Today, the United States Supreme Court will hear three consolidated cases in Trump v. CASA on the growing use of national or universal injunctions. This is a matter submitted on the “shadow docket” and the underlying cases concern the controversy over “birthright citizenship.” However, the merits of those claims are not at issue. Instead, the Trump Administration has made a “modest request” for the Court to limit the scope of lower-court injunctions to their immediate districts and parties, challenging the right of such courts to bind an Administration across the nation. Continue reading ““A Modest Request”: The Supreme Court Hears Challenge to National or Universal Injunctions”
Category: Courts
Justice Sonia Sotomayor has previously been criticized for making public comments that some viewed as overly political or partisan, including telling law students to organize in favor of abortion rights. This week, the Justice has triggered another controversy in calling for lawyers to “fight this fight,” presumably against the Trump Administration. Continue reading ““An Act of Solidarity”: Sotomayor Calls for Lawyers to “Fight this Fight” in Controversial Speech”
Many of us have been waiting for the arguments on May 15th before the Supreme Court in the birthright citizenship case to see if the justices will put long-needed limits on district courts issuing national injunctions. Critics object that Democratic groups are going to blue states in open forum-shopping to secure such injunctions from favorable judges — a record number of injunctions for an Administration that only just passed its 100th day mark. Those complaints are likely to only increase after the new order by District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco. It is arguably the most expansive yet in its scope and assertion of judicial power. Continue reading “Federal Judge in San Francisco Halts All Large-Scale Firings by the Trump Administration”
It was once said that possession is nine-tenths of the law, an acknowledgement that the possessor of property generally has the advantage in keeping it. This principle has been taken to absurd extremes in some squatter cases, where people invade homes and then demand the right to stay pending long legal challenges. Today, under both our housing and immigration laws, mere occupation often appears to be nine-tenths of our laws. Continue reading “Squatter Syndrome: How the Inefficiencies of Our Legal System Are Making a Mockery of Our Immigration Laws”
Below is my column in the New York Post on the first 100 days of the Trump Administration in court. It is too early to handicap many of these lower courts decisions. I have been critical of some of these orders as either premature or unconstitutional. There is a reason for the hyperkinetic pace of the Administration. However, it needs greater focus and discipline in picking cases.
Here is the column:
Continue reading “The First 100 Days: The Method Behind the Madness in Court Challenges”
The defense team for Judge Hannah Dugan is likely thinking, “This is not helpful.” While Dugan initially contested the allegations that she assisted an illegal immigrant to evade federal authorities in her Milwaukee courthouse, Democrats are heralding her as a type of Harriet Tubman guiding illegal immigrants to safety. Democratic State Rep Ryan Clancy even declared to a cheering crowd: “What Judge Dugan apparently did was what all of us should be doing.” That is precisely why federal authorities felt criminal charges were warranted despite Dugan’s judicial title.
Below is my column in the Hill on the slew of additional injunctions imposed by district courts last week. Some of these courts seem on a hair-trigger in ordering the record number of injunctions racked up in the first 100 days.
Here is the column: Continue reading ““Here We are Again”: Federal District Courts Piling on Injunctions to Stop Trump”
“This is not normal.” Those words from Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., are undeniably true after the arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan. However, the reason it is not normal is far more debatable. Dugan is accused of becoming a lawbreaker in seeking to obstruct an effort to arrest a man wanted by federal authorities. If true, that is manifestly not “normal.” Continue reading ““This is Not Normal”: Democrats Miss an Obvious Problem with the Arrest of the Wisconsin Judge”
It has been a busy 24 hours in the courts. Early this morning, the Supreme Court blocked (for now) the deportations of any Venezuelans held in northern Texas under the Alien Enemies Act, a law only used three times before in our history. At the same time, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the lower court’s order in the case of Abrego Garcia.
After the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, I wrote a column disagreeing with the media coverage that claimed that the Trump Administration was ordered to return Garcia to the United States from El Salvador. The Administration mistakingly sent Garcia to a foreign prison. However, the Court only ordered that the Administration “facilitate” such a return, a term it failed to define. Now, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis is indicating that she feels unfacilitated, but it is unclear how a court should address this curious writ of facilitation.
The intense struggle between the Trump Administration and federal judges continued this week with another court ordering a halt to a nationwide program. In Massachusetts, District Judge Indira Talwani is preventing President Donald Trump from canceling a Biden program granting parole and the right to work to immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (CHNV). Judge Talwani’s order would require individual hearings for the half of a million individuals allowed into the country under this program by President Joe Biden.
In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court delivered a victory to the Trump Administration on the deportations under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act of suspected gang members of Tren de Aragua. The Court ruled that U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s March 15 order temporarily blocking deportation was invalid and that he should never have proceeded in the case. Rather, as some of us previously argued, the Court ruled that this is a habeas case that should be heard in Texas. Chief Justice Roberts joined Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh to support the Administration.
Today, the voters of Wisconsin go to the polls in what may be the single most expensive and important judicial race in modern history. Both parties are spending millions with the balance of the state Supreme Court in the balance. If liberal Susan Crawford wins, the expectation is that she will vote with the Democratic majority to approve a gerrymandering of congressional districts to guarantee the loss of two Republicans and possibly flip control of the House of Representatives to the Democrats.
The raw political pitch in the election is disturbing. It assumes that both candidates will blindly support the objectives of their respective parties. The real reason to cast a vote today should be on judicial ideology. Ironically, the United States Supreme Court made that plain in an important Wisconsin case argued just the day before the state election. Continue reading “The Wisconsin Supreme Court Race Should Turn on Principle Not Politics”
In a decision that could well find itself before the Supreme Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld California’s ban on “large capacity” magazines. In a rare move, Judge Lawrence Van Dyke offered a video dissent to the majority opinion. Continue reading “Ninth Circuit Upholds California’s Ban on “Large Capacity” Magazines” 
MSNBC analyst and former Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill has long been criticized for unhinged rhetoric. That was evident on “Morning Joe” recently when McCaskill said that the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members was akin to Putin “disappearing” people. It is not the first such analogy by McCaskill, who has called those opposing the censorship under the Biden Administration “Putin lovers.” However, just for the record, Putin does not generally disappear people by putting them on flights back to their countries. He tends more toward nerve agents than immigration agents to remove people. Continue reading “McCaskill: Trump is Trying to “Disappear” People Like “his Buddy Putin””