There was a curious shift that occurred in the 24 hours leading up to the decision of the Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawaii. News organizations repeatedly emphasized that the travel ban under consideration was, in the words of CNN, “very different” from the one first issued by the Trump Administration and the current order was much narrower. It is certainly true that the current travel ban has a slightly different array of countries and a much enhanced record. Moreover, I was a critic of the poorly drafted and poorly executed original ban. However, it is not true that those differences carried the day with the Court. The two threshold issues remained that same and, until the loss yesterday, challengers maintained that the legal issues had not materially changed.
Continue reading “The Supreme Spin: How The Travel Ban Victory Became A Victory For Critics”
I (and many others) have cautioned the President for over a year that his tweets and public comments are underlying his case (and litigation like the immigration challenges) in federal court. Now the 
Broward County Circuit Judge Merrilee Ehrlich is facing a torrent of criticism over her berating a defendant who is obviously experiencing serious physical discomfort in the courtroom. Defendant Sandra Faye Twiggs, 59, complained about her trouble breathing but Ehrlich abused her and her counsel in a tirade on April 15th that has resulted in Judge Ehrlich being relieved of her duties. It will not be of much relief to Twiggs, who died three days later. Update: 
Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the push for new legislation to Robert Mueller. I supported the appointment of a Special Counsel and still believe that Mueller must be allowed to complete his work. However, this legislation would do little in terms of real protection while putting at risk a major piece of precedent from the Supreme Court.
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on why a separate and independent investigation of the FBI’s conduct is warranted. My support for the investigation is not because I believe that criminal charges will likely be brought. Rather, I have never seen our country more divided and I cannot imagine any way for us to get beyond this poisonous political environment without full and complete investigations with public disclosure of the findings. 
A federal judge issued a surprising decision that allowed part of an emoluments challenge to proceed toward trial. The opinion has been widely misreported, but still represents a rare win for those arguing that President Donald Trump is accepting prohibited payments from foreign governments at the various Trump properties. However, the decision is only on the threshold standing question and did not address the merits of the constitutional claim. Moreover, United States District Judge Peter Messitte dramatically narrowed the action to only claims related to the Trump Hotel in Washington, D.C. These is considerable debate over the meaning of 
Municipal Judge Wilfredo Benitez is at the center of a controversy after he reportedly 
At the turn of the last century, surrealists had a parlor game in Paris called “The Exquisite Corpse” where writers would create collective stories by writing lines without knowing what preceded them. The lines were often nonsensical like the line that gave the game its name: “Le cadavre exquis boira le vin nouveau. ” (“The exquisite corpse shall drink the new wine.”) With minutes of his firing, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe became such an exquisite corpse with various politicians adding lines to his story that seemed entirely disconnected to his story. Former FBI Director James Comey used McCabe to pitch his upcoming book while former Attorney General Eric Holder used him to effectively attack career staff at his former agency. The point of the game in both politics and literature is not to advance a coherent narrative but insert your own lines into a collective story.