Academia, Columns, Constitutional Law, Politics

Panic Politics: Law Professors’ Umpteenth ‘Constitutional Crisis’ Falls Flat

Below is my column in the Hill on yet another letter from law professors declaring a “constitutional crisis” over the Trump policies. Despite the claims that this is a rogue president ignoring the rule of law, the Administration continues to prevail in some of these cases, including another ruling in favor of the Department of Government Efficiency late on Friday. As stated in the column, it has also lost some cases as did the prior Administration. The point is that, rather than witnessing the collapse of the constitutional system, these cases show that it is continuing to function as designed in sorting out these disputes.

Here is the column:

It’s only March, and we have yet another declaration of a “constitutional crisis.”

The latest dire declaration comes from roughly 950 law professors, who refer generally to actions and policies implemented by President Trump as “beyond his constitutional or statutory authority.”

So — what happens if the “experts” hold a crisis and no one shows up?

After years of such claims, the perpetual crisis has left a dwindling number of people inclined to panic. Many simply have more pressing matters at the moment and have the same reaction of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger: “There cannot be a crisis next week. My schedule is already full.”

The latest letter follows a familiar pattern that has played out like a political perpetual motion machine since the first Trump impeachment. It works something like this: A legal academy composed of largely liberal academics announces a “constitutional crisis” caused by conservatives, and then a largely liberal media runs the story with little scrutiny or skepticism. On most echo-chambered media sites, the public rarely hears an opposing view.

The purging of conservative and libertarian faculty from most universities has been a long-standing problem. In self-identified surveys, professors confirm that some departments lack a single Republican. A study by Georgetown University’s Kevin Tobia and MIT’s Eric Martinez found that only 9 percent of law school professors in the top 50 law schools identify as conservative.

Law schools are not unique. A survey conducted by the Harvard Crimson shows that more than three-quarters of Harvard Arts and Sciences and School of Engineering and Applied Sciences faculty respondents identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.” Only 2.5 percent identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4 percent as “very conservative.” A 2017 study found that only 15 percent of faculty members were conservative. Another analysis found that 33 out of 65 departments lacked even a single conservative faculty member.

In other words, it is embarrassingly easy to get 1,000 law professors to sign off on letters claiming endless constitutional crises caused by Trump or conservatives.

Those letters are then fed to eagerly awaiting media outlets. The perpetual machine then whirls and spins as liberal professors feed liberal reporters, who then feed liberals in Congress, who cite the unchallenged consensus of academia and the media.

The New York Times rushed the news to its viewers that “Trump’s Actions Have Created a Constitutional Crisis, Scholars Say.” The Times interviewed Berkeley Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, who previously called the conservative justices “political hacks” and just published a book titled “No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States.”

Chemerinsky breathlessly explained “We never have seen anything like this.”

The problem is that we have. Presidents often negate the prior executive orders of their predecessors, fire their appointees and implement sweeping new changes. Those actions are frequently challenged and some are found to be procedurally or substantially unlawful. Others are upheld.

President Biden was repeatedly found to have violated the constitution without most of these signatories expressing a peep of concern over the mounting “crisis.”

Indeed, some pushed for unconstitutional actions against the overwhelming views of legal experts. Take Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe, who also signed this letter to express alarm at Trump pushing the Constitution to the breaking point. Tribe has attacked conservatives in profane diatribes and supported packing the Supreme Court to engineer a liberal majority.

When Biden wanted to circumvent Congress and implement billions in student loan forgiveness payments before the election, Tribe was there. Even former Speaker Nancy Pelosi admitted that Biden could not constitutionally wipe out hundreds of millions of dollars of student loans without congressional action. However, Tribe assured President Biden that it was entirely legal.

It was found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and lower courts.

When Biden wanted to impose a national eviction moratorium, he admitted that his own lawyers told him that it would be flagrantly unconstitutional. Pelosi then told him to call Tribe, who assured Biden he had the authority to act alone.

This was also quickly found to be unconstitutional.

Biden was also found to have engaged in racial discrimination and other flagrant constitutional violations.

Of course, none of that is a crisis, and none of these signatories ran to blast fax a letter to the legal academy.

Other signatories, such as Professor Heidi Li Feldman, have declared that conservative justices and lawyers are “lawless” due to their opposing constitutional views. She has called upon law professors not to fall “into complicity with lawlessness.” In other words, conservative jurisprudence, followed by roughly half of the bench, is simply unacceptable and should not be recognized.

If you view conservatives judges and justices as “lawless,” then every decision that they issue can be construed as a “crisis” in failing to adopt your own interpretive approach.

There are good-faith reasons to challenge some of Trump’s actions, as there were under Biden. I have criticized some of those measures. However, Trump has repeatedly pledged to follow adverse court orders while he seeks appeals. That is precisely what he did in his first term, where he complied with opposing rulings, including some issued by his own appointees.

Trump is also prevailing in some of these cases and will likely prevail in many others. Democratic groups have forum-shopped around the country to bring challenges before favorable judges. Some have issued injunctions, while others have not. Others have already been reversed.

For example, the media made great fanfare over restraining orders issued to limit the actions of Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency. Less coverage was given to later opinions reducing those orders or setting them aside, including a recent order refusing to bar Trump from firing many government employees at USAID.

Likewise, the media and many professors lionized Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger for suing to stop Trump’s firing. When Judge Amy Berman Jackson in Washington issued her opinion, some of us expressed skepticism over her cited legal authority. Within four days, the D.C. Circuit had reversed her, ruling for Trump. Dellinger then dropped his own case rather than multiply adverse rulings.

None of this means that Trump will prevail in most such lawsuits or that these are not good-faith challenges. However, the record does not suggest a constitutional crisis. It suggests the opposite — a constitutional system that continues to function efficiently and fairly.

The real “crisis” seems to be that Trump is winning in some of these cases. To make matters worse, he is complying with adverse rulings. After an election where many of these same voices declared the imminent death of democracy if Trump were elected, the constitutional system seems to be, inconveniently and stubbornly, very much alive and well.

Of course, opposing these actions on policy or conventional legal grounds would generate little press. It has to be a “crisis” to get headlines and segments on cable news. Stanford law Professor Pamela Karlan and co-signatory described Trump as different, a president “for whom the Constitution [is] essentially meaningless.”

Karlan, who previously testified in favor of impeaching Trump in his first term, ignores the fact that our system does not depend on how Trump feels about the Constitution, even if she did have an insight into his inner self. We have the oldest and most successful constitutional system because it does not rely on the good motivations or values of those in government. It has survived centuries with often hostile presidents due to its checks and balances.

In the end, the seeming unanimity is not reflective of the merits but the membership of the legal academy. From calls to pack the court to curtailing free speech to trashing the Constitution, law professors are like priests who have kept their frocks while losing their faith. And their crisis of faith is the only crisis these professors are facing.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.” 

480 thoughts on “Panic Politics: Law Professors’ Umpteenth ‘Constitutional Crisis’ Falls Flat”

  1. Dear Professor-I love the column today. Especially describing law professors like priests who have kept the frocks but lost their faith. Things are little different this time because the compliant mainstream media has shrunk to a far more controllable size and some of its members are starting to disappear before our very eyes. This seems to result in a far smaller echo chamber that has trouble getting its message over the Potomac, much less to the rest of the country.
    The IVY league seems to shrink day by day as they try to turn into a mini Gaza, Hollywood is depleted by massive losses as a film after film seems to collapse around it’s woke and awful story lines. Even Netflix is finding out there is a limit to how far out there you can go before people just click to another stream. The shrieking of the chattering classes in academia, movieland , and politics is more and more like the remnants of a bad echo that is slowing disappearing into the mountains.
    The daily exposure of the stupidities in the budget, if not the outright graft, seems to have numbed the public to the sufferings of the outrageous progressives. They seem to have to resort to more and more extreme shenanigans in order to even budge the public “interest meter”. It could not have happened to a better group.

  2. FREE SPEACH MY ASS
    ICE Arrests Palestinian Activist Who Helped Lead Columbia’s Anti-War Protests

    Get off you duff JT, stop drinking the kool aide.

    Home of the free and brave? How about home of the great orange chicken god.

    1. Baby Trump, the Jew hater, has no issue with Hamas supporters blocking Jewish students from going to the library, but would go nuts if Ben Shapiro was allowed to give a speech on campus.

      1. You know nothing about me yet call me a “jew hater”

        Typical MAGA that doesn’t know sh-t.

        I said nothing about anybody else, just this one person. Free speech? My ASS.

    2. That “activist” was free to speak all he liked. He was NOT free to break the law while doing so. Nobody is.

      The fact that these “protests” are vile and disgusting, and every person who participated in them should be unemployable for life, is irrelevant. So long as they don’t break any laws they have the right to wave Nazi flags and shout Heil Hitler, or to wear Klan robes and call for bringing back slavery and lynching. But protesting does not exempt a person from any of the laws that apply to everyone all the time, and when a protester breaks a law they should be arrested.

      1. He didnt’ break the law. He violated school policy. That doesn’t make it a crime resulting in deportation and allegedly revoking his green card for exercising his free speech right.

        ICE uses AI to scour the internet for those expressing views supporting the palistinian cause and deporting them for doing so. That is a clear violation of their 1st amendment right. Trump is exercising viewpoint discrimination and punishing those who are expressing it. Turley would be agast if Biden did this. Yet he remains silent.

        1. ICE presently is arresting known criminals and illegal alien agitators guilty of violence on college campuses, and most are not students.

          It’s about time. Such scum does not deserve to be in America. You don’t either, but I suppose you have American citizenship despite being a lousy citizen.

          1. The Columbia student didn’t. commit a crime. Protesting is not a crime. Even resident aliens have 1st amendment rights.

            It should be a crime to be as ignorant as you however.

            1. I protest outside your house or business by holding signs and chanting = hunky-dory fine.
              I protest inside your house by breaking windows, funding others to attack, and disrupting normal peace and order = a crime.
              Right to Assemble does not mean Right to be an Ass.

              1. Public spaces at universities are as being inside my house. Right to assemble in public spaces paid by our tax dollars is not illegal or a crime. Violating school policy is not a violation of criminal statute.

            2. Stupid: Look at everything he did, where and how he did them. He helped promote terrorist activities. Therefore, he is not a citizen and doesn’t have the same rights as you. If you did those things, they might need more evidence to prove you a criminal and jail you. You might get off by pleading the truth: stupidity. Khalil is not a citizen. The INC rules say he can be deported.

  3. The Constitutional crisis is the unwillingness of the elected Congress to take charge of settling the most controversial issues of the times, whether immigration policy, abortion policy, the deficit and the debt, internet privacy, AI and copyright infringement, foreign policy. Instead, Congress has punted to the Exec. and Judicial Branches to make the hot-button calls. This hands over policy to activists and lawyers, pushing public sentiment aside and protecting special interests.

  4. Speaking of Legal Inaccuracies, see Young Scholar, Jasmine Crockett’s interpretation of Immigration Law!

    “Viewers of MSNBC and CNN have recently noticed more frequent appearances by Reps. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York). With the Democratic Party lacking clear leadership in a rudderless motion—still confused about how many genders—its strategists are testing the waters to determine which unhinged and crazed progressive lawmaker will be the party’s new face.

    “I have heard from Democratic operatives is that Crockett and Ocasio-Cortez are trying to fill the vacuum created by Harris’s loss, the absence of a clear 2028 frontrunner and a coherent agenda,” Douglas MacKinnon, a former White House and Pentagon official, recently penned in an op-ed featured in The Hill.

    Crockett’s latest appearance on far-left conspiracy network MSNBC resulted in a Community Note on X after she claimed: “It is not a criminal violation to enter the country illegally… it’s not a crime.”

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/crock-sht-dem-rep-jasmine-crockett-says-entering-usa-illegally-not-crime

    1. She probably meant to say that remaining in the country illegally is not a crime, which is correct. It isn’t. But entering it illegally is certainly a crime. She’s probably just too dumb to understand the difference.

    2. Mark my words, we’ll be seeing a Crotchett/Occasional-Cortex 2028 ticket, with Harry Sissy as hypeman/ press briefer

  5. Wow Turley is showing his MAGA brain rot. The eviction moratorium was first done by Trump and upheld by the court. Then magically they struck it down under Biden.

    Also the amount of media attention does not determine what is a crisis.

    We are absolutely in a Constitutional crisis. The court struck down the line item veto in the 90s. Trump is doing the same thing by refusing to spend money, cancelling grants, and destroying entire agencies without Congressional approval.

    And what happened this weekend should shock anyone. A green card holder was arrested without a warrant for legal and protected speech, and facing deportation. That is a fascist move.

    1. The taking and holding of US Citizen hostages by Hamas is an act of war. Green card holders are non-citizens, and are subject to ongoing evaluation of their desirability as future citizens. The 5 -year residency is a probationary period. Check the law. Look it up.

    2. 1. Congress never approved those grants in the first place. It was the bureaucrats in USAID who decided to award them. Trump has every right to cancel them. He’s not refusing to spend money, he’s refusing to WASTE money. He has until the end of the fiscal year to spend what Congress has appropriated, and he can decide what to spend it on, within the broad outlines of the appropriation. And he doesn’t need Congress’s permission to “destroy” an agency, only to formally abolish it.

      2. The nazi was arrested with a warrant, for crimes he committed.

      1. Federal grants are contracts, and contracts must be honored. Also mass pausing and cancelling of grants has nothing to do with finding waste (which is a slow and detailed process) but plain old politics. They are cancelling grants that don’t confirm to MAGAism, and that is not allowed. Because it is the federal government, due process applies.

        1. Franke, what is the government’s fraud, waste and abuse hotline number?

        2. There’s always a way out of contracts, Franke my boy. Else, why have a lawyer-written contract for work in the first place, if not to have a way to not get screwed by the other party?

    3. “A green card holder was . . .”

      You might want to look at the “inadmissibility clause.” It was written for the type of creatures you are coddling.

    4. False
      There was no federal eviction moratorium under trump
      Some states closed the courts making evictions impossible
      But rent was still due

  6. As the professor has illustrated, our constitutional crisis is always the figment of prog/left ideologies. It doesn’t really matter what argument they raise, the reason for this is the degeneration of our media/education industry and NOTHING will change until those 2 institutions are cleansed of those who believe that universities, media, and cultural institutions serve as propaganda machines for indoctrination rather than centers for free thinyears.

    Trump, and his MAGA movement, will only be a bandage on a very deep wound. If a large segment of our society has been effectively brainwashed to defy change towards more conservative values/principles we will not be successful in righting this ship until the progressive/anti-western traditional values are squashed for the utter insanity that they are. That is a much heavier lift that winning power fir only 2-4 years.

    I am most concerned about the failure of our current attorney general to hold anyone responsible for their quite evident unconstitutional actions. Where are the arrests of those flagrantly flaunting our laws? Trump is losing the public relations battle over the constitution by this inaction; his supporters want to see orange jumpsuits on so many unabashedly defiant progressives in government who are continually ridiculing his justice department.

    2. Purging universities of ideologies you don’t like, swashing those who don’t share your “more conservative values”. What you are advocating is fascism.

      1. No, I’m suggesting that the founding fathers and those advocating for traditional concepts of FREE thinking did not anticipate the total fascism of progressive ideology and that it is this cultish behavior by them that does not allow opposing thought; but functions more like the Spanish Inquisitors who would demand conversion to their ideology through coercion/torture. The sort of actions that will use force to maintain their power. The current acts of vandalism and censorship by the prog/left only validates my point.

          1. Franke
            Look in the mirror Mr. Hypocrisy, oh wait Vampires don’t have a reflection. The left has been doing to Conservatives what you keep calling fascism for the last 40 years.

          2. please elucidate the difference between the prog cult and the Inquisitors when it comes to coercion of thought? The left has turned into what it had protested against and they are willfully ignorant of that; seeing as much virtue in what they demand as any of Torquemada’s best henchmen. Comply with progressive ideology or else. Let them admit their cultish obsession with control.

      2. Isn’t that what the left is doing? How many faculty members at universities do you think lean tight vs left?

        1. Intellectualism and academics has been associated with liberal and progressive philosophy for hundreds of years. Not because the liberal professors boot out conservation ones, but because being a conservative means denying science and logic, and being stuck in the past. Educated people are much more likely to look at the present world and say “Dude that is f’ed up!” and want to change it, which is being a progressive.

            1. Yes. Because the meaning of “men” is not simple. Does it mean genetically XY, or having normal male anatomy, or all of the above and confirming to what society determines is “masculine”? Those are all quite different. So yes a “man” who takes hormones, has had a mastectomy, looks like a “man” and acts like a “man” could still have a functional uterus.

              1. Lmao this is what is called delusions. Or better yet, pure insanity! Males and men are directly related! Separating these two is not only irresponsible but evil in nature. Science is not for solving your inner issues you have with your body and to “affirm” your delusions! Imagine needing someone else to make you feel like you “exist!” Talk about cheapening life and not being in reality

              2. The flaw here, is that to get this to work, you must know what a woman is, and simultaneously reject what a woman is, in order to define a man who castrated himself, inverted his parts, and wears a wig as a woman. What is a woman, Franke? You must have a definition of “woman” in order to reach this logic, correct?

            2. Also you are demonstrating my point. You are taking a simplistic view of a complicated topic to push your politics. That is typical of conservatives.

              1. Lol somethings in life a just that, simple. Its the democrats who think they because are “educated” that solution isn’t a solution unless it’s complicated… thats messed up logic. And dehumanizing in a way

              2. Also, not a complicated topic when they already solved this issue. These people belong in a mental institution! Dsm5 ring a bell?

              3. Also you are demonstrating my point. You are taking a simplistic view of a complicated topic to push your politics.

                Complicated topic? Franke, like the latest brilliant communist judge on SCOTUS, you can’t even peer down into your panties, look at what’s frowning back up at you, and tell Americans you can identify a women, whether at the moment of birth or what you are now?

                You can’t even figure it out by thinking of whether you squat or stand to pee.

                Typical of the self-appointing “intellectuals” that prefer to be called ‘liberals’ instead of the communists that they are tearing at all the load bearing walls of our republic. Schoolchildren can tell you the difference – unless communist unionized public school teachers get a few years to mess with their minds.

          2. Educated people do not say, “dude.” Or generally “f’ed up!” Progressives do. And what all us normal, sane and even those of us who do not have a college degree, look at progressive policies, think and know they are messed up. Biological males in women’s sports, bathrooms, locker rooms, not only messed up but wrong. Pornography in elementary school libraries is not only messed up but wrong. Letting millions of un-vetted illegals into the country to commit crimes is not only messed up but wrong. Protecting or releasing violent criminal illegals or not reporting them to ICE is not only messed up but wrong. All of those things are progressive policies. And we, The People, voted against that nonsense. And Trump is doing exactly what we voted him into the WH for. We, The People, look at the hot mess you have made of this nation and the world and voted to change it.
            How marvelous!

    3. You are right about the Deep Wound. Saw this on Free Republic this morning:

      https://www.tiktok.com/@blackbeauty_235/video/7444301478715608363?lang=en

      And it’s not just with the Ghetto Girls. American Women all across the country have chosen to live in a Fantasy World, and stats show more women are unhappy post-Feminism, than pre-Feminism. Same with all the Gay Rights and Trans stuff. Same with the Globalists, and the Climate Change Extremists. And the millions of drug addicts. And the millions of criminals. The liberals in academia and the press. And this:

      “In the United States, 54% of American adults read below the equivalent of a sixth-grade level, and nearly one in five adults reads below a third-grade level. Lower literacy rates directly correlate to higher unemployment rates, reduced income, and overall impacts U.S. competitiveness on the global stage.”

      And this:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK0I4-7N4gs&t=173s

      These are all genies that can not be put back into the bottle, IMHO.

  7. Turley seems to ignore a clear issue of free speech at Columbia University. Trump declared a ban on illegal protests, and any international student engaging in illegal demonstrations will be deported. One student has already been illegally detained because he was involved in protesting Israel despite having a green card and ICE not being able to produce a warrant. Even students with visas have free speech rights as long as they are within our borders. Trump is infringing on their free speech rights because he doesn’t like their views. Turley, why aren’t you chastising Trump?

    1. George, you are not a lawyer. You no nothing about green cards or immigration law. You are all mouth.

      1. So? You didn’t prove me wrong. All you can offer is pithy put-downs and snark in lieu of substance. I’m sure you could do better but I doubt you are able to.

      2. Protected speech and arrest without a warrant for non-crimes are illegal for anyone in the US. That is is based on protected speech makes it worse.

          1. There is no such thing as an “illegal” protest. It’s still protected speech. Punishing anyone for exercising it is unconstitutional. Simply declaring any protest illegal is the very reason why we have the 1st amendment.

              1. No, not it is not. “Illegal protest” is a fascist concept. A riot requires violence (which some of the pro-Hamas protesters did). But the person in questing was not charged with a crime.

                2. Khalil is an illegal immigrant so he should be booted. But not only is he illegal, he is one of the “protestors” in many campuses and is involved in violence. Boot him from the country and if Franke isn’t American, boot him as well. Franke does nothing positive and is a drain on society.

                  1. Kalil is here legally S. Meyer, he is legal green card holder. Protesting is not a crime. Your ignorance is astounding. He has not been charged with committing violence. He is accused of expressing opposition to Israel online which is protected speech. It’s illegal to arrest anyone for expressing their views publicly or online as long as it does not involved inciting violence.

                    Khalil is only accused of organizing a protest and that is not a crime. You are nothing but a mass of ignorance enjoying the freedom to be as ignorant as you can be and that is certainly your prerogative.

                    1. “he is legal green card holder.”

                      It makes little difference. He is not a citizen. Throw him out. If he has an expired green card, put him in jail and then throw him out. The nation is forced to keep worthless citizens like you, but that doesn’t extend to him.

                      “Khalil is only accused of organizing a protest “

                      You are too stupid to realize he has been tracked, so it wasn’t for ***a*** protest.

                      “He is accused of expressing opposition to Israel online”

                      Not so. We can’t expect much from you. You are a dumbbell.

                  2. S. Meyer,
                    Oh, a drain is right. He is a federal employee. Trolling the good professor’s blog, on a government computer. On a government network. On government and taxpayer time.

    2. What is your stance on speech that incites to violence? I thought all you progs supported that unconstitutional legislation decrying “hate speech”. “Chants of “death to America” and death to Jews” sound rather incendiary to me. Why the hypocrisy on your part?

      1. It may be incendiary, but it is not incitement. You just admitted that Democrats are wrong about so-called “hate speech”, and their attempts to suppress it are unconstitutional. How can you turn around at the same time and say that when it’s a Hamas nazi he should be arrested for it?

        But the fact is he wasn’t arrested for his speech but for his illegal actions. He can shout “Sieg Heil” all he likes, but he can’t commit crimes at the same time and expect not to be arrested for them.

        1. He was arrested for his views online. ICE used AI to scour the social media to find his views on Israel and declared it as ‘support for Hamas’ that in itself is not a crime. It’s protected speech. Trump is looking for excuses to boot out those who are critical of israel. Problem is even students on visas are protected by the 1st amendment as long as they are within our borders.

          His “crime” was voicing support for Palestinians. You can voice support for neo-nazis or the communist party all day long and still not be a crime. You can’t be arrested for it. If you believe that you can then anyone voicing support for Palestinians, even Hamas, or Neo-Nazis should be thrown in jail.

      2. Chanting “death to america” and “death to jews” is protected speech. It’s incindiary speech. Inciting violence requires speech to be more precise than simply saying “Death to America” or Death to Jews”. In order for speech to be deemed incitful speech must encourage or command others to get violent promote destruction.

    3. He wasn’t arrested for his speech, he was arrested for his illegal actions. You said it yourself: “Trump declared a ban on illegal protests”. Illegal protests are, by definition, illegal. Technically there’s no such thing as an illegal protest, but it’s obvious shorthand for a protest at which illegal acts take place. Protesting doesn’t give you immunity from any law. You still have to obey all the same laws that everyone else does and if you don’t you can be arrested.

    4. What a dummy. No one was detained for protesting or freedom of speech. The person you may be talking about was jailed for breaking the law. Managing two ideas simultaneously is a mountain you find too high to climb.

      1. A bit more information from the NY Post:

        “With the reported arrest and likely deportation of Mahmoud Khalil, a ***noncitizen ringleader*** of antisemitic protests at Columbia and Barnard, ICE has put fresh teeth on President Donald Trump’s crackdown on campus hate. Hooray!

        This follows Friday’s nixing of some ***$400 million in federal grants to and contracts with Columbia for its failure to comply with anti-discrimination laws***, even as Trump’s Education Department is eyeing four other universities (to start) for similar treatment”

        What would happen if one person repeatedly used the N word? We all know but George, a foolish fellow, can’t answer.

        “Khalil, despite finishing his graduate studies at the school in December, stuck around — plainly with an eye to continuing the disruptions that included this month’s Barnard building takeovers.

        This movement was never merely about protest: Ever since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks, it has sought to intimidate America with passion and ***force*** — occupying campus quads, blockading and/or ***rampaging through libraries, harassing and assaulting visible Jews.***

        Nor is it truly a student movement: As arrest records show, even ***actions on campus include gobs of older “career” radicals, often leading the worst excesses.***
        —
        “In Syria, militias tied to the new government just slaughtered over 1,000 civilians, to no outcry on any US campus, just as previous Syrian governments’ massacres over the last decade raised not a peep of protest.”

        Where is stupid George’s outcry!!!

          1. S. Meyer doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He claims Khalil is an illegal immigrant. He’s here legally with a green card. He was arrested for exercising his free speech rights. Voicing support for Palestinians is not a crime.

        2. S. Meyer. You didn’t show Khalil being a accused of committing violence. He is accused of supporting Hamas and that is not a crime.

          Having a green card means you have permanent status which allows you to remain here as long as you have a job.

          “ What would happen if one person repeatedly used the N word? We all know but George, a foolish fellow, can’t answer.”

          Nothing would happen S. Meyer, you can’t be arrested for repeatedly using the N-word. Your ignorance is ovewhelming please seek help.

          1. “Having a green card means you have permanent status which allows you to remain here as long as you have a job.”

            Absolutely false! What should we expect from stupid people?

            Check out INA§237 8USC 1227 and 1182

            “Nothing would happen S. Meyer, you can’t be arrested for repeatedly using the N-word. Your ignorance is ovewhelming please seek help.”

            Go on Columbia’s campus and say it. See what happens. Then, go to Barnard’s campus and see what happens. Keep doing it while encouraging others. You are a citizen. Khalil doesn’t have that luxury. You have the luxury of being a citizen and stupid.

          1. Upstate, I like the endpoint, but I would be much happier if the visit was from someone else.

      2. S. Meyer, Khalil was arrested for exercising his right to protest. What law did he break S. Meyer?

        Expressing support for Palestinians and criticizing Israel is not a crime. Your ignorance is suffocating your attempt at logic.

        1. Read the Immigration and Naturalization Act. You don’t need to be a criminal to be deported.

          Hamas is a terrorist organization! You are an idiot.

    5. Trump has not banned illegal protests
      He has demand that those who committ crimes are punished
      And he is deporting them
      Protest all you want
      Commit crimes get deported

  8. Musk is the real President of the U.S. He is Trump’s Roy Cohn, helping baby Donald to disrupt and otherwise take vengeance upon world order because Donnie gets no respect…like an orangutan playing with alphabet blocks. Inhabiting the Oval Office keeps little Donnie out of prison for now. His is a lame duck administration.

        2. Don’t forget to claim the extra anus directly below your eyes that your posts emanate from. Oh, and that special mangina The Oval Office House Plant issued you so you could go legally parade your wedding tackle in little girls’ change rooms by cosplaying as being a woman.

        3. You do not seem to be using those eyes and ears

          You say this administration sucks ?
          Why should I?
          Because waste fraud and abuse are being cut ?
          What is happening that you oppose ?

      1. Franke: Trump is a lame duck because this is his last term as President, unless he declares himself dictator at the end of four years and the country submits to this moron.

    3. Another Biden Bolshevik Birthing Boy, bitter since he lost the protection of The Oval Office House Plant’s autopen. Speaking His Democrat Truths in fear since Trump made it illegal for him to continue going into little girls’ change rooms to hang his male wedding tackle out on display. Now he’s no longer a male legitimately cosplaying as female – now he’s back to what he always was: a groomer and pedophile.

      The mid-term campaign will be starting in a few months: DON’T CHANGE A SINGLE THING YOU’RE DOING IN RUNNING YOUR 2024 ELECTION STRATEGY!

    4. ROFL
      Wrong but who cares ?

      Of course this is a lame duck
      That is true by definition

      At the same time trump and his people are looking to unf$#k the country as much as possible in the next 4 years

  9. The most important part of the post:

    “It works something like this: A legal academy composed of largely liberal academics announces a “constitutional crisis” caused by conservatives, and then a largely liberal media runs the story with little scrutiny or skepticism. On most echo-chambered media sites, the public rarely hears an opposing view.”

    It is a circle-jerk, on a large scale, and it has been going on for decades now.

    1. As illicit public funding for the circle jerk is halted, jerks will leave and the circle will shrink. There will be some dedicated jerks who remain but the noise and threat factors will be reduced.

    2. Increasingly few people are paying any attention to the msm democrats the left

  10. Turley claims to be an “expert” on constitutional issues but only discusses topics that support his views or Trump’s. Legal experts correctly note that Trump has lost more legal cases than Biden. Turley seems to enjoy pointing out Biden’s record of court losses to suggest a lack of progress. Trump has experienced more losses than Biden, leading some Republicans to call for the impeachment of judges, claiming they are biased against him instead of addressing the actual issues. He managed to lose in court three times within 90 minutes.

    Trump’s already taken a couple of hits in the Supreme Court, and if he keeps pushing things too far, he’ll probably rack up even more losses.

    Turley is pandering to Trump supporters while evading serious legal issues facing the administration. He ignores Trump’s attempt to assert power over legal interpretation and the potential problem of Trump disregarding court orders, which could raise significant constitutional concerns. If Biden were to do this, Turley would be quick to criticize.

      1. No, just making the obvious observation based on Turley’s myopic views of current issues.

    3. Turley is a solid MAGA and supporter of fascism. That is why he ignores or plays down Trump’s illegal acts.

    4. Do you hear yurself?
      Biden himself started the trope that a Trump win would kill US democracy!
      Turley is reminding us that this claim is alive and well among academia and leftist propoganda!
      That these liars keep spewing their lies is further evidence against them!

      1. He wasn’t wrong. Trump loves dictators because they do what they want without having the pesky problem of dealing with governmental bodies like congress or the judicial branch. He’s already made it clear he would prefer those two branches just roll over and don’t interfere with this vision or agenda.

    5. Not many were suing biden because we are not unhinged like the others. So your point is moot.

      1. Not many were suing Biden because was not pushing beyond the boundaries of the executive office and allowing a private individual who was not elected or confirmed by the senate to unilaterally decide to freeze funding and stop payments for work already performed.

        Trump is going beyond his authority and Republicans are rolling over and essentially abdicating their role of having the power of the purse.

    6. George

      Trump ultimately won most legal cases
      Intermediate bad choices do not matter

      There are further issues
      Much of the unconstitutional conduct of Biden is only now being found

      There was no court loss because the misconduct was in secret

      1. Trump hasn’t won. Not on the merits of the cases. He still has plenty of cases pending in court and he’s lost multiple motions and appeals. Far more than Biden.

        Turley made the number of court rulings Biden lost as a measure of Biden’s performance as president. Now that Trump is in a similar predicament Turley remains silent. He makes an effort to hand wave away Trump’s court troubles as mere routine. It shows his bias and partisan disingenuousness.

    7. Can we cut the stupid left wing lies ?

      Do you understand that you have lied so much people do not believe you ?

      Why should I accept any assertion in your post as factual?
      Why should I accept you legal experts who were wrong about pretty much everything in the past decade

      1. “ Can we cut the stupid left wing lies ?”

        What lies? I never claimed to be a legal expert. You seem to be assuming a lot.

        You’re free to disagree just as I am free to disagree with your evidenceless claims. Does that make them lies too? You lie as much as anyone else here.

        1. “I never claimed to be a legal expert.”
          Neither did Turley.
          However, one is more qualified to claim so than the other…..

          1. Perhaps, but that does not mean Turley has the authority to dismiss others as “experts” either since they too are professors and legal professionals who are practicing lawyers. That puts Turley in the same position you put me in.

            950 Legal experts still has more weight than Turley’s current argument. Turley dismissing them as “experts” because he says so as somehow an assertion of crediblity is frankly pretty stupid. That’s why he commands little respect among his peers.

            1. George: “That’s why he commands little respect among his peers.”
              And how is it that you know that?
              Is there a conflation of speculation and fact?
              Or is it ALL just speculation (excepting wishful thinking) from less than a handful of others with considerably less footprint (e.g., tribe, bump)? thanks.

                1. re: the authors of your two examples: one I never heard of and had to look her up -Julie Rodin (the Democrat political activist who worked for Kamala Harris campaign)- and the other -Weisberg (the Democrat from Woke Stanford), is hardly in the same class as Turley the Democrat who calls balls and strikes as he sees them…
                  Sour grapes from two leftists?
                  Was either ever asked to appear before Congress as an expert? Was either asked by Robert Mueller to appear for testimony? Does either have an international audience? I dunno…do you?
                  can you come up with something better? thanks, George

                  1. I’m not interested or qualified to defend Professor Turley. I simply don’t like persons, who know probably less than I, coming on his blog everyday to discredit him, that’s all, thanks George!

                2. p.s. who are the “plenty” of legal scholars who once admired Turley?”
                  “Plenty” as in Julie Rodin exponentially? (I don’t think Weisberg once “admired Turley” as of record. Do you have personal knowledge? thanks

  11. Dear Mr. Turley, thanks again for another great article. It is so exhausting to hear another leftist scream “constitutional crisis”. We learned a long time ago to ignore these folks crying wolf over Mr. Trump. The legacy media, ravenous for any drop of anti-Trump rhetoric, announces it with all of the fanfare that should be accorded to the Second Coming of Christ. The Left’s playbook is predictable: ATTACK THE PERSON (AND FAMILY, INCLUDING YOUNG CHILDREN). Those who voted for Mr. Trump knew this was coming and have prepared themselves for the onslaught knowing sooner or later, truth prevails, and the Left will continue to turn on themselves. For those who keep pointing back to January 6, 2021 as an attack toward Mr. Trump, I suggest they read a great article put out by Hillsdale College. The title is: “What We Know and Don’t Know About January 6.”

  12. The Globalist/Left Wing DEMS/College Professors/Liberal crowd World that they want is Crumbling and their Dreams shattered. Everything is a Crisis. As for the Professor Karlan, she is a extreme Trump hater, I remember her testimony in Trump trial, absolutely hates Trump. We are in the first 60 days and the Left/Globalist/Elites/Corrupt Washington Elite are in shear Panic, everyday is a Crisis. Trump has the Left/Washington Elites terrified what the next day will bring as well as the Globalist. Their Corruption is being Exposed by DOGE, wait until DOGE tracks the $$$$ and US Gov’t starts freezing and pulling it back, Sit back and enjoy the Globalist/Left Wing/Corrupt Uniparty etc. Panic.

    2. Being an extreme Trump hater is quite common in the US. Given that Trump is instituting fascism in the US, why are you not a Trump hater?

      2. As the good professor points out, Trump is going about all these things, legally, and in compliance with the law and the courts. You are just too stupid to see that.

  13. Good morning, Turls…, checking in with another Tribe hit piece because that’s what libertarian trump stooges such as yourself do to keep the propaganda flowing. Good work!

    And in the ‘broken clock being right twice a day’ realm you seem to have stumbled on to something with this constitutional crisis overload push piece. Not because we’re not in constitutional crisis…, we’ve been in one since the thing was written and it didn’t grant rights to a lot of the county’s citizens. Everything after that is just added crisis to a greater or lesser degree…

    As to the convict you’ve chosen to sell out and shill for, he took it to eleven right out the gate with his emoluments violations and he’s been escalating ever since directly into authoritarian ism. And you love flakking for him ‘cuz the money’s good no doubt.

    Party on you libertarian trump stooge you!!

    2. he took it to eleven right out the gate with his emoluments violations

      There was no emoluments violation. There are two emoluments clauses; one about foreign emoluments and one about domestic ones. The foreign emoluments clause does not apply to the president. He is not an officer of the united states, and so is free to receive as many gifts as he likes from foreign governments and doesn’t need anyone’s permission. George Washington received many valuable gifts, kept them all, and didn’t ask Congress “may I”, nor did anyone protest at his failure to do so, because everyone understood that it was none of Congress’s business.

      That aside, the fact is that Trump never received any emolument from any foreign government, even though the constitution allows it. He turned over all his gifts of any substantial value to the National Archives, just as every president has done since Hoover. So even if the clause had applied to him he still wouldn’t have violated it.

      1. Trump was sued in his first term and lost twice over emoluments violations, one of those violations involved taking money from Egypt. And the reason it’s a crisis is, while emoluments violations were drawn up in early days of the Constitution, the authors never really thought someone would be so blatant a violater as trump, so they were weak on what the actual punishments were for it….

        Fast forward to trump’s first term, and his blatant violations, his loss in court over them, and what actually happened is the cases were declared moot because he lost in ’20 and wasn’t in office any longer…

        Now he’s back and selling crypto to anyone with the money to bribe him through that vehicle, and he’s having dinner at Mar a Lago with anyone who will pony up $5 million.

        Are you blind or just drastically uninformed?

    3. Imagine the brain power, or hypocrisy, of a Biden Democrat talking about emoluments?!?!? If defies logic.

      1. I know, right? And the fact we use that brain power to imagine your exact facial expressions when you’re moaning at the inbred cretin circle jerk so that we can laugh hilariously at your expense!! It’s tragic!!!

    4. Once upon a time tribe was one of the best constitutional lawyers in the country
      But like the Democratic Party he had destroyed himself with woke nonsense

      Tribe was never libertarian
      But he once was sane

      I would note the final A in MAGA
      For Again

      It is a return to sanity

      The modern right is far to the left of where it was 40 years ago
      Jesse helms is dead
      But the left has gone to la la land
      George McGovern would not recognize the idiocy the modern left shills

      People like Turley and I fought for free speech from the left decades ago
      Todays McCarthyites are entirely on the left

    5. All the emoluments cases died
      Because idiotic left wing nuts did not grasp that the constitution does not prohibit them se in government from conducting private exchanges of value for value so long as the exchange is purely private
      George Washington bought and sold property while president

      You do not get to read whatever you want into the constitution
      If you don’t not like it as written
      Amend it

      1. Cases were declared moot when trump lost in ’20 and left office. He lost the initial rounds, and clearly…

        You’re organically clueless.

  14. OT. The latest PLOY of the Dems when asked about trans guys in woman’s sports is to say “it is a local issue that should be decided by local communities deciding what is safe and fair”. Two keys here are a) the “reporter” will never then ask the interviewee what their own opinion is and b) since when is the party in favor of states rights and a smaller fed? Also, wasn’t it Biden that punished states for not following his new Title IX rules?

    1. If it’s a local issue that should be decided by local communities deciding what is safe and fair then Congress should repeal Title 9 altogether. The entire point of Title 9 is that Congress is dictating to each school that it must have girls’ sports and fund them equally with boys’ sports even if hardly anyone at the school wants them.

      Also, perhaps if the local community wants racially segregated schools, or sports teams, maybe they should be allowed to do that too?

      When a school is FORCING girls to change in front of anatomically correct boys, and to have to look at their penises, and to share hotel rooms with boys, that is a human rights violation. What’s next, forcing them to have sex?

      1. Thanks for the excellent backup support with great points that I failed to raise.

        Wasn’t it the left that went bonkers over DeSantis banning porn in KIDS LIBRARIES? Where was the “it’s a local issue” crowd then?

    2. I don’t recall Biden taking action against states based on Title IX violations. Why would he? Title IX violations are done at the school or university level, not state. Punishing a whole state to force them to abide by his politics is a Trump move.

      1. He did. Everytime how many federal agencies bullied parents, and states when we disagreed? How do you think EAST TENNESSEE AND NC are feeling after the hurricane?? Or how about FL?

    3. This is typical of the left
      They do not actually believe the issue is local
      What they want is the issue to be resolved in whatever forum they will win in

      If the control the executive it is a presidential decision
      If the control the courts its is a judicial decision
      If the control the state it is a state decision
      If they control the school board it is a local decision

      But the majority of people are never to be permitted to tell them no

      Where in this country do the parents of girls want them competing with boys ?
      What parent wants their daughter pummeled by a guy ?

  15. We are experiencing the true “great reset” that the country has been longing for, some without knowing they did until now. Common sense is returning. The monolith erected by the Left was always on rotten foundations, and is now toppling. Not as quickly as I would like, but it is going down. The actual lawlessness enshrined by the Marxists is being eliminated rather handily. The shrieking hysteria of the Left, while enjoyable, is also an indication that they see it coming, and have become aware that there is nothing they can do about it. The Reckoning is coming for them, too.

    1. common sense returning? Its retribution. You wouldn’t know a marxist if it introduced itself, So stop shriecking.

      2. People know the difference between those who adhere to the state securing rights and liberty and those who want government to relieve them of the burden of making the own choices and decide everything for them

  16. Professor Turley,

    You write: “Trump has repeatedly pledged to follow adverse court orders while he seeks appeals.”

    However, his verbal pledges do not accord with his actions. Courts have already held that he has not complied with court orders.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/10/us/trump-unfreezing-federal-grants-judge-ruling.html

    No judge during the Biden term held that the Biden administration was flagrantly disobeying a judicial mandate. This there is no comparison.

    Even Bidens challenge to student loan obligations didn’t not involve the administration violating a court order.

    https://www.cnn.com/cnn/2023/10/22/politics/biden-student-loan-forgiveness-supreme-court

    I challenge anyone to find a similar ruling at any point in the 4 years of Biden’s term. So stop the false equivocating please.

    2. How many times do you think biden did something unconstitutional? And also, anytime a federal agency does an action that is effectively the executive branch. So if an agency does an unconstitutional act, that is biden acting. Anyone who thinks we have “independent federal agencies” should go ahead and schedule a lobotomy!

      1. So, no, you couldn’t find a single time that a judge chastised Biden for disobeying a court order. THAT is what commentators are pointing out creates a “constitutional crisis.”

        “doing something unconstitutional” is not what creates the crisis. Delegitimizing the authority of the courts by refusing to comply with their orders is WAY more problematic that simply taking an act that is later adjudicated by the courts as unconstitutional. Do you really not understand the difference?

    3. Yes left wing courts have issued stupid orders and then claimed they were violated when it was either impossible to comply or the judge failed to read their own order

      The ignorance and piss poor education of left wing nuts is a real problem

      Judges vastly exceeding their authority and issuing impossible to to comply with orders is a problem

      Just plain judicial stupidity is a problem

      As an example judge Ali’s nonsense that went to SCOTUS
      Turns out to be a tempest in a tea pot
      When plaintiffs were required to provide invoices
      Nearly all dropped out
      As of Friday only 137,000 in payment for services actually performed had been requested

      So much for idiotic claims of $2B

      If left wing nuts did not lie so much
      Our legal system could dispose of these idiotic challenges quicker

      1. Blaming the judges as a way to justify a failure to comply is EXACTLY why there is a “constitutional crisis.” Thanks for making my point.

        The executive cannot simply refuse to comply because he thinks the judge is biased. That is what the appellate system is for.

        1. The executive must comply with illegitimate court orders
          Higher courts must hold courts that act illegitimately to account
          They have not

          Further a judge claiming his order was not followed is not the same as the order not being followed
          Judges can hold doj lawyers in contempt
          And when he does that raises the stakes for higher courts
          Trump was not help in contempt
          Because he wasn’t
          Because doing so would have brought scrutiny from higher courts or congress

          You would presume that judicial power is infinite and unreveiwable
          That is false
          It takes more than an assertion by a left wing nut lawyer our judge to conclude a court order was not followed
          And judges who are issuing unconstitutional orders tend not to push hard for compliance

      2. It’s also not impossible to comply with an order that requires us to lift a freeze on payment of assets. It’s reverting back to the status quo. Which was altered just as quickly.

      3. You’re insinuating that “left-wing” judges don’t have any real power because the issue order you don’t agree with thus ignoring their order is justified. That’s wrong on so many levels.

        Judges have a lot of power and there’s a reason behind it. You can’t just decide which judges to obey because they are left or right or Democrat or Republican.

        The judges orders were not “impossible to comply” with. All they needed to do is reverse the freeze on funds for work already completed. Contracts were violated when the Trump administration arbitrarily decided to withhold money contractors were owed for work completed. It is a violation of a contract.

        You demand to see invoices which is completely irrelevant. The government is withhnolding money owed to contractors for work completed. Pretty sure plaintiffs can provide invoices when they go to court over the dispute. But that doesn’t excuse the government arbitrarily cancelling or withholding payment for work completed.

        The goverment has not shown they did NOT complete the work. Why isn’t the government showing the judge proof that work was indeed not completed?

        Calling it idiotic does nothing to prove your argument is correct. Just saying so is not evidence or proof. You’re not going to be seeing detailed invoices and documentation to satisfy your claim that the judge is issuing “stupid” orders.

        It seems ignorance is your problem not the courts or the judges.

    4. I challenge you to provide a specific example where trump failed to comply
      Where the court was demanding trump follow existing law rather than made up nonsense
      Trump has ultimately complied with all court orders
      Even stupid ones that were later reversed
      On occasion trump has failed to immediately comply with orders that gave him days or hours to do thing completely aposit to the way the federal government works

      1. See above. I provided the link in the initial post. Did you actually read it?

      2. Really? SCOTUS just turned down an appeal to a TRO because they sought to bypass the court’s order on paying $2 billion in owed money to contractors for completed work.

        Trump chose to disobey a court order. It’s the law that requires government honor it’s contracts.

    5. I would further not there is a gigantic difference between Biden who tried to exercise unconstitutional power to expand government and trump who is nearly always trying to reduce it
      Only a moron thinks it is a massive constitutional crisis for government to infringe on individual liberty less
      But no big deal to further restrict liberty

      I would further note that over time we learn more and more that biden and Obama engaged in blatantly unconstitutional acts mostly in secret

    6. Let’s see
      Turns out Biden spent $1.1T on dei with congressional authorization
      Turns out Biden did not even sign the EOs for the past 4 yrs

  17. If law professors — let alone the “eagerly uninformed” commoners of the electorate — want to see a true “constitutional crisis,” they might want to examine more closely the judiciary’s stupefying insouciance over the still unresolved question of the Founders’ understanding of the “natural born Citizen” presidential eligibility restriction set out in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5. The 2024 Oval Office Derby saw the potential for electing the Republic’s third usurper of the office.

    Perhaps President Trump’s challenging of “birthright citizenship” will force the issue. On the other hand, the accepted narrative of “it’s settled…, move along folks…, nothing to see here” persists. An eagerly uninformed electorate is the perfect recipe for bringing to fruition Ben Franklin’s warning as he left the Constitutional Convention in 1787. You heard it here first….

    1. What could be more a more pressing issue than the Left’s hyperventilating over a Constitutional Crisis?

      Well now, that’s an easy one: the dogs want to come in and my toast is up.

      As far as Trump’s winning some and losing some, nothing ventured, nothing gained. I hope the pace can be maintained for years

    2. There is nothing unresolved about it. Your theory is completely without merit. Everyone born in the USA without immunity to its laws is automatically a citizen. And anyone born a citizen is eligible for the presidency.

      1. And what SCOTUS decision — specifically — holds that mere birth here renders one a “natural born Citizen” eligible to the presidency?

        Please, the decision in Wong Kim Ark — burdened with its manifest factual error adopted as part of the majority opinion by Justice Gray — is not controlling. Read the cogent dissent. The pontifications of law professors, media talking heads and even former Solicitors General, are not SCOTUS precedent.

        Sadly, those who believe otherwise are among the “eagerly uninformed,” perpetuating the narrative that a “citizen at/by birth” is the same as a “natural born Citizen” as understood and intended by the Founders as contrasted with contemporary “experts.” The two classes of citizens are not synonymous: read more closely Minor v. Happersett, a unanimous SCOTUS decision.

        1. Natural born citizen is a qualification for president
          Citizenship by birth requires you to be born here and subject to this government
          That is everyone born here except the children of foreign government employees

  18. Everyone hates the US Constitution when it fails to deliver the desired political outcome.

    The fist-fight du jour is nothing but the ” end-state” of the last 50 years or so, in which the Left has managed to have compliant courts force their agendas when those agendas could never be achieved through legislation.

    The problem now is that too many people of all stripes have come to understand the game, and are not ceding the playing field to the “other team”. It certainly is a “crisis” if you’ve been able to force your point of view through to society with little real opposition for generations, only to find that all of a sudden, that strategy no longer works.

    1. Issues Republicans have had SCOTUS do for them that they could not do via legislation: eliminate affirmative action, outlaw abortion, push extreme gun control polices, give the president immunity, re-write 14AS3, enable voter suppression, weaken the EPA, legalize bribery and other forms of political corruption, and many others.

      1. Trolling the good professor’s blog again? On a government computer? On a government provided internet connection? On government, taxpayer time? Our time? Darren really should send DOGE your IP address,.

      2. Issues Republicans have had SCOTUS do for them that they could not do via legislation

        Franke: let’s do a commie-check on you while you’re attempting to be Cringe Jean-Pierre’s replacement Spokes Liar:

        1. You’re claiming it was Republicans that had SCOTUS force homosexual marriages on all states, a law they could not pass in Congress.

        2. You’re claiming it was Republicans that forced SCOTUS to rule that Congress’s Obamacare was actually a tax – when Congress and Obama explicitly said it wasn’t.

        3. You’re claiming it was Republicans that forced SCOTUS to rule that Obama had the power as president to reform Obamacare legislation with his pen.

        outlaw abortion

        Lyin’ Like A Proud Biden doesn’t give you credibility, Franke. If SCOTUS outlawed abortion, why aren’t there mass arrests going on after the Dobbs decision several years ago?

        You’re still capable of getting your usual two or three elective birth control abortions a year after those back alley business transactions of yours keep going wrong. Your attempts at a change of employment to working here as a Democrat apparatchik aren’t morally any better.

        CNN: US abortions reach highest level in over a decade after Dobbs decision
        https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/18/health/abortion-data-guttmacher/index.html

      3. Franke you have this backwards
        Affirmative action violates the equal protection clause
        General police policy has always been a state function Rowe was always unconstitutional
        You are free to criminalize or legalize abortion in your state
        The second amendment says shall not be infringed
        The president has always had immunity
        Until democrats pretended he did not
        And as scotus got perfectly correct the 14th amendment restricts states it does not empower them

        Democrats could have impeached and removed trump with faux insurrection claims but they did not

        Only citizens can vote
        You really want to discuss bribery and political corruption and with Biden and now Abraham’s and Clinton

Comments are closed.