Category: Courts

Courts, Lawyering

Justice Delayed: New York Appellate Court Reportedly Split Over Trump Civil Fraud Judgment

Some of us have expressed frustration with the ridiculous delay in the appellate court review of the absurd civil judgment against Donald Trump. It appears to have entered some judicial black hole where neither light nor an opinion can escape. Now, the Wall Street Journal claims that it is due to a deeply divided panel in a column titled “Court Split Leaves Trump’s Civil Fraud Appeal Stuck in Slow Lane.” Continue reading “Justice Delayed: New York Appellate Court Reportedly Split Over Trump Civil Fraud Judgment” →

Courts, Criminal law, Media, Politics

“A Failure to Communicate”: Democrats Face Costly Calls on Texas Redistricting Bluffs

In Cool Hand Luke, Paul Newman’s character famously bluffs in a hand of poker and later explains, “Yeah, well sometimes nothing can be a real cool hand.” It is a great scene and a great movie. The problem is that sometimes nothing can be . . . well . . . nothing. Democrats are learning that lesson this week after some Texas legislators indicated that they will be headed home and opponents are calling the bluffs of figures from California Gov. Gavin Newsom to Texas’s Beto O’Rourke. Continue reading ““A Failure to Communicate”: Democrats Face Costly Calls on Texas Redistricting Bluffs” →

Constitutional Law, Courts, Supreme Court

Tenth Circuit: Parents Do Not Have Right to Override Ban on Gender Transitioning of Minors

The Tenth Circuit handed down a notable opinion this week in Poe v. Drummond, upholding Oklahoma’s law prohibiting gender transition procedures for anyone under eighteen. The opinion by Judge Joel Carson (joined by Judges Harris Hartz and Gregory Phillips) concluded that parental rights do not trump a state’s determination of what are safe treatments for minor patients. Continue reading “Tenth Circuit: Parents Do Not Have Right to Override Ban on Gender Transitioning of Minors” →

Constitutional Law, Courts, Free Speech, Media

Federal Judge Strikes Down California’s Unconstitutional Deepfake Law

I previously criticized the California law, called the Defending Democracy from Deepfake Deception Act of 2024, as flagrantly unconstitutional. Signed by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, the law would have gutted free speech protections for political parodies. Now, in Kohls v. Bonta, Senior U.S. District Judge John Mendez has rebuked the state for a law that he concluded had to be rejected in its entirety as flawed to its core: “No parts of this statute are severable because the whole statute is preempted. No parts of A.B. 2655 can be salvaged.” Continue reading “Federal Judge Strikes Down California’s Unconstitutional Deepfake Law” →

Constitutional Law, Courts, Politics

Justice Department Files Complaint Against Board Members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting Accused of Usurping Office

By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor

On Tuesday the Justice Department petitioned for a writ of Quo Warranto against three individuals having served as board members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting who were fired by President Trump yet allegedly continued to hold and exercise their office.

The complaint states “[s]ince April 28, 2025, Defendants Laura G. Ross, Thomas E. Rothman, and Diane Kaplan have been usurping and purporting to exercise unlawfully the office of board member of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (the “CPB”)… President Donald J. Trump lawfully removed each Defendant from office on April 28, 2025. As recent Supreme Court orders have recognized, the President cannot meaningfully exercise his executive power under Article II of the Constitution without the power to select—and, when necessary, remove—those who hold federal office. Personnel is policy, after all.”

Continue reading “Justice Department Files Complaint Against Board Members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting Accused of Usurping Office” →

Constitutional Law, Courts

“Shameful”: Federal Judge Rules in Favor of Trump Administration But Adds His Own Personal Condemnation

The Trump administration notched another victory this week when U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington granted a motion to dismiss a case brought by five organizations to stop the cancellation of more than 360 grant awards by the Justice Department. However, in reaching this relatively straightforward conclusion, Judge Mehta opted to follow a pattern set by other judges in adding his own personal commentary on the wisdom of the policy change.

Continue reading ““Shameful”: Federal Judge Rules in Favor of Trump Administration But Adds His Own Personal Condemnation” →

Constitutional Law, Courts, Supreme Court

Justice Kagan Joins Colleagues in Rebuking Liberal Boston Judge Over His Defiance of the Court

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued a relatively rare clarification of its earlier opinion, which lifted the injunction on the deportation of immigrants to third-party countries. In a surprising response, Judge Brian Murphy in Boston ruled that he considered his orders regarding the eight immigrants set for deportation to South Sudan to remain unchanged by the decision. The Court quickly disabused him of that notion by declaring that he was not in compliance with its order. What was most remarkable, however, was the sharp concurrence by Justice Elena Kagan who, despite voting against the original order, called out Murphy for defying the authority of the Court. It was a commendable and principled position that escaped her colleagues, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, in dissent. Continue reading “Justice Kagan Joins Colleagues in Rebuking Liberal Boston Judge Over His Defiance of the Court” →

Constitutional Law, Courts, Politics

Federal Judge Rules Against Trump on Use of “Invasion” Powers to Expedite Deportations

In Washington, D.C., District Court Judge Randolph Moss has issued a notable decision against the Trump Administration in Refugee and Immigrant Center for Legal and Educational Services v. Noem. Judge Moss rejected the use of Trump’s January 20 “invasion” executive proclamation to block undocumented immigrants from pursuing asylum applications and other legal pathways. The court essentially rules that the Guarantee Clause of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution is something of a paper tiger, finding that states are protected from “invasion,” but affording the President no additional powers to carry out that guarantee. Continue reading “Federal Judge Rules Against Trump on Use of “Invasion” Powers to Expedite Deportations” →

Columns, Constitutional Law, Courts, Politics, Supreme Court

The Chilling Jurisprudence of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson

Below is my column in the New York Post on the controversial dissenting opinion of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in the injunction ruling in Trump v. CASA on Friday. The opinion seemed to fan the flames of “democracy is dying” claims of protesters, suggesting that basic limits on injunctive relief could result in the collapse of our core institutions. It was a hyperventilated opinion better suited to a cable program than a Court opinion. The response from Justice Amy Coney Barrett was a virtual pile driver of a rebuke. What was notable is that a majority of the justices signed off on the takedown. It could indicate a certain exasperation with histrionics coming from the left of the Court in recent years.

Here is the column: Continue reading “The Chilling Jurisprudence of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson” →

Constitutional Law, Courts

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California’s “1-in-30” Gun Rationing Law

A unanimous panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has struck down California’s “1-in-30” gun rationing law as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The law restricted citizens to one gun purchase every 30 days and was based on a ridiculous rationale that was shredded by the three-judge panel. Continue reading “Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California’s “1-in-30” Gun Rationing Law” →

Courts, Politics

Ninth Circuit Rules for Trump on National Guard Deployment

California Gov. Gavin Newsom just lost a major ruling in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which ruled that President Donald Trump is likely to prevail in his deployment of National Guard troops. Newsom and various Democratic politicians have insisted that Trump’s order is unlawful and that Newsom has to agree to any request for deployment. The Ninth Circuit ruled on Thursday that Newsom does not have such a veto over deployments. Continue reading “Ninth Circuit Rules for Trump on National Guard Deployment” →

Constitutional Law, Courts, Politics, Supreme Court

The Supreme Court Delivers a Blow to Transgender Cases

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its 6-3 ruling upholding a Tennessee ban on transgender medical treatments for adolescents. The ruling has major implications for pending transgender cases, particularly the concurrence of Justice Amy Coney Barrett rejecting the claim that transgender status qualifies as a group entitled to heightened scrutiny under the Constitution.  One of those cases just resulted in a major ruling in Boston against the move by the Trump Administration to restore the binary options of “male” and “female” sex designations on U.S. passports. Continue reading “The Supreme Court Delivers a Blow to Transgender Cases” →

Courts, Justice, Politics

More Heat Than Light: New York Judge Blocks ICE Access to Rikers Island Over Alleged Adams Conflict

This week, New York Judge Mary Rosado issued an opinion in Council of City of N.Y. v. Adams. The court is blocking the city from allowing the federal government to maintain office space at Rikers Island. The reason is that Rosado agreed that Mayor Eric Adams had a conflict of interest and likely bargained away the access as part of a quid pro quo arrangement to get the Justice Department to drop criminal charges against him.  The opinion is quite extraordinary and, in my view, fundamentally flawed. The opinion generated more heat than light on the proper handling of a conflict of interest.

Continue reading “More Heat Than Light: New York Judge Blocks ICE Access to Rikers Island Over Alleged Adams Conflict” →

Constitutional Law, Courts

Second Circuit to Hear Trump Appeal from New York Criminal Case

Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will hear oral arguments on a threshold issue in the criminal case against President Donald Trump in New York. The case is still pending in the New York court system after his sentencing, but  President Trump wants the case removed to federal court. He is relying on last year’s presidential immunity decision and arguing that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg tripped a wire by calling former White House aides as witnesses. Continue reading “Second Circuit to Hear Trump Appeal from New York Criminal Case” →

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks