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

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

On The Travel Ban The Supreme Court Says: Stay Tuned

6/26/17  //  Quick Reactions

Some quick thoughts on the Supreme Court's actions on the travel ban.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

It's All About that Stay (and Its Surprising Limits)

6/26/17  //  Quick Reactions

Preliminary thoughts on the Supreme Court's travel ban order.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

Animus Revisited: DOJ Fails To Explain Change in Position on Relevance of Campaign Statements

6/23/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

DOJ can't distinguish a case from 1995 in which it took a diametrically opposed view on the relevance of campaign statements.

Jim Oleske

Lewis & Clark Law School

An Updated Guide to Our Analyses of the Travel Ban

6/22/17  //  Latest Developments

Take Care hereby presents in a single, updated post all commentary we have published about the revised travel ban.

Take Care

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

U.C. Irvine School of Law

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

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

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

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

How the President’s Clarifying Memorandum Destroys the Case for the Entry Ban

6/15/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The President's "clarifying" memorandum undermines the facial legitimacy of the entry ban, and the government's stated purposes for the entry ban.

Take Care

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

The President Resuscitates the Entry Ban: Where Should the Supreme Court Go From Here?

6/15/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

In this post I explain why, in light of the Ninth Circuit’s decision on Monday, there’s no good reason for the Supreme Court to grant any of the government’s petitions or applications.

Marty Lederman

Georgetown Law

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

U.C. Irvine School of Law