Law Commons^™

It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

The Trump Administration Should Have Attorney Whistleblowers, Carliss N. Chatman

Scholarly Articles

In the Godfather trilogy, lawyers do most of their work outside of the courtroom. The family’s lawyer, Tom Hagen, has the title of consigliere, serving as the boss’s right-hand man. He is legal counsel and also assists with business management and planning. This includes operation of the family’s criminal enterprise. In The Godfather, a lawyer is a fixer, an enforcer, and a collaborator. This conceptualization of the attorney role is not only unethical, it is illegal. Yet, it is the role currently assumed by our Attorney General, William “Bill” Barr, and White House Counsel, Pasquale “Pat” Cipollone. Although both …

“Opening The Door” To Presidential Press Conferences: A Framework For The Right Of Press Access, Alexandria R. Taylor

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

Since President Donald Trump took office in 2017, there has been tension between the White House and the press. While this tension has been present in prior presidencies, its current manifestation raises important First Amendment issues. This Note discusses the limitations of the President to restrict the press’s right of First Amendment access to presidential press conferences. After delving into the Supreme Court’s development and recognition of the press’s right of access and how the lower courts have interpreted this right, this Note proposes a framework to analyze the press’s right of access and addresses the question of when and …

Preserving The Nationwide National Government Injunction To Stop Illegal Executive Branch Activity, Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

The Trump Administration’s extravagant claims of executive power have focused the federal courts’ attention on separation of powers, judicial review, and equitable jurisdiction to grant broad injunctions that forbid the administration’s violations of the Constitution and federal statutes. Critics question the federal courts’ power to grant broad injunctions that are effective everywhere. These critics maintain, among other things, that the federal courts lack jurisdiction and that broad injunctions improperly affect nonparties and militate against “percolation” of issues in a variety of courts.

This Article examines the critics’ arguments and finds them unconvincing. Accepting the critics’ arguments would rebalance the separation …