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.

6/8/17  //  Commentary

The government’s litigation strategy in the travel ban litigation undermines the purported national security rationale for the entry ban.

6/7/17  //  Commentary

The Administration's unhurried pace in defending its revised travel ban belies its representations of urgency to the U.S. Supreme Court.

6/7/17  //  Commentary

Texas’s Amicus Brief Makes An Argument That Is So Obviously Wrong Some People Thought It Was Not Worth Responding To

6/6/17  //  Commentary

A Munsingwear vacatur could be an intriguing compromise in the travel ban case that just might generate consensus on the Supreme Court. It would let the Justices avoid wading into treacherous constitutional waters. But it would also avoid giving the impression that the Court approved of a nationwide injunction about which the conservative Justices will, I suspect, have serious concerns.

6/6/17  //  Commentary

Let's explore the hypothesis that Trump is deliberately sabotaging the already weak case for sustaining the travel ban. This is extremely unlikely. As they say in medical school, when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras. The most obvious explanation--Trump is an ignorant racist with no impulse control--should dominate more intricate theories.

6/5/17  //  Commentary

The President's latest statements on Twitter undermine DOJ's defense of the entry ban, and continue the President's efforts to blame everyone (including DOJ and the courts) but himself.

6/5/17  //  Quick Reactions

Thanks in part to the President's own recent tweets and public comments, the case for concluding that his revised travel ban is unconstitutional has now become overwhelming.

6/5/17  //  Commentary

The President's statements on the London attacks reveal how the President thinks about his entry ban, and also what he might do if there is ever an attack on the United States.

6/3/17  //  Commentary

I've argued that the Supreme Court shouldn't grant review of the travel ban case because 33 hours after the Respondents file their response to the petition for certiorari on June 12, the entry ban will no longer be operative. Here I respond to two purportedly “plausible” alternative interpretations of the executive order offered by William Baude.

6/2/17  //  Quick Reactions

The government's petition for certiorari and stay requests raise some difficult timing issues in the travel ban litigation.

6/1/17  //  Commentary

On a new episode of Versus Trump, Take Care's podcast, Easha and Jason dig into healthcare for the first time, as they take a deep dive into the House v. Price litigation that addresses whether certain payments to insurers under the Affordable Care Act have been properly appropriated. They also debate immigration rhetoric vs. action and discuss drug testing for unemployment benefits. Listen now!

6/1/17  //  Commentary

The Ninth Circuit can give life to one of the challengers' most powerful arguments against Supreme Court review.

5/30/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

A detailed guide to how and when the Muslim Ban might reach the Supreme Court (and why this question really matters).

5/25/17  //  Quick Reactions

By Corey Brettschneider: As the Fourth Circuit recognized today, even if Kleindanst v. Mandel supplies the rule of decision and requires rationality review, animus is fatal to the Muslim Ban even under that standard.