After the spectacular collapse of his sweetheart deal with the Justice Department in court, Hunter Biden’s lawyer angrily told the prosecutors in open court to “just rip it up.” It appears, however, that the defense team does not want to shred one part of the deal: the diversion agreement to avoid any charge over his false statement to obtain a gun permit. The defense is now arguing that, since the two sides signed the agreement before the implosion in court, it is final and complete. Continue reading “Will Biden Go Full Bruen? A Hunter Biden Indictment Could Bring a Surprising Challenge”
Below is my column in USA Today on adoption of some Democrats of arguments and rationales once used against the left to silence or jail them. Pundits and politicians are becoming the very thing that they have long condemned in this age of rage. It is realization of Nietzsche’s monster theory.
New Jersey’s Democrat Gov. Phil Murphy is pushing back on a plan to fly undocumented immigrants to his state, suggesting that New Jersey is now effectively off-limits to planned federal flights dropping off undocumented immigrants. It was a striking reversal for a politician who campaigned for office on the pledge that New Jersey will always be a sanctuary state. In 2017, he declared “We’ll be a sanctuary – not just city – but state.” However, it was easier to become a sanctuary state than a closed state. President Joe Biden’s authority trumps that of Murphy in the expected flights. Continue reading “Sanctuary but Unsuitable: New Jersey Governor Comes Out Against Additional Federal Flights of Undocumented Migrants”
Below is my column in The Hill on the growing list of aliases used by President Joe Biden in prior years and the unsuccessful efforts of public interest groups and Congress to gain access to the emails. There may be innocent explanations of why the President used aliases to send information to Hunter Biden. For example, one message concerning Ukraine also mentioned his plans to go to Delaware. However, in the midst of a major corruption scandal, there is an obvious reason why Congress must be able to review these emails. It will win if this goes to court but the Biden Administration is still delaying release. In the meantime, the President has established a “war room” to deal with impeachment. Yet, he can forestall any impeachment inquiry by simply releasing his financial and email records. If these records show legitimate transactions and innocent messaging, as claimed, they will exonerate the President. In other words, this is a war that can be avoided by simple transparency. Conversely, using White House staff to cover up any wrongdoing could make this situation far worse for the President.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Biden’s Use of False Names Could Cost Him”
In my torts class, I often compare the different approaches and doctrines in the United States and the United Kingdom. One of the most pronounced is the position and authority of physicians on issues like consent and malpractice. This week produced a particularly striking example. British doctors are seeking to take a 19-year-old critically ill female patient off the intensive care despite her objections and those of her parents. Unlike most such cases, the woman known only as “ST” is conscious and communicative. Yet, the doctors argue that she is not being realistic about her chances of survival from a rare disorder. Now a British court has agreed and ordered that she can be placed on end-of-life care against her will. Continue reading “British Court Rules that Competent and Conscious Patient Can Be Denied Life-Sustaining Treatment Against Her Will”
We recently discussed a federal court ruling that the Texas law requiring age verification and warning for porn sites was unconstitutional. Now, Judge Timothy Brooks in Arkansas has found that another state law imposing age verification requirements for social media violates the First Amendment. In Netchoice, LLC v. Griffin, Judge Brooks found that the law “will unnecessarily burden minors’ access to constitutionally protected speech.” Continue reading “Federal Court Strikes Down Social Media Age-Verification Law on First Amendment Grounds”
I recently wrote how the Washington Post issued a statement that declared that the newspaper was “standing by” columnist Philip Bump on his proven false claims on subjects ranging from Lafayette Park to Russian collusion. Bump’s prior claims have not only been conclusively shown to be false but other major media outlets have now rejected those claims. However, the Post claimed this week that they are in fact true in response to one of my earlier columns.
Now, Miranda Devine at the New York Post has written about a meltdown by Bump in a podcast interview with Noam Dworman, owner of New York’s own Comedy Cellar. Dworman had asked Bump to explain some of his claims and Bump offered one of the most vivid examples of the new media and it is chilling. After declaring that “I’m gonna lose my mind,” he stormed out of the interview after refusing to address the contradictions and dubious claims in his prior columns. Continue reading ““You Don’t Listen to the Press . . . I’m Telling You”: Post Columnist Philip Bump Strikes Out at Those Questioning Prior False Claims”
There is an interesting free speech ruling in Texas in favor of the adult entertainment site, Pornhub. Senior U.S. District Judge David A. Ezra of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas ruled that a Texas law requiring age-verification and warning labels about the alleged dangers of porn contravenes the First Amendment. Continue reading “Pornhub Wins Free Speech Challenge to New Verification and Warning Laws”
Former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani lost a defamation lawsuit by default Wednesday in Washington, D.C. In a 57-page ruling, United States District Judge Beryl Howell shredded Giuliani for not producing evidence in the case filed by election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. She then ordered a default and the payment of the plaintiffs’ attorneys fees totaling tens of thousands of dollars as well as punitive damages. Continue reading “Giuliani Loses Defamation Case By Default”
We recently discussed a troubling decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Porter v. Board of Trustees of North Carolina State University. The Fourth Circuit negated the free speech rights of a professor who was fired after raising objections to school policies. The case is addressed in a forthcoming law review article, Jonathan Turley, The Unfinished Masterpiece: Compulsion and the Evolving Jurisprudence Over Free Speech, 82 Maryland Law Rev. (forthcoming 2023). We now have a positive ruling for free speech out of the District of Maine where Chief Judge Jon Levy has ruled in favor of a professor terminated by the University of Southern Maine for questioning mask and vaccination policies. Continue reading “Southern Maine Professor Wins Critical Victory in Free Speech Case”
The historic Gadsden flag is at the heart of a controversy involving a twelve-year-old boy in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The child was removed from the school due to a patch on his backpack featuring the flag. The school district defended the action and claimed that, despite its historical symbolism, it is now considered racist and connected to slavery. Not only is the flag a historical image originally unconnected to slavery, but the action (in my view) contravenes core free speech protections. Continue reading “Colorado Controversy Raises Questions Over the Meaning of the Gadsden Flag [Updated]”
Below is my column in The Messenger on the early struggle of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to preserve her strategy of holding a mass 19-person trial over the 2020 election case involving former president Donald Trump. Not only are defendants scattering, but some are seeking to go to federal court where the trial would not likely be televised, as the Georgia prosecutors reportedly want. The hearing on the removal gave a glimpse into the case. Regardless of the ruling of the court, it is likely to be appealed.
This morning, I was surprised to receive a note from the Washington Post on my prior criticism of the Post’s Philip Bump as previously spreading “false stories” and refusing to accept the facts after they were established by the media. The Post has declared that Bump’s original claims on Lafayette Park, the Hunter Biden laptop, and Russian collusion were true and they stand by them. In light of the unprompted review by the Post, I wanted to lay out what the Post is now embracing as true. Continue reading “Washington Post Stands by Philip Bump’s Claims on Lafayette Park, the Hunter Biden Laptop, and Other Controversial Claims”
The hearing yesterday on the motion of former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to remove his case to federal court from Georgia state court had a number of notable moments. The testimony of both Meadows and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger offered insights into the case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. While I have said that the sweeping indictment contains some serious allegations of criminal conduct against individual defendants, I have been critical of its broad scope and its implications for free speech in future challenges to elections. Unsupported legal claims may be sanctionable in court, but they have not been treated as crimes. What was most striking is that Raffensperger confirmed a key aspect of “the call” with Georgia officials that I previously raised about the purpose of that call. For his part, Meadows categorically denied key allegations made by Willis in the indictment.