelsey Kivland of Dartmouth College.

Take Care

UPDATE: The President’s Twitter Account & the First Amendment

6/22/17  //  Commentary

Recent developments bolster claims that President Trump has violated the First Amendment by blocking people on Twitter.

Amanda Shanor

Yale Law School

Closing the Courthouse Doors: Justice Kennedy’s Very Bad Day

6/22/17  //  Commentary

David Gans discusses Ziglar v. Abassi, a new SCOTUS ruling that makes it very hard for individuals to sue federal officials for trampling on federal constitutional rights

Take Care

Presents, Emoluments, and Corruption

6/21/17  //  Commentary

Simon Stern explains why DOJ's interpretation of "emolument" doesn't make sense as a matter of text or purpose.

Take Care

Asymmetric Geographical State Standing

6/20/17  //  Commentary

The recent DC/Maryland emoluments case reflects a truth known to the Framers: jurisdictions geographically closer to the national capital would have a different relationship with federal power.

David Fontana

George Washington University Law School

The President’s Clarifying Memorandum And The Amicus Brief About Animus

6/20/17  //  Commentary

The President’s clarifying memorandum undercuts the legitimate rationale the executive order and DOJ had offered for the entry ban. An amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court explains why that matters.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

SCOTUS Severely Narrows Civil Rights Suits Against Federal Officers

6/20/17  //  Commentary

Yesterday's SCOTUS ruling in Ziglar v. Abbasi makes it all but impossible for civil rights plaintiffs to sue federal officials for money damages.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

Congressional Standing Is Not an All-or-Nothing Proposition

6/19/17  //  Commentary

It is perfectly consistent to think the House lacks standing in House v. Price, but that members of Congress have standing to sue for Foreign Emoluments Clause violations.

Brianne J. Gorod

Constitutional Accountability Center

Some Thoughts on the Government’s Latest Filing in the Entry Ban Cases

6/19/17  //  Commentary

Here I offer three quick reactions to the government’s latest filing in the Ninth Circuit case—the first two on questions concerning what the Court should do now with the government’s applications, and the third with respect to the merits of the statutory ultra vires argument on which the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit relied.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

The Fire Alarm Function of Office-Holding

6/19/17  //  Commentary

Trumps can fire Mueller only by issuing a directive to Acting AG Rod Rosenstein. Here's why -- and why it really matters.

Zachary Price

U.C. Hastings College of the Law