JONATHAN TURLEY
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
Professor Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law. He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Northwestern, University of Chicago, and other schools.
After a stint at Tulane Law School, Professor Turley joined the George Washington faculty in 1990 and, in 1998, was given the prestigious Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law, the youngest chaired professor in the school’s history. In addition to his extensive publications, Professor Turley has served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades including the representation of whistleblowers, military personnel, judges, members of Congress, and a wide range of other clients. He is also one of the few attorneys to successfully challenge both a federal and a state law — leading to courts striking down the federal Elizabeth Morgan law as well as the state criminalization of cohabitation.
In 2010, Professor Turley represented Judge G. Thomas Porteous in his impeachment trial. After a trial before the Senate, Professor Turley (on December 7, 2010) argued both the motions and gave the final argument to all 100 U.S. Senators from the well of the Senate floor — only the 14th time in history of the country that such a trial of a judge has reached the Senate floor. Judge Porteous was convicted of four articles of impeachments, including the acceptance of $2000 from an attorney and using a false name on a bankruptcy filing.
In 2011, Professor Turley filed a challenge to the Libyan War on behalf of ten members of Congress, including Representatives Roscoe Bartlett (R., Md); Dan Burton (R., Ind.); Mike Capuano (D., Mass.); Howard Coble (R., N.C.); John Conyers (D., Mich.); John J. Duncan (R., Tenn.); Tim Johnson (R., Ill.); Walter Jones (R., N.C.); Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio); and Ron Paul (R., Tx). The lawsuit was before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
In November 2014, Turley agreed to serve as lead counsel to the United States House of Representatives in its constitutional challenge to changes ordered by President Obama to the Affordable Care Act. The litigation was approved by the House of Representatives to seek judicial review of the claims under the separation of powers. On May 12, 2016, the federal court handed down a historic victory for the House and ruled that the Obama Administration violated the separation of powers in ordering billions to be paid to insurance companies without an appropriation of Congress.
Other cases include his representation of the Area 51 workers at a secret air base in Nevada; the nuclear couriers at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; the Rocky Flats grand jury in Colorado; Dr. Eric Foretich, the husband in the famous Elizabeth Morgan custody controversy; and four former United States Attorneys General during the Clinton impeachment litigation. In the Foretich case, Turley succeeded recently in reversing a trial court and striking down a federal statute through a rare “bill of attainder” challenge. Professor Turley has also served as counsel in a variety of national security cases, including espionage cases like that of Jim Nicholson, the highest ranking CIA officer ever accused of espionage. Turley also served as lead defense counsel in the successful defense of Petty Officer Daniel King, who faced the death penalty for alleged spying for Russia. Turley also served as defense counsel in the case of Dr. Tom Butler, who is faced criminal charges dealing with the importation and handling of thirty vials of plague in Texas. He also served as counsel to Larry Hanauer, the House Intelligence Committee staffer accused of leaking a classified Presidential National Intelligence Estimate to the New York Times. (Hanauer was cleared of all allegations).
Among his current cases, Professor Turley represents Dr. Ali Al-Timimi, who was convicted in Virginia in 2005 of violent speech against the United States. In 2020, the federal court found that there merit in the challenges raised by Professor Turley and his co-counsel Tom Huff. Accordingly, the judge ordered his release to protect him from Covit-19 while the Court prepared a decision on the challenges. Pursuant to a court order, Dr. Al-Timimi was released from the Supermax in Colorado and the two drove across the country so that he could be placed into home confinement. He also represented Dr. Sami Al-Arian, who was accused of being the American leader of a terrorist organization while he was a university professor in Florida. Turley represented Dr. Al-Arian for eight years, much of which was in a determined defense against an indictment for criminal contempt. The case centered on the alleged violation of a plea bargain by the Justice Department after Dr. Al-Arian was largely exonerated of terrorism charges in Tampa, Florida. On June 27, 2014, all charges were dropped against Dr. Al-Arian. He also represented pilots approaching or over the age of 60 in their challenge to the mandatory retirement age of the FAA. He also represented David Murphee Faulk, the whistleblower who disclosed abuses in the surveillance operations at NSA’s Fort Gordon facility in Georgia.
Professor Turley also agreed to serve as lead counsel representing the Brown family from the TLC “Sister Wives, a reality show on plural marriage or polygamy. On December 13, 2013, the federal court in Utah struck down the criminalization of polygamy — the first such decision in history — on free exercise and due process grounds. On September 26, 2014, the court also ruled in favor of the Browns under Section 1983 — giving them a clean sweep on all of the statutory and constitutional claims. In April 2015, a panel reversed the decision on standing grounds and that decision is now on appeal.
Professor Turley was also lead counsel in the World Bank protest case stemming from the mass arrest of people in 2002 by the federal and district governments during demonstrations of the IMF and World Bank. Turley and his co-lead counsel Dan Schwartz (and the law firm of Bryan Cave) were the first to file and represented student journalists arrested without probable cause. In April 2015, after 13 years of intense litigation, the case was settled for $2.8 million, including $115,000 for each arrestee — a record damage award in a case of this kind and over twice the amount of prior damages for individual protesters. The case also exposed government destruction and withholding of evidence as well as the admitted mass arrest of hundreds of people without probable cause.
Professor Turley also served as the legal expert in the review of polygamy laws in the British of Columbia (Canada) Supreme Court. In the latter case, he argued for the decriminalization of plural union and conjugal unions. In 2012, Turley also represented the makers of “Five Wives Vodka” (Ogden’s Own Distillery) in challenging an effective ban on the product in Idaho after officials declared the product to be offensive to Mormons. After opposing to the ban on free speech and other grounds, the state of Idaho issued a letter apologizing for public statements made by officials and lifting the ban on sale for “Five Wives Vodka.”
Turley has served as a consultant on homeland security and constitutional issues, including the Florida House of Representatives. He also served as the consultant to the Puerto Rico House of Representatives on the impeachment of Gov. Aníbal Acevedo Vilá.
Professor Turley is a frequent witness before the House and Senate on constitutional and statutory issues as well as tort reform legislation. That testimony includes the confirmation hearings of Attorney General nominees Loretta Lynch and William Barr as well as Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. Professor Turley is also a nationally recognized legal commentator. Professor Turley was ranked as 38th in the top 100 most cited “public intellectuals” in the recent study by Judge Richard Posner. Turley was also found to be the second most cited law professor in the country. He has been repeatedly ranked in the nation’s top 500 lawyers in annual surveys (including in the latest rankings by LawDragon) – one of only a handful of academics. In prior years, he was ranked as one of the nation’s top ten lawyers in military law cases as well as one of the top 40 lawyers under 40. He was also selected in the last five years as one of the 100 top Irish lawyers in the world. In 2016, he was ranked as one of the 100 most famous (past and present) law professors.
Professor Turley is one of only two academics to testify at both the Clinton and Trump impeachment hearings. In December 2019, Professor Turley was called as the one Republican witness in the House Judiciary Committee impeachment hearings. He appeared with three Democratic witnesses. Professor Turley disagreed with this fellow witnesses in opposing the proposed articles of impeachments on bribery, extortion, campaign finance violations or obstruction of justice. He argued that these alleged impeachable acts were at odds with controlling definitions of those crimes and that Congress has historically looked to the criminal code and cases for guidance on such allegations. The committee ultimately rejected those articles and adopted the only two articles that Professor Turley said could be legitimately advanced: abuse of power, obstruction of Congress. Chairman Jerrold Nadler even ended the hearing by quoting his position on abuse of power. However, Turley opposed impeachment on this record as incomplete and insufficient for submission to the Senate. He argued for the House to wait and complete the record by seeking to compel key witnesses like former National Security Adviser John Bolton. His testimony was later relied upon in the impeachment floor debate by various House members and he was cited by both the White House and House managers in their arguments before the United States Senate in the Trump impeachment trial, including videotaped remarks played at the trial.
Professor Turley’s articles on legal and policy issues appear regularly in national publications with hundreds of articles in such newspapers as the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Los Angeles Times and Wall Street Journal. He is a columnist for USA Today and writes regularly for the Washington Post. In 2005, Turley was given the Columnist of the Year award for Single-Issue Advocacy for his columns on civil liberties by the Aspen Institute and the Week Magazine. Professor Turley also appears regularly as a legal expert on all of the major television networks. Since the 1990s, he has worked under contract as the on-air Legal Analyst for NBC News, CBS News, BBC and Fox News. Professor Turley has been a repeated guest on Sunday talk shows with over two-dozen appearances on Meet the Press, ABC This Week, Face the Nation, and Fox Sunday. Professor Turley has taught courses on constitutional law, constitutional criminal law, environmental law, litigation, and torts. He is the founder and executive director of the Project for Older Prisoners (POPS). His work with older prisoners has been honored in various states, including his selection as the 2011 recipient of the Dr. Mary Ann Quaranta Elder Justice Award at Fordham University.
His award-winning blog is routinely ranked as one of the most popular legal blogs by AVVO. His blog was selected as the top News/Analysis site in 2013, the top Legal Opinion Blog in 2011 as well as prior selections as the top Law Professor Blog and Legal Theory Blog. It was also ranked in the top 20 constitutional law blog in 2018. It has been regularly ranked by the ABA Journal in the top 100 blogs in the world. In 2012, Turley has selected as one of the top 20 legal experts on Twitter by Business Insider. In 2013, the ABA Journal inducted the Turley Blog into its Hall of Fame.
Professor Turley received his B.A. at the University of Chicago and his J.D. at Northwestern. In 2008, he was given an honorary Doctorate of Law from John Marshall Law School for his contributions to civil liberties and the public interest.
For further information: Mr. Seth Tate – 202-994-0537
Icon made by DinosoftLabs from Flaticon
You are very welcome Prof, Turley.
Thanks, Judy. You made my week.
Prof. Turley,
I was very pleased to hear of your blog on the Randi Rhodes Show today. I enjoy your many appearances on TV and whtching the testimony you present to Congress.
Keep up the good work. No secerts or privelege here.
Thanks so much, and happy thanksgiving to you too!
I think it appropriate on Thanksgiving to say “Thanks” to you.
You are a welcome reminder that the Constitution is so much more than
“just a piece of paper.”
Kate:
What a wonderful surprise to read your entry on the blog. I cannot tell you how much it means to an academic to receive such a response to a speech. I hope that you continue your plans for the law. We need good people in this profession!
All my best,
Jonathan
Dear Mr. Turley,
Hi, my name is Kate and I attended NYLF Law last week. During my week at DC, I had the opportunity to attend your speech. It was extremely engaging. I was always afraid of admitting that I wanted to be a lawyer (I mean.. it does sound nerdy) and was often confused as to what being a lawyer actually meant. It just seemed like a fancy title that everyone wanted to have. However, after your speech, my dream of becoming a lawyer and helping people became more tangible. I’d like to thank you for such an amazing speech and I’ll never forget that night. Thank you very much.
In my view, President Bush clearly committed an impeachable offense in ordering the domestic surveillance program which is a federal crime. The Democrats, however, allowed the law to be extended in one of the most bizarre decisions in decades. The White House immediately claimed that the move established its legality. There are a variety of alleged violations of law but little serious effort in Congress to force disclosure of the information. Years ago, Democratic leadership promised not to allow impeachment investigations let alone proceedings.
Dear Mr. Turley,
PLEASE help me!!
Knowing the Constitution and Bill of Rights as well as you do, would you say that Bush and/or Cheney have violated the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights enough to be impeached?
My congressman, Robert Wexler, says no. If he is mistaken, I would like to give him a list of impeachable offenses if I could. Please help me to compile such a list.
Respectfully,
JBR
K.S.:
Thank you for your very kind comments. On the Masonic issue, I am aware of the long controversy. I do not like secret societies and I certainly do not like any oath that seems to place the organization above civic duties. Beyond that, I do not know enough about the Masons to comment. On the constitutonal groups, there is an array of options. No good entirely thrills me, but I tend to be a hard sell. The American Civil Liberties Union has done important work historically, but I do not agree with some of its more recent priorities. There seems to be a great deal of politics in the selection of its positions on some issues. Nevertheless, it is an organization with a proud history. I tend to have a fair dose of libertarian feelings so CATO has always held some interest for me. There are, however, a plethora of great groups that specialize on issues of church/state separation and privacy. I tend to be a mutt when it comes to my political views with some conservative, some libertarian, and some liberal elements.
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts,
Jonathan
Joe:
Thank you for adding me to the website and checking in. I originally set this site up for my students and colleagues. I have been surprised and gratified by the interest outside of the law school. As a baby blogger, I am still learning the ropes but it is a fun distraction.
All my best,
Jonathan
Sorry (you have no email address so I have to leave this here but you can delete these comments if you wish). I see I added you already to Center Voices since you’d get more hits there.
Welcome to the blogosphere! I’ve linked to you before and will do so again and run a special Take A Peek on our site to get some of my modest readership to your new blog. Also, clearly you won’t be putting political blogs on our blogroll but I’m going to add you to OTHER VOICES on The Moderate Voice’s blogroll right now. I’ll check in and link to you frequently. Your site is already a great resource and you are someone who has enormous credibility…someone who calls the shots in a consistent manner.
Attorney General! I thought you liked me. Recently, Republican candidate Ron Paul said that he would like to make me Attorney General if he is elected and I asked what I ever did to him.
Thanks for the kind words Diana. Such positive feedback means a lot to me.
Best,
Jonathan
Dear Professor Turley:
I am a loyal fan and always watch your commentary on Countdown. (I make sure to watch it again when it re-airs at midnight to make sure I get it all…) No one in this house is allowed to talk while your segment is airing.
Your words are a voice of reason in all of this Constitutional madness we have had to endure since this administration seized power. I also appreciate the way you explain Constitutional issues in layman’s terms for all of us non-lawyers.
Some people have religion, some people have the bible. For me the Constitution is my bible. I worship it and often get depressed about how it is being assaulted time and again. The Framers are rolling over in their collective graves.
I want to thank you for all that you do. You are a true American patriot and because of you, I have hope that we can get back to the country we once were. (Oh – and go on Randi Rhodes more – I love those segments too!)
I think you’d make a great Attorney General. 🙂
Warmest wishes and regards,
Diana
Loxahatchee, Florida
Arabella:
That alone was worth blogging. What a wonderful way to start the weekend. Thanks for the kind note.
Jonathan
Dear Prof. Turley,
I deeply appreciate the intelligence and perspective you’ve brought to the Countdown broadcasts; like Stephen Mette, above, I drop my knitting and just listen when you (and John Dean) come on the show. I also learned of your blog from a reference Randi Rhodes made to it, and was very happy to learn of it. Thank you for joining us in the blogosphere, and may you always find it welcoming!
Best wishes,
Arabella
Dear Mr. Turley:
I never imagined I would ever get a chance to address you directly, but like bloggomio and Stephen Mette above I have been a fan and supporter of yours for many years now. Today, I enjoyed (as always) hearing you discuss the latest “high crimes and misdemeanors” on AirAmerica with Randi Rhodes, and was thrilled to hear about your blog. So, here I am. The following “note” is much longer than I intended, and I hope it does not overwhelm you! Please bear with me.
As depressing as it can be to be a patriot and constitutionalist in these trying times, it is good to know that there are a few men out there with the time, tools, talent, intellectual chops and courage to take on massively powerful corporate/government interests when they engage in unconstitutional (and un-American) behavior. Criminality and unconstitutionality seems to be the standard operating procedure these days. Perhaps it has always been thus…
I’ve followed your work for years, going all the way back to the Clinton era (seems like ancient history now). The Area 51 case was amazing. I consider myself fortunate to have seen you on a documentary about “America’s most secret base,” lest I might never have heard about the case otherwise. The story certainly wasn’t covered by the local news here in Los Angeles!
I imagine it took great chutzpah to “beard the lion” in his own court, if not in his own den, and it was highly surreal listening to you describe a court battle in which part of the government’s defense was that since the base didn’t exist there couldn’t be any violation of law. It must have been even more surreal to be there! In my opinion, knowing how powerful (and nefarious) the federal government is these days, I think it’s safe to say that those injured workers and their surviving family members were very lucky to have you. Well done sir!
In any event, I believe your words (both written and spoken) have had a profound effect on the criminal cabal running this country and have contributed mightily to the recent departures of several luminaries. I’m sure Gonzo and others like him get rather dyspeptic when they hear you enumerate the many ways in which they have violated the law, and would greatly prefer that you didn’t! More-so, your work keeps extremely important issues front and center for many people — including members of congress — who seem to need a “good swift kick” to even contemplate doing the right thing these days.
Thankfully, the Att’y General is stepping down. I believe you and Mr. Olbermann had a big hand in that. I can only hope that there will be real investigations and prosecutions (where warranted). Not that I’m holding my breath. Sadly, in the end, the President will most likely pardon all of his cronies so there’s little chance any of it will “stick.” The implications are dire for what’s left of the republic and it’s long-term survival. I am certainly not the first to point out that we have been sliding down the slippery slope towards total statism/fascism for a long time now, and I fear that we are reaching the bottom.
So, having said all this, I hope you will indulge me for a few more minutes. I have two questions for you. The first is rather long, but I think it will be of interest, and I look forward to your answers.
*** *** ***
1) At the risk of being immediately labeled a “conspiracy theorist” (or worse) for even raising the question, I’m wondering if you and your colleagues are aware of the fact that many (if not most) of our high-ranking officials, elected or otherwise, are Freemasons (and/or members of other Masonic secret societies, such as Skull and Bones, to which our President and his father belong)?
While you may not realize it, this is a profoundly important issue, perhaps even one of the most important (though largely unknown) issues in America today. Why? Because Freemasons and Bonesmen swear oaths of loyalty, secrecy and protection that supersede any others, including the oath of office!
I simply can’t emphasize how important this point is, and I think you of all people understand it’s implications. In my opinion, the behind-the-scenes influence of the Masonic brotherhood goes far towards explaining much of the unconstitutionality (and criminality) that is endemic today. FDR and Truman were at the very top of Freemasonry (32º and 33º respectively, 33º being the highest), and it’s been steadily downhill for this nation, insofar as observance of constitutional law goes since then. By the way, lest I be accused of partisanship as well as lunacy, I am not claiming this is purely a partisan problem. It is not. High level Freemasons infest (and I’m choosing words very carefully here) both of our major political parties. I simply mention Roosevelt and Truman because it was under their watch that the rise of the crypto-fascist national security state began.
For those without time or interest to investigate the role of secret societies but who wish to get a flavor for their influence on day-to-day events and “national security,” I recommend the recent films The Good Shepard (directed by Robert De Nero) or The Company (starring Michael Keaton). These works focus on the dangerous and unconstitutional activities of Bonesmen (rather than Freemasons, per se) in American intelligence and foreign policy. However, the message is clear.
If you wish to see a list of “important Freemasons,” I suggest going over to Wikipedia. For those who are not steeped in such material, it’s an eye-opener, I assure you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Freemasons
Our forefathers were certainly aware of how important the intertwined issues of divided loyalty and secret societies was, and it remains to this day. Washington, Jefferson, Hancock, Madison, Paine (among others) warned of the dangers to the republic inherent in secret societies (given that Washington was at one time an active Mason, his condemnations are particularly apt and telling).
John Quincy Adams, in his LETTERS ON THE MASONIC INSTITUTION said: “A more perfect agent for the devising and execution of conspiracies against the church or state could scarcely have been conceived.”
Following the murder of ex-Freemason William Morgan (by Masons) in 1826, the Anti-Masonic party came to the fore. In it’s day, it’s influence was such that Masonry (prior to the Civil War) nearly died out. Would that it had.
Masons (the so-called “blue lodge” or first three degrees) pledge to protect their brothers in all matters, excepting treason and murder. I should not have to point out that this still includes a high degree of latitude. But far more disturbing is that higher level Masons (which includes most of the officials in high office all over the land) swear to protect their fellow Masons in all cases, up to and including treason and murder!
I don’t know about you, but I think this is extremely alarming, to say the least.
“You must conceal all crimes of your brother Masons…and should you be summoned as a witness against a brother Mason be always sure to shield him…It may be perjury to do this, it is true, but you’re keeping your obligations.” — Ronayne, HANDBOOK OF MASONRY
Please understand that I am not one who approaches this from a fundamentalist Christian and/or Biblical perspective. I’m not religious at all, and in fact, consider myself a deist like most of the Founders. But there are those who say Freemasons are Luciferians and/or Satanists and therefore inherently evil. To my mind, that whole line of thought is nothing but a straw man argument and, worse yet, a distraction from the real danger. No, my concern is purely a pragmatic one. To wit: how can we have honest, open government when many (if not most) high-ranking officials are sworn to cover up each other’s crimes? How can we trust anything they do or say when the oath of office means nothing to them?
Concern over this problem has gotten so acute in England that the government has enacted laws requiring secret society members (Masons in particular) to disclose their relationship to the brotherhood. It may not be much, but it at least it’s a start.
In my opinion, Masonic secrecy (and all that it entails) is one of the most important issues in the world today. Yet outside of very narrow circles it is not even known, much less discussed. Your thoughts?
*** *** ***
2) If you had to pick a few constitutional groups to support with your time and/or money, which ones would you choose?
*** *** ***
In closing, I thank you for your attention and I commend you on your great work! I believe you are truly an American hero, albeit largely unsung. Somewhere far away, the Framers are smiling knowing that a few staunch men of conviction remain. Above all else, keep up the good work, continue to fight the good fight and (we hope and pray) never falter — America needs you!
Sincerely Yours,
K. S. Knight
Prof. Turley,
There are a very few TV/radio commentators who, when they speak, I stop what I’m doing and listen. You are one of the best. Thanks for your input on politics and current affairs.
Stephen Mette
Mr. Turley, I’m a fan of yours and have enjoyed the mental aerobics you’ve displayed during testimony before Congress and elsewhere on TV. I’m happy to learn of your new WordPress.com blog and plan to follow your endeavor here. Welcome! May you shine here as well as you do elsewhere. 🙂