Oceans Apart But Still a Close Familial Relation

9/5/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Analysis of the Ninth Circuit's latest travel ban argument (and some personal reflections).

Killing The Dream

9/5/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Donald Trump's apparent reasons for (apparently) rescinding DACA make little sense.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

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

Punching Down From The Pulpit, And Other Unpresidential Positions

8/8/17  //  Commentary

The President’s litigation positions underscore how he views his office as a license to beat up on persons with less power.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Second Thoughts About The Supreme Court’s Scheduling The Entry Ban Case

8/2/17  //  Commentary

The Court’s October Calendar Further Underscores That It Never Actually Intends To Resolve The Legality Of The Entry Ban

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

Some Notes On The Latest “Ban”

7/31/17  //  Commentary

There are some notable similarities between the President's announcement that transgender individuals would be banned from military service, and the ban(s) on entry from several Muslim majority countries.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

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.

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

The Government And Grandparents (What's The Big Deal?)

7/15/17  //  Quick Reactions

DOJ rushed to the Supreme Court to ensure that the government wouldn't have to admit grandparents. Its arguments are silly.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

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

A Reality Check On Proceedings Related To The Entry Ban Injunctions

7/13/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Some commentators are seizing on court orders in the proceedings related to the scope of the injunction against the entry ban as an indication that courts are rethinking their decisions against the entry ban. That's wrong (with a cautionary note about the federal courts).

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

What It Means To Be Presidential: Litigating Positions

7/11/17  //  Commentary

Jane Chong questioned whether the administration's “self-interested [legal] stance" in the cases about the emoluments clauses "is ... fundamentally at odds with the trust that the office [of the President] confers.” It's worth asking the same about the administration's litigating position on the scope of the injunction against the entry ban.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

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