We recently discussed the Georgetown law professor who defended “more aggressive” protests targeting the Supreme Court justices, but Harvard clinical instructor Alejandra Caraballo wants to guarantee that “The 6 justices who overturned Roe should never know peace again.” Accordingly, Caraballo is calling for people to “accost them every time they are in public.” That harassment, according to Caraballo, is the “civic duty” of every American.
Below is my column on the case of the ten-year-old rape victim who allegedly was taken to Indiana because an abortion was barred in Ohio. (A shorter, edited version of this column ran in the New York Post). There is a Fox News report that it was able to confirm an abortion involving a ten-year-old girl in Indiana but could not confirm the other claims. Fox is also reporting that a HIPAA complaint has been filed against Dr. Caitlin Bernard. There remain, however, questions as to why the child had to leave Ohio, which has exceptions that would apply to the case. This may reflect confusion among these doctors, but the law seems clear on the available exceptions. There is also the question of what happened to this child and whether a police report was filed. There may have been such a report. It should not violate HIPPA or other laws to confirm that a report was filed and the victim has been protected by authorities.
Here is the original column: Continue reading “The 10-year-old Rape Victim’s Abortion Leaves a Number of Glaring Questions”
Below is my column in The Hill on the punishment of four mounted Border Patrol agents in Texas and what is says about us as a country. What is particularly crushing is not just that this can occur but that it was predicted almost a year ago.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Biden’s Canned Hunt: The Punishment of the Border Agents is about Protecting a President, not Migrants”
In a series of tweets this week, Professor Heidi Li Feldman has denounced “lawless” and “actively rogue” Supreme Court justices and professors who disagree with her views on the Constitution. She has called for “genuine” law professors not to fall “into complicity with lawlessness” in teaching such subjects. It is the latest voice of intolerance and orthodoxy at a leading law school.
Below is today’s column on common talking point among Democratic members and pundits on how the recent Dobbs decision will present a barrier to women seeking treatment for ectopic pregnancies. It is not only legally and medically false but it is dangerous if women actually believe what they are hearing or reading from these figures. There are ample grounds for pro-choice advocates to oppose the decision without spreading alarm over a danger that does not exist.
Here is the column:
After a setback before the Delaware Supreme Court, the University of Delaware is continuing its dogged effort to prevent the public from seeing the senatorial papers of President Joe Biden. The continued litigation, at public cost, has been criticized as an effort to shield President Biden from potentially embarrassing material from being accessed by the media or public interest groups. For a research institution, it is a curious role to prevent access to documents but clearly a role supported by President Biden and his family. What is particularly troubling is the reason being claimed by the university. Continue reading “University of Delaware Continues Fight to Shield Biden Documents From Public Review”
There is a new controversy over the alleged bias of the J6 Committee and the extreme measures used to avoid alternative or conflicting accounts. On Friday, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a member of the House select committee, declared that former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone” did not contradict” the testimony of previous witnesses like Cassidy Hutchinson. However, the New York Times is reporting that he was not asked about statements that the Committee knew he would contradict. The controversy comes at a time when the head of the Oath Keepers has offered to testify, an extraordinary move since he is facing criminal charges. However, he has one big demand: it must be live and in public. In other words, it cannot be edited or tailored by the Committee.
A professor at Laval University (Université Laval) in Quebec City has been suspended without pay for two months for questioning the benefits of COVID vaccines for children. Microbiology and immunology Professor Patrick Provost sent out an email soliciting a discussion on the issue and raising his concerns. He has now been disciplined for merely raising such issues by a university that has discarded any semblance of academic integrity and free speech. Continue reading “Laval University Professor Suspended for Questioning Covid Vaccines for Children”
Below is my column in the Hill on the effort to declare an “invasion” along the Texas border to allow the state to take greater control along the border to stem the flow of illegal immigrants. This week, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed an order allowing Texas law enforcement to return illegal immigrants apprehended in the state back to the U.S. border. The Biden Administration has already indicated that it will oppose such efforts. Whether such state enforcement is constitutional will be hashed out in the courts in light of the 2012 decision in Arizona v. United States. Texas can legitimately raise the obligations of the federal government to protect the border under Article IV and even refer to this influx as an invasion in the colloquial sense. However, the argument that it constitutes an invasion in the constitutional sense would not be a compelling argument in federal court.
Here is the column:
I am happy to report that my law review article in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy is now out in print. The article entitled “Harm and Hegemony: The Decline of Free Speech in the United States,” explores the anti-free speech movement in the United States and the increasingly common claim that free speech itself is harmful. I wanted to thank the journal editors and staff for their tireless efforts to bring this rather lengthy work to print. It was a great pleasure to work with each and every one of the law students who contributed to the editing and sourcing of this law review.
Continue reading “Harvard Journal Publishes Turley Free Speech Study”
Below is my column in the New York Post on the recent cancel campaign targeting Associate Justice Clarence Thomas. It was always doubtful that a law school would take the unprecedented step of barring a sitting Supreme Court justice. However, the decision to stand with free speech and academic freedom was still a refreshing departure from the trend toward increasing viewpoint intolerance and orthodoxy. The problem is that most targets of these campaigns have neither the status nor the day job of a Supreme Court justice. Most do not have the option of securing a seat on the Supreme Court to guarantee their free speech and academic freedom. For every Thomas, there are a thousand other “contingency professors” who have little protection or expectation in the current intolerant environment.
Here is the column:
There was an extraordinary story this week out of Rolling Stone magazine, which breathlessly reported a “serious matter” of an allegation that Supreme Court justices prayed with evangelicals, including some associated with groups that filed amicus briefs with the Court. Many liberal sites went immediately into instant vapors at the thought of justices praying with such individuals, including the usual unhinged claims of ethical violations and renewed calls for everything from court packing to impeachments. What is clear is that the critics will require more than this “hope and a prayer” to achieve such ends. Continue reading “Hope and a Prayer: Liberals Condemn the Conservative Justices After Dubious Rolling Stone Article”
The University of Idaho has lost a major free speech and religious freedom case after a federal judge ruled in favor of three Christian law students at the College of Law. Judge David Nye granted a preliminary injunction in favor of the students who objected to “no contact orders” issued against them. A faculty member, Professor Richard Seamon, was also made the subject of such an order. Continue reading “University of Idaho Loses Major Free Speech and Religious Freedom Case”
I previously wrote about how most Americans are not aligned by the most extreme views of both parties on abortion. Many Democratic leaders have been speaking of absolute abortion rights, as reflected in states like Colorado which recognize the right to abortion until the moment of birth at nine months. Many Republican leaders have been speaking of absolute or near absolute bans on abortion, as reflected in states like Arkansas with only limited exceptions for the life of the mother. Now a Harvard poll reaffirms earlier polling that shows most Americans embrace views closer to Mississippi than Michigan on abortion. Indeed, while Democratic leaders denounced the Mississippi law setting a 15-week limit on abortion, 72 percent of those polled opposed abortion generally after that limit. Continue reading “Harvard Poll: 72 Percent Oppose Abortion Beyond 15-Week”
In yesterday’s White House press briefing, there was an extraordinary moment when White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre refused to discuss a 2018 voicemail from President Biden that showed that the President lied repeatedly in denying ever speaking with Hunter Biden about his foreign business dealings. Jean-Pierre refused to answer a question from Fox News’ Peter Doocy and then refused again to answer a question from RealClearPolitics reporter Philip Wegmann. The rest of the press seemed content with an answer that was not just openly evasive but contemptful of the press. It is continuing evidence of the success of the Biden campaign to get the media to maintain a false narrative that they helped create during the campaign.