Bio

JONATHAN TURLEY
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

unnamed-1Professor 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, the University of Chicago, and other schools. He is a New York Times best-selling author of The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage (available here) and “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution” (#2 on NY Times Bestseller List).

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 2024, a G.W. alum endowed a fellowship after him, “The Professor Jonathan Turley Public Interest and Public Service Summer Fellowship.

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.

Turley-600x287In 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).

05282015_6695Among his current cases, Professor Turley represents Dr. Ali Al-Timimi, who was convicted in Virginia in 2005 of violent speech against the United States. (He was ultimately cleared of all charges in 2026). In 2020, the federal court found that there was 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 served as an expert defense witness in the extradition proceedings of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange in London. Turley was asked to testify on the likely pre-trial, trial, and appellate issues facing Mr. Assange as well as the prison conditions that he could expect upon extradition to Northern Virginia for trial.

Professor Turley also agreed to serve as lead counsel representing the Brown family from the TLC program “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 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 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 with 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.

05282015_6655Professor Turley is a frequent witness before the House and Senate on constitutional and statutory issues as well as tort reform legislation. He has testified over 100 times in the House and the Senate. 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 ranked in the top five most popular law professors on Twitter and 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.

694940094001_6113691487001_6113685625001-vsProfessor 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 his 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.

download-2Professor 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.

In 2024, the Washingtonian recognized Turley as one of the most influential persons in shaping policy. 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 was 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. In addition to teaching a course on the Supreme Court and the Constitution, he is on the board of the Supreme Court Historical Society.

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.

Twitter: @jonathanturley

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.” and “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”

 

Icon made by DinosoftLabs from Flaticon

1,633 thoughts on “Bio”

  1. amy,

    Approximately what age group are you?

    To have a constitutional scholar of Professor Turley’s caliber on the SCOTUS would be an exceptionally good and wise choice.

    MtnMan. This post *is* relevant to the Prof. Turley’s Bio/ Curriculum Vitae

  2. I’ve never written on a blog before, but I surely hope that President Obama will appoint Jonathan Turly to the Supreme Court to replace outgoing Justice David Souter.

  3. Tom, forgive me – I didn’t initially recognize your place as community spokesperson.

  4. Jonathan P,

    Now you’ve done it! I imagine, from now on, everyone will think
    of a mouthful of vomit when we see your name. I hope you have a good mouthwash.
    I mean, since you’ve chosen to weigh on, so to speak>

    Tom Fitchue

    And, as That says – CHEERS!

  5. re: how far I have come,

    Was a time, when I thought Pat Buchanan was a ‘crazy man’. Now considering the present right wing camp Pat is sounding like the voice of reason. OMG! Am I alone in that or do others find Pat a more reasonable voice these days?

    On that topic, I was thinking to myself, how much I missed Bill Buckley…an unrelenting, arch conservative. I didn’t agree with him all that often, but he always made me work to consider his positions. (and lord I loved his elocution!) I think the country needs him, or those like him, to be a healthier place. I just wonder if there are any out there or is all that is left of (forgive my pun here) the right, the crazies?

    cheers!

  6. Hey Tom,

    Welcome back.

    I’d be happy to offer my services as modest as they are, on taking up the debate on the birth issue. But first, I just have to ask ‘why?’. You’re obviously one of the brightest and frankly I just don’t believe that you believe he is an alien. And while I appreciate you may have an interest in ‘poking the bear’ so to speak, there are so, so many issues a good ‘right winger’ could debate about the new administration without sounding like a member of the flat earth society. I am pretty sure you have list! 😉

    cheers

  7. Hey MtnMan,

    Fire away, I aint the proprietor here (oh, and that is king of the Blackboard jungle…and I am a former ‘cause I am washed-up and irrelevant.

    And stop askin’ questions ‘cause you are getting me to fall into the trap of posting under this Bio and appearing a hypocrite!

  8. FFLEO,

    It was funny to read your note ‘whats the point?’ of the postings here….I myself discovered this blog oh, about…2 weeks ago or so, and asked the same question! LOL! I have since discovered that its quiet addictive and enjoyable to read what is going on, and to throw in your own two cents. I think you will find the debates can be ‘lively’ (to say the least!), interesting and even on occasion relevant 🙂

    cheers

  9. *AN* not *a* LEO is the king of the jungle…and master of none…

  10. Mike Spindell,

    I understand and recognize your comments and the efforts that you expended that could be lost. I just think any Curriculum Vitae is denigrated my off-topic ‘trollisms’ and gives them an ‘unregulated’ voice of recognition.

  11. Jonathan P,
    Excellent point and good catch re: the media.

    JT & FFLEO,
    FFLEO’s point is well taken, perhaps you should delete all comments on both sites. The only problem I see is that we’ve found some good new people here and so this may serve as a lure. On the down side I mainly post here to annoy the trolls, who would mis-characterize what you’re doing and put it here with the expectation that new visitors would first check out your bio. Also have you both noticed that some trolls seem stuck to the bio section? Is that internet unfamiliarity, or the logarithms of a troll attack program. Due to it I’m loath to tell the interesting posters that a wider world awaits.

  12. With the greatest respect, Professor Turley, what do any of these recent discussions have to do with your Bio and what do those other comments under your Latest Column section have to do with your latest column? Nothing, that I can discern.

    Does this mean that these 2 sections are where I can best post off-topic subjects I am interested in because I too might like to do so.

    Respectfully submitted

  13. “The problem with people of a certain mentality is that they have spent so many years listening to Bush/Cheney, their apologists and Rush & Company, that they believe no matter what crackpot topic some right wingers bring up, there are two sides to the debate.”

    And Mike, this affliction has fully taken route with the media, even the mainstream media, which now go out of their way to appear “unbiased” even when presented with the absurd.

    Tom Fitchue: As a newbie here who HAS read through the previous posts, your attempt in your last post to portray yourself as a voice of reason made me throw up in my mouth a little.

  14. “thinking that there would be un-biased opinions offered on this subject.”

    The problem with people of a certain mentality is that they have spent so many years listening to Bush/Cheney, their apologists and Rush & Company, that they believe no matter what crackpot topic some right wingers bring up, there are two sides to the debate. In their world people can say that the sun revolves around the Earth and that God created the Universe about 6,000 years ago. They foolishly expect that by expressing their crackpot viewpoints people should engage them in honest discussion. This was done after 1992 with Bill Clinton on whether he was an Arkansas drug dealer and the drumbeat of the fascist and the feeble-minded was taken up after the public overwhelmingly rejected their politics, in the 1996 election and now the 2008 election.

    President Obama was fairly elected and has proved to be a refreshing change from the stupid, draft dodging traitors who preceded him and tried to wreck our country. These birth certificate arguments have been refuted time and again but their proponents refuse to admit the truth. They are behaving like traitors to our Country and to our way of government. To dignify their dumb arguments by continuing to refute them is a waste of time, because at the bottom of this isn’t President Obama’s birth certificate, it is an inability on the part of some people to accept our American way of life. If they were capable of speaking Russian, I think Vladimir Putin would be the type of leader they should be following and Russia is the place where they should go.

  15. Hi Jon,

    I think Buchanan got one thing right on Chris Matthews’ show yesterday evening, referring to you as “Chief Justice Jonathan Turley.” I, as well as many, many others believe you would be a great replacement for the outgoing Justice David Souter. There would be none better than you, sir. Keep up the great work, Jon!!! Tim

Comments are closed.