A Rough Guide to Amicus Briefs In the Travel Ban Cases

4/24/17  //  Latest Developments

Take Care offers a quick, rough breakdown of the amicus briefs filed last week concerning President Trump's revised executive order.

Take Care

The Attorney General, Hawaii Statehood, and National Injunctions

4/21/17  //  Quick Reactions

The AG's comments denigrating Hawaii statehood are objectionable for many reasons. But don't overlook his underlying complaint about national injunctions—which conservatives spent years developing and have suddenly, painfully discovered can be used against them.

Joshua Matz

Publisher

The Muslim Ban: Answering Tough Questions About Motive

4/21/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The opinion by then-Justice Rehnquist in Hunter v. Underwood (1985), a case about denying the right to vote for racist reasons, offers thoughtful answers to many of the hardest questions that you might ask about motive and the Muslim Ban.

Richard Primus

University of Michigan Law School

A Different View of Why the Muslim Ban Violates the Establishment Clause

4/20/17  //  Commentary

A diverse group of leading constitutional law scholars—representing many different views about the Establishment Clause—has filed an amicus brief challenging the Muslim Ban. Here's what you need to know.

Joshua Matz

Publisher

Corey Brettschneider

Brown University

Micah Schwartzman

University of Virginia School of Law

Nelson Tebbe

Brooklyn Law School

Information Wars Part V: Immigrant Crime Disinformation

4/20/17  //  Commentary

In its war on information, the Trump administration is not just trying to hide the facts. It’s also trying to misrepresent them.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Helen Klein Murillo

Harvard Law School '17

Why Trump's Travel Ban Statements Compel a Finding of Improper Purpose

4/6/17  //  Commentary

Trump's statements about the revised travel ban overwhelmingly evidence a purpose at odds with the Establishment Clause. And few, if any, of those statements evince actual, substantive national security or foreign affairs objectives that explain the bizarre scope of his order.

Joshua Matz

Publisher

Why Courts Have Probed Trump’s Motives for the Travel Ban

4/4/17  //  Commentary

Perceptions of presidential bad faith have given judges the fortitude to do what the law already demands of them, even though their actions might prompt the President to bash them by name on TV or Twitter.

Joshua Matz

Publisher

The Imperatives of Structure: The Travel Ban, the Establishment Clause, and Standing to Sue

4/3/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

In the Fourth Circuit travel ban appeal, DOJ contends that the plaintiffs lack standing. But a deeper examination of the Establishment Clause proves that the plaintiffs’ claims must be heard on the merits.

Ira C. Lupu

George Washington University Law School

Peter J. Smith

George Washington University Law School

Robert W. Tuttle

George Washington University Law School

An Update on DACA

3/31/17  //  Latest Developments

The President's words indicate he is open to honoring DACA (the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program). But his actions (and inactions) suggest otherwise.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

En Banc Review? How Can I Say No?

3/30/17  //  Quick Reactions

When asked by the Fourth Circuit, the Government said it wanted to have the full court consider its Muslim ban. But the Government probably did not mean it.

Amir Ali

Roderick & Solange MacArthur Justice Center

The First Amendment Belongs Only to Americans? Wrong

3/29/17  //  Commentary

The First Amendment makes America great for everyone, not just for citizens.

Nikolas Bowie

Harvard Law School

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

The Standard Fare of Judges: What Happens When the Judiciary Does What It Always Does

3/28/17  //  Commentary

The Muslim Ban litigation does not involve a "revolt of the judges." As proven by a survey of major and minor cases from the legal canon, this litigation involves only the standard fare of judging.

Daniel Deacon

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

McKayla Maroney Is Not Impressed (With DOJ's Brief in the Fourth Circuit)

3/27/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Department of Justice has filed a brief in the Fourth Circuit defending President Trump's revised entry ban. This is not an impressive brief: it is rife with misstatements of fact and incorrect legal arguments.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Sherley You’re Joking

3/27/17  //  Commentary

A confused and poorly reasoned decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit shouldn’t be read to shield agencies from judicial review whenever they happen to be following an executive order.

Nick Bagley

University of Michigan Law School

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

U.C. Irvine School of Law