June Medical Symposium: The History Behind Third Party Standing Arguments
In the third post in our Symposium on June Medical, Professor Mary Ziegler links Louisiana's argument that doctors lack standing to litigate cases related to abortion with a broader shift in litigation tactics by those opposed to abortion. And she wonders whether a reversal of precedent on standing doctrine could lead inevitably to the end of Casey and Roe.
June Medical Symposium: Abortion Returns To The Supreme Court
On March 4, the Supreme Court will hear its first abortion case in several years. In the first entry of our symposium, Dean Erwin Chemerinsky sets up the stakes—and fears that the case is going to end with the five conservative justices allowing severe restrictions on abortion, such as have not been upheld since Roe v. Wade.
The Blame Game
The administration often tries to foist blame on the courts for its politically unpopular policies--or to have the courts effectuate its politically unpopular policies for the administration.
Versus Trump: State Immunity Under The VRA + Adios, Easha :(
On this week’s Versus Trump, Charlie and Jason discuss a dissenting opinion by a Trump-appointed judge arguing that states cannot be sued for violating the Voting Rights Act. They then say goodbye to Easha with a tribute to her thinking about Versus Trump law and litigation. Listen now!
Was Impeachment Good Or Bad? The Conclusion
Last week, I took both sides of a series of important, related question: was Trump’s impeachment a good thing for democracy? The rule of law? For Democrats? Now I have to render a verdict. Which one was it?
Versus Trump: Was Impeachment Good or Bad?
On this week’s Versus Trump, Charlie and Jason discuss Jason's ongoing essays for the Take Care blog about whether impeachment was good or bad, net-positive or net-negative. This leads them to discuss whether the Democrats should have more aggressively pursued witnesses and whether this whole proceeding did much to vindicate the rule of law. Listen now!
Versus Trump: Vs. The Inaugural Committee, Plus Bolton Update
On this week’s Versus Trump, Charlie and Jason look at a new lawsuit by D.C. claiming that Trump's inaugural committee overpaid for space at the Trump Hotel and thus "wasted" at least $1 million in charitable funds. Spoiler alert: the lawsuit seems convincing. Listen now!
Versus Trump: Who Are Presidential Electors?
On this week’s Versus Trump, Charlie and Easha take a deep dive into two recently granted Supreme Court cases that go to the heart of the systems that we use to elect the President. The discussion takes us deep into questions of political accountability, free choice, and constitutional history. A classic Versus Trump cat's-away-mice-will-play episode chock full of fun analysis of, among other things, Jason's work. Listen now! (I mean right now.)
Versus Trump: Trump vs. The Equal Rights Amendment
On this week’s Versus Trump, Jason, Easha, and Charlie discuss the Trump Administration's new legal opinion regarding the legal status of the Equal Rights Amendment, also known as the ERA. They consider what will happen now that Virginia has become the 38th state to ratify the ERA since 1972. Is it too late, or can Congress do anything to add this amendment to the Constitution? Listen now!
Versus Trump: Amazon vs. Trump
On this week’s Versus Trump, Jason, Easha, and Charlie consider a new lawsuit by Amazon, in which the company claims that it was illegally denied a $10 billion Pentagon contract because of President Trump's stated dislike of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. And the return briefly to the question of Bolton's potential testimony at the Senate impeachment trial. Listen now!