Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the reappearance of Obama officials in the contemporary debates over surveillance and health care. Here is the column.
Category: Politics
The United States Attorney for Manhattan, Preet Bharara, appears to believe that he is working for a different branch of government. After Attorney General Jeff Sessions asked for the resignations of all U.S. Attorneys, a standard change of political appointees in a new Administration, Bharara reportedly indicated that President Donald Trump would have to fire him. Just as with the bizarre conduct of Sally Yates as Acting Attorney General, Bharara has shown a curious understanding of this position and his obligations as a federal officer. If these media reports are true, President Trump should immediately accommodate him and Bharara will have to explain to future employers how he justifies such an unfounded stance. [Update: Bharara has been fired]
I sincerely hope that the reports are not true or that Bharara quickly reconsiders and gets his letter of resignation in today. This is not the way to close a successful career as U.S. Attorney. In the end, I am not sure what the basis for refusing a letter of resignation is. Bharara seems a rebel without a cause.
Continue reading “Fire Me: U.S. Attorney In Manhattan Reportedly Refuses To Resign [UPDATED]”
I have great respect for Harvard law professor Lawrence Tribe, who remains one of the iconic figures in constitutional law and someone with whom I have had exchanges for years on legal controversies affecting this country. While I was not surprised to see that we disagreed on a constitutional issue related to President Donald Trump, I was surprised to see that he took literally a comment that I made as a joke about impeachable tweets on Morning Joe recently. Tribe ironically responded in a series of tweets to the comment. The more serious problem is that I considered the suggestions of impeachment over Trump’s criticism of President Obama to be laughable. They clearly are not to Professor Tribe. It is something of a reversal of roles since both Tribe and I testified during the Clinton impeachment hearings where he suggested a narrower definition of the constitutional standard while I argued that Clinton could be impeached for an act of perjury.
Continue reading “Impeachable Tweets: A Response To Professor Tribe”
I recently criticized the ethics complaint filed against Presidential Advisor Kellyanne Conway by 15 ethics law professors. For full disclosure, Conway is one of my former students at George Washington University Law School (she graduated in 1995). I criticized the complaint as highly political with little foundation. The only aspect of the complaint that was not frivolous was the allegation that Conway violated the federal rule against endorsing commercial products in light of her comments about Ivanka’s line of clothing and jewelry. As I stated, Conway did violate the rule and I believe that she should have been punished with an official reprimand or some other equivalent measure. However, I viewed the violation as part of a tongue-in-cheek retort to the controversy. The White House reached the same conclusion that there was no “nefarious” intent but it also declined to impose any formal punishment. That decision has led to a relatively rare rebuke fromOffice of Governmental Ethics Director Walter Shaub. Referring to Conway’s “free commercial,” Shaub expressed dismay over the failure to impose any punishment and further chastised deputy White House counsel Stefan Passantino for his explanation for the lack of any discipline.
I have been a long critic of Germany’s criminal speech laws, including its long criminalization of Nazi symbols. Now, Sven Pohl, 37, is facing charges in Germany for “heavy drug trafficking” after he triggered a raid due to his posting of a Nazi-themed breakfast. The police arrived being found with massive quantities of methamphetamine and marijuana.
Continue reading “Mein Meth: German Arrested After Posting Hitler Toast”
We just discussed the move in Hawaii to secure a new restraining order to cover the second Trump executive order. That was the most likely move that we previously discussed. The other option was to seek to extend the existing restraining order to cover the second executive order on the grounds that there was not a substantial change. That is the option that Washington state is taking. Today, Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson indicated that he will ask that Judge James Robart’s Feb. 3 ruling be extended on the grounds that the second Executive Order contains the same alleged violations as the first.
Continue reading “Washington State To Move To Extend Restraining Order To Second Executive Order”
The United Arab Emirates have supplied the most recent example of the Sharia legal system in the Muslim world. South African Emlyn Culverwell‚ 29, and his Ukrainian fiancée Iryna Nohai, 27, were arrested after Nohai wemt to the doctor over stomach pains. In the UAE doctors appear to have no notion of confidentiality (or humanity) and informed the police when he discovered that she was pregnant. Since she had not yet married Culverwell, that meant that they had violated the Islamic code against sex outside of marriage — even though the impregnation occurred outside of the UAE. They are criminally charged.
Just a day after Sen. Al Franken publicly accused Attorney General Jeff Sessions of perjury, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) went public on CBS with a theory that appears to have been bothering him: “You can imagine a set of circumstances in which the Trump campaign gave him talking points [and] he was a message boy for them.” The purpose, Whitehouse suggested, was for Sessions to convey “Mission accomplished” after meeting with his Russian handlers. It is a curious notion that Sessions was a Manchurian senator but the Russian ambassador still met with him in the presence of staffers on the Hill or in public at the Republican National Convention. If this is a sequel to the Manchurian Candidate, I may have to pass.
While most Democratic senators have been somewhat circumspect in characterizing the testimony of Attorney General Jeff Sessions as “inaccurate” or “misleading,” Minnesota Sen. Al Franken yesterday publicly accused Franken of perjury. It is a weighty charge that I have previously said would be highly difficult to actually prosecute.
Continue reading “Sen. Al Franken Accuses Sessions Of Perjury”
Pakistani media is reporting a disturbing series of comments by Islamabad High Court (IHC) Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui who has shown the danger of Sharia law and the erosion of the separation of mosque and state. Justice Siddiqui went on a religious rant recently in denouncing “disrespectful” comments on social media and pledged to treat all such blasphemers as terrorists.
Continue reading “Pakistani Justice Pledges To Treat Blasphemers On Social Media As Terrorists”
With the rollout of the new GOP health care law, a new CNN/ORC poll shows that the nation remains deeply divided on the issue. Indeed, little has changed since Obamacare was first passed by a handful of votes. Some 50% of people oppose the removal mandatory health care coverage while 48% are in favor of such a change. While some have called the new plan “Obamacare-lite,” it is clearly a repeal and massive change in the existing law. The thumping heart of Obamacare is the individual mandate and this plan would drive a stake through it.
Continue reading “Poll: Americans Split Evenly Over Repeal Of Obamacare”
The Trump Administration has issued a new executive order on immigration. As expected, the second order removes some of the most controversial provisions of the first order and tightens the language. Iraq has been dropped from the list of countries subject to the 90 day ban. However, there will be additional security of Iraqi nationals. That would leave Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Syria and Libya. The permanent ban on entry of Syrians has been removed. There is still a limit on all refugees to 50,000 — a 50 percent cut. Current VISA holders and permanent residents are exempted. Notably, this travel ban will be implemented on March 16 and the order will be dated to run from the date of the original executive order (which was . Finally, the preferential treatment afforded to religious minorities has been removed.
The new order removes the edges from the rather casual drafting of the first order. As I previously noted, good lawyering rarely changes the outcome of litigation but bad lawyering can. The first order reflects remarkably bad lawyering — if indeed it was drafted primarily by lawyers. Of course, this still distinguishes between people based on their nationality — the core of the challenge of the earlier litigation. Thus, it is likely that this will face new challenges — or attempts to amend earlier complaints. The rollout with the Secretary of State, Homeland Security Security, and the Attorney General shows a significant change in the level of professionalism from the more improvisational effort of the original order. It was a surprisingly sharp learning curve but the A-Team appears to have shown up to defend this order. The new order is below.
Continue reading “TRUMP SIGNS NEW IMMIGRATION EXECUTIVE ORDER”
With the chorus of calls for an “independent counsel” or “special prosecutor” to investigate the Russian hacking scandal, there has been one element that remains rather ambiguous: what is the specific crime to be investigated? Clearly there is the hacking but that crime is well-known and was committed by Russians who are unlikely to be subject to any real investigation. A special counsel, as opposed to a bipartisan commission, would require the articulation of a crime and the basis for the investigation. I am all in favor of independent investigations of this and other issues. However, if we are going to move beyond a special commission to special counsel we need to have more evidence and a notion of what we are investigating. That may come but we are not there yet. Below is my column in The Hill Newspaper on the subject — and the moral outrage over hacking.
Continue reading “Hacking and the Politics of Moral Outrage”
I recently discussed an ethics complaint by law professors against presidential aide Kellyanne Conway that I viewed as facially political in character and lacking a substantive foundation. (Of course, this was before the “Couchgate” scandal) My reaction to a new proposed first amendment lawsuit by news media is little better. Democratic U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney and first amendment advocated joined in condemning the Trump Administration’s exclusion of some new organizations from a White House press briefing. I share their view that the exclusion was wrong and, with the recent attacks on the media by President Trump, contradict our core values as a nation that values the freedom of the press. However, I do not see a credible constitutional claim brought under the threatened lawsuit.
Until now, I thought “eco-terrorist” was an industry spin. However, the leader of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Hibatullah Akhundzada, has gone all green. It appears that when his followers are not throwing acid in the faces of girls seeking to be educated or blowing up mosques and markets, they should be planting trees. It is the Taliban version of Greenpeace without the peace part.
Continue reading “Eco-Terrorists: The Taliban Goes Green With Tree Planting Message”