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, 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.
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. (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.
Professor 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.
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 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.
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.
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
“All have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God”
Rom: 3:23
A christian will be judged by what he has done because of his faith in Christ. An unbeliever will be judged by what they did but they are not nder grace. NO! You can’t dowhat you want and expect to God to forgive. God forgives a repentant heart. I ahve always been consistent in my message.
Mike, Your parents may not have had a problem with your forniation but I can assure you God does. This is peopl’es biggest problem. They sin frely because they don’t believe there to be a consequence. It should also be noted that when we sin, we can ask forgiveness. We however can’t lve in sin. To live in sin with no uneasy feeling is a great sign of being lost for eternity.
To take my last comment one step further, doesn’t faith obviate sin? What is the punishment for a faithful sinner?
“Didn’t you say in posts way above this one that the determinant of entry into heaven is faith, not acts. If this is so then a true believer in Jesus, no matter how
they’ve acted will be admitted to heaven.”
Thank you for beating me to this. I dated a “Christian” woman for years, and she believed (as does Boyle, I assume) that the only criterion for salvation is faith. In other words, you can do ANYTHING, either before or while believing in Christ as our savior, and still be saved. In my opinion, buying into that deal (whether it turns out to be true or not) is immoral.
“You missed the point. Sex before marriage is wrong.”
Mr.Boyle,
I had lots of sex prior to my almost 3 decade marriage, where I’ve never been unfaithful or even flirted with another woman and nobody ever became pregnant. My parents, whose marriage you extol, saw nothing wrong with non-marital sex as long as their sons behaved responsibly. I agree with them and I reject your belief, but defend your right to have it. I do believe though that if you could you would impose your belief on the rest of us and to me this is not only wrong, but it is curiously anti-God. This is because in the teachings you follow people have to make choices in order to be judged. If you take away their choice, then how can they be judged?
You would of course answer that Jesus knows what is in everyone’s heart and I would respond by saying your view of the world is like that of a puppet show, with God pulling the strings. This to me would be blasphemy in the sense that the creator of the Universe would be way beyond creating a planet and humanity to watch a puppet show.
There is also a dichotomy when you state:
“There are consequences to these actions. Unfortnately, BOTH women and men want to play but not pay. If they are not held accountable by our country then God will hold the country responsible and yes they will be judged when their time on earth expires. “Blessed is the nation whose lord is God”
Didn’t you say in posts way above this one that the determinant of entry into heaven is faith, not acts. If this is so then a true believer in Jesus, no matter how they’ve acted will be admitted to heaven. This doesn’t make sense and to me trivializes God.
Mike,
You missed the point. Sex before marriage is wrong. Your angle is saying that people don’t marry for love but rather lust. This wrong. People simply don’t want commitment anymore. Just because divorce is high in the Bible Belt, doesn’t give moral right to have sex before marriage. There are consequences to these actions. Unfortnately, BOTH women and men want to play but not pay. If they are not held accountable by our country then God will hold the country responsible and yes they will be judged when their time on earth expires. “Blessed is the nation whose lord is God”
“If we really want to get to some real change, we will talk about sex outside the confines of marriage. This alone will greatly reduce the # of abortions in this country and set us back on to the path of moral character which we deeply need.”
Mr. Boyle,
Thank you for finally getting to the heart of the abortion opposition. This has never been about babies per se. What it really is all about is punishing women for having sex outside of marriage. Your version of your religion interests itself predominantly in sex, focused specifically on a fear of women’s sexuality. By interpreting Jesus message this way you can ignore the true sins of the world and at the same time attempt to retain male dominance.
I happen to believe that sex outside of marriage is healthy and normal. People need to take test drives and that is why the divorce rate in the “Bible Belt” is much higher than it is in the “blue states.” It is also why the “Abstinence” initiative has been a failure and it is found that it even encourages pregnancies.
My religion, incidentally believes that life begins when God blows the first breath into a newborns lungs. To my religious sensibilities your version of Christianity has it all wrong. How can this be resolved? Easily. The people who believe as you do shouldn’t get abortions and you should leave the rest of us alone. This will allow us all to follow our faiths in peace, instead of in murderous rampages like the one that killed Dr. Tiller.
Whenever people of a particular religious belief try to impose their belief on others death and mayhem occurs. The other part of that is it allows demagogues to use people’s religious beliefs to put themselves into positions of power. What I find so inconsistent about your particular viewpoint is that while you are willing to regulate a most personal aspect of a woman’s life, you shudder at government taxes and regulation of businesses. To me this is the dichotomy of some Christian fundamentalists and I do believe that it is a viewpoint motivated by personal greed and a misunderstanding
of true religious values. You are aware of Hillel, but you are impervious to his teachings.
The Other Mike
Mike,
Duty as in charge of defense and authority of giving advice on what to do with terrorists. No one said anything about the military.
Also, abortions given because a female simply doesn’t want the burden or gets headaches, is no reason for killing a human being. No one deserves to be murdered. I completely disagree with Tiller’s practices but am deeply saddened by his death. What we need is a dialogue on protesting peacefully and what we should do about abortions in today’s society. If we really want to get to some real change, we will talk about sex outside the confines of marriage. This alone will greatly reduce the # of abortions in this country and set us back on to the path of moral character which we deeply need.
Mr. Boyle, if you are the least bit familiar with your history, you know that Mr. Cheney refused to report for duty with the rest of us in the ’60s. Like Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Hannity and other bellicose conservative talking heads, the only green he has ever been interested in lines his wallet. You need to look elsewhere for your examples of patriotic courage.
Mr. Yitzak has declined to address the subject matter of any of the threads, which would entail some independent thought, preferring instead to create a twisted path of hate-filled rubble through all of the threads, much like a tornado,lacking any purpose identifiable by reason or logic, but grimly determined to cause as much mayhem and destruction as possible in the course of his mindless excursion.
PHILADELPHIA, June 10, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Operation Rescue said today that it is appalled to learn that Philadelphia Women’s Center gave away free abortions on Tuesday as a means of “honoring” slain late-term abortionist George Tiller. “There seems to be no comprehension of the value of human life with these people. Killing babies for free to honor someone who was murdered can only be described as sick,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. The abortion facility told the media that an unspecified number of abortions were done free of charge in memory of Dr. Tiller.
can we be truthful here? Tiller did about 60,000 abortions at an estimated $2,000 each. That is $120,000,000! Tiller died a very rich man aborting babies that were capable of living on their outside the womb…that is sick.
Markk, guess you’ll have to go to a blog where there are real attorneys. Good luck with that.
Can Al Gore be legally liable for damages for sending his two journalists to North Korea? Al Gore is worth over 150 million dollars. These two journalists could have been shot on the spot in North Korea. Al Gore needs to answer some questions.
CAN I GET AN ANSWER PLEASE OR DO I HAVE TO GO TO A BLOG WHERE THERE ARE REAL ATTORNEYS POSTING INSTEAD OF YOU PHONIES?
Jew
Great reporting!
If we become weasels towards captured terrorists, it will only be a matter of time before we get hit again. Then, Dick Cheney will be asked to once again report for duty. He may not be liked today but our country is safer today than it was in 2001.
‘This Document is Toilet Paper For the Americans If They Want It’
THE Obama Administration now confirms that at least 74 former Guantanamo detainees have resumed terror ist activities after claiming they weren’t terrorists.
These dangerous prisoners should never have been cleared for release. Why did interrogators fail to find the cracks in their stories and alibis?
Why wasn’t more intelligence gathered to predict they’d rejoin al Qaeda or the Taliban? In a word, politics. Gitmo interrogations have been emasculated to placate critics of waterboarding and other “torture,” say senior administration officials.
Even known terrorists are spared high-pressure techniques — tactics that have worked before in squeezing out information.
For that matter, Gitmo doesn’t even do “interrogations” anymore. They’re now called interviews, and they’re voluntary.
Many recidivists used the interviews as an opportunity to argue for release, spinning familiar excuses for why they were in Afghanistan after 9/11. They were freed after interrogators, many of them inexperienced, for the most part bought their sob stories and review boards judged them least likely to return to jihad.
“We have on numerous occasions gotten literally straight-from-the-schoolhouse interrogators who are being stuck in with these hardened jihadists,” a top security official at Gitmo told me. “And they essentially look at them and laugh.”
He says many are 19-year-olds who lack battlefield skills and don’t understand the first thing about jihad and militant Islam.
“They get played by detainees, who end up getting released because the interrogators believe them when they say they don’t know anything and just want to go home and be a goat herder,” he says.
As a condition of their release, the Gitmo detainees signed pledges to renounce violence and enroll in “reintegration programs” in countries that agreed to repatriate them.
Terrorist Said Ali al-Shihri went through the resort-like Saudi program after his release in 2007.
Afterward, he helped plan last year’s deadly attack on the US Embassy in Yemen as al Qaeda’s operations chief there.
Another Gitmo recidivist, Slimane Hadj Abderahmane, laughed at the anti-violence agreement he signed. Once free, he re-engaged in terror and said, “This document is toilet paper for the Americans if they want it.”
MESPO
No Abraham was justified by his faith. Faith without works is dead. Abraham showed his faith with his works of obedience. You see too many people want to work their way into heaven but have no faith. Take the thief on the cross. He had no works but his belief in Christ caused Christ to say “you shall be with me in paradise.” Faith is a pre-requisite to works. Works without faith gets you nowhere with God but may get you somewhere with man. God looks at the heart and knows our motivation. This is why we are not to judge. Do you really believe that Obama wants to help people or is he looking for votes? We may not truly know this answer but I believe through his actions we shall be able to find out.
PS: Mohammed didn’t ascend into heaven He ascended to the moon where the moon god allah is. Christ ascended to God the father who made the moon.
Conservatism all the way!!!!!!!!
Europe falls far to the right as voters choose EU Parliaments
By MICHAEL WEISSENSTEIN and ROBERT WIELAARD
June 7, 2009
Associated Press
2 hrs 9 mins ago
BRUSSELS – Europe fell far to the right Sunday as tens of millions of people voted in European Parliament elections, with conservative parties favored in most countries.
Election results & polls are showing Conservative wins over their opposition in Germany, Italy, France, Belgium, Britain, Spain and some smaller countries.
This amid theories these elections are a referendum on the United States election of a liberal President.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090607/ap_on_re_eu/european_elections/print
I gave you my crabcake recipe with the key lime aioli
– I know I did. Forget the diet… ;o
Bon Appetite!
Patty C:
Crabs were great. Now it’s time to make crabcakes with the leftover backfin meat. We went with the pineapple upside down cake for dessert. Big hit as well!
mespo727272 1, June 4, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Mike A:
Ever try to argue Proust with a child? I haven’t. Let me know how it turns out with the pious Mr. Boyle.
—
Mespo, lol!
Speaking of ‘Boils’ how were those Maryland Blues, yesterday? I’m envious, a smidge. We find tasty crab here, but it’s usually already picked. I make a baked crab dip that’s a staple
fav for sit-downs and your basic chilled salad – always perfect on toasted rolls.
Last night was much needed and long overdue fun. My ‘other worldy’ flambe was ripe, spiced, pear halves softened and warmed in brown sugar, melted butter, over coals and flamed with dark rum and served gingerly over ginger ice cream.
Dramatic and delicious, it was! How about Cherries or Peach Melba, for you guys?
http://www.diynetwork.com/diy/lc_desserts/article/0,2041,DIY_14000_2273503,00.html