Law Commons^™

The Other Cause Of January 6, Katherine A. Shaw

Online Publications

John Eastman. Rudy Giuliani. Donald Trump himself.

These people all bear some responsibility for the events of January 6, 2021. But there is another contributing factor—an institution, not a person—whose role is regularly overlooked, and that deserves a focus in the ongoing January 6 committee hearings: the Electoral College. The Electoral College isn’t responsible for President Trump’s efforts to remain in office despite his clear loss. But it was integral to Trump’s strategy, and it has everything to do with how close he came to success.

Justice Accused At 45: Reflections On Robert Cover’S Masterwork, Sanford Levinson, Mark A. Graber

Touro Law Review

We raise some questions about the timeliness and timelessness of certain themes in Robert Cover’s masterwork, Justice Accused, originally published in 1975. Our concern is how the issues Cover raised when exploring the ways antislavery justices decided fugitive slave cases in the antebellum United States, played out in the United States first when Cover was writing nearly fifty years ago, and then play out in the United States today. The moral-formal dilemma faced by the justices that Cover studied when adjudicating cases arising from the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850 was whether judicial decision-makers should interpret the …

Trump’S Peace To Prosperity Plan: Kesepakatan Untuk Mewujudkan Perdamaian Israel-Palestina, Jaya Ahmad Nurjaman

"Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI

Peace to Prosperity: A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestine and Israeli People has been published by Donald Trump, President of United States. The Peace Plan was sparked by Trump then later known as the Trump's Peace to Property Plan. The prolonged Israeli-Palestinian conflict until these days underpins the Trump Peace Plan. The series of historical peace agreements have not yet yielded satisfactory results. However, Trump's Peace Plan does not run smoothly. It was leading to an international debate which was launched in January 2020 whether leaders agree or disagree toward the Trump Peace Plan. This research uses …

The Emerging Lessons Of Trump V. Hawaii, Shalini Bhargava Ray

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the years since the Supreme Court decided Trump v. Hawaii, federal district courts have adjudicated dozens of rights-based challenges to executive action in immigration law. Plaintiffs, including U.S. citizens, civil rights organizations, and immigrants themselves, have alleged violations of the First Amendment and the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause with some regularity based on President Trump’s animus toward immigrants. This Article assesses Hawaii’s impact on these challenges to immigration policy, and it offers two observations. First, Hawaii has amplified federal courts’ practice of privileging administrative law claims over constitutional ones. For example, courts considering …

Destructive Federal Decentralization, David Fontana

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article—written for a symposium hosted by the William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal—focuses on the efforts by the Trump administration to relocate federal officials outside of Washington to reduce the capacity of the federal government. Federalism and the separation of powers are usually the twin pillars of structural constitutional law. Locating federal officials outside of Washington— federal decentralization—has been an additional tool of diffusing power that has started to gain some scholarly attention. These debates largely focus on structural constitutional law as constructive—as improving the capacity and operation of the federal and state governments. The power …

“Lawyers’ Work”: Does The Court Have A Legitimacy Crisis?, Lackland Bloom

St. Mary's Law Journal

Talk of the Supreme Court’s legitimacy is pervasive. It can’t be avoided by anyone paying attention. The question this article addresses is does the Supreme Court have a legitimacy crisis. The title “Lawyers’ Work” is taken from Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in which he declared that as long as the Court decides cases by engaging in “Lawyers’ Work” the public will leave it alone. This article concludes that Justice Scalia was partially though not entirely correct.

The article begins by considering the concept of judicial legitimacy as developed and studied by political scientists. Next it …

"De-Americanization" During The Trump Administration: Derivative Citizenship And Deceased Parents In The United States, Katheryn J. Maldonado

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The Trump Administration’s war on immigration will be marked in history as one replete with white supremacy and terror. Much attention has been focused in the realm of undocumented immigrants, detention centers, and family separations because of the pervasiveness of those issues and the gravity of the human rights violations occurring in the United States. However, little focus has been given to immigrants who are lawful permanent residents or naturalized citizens at risk of denaturalization and deprivation of their constitutional rights. This Note highlights the effects of the Trump Administration’s war on immigration on citizens and green card holders in …

A Defense Of The Electoral College In The Age Of Trump, John Yoo

Pepperdine Law Review

In the aftermath of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, where Donald J. Trump lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes but still secured victory in the Electoral College, renewed efforts to delegitimize or abolish the Electoral College system have surfaced. Critics, calling for a direct national vote for President, attacked the legitimacy of the election and decried the Constitution’s method of presidential selection as antiquated and undemocratic. Some legal scholars even suggested that the Electoral College must be abolished to disentangle it from America’s racist past and history of slavery. Recently, though, reformers in several States have banded …

The Senate, The Trump Impeachment Trial And Constitutional Morality, Joel K. Goldstein

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Impeachment As A ‘Madisonian Device’ Reconsidered, Amanda Hollis-Brusky

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ostracism And Democracy, Alex Zhang

Faculty Articles

The 2020 Presidential Election featured an unprecedented attempt to undermine our democratic institutions: allegations of voter fraud and litigation about mail-in ballots culminated in a mob storming of the Capitol as Congress certified President Biden’s victory. Former President Trump now faces social-media bans and potential disqualification from future federal office, but his allies have criticized those efforts as the witch-hunt of a cancel culture that is symptomatic of the unique ills of contemporary liberal politics.

This Article defends recent efforts to remove Trump from the public eye, with reference to an ancient Greek electoral mechanism: ostracism. In the world’s first …

Preparing The Public For A Contested Election, Deborah Pearlstein

Online Publications

While perhaps once thought too far-fetched to discuss out loud in serious company, concerns that Donald Trump will refuse to leave office even if he loses the November election have gained increasing mainstream attention in recent months. Indeed, it would be foolish to assume that such a possibility is out of the question. The president has spent the past four years making clear his desire to remain more than two terms in office, and has worked especially diligently of late to lay the rhetorical groundwork for declaring the results of the federal election – particularly one reliant on absentee voting …

Policing The Wombs Of The World's Women: The Mexico City Policy, Samantha Lalisan

Indiana Law Journal

This Comment argues that the Policy should be repealed because it undermines

firmly held First Amendment values and would be considered unconstitutional if

applied to domestic nongovernmental organizations (DNGOs). It proceeds in four

parts. Part I describes the inception of the Policy and contextualizes it among other

antiabortion policies that resulted as a backlash to the U.S. Supreme Court’s

landmark decision in Roe v. Wade. Part II explains the Policy’s actual effect on

FNGOs, particularly focusing on organizations based in Nepal and Peru, and argues

that the Policy undermines democratic processes abroad and fails to achieve its stated

objective: reducing …

Understanding The Spirit Of The Constitution On Corruption: Emoluments, Impeachment, And The Primacy Of Political Virtue, Lea Mano

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Ascriptive Nationalism, Demagoguery, And The Modern Presidency: A Case Study In Constitutional Decay, Christopher J. Putney

Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects

This study is an account of the modern presidency as a source––and under Donald Trump, an accelerant––of systemic problems in American politics. Against the prevailing scholarly view of the Trump presidency as an unqualified aberration, I argue that the signal features of his efforts at governance are actually the product of converging patterns of political and institutional order. Building on seminal (but previously disjointed) work on ascriptive Americanism and the rhetorical presidency, I show that Trump represents the political synthesis of America’s ascriptive tradition and a form of presidential leadership inaugurated more than a century ago by Woodrow Wilson. Moreover, …

Two Popular Democracies' "Energy Independence" Initiatives Through The Lenses Of Constitutionalism, Environmentalism, And Judicial Activism Oeuvres--A Comparative Study Of The Trump And Modi Administrations, Vidhya V. Iyer

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

The energy independence approaches by two popular democracies, the United States and India, have recently been the center of attention. This Article examines whether two Democratic leaders, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, and Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, have maintained constitutionalism in light of executive orders and ordinances that focus on energy independence by way of promoting coal-fired power plants rather than focusing on the environment and human health. Based on constitutional underpinnings, this Article concludes that although both leaders and their administrations may not have violated their respective constitutions, they have certainly violated notions of …

Why Trump’S Lawyers Should Talk Like Lawyers, Katherine A. Shaw

Online Publications

The Constitution says that what’s happening in the Senate right now is a trial. But it’s no ordinary trial: As we’re all now well aware, a Senate trial is a hybrid affair, part law and part politics.

Why Law Of Evidence Supports The Verdict That The President Is Guilty, Edward A. Purcell Jr.

Other Publications

This post originally appeared on https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/477186-why-law-of-evidence-supports-the-verdict-that-the-president-is-guilty

@Usa Vs. @Realdonaldtrump: The Decline Of Democracy In 280 Characters Or Less, Bryn Edwards

CMC Senior Theses

From threats, to hate speech, to potential criminal statements, Donald Trump has made use of Twitter like no president or world leader before him. His presidency and communication strategy have been defined by his “tweetstorms” and a consequent slew of legal issues. The prolific rate of his tweeting has made large-scale analyses difficult as they quickly become dated.

Nevertheless, this thesis has aimed for a more holistic analysis by uniquely linking trends in his tweeting to its perceived social consequences, situating this work in a long line of analyses of presidential rhetoric and media strategies. Moreover, it assesses Trump’s use …

"Believe Me," We Do Not Have A Foreign Emoluments Clause Violation, Scotty N. Teal

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

President Trump was sued in New York District Court for allegedly violating the Foreign Emoluments Clause. In its brief, the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) alleged that the president's international businesses and real estate holdings positioned him to receive money from foreign governments. These business interests, or entanglements, could "sway" or create an opportunity for negative foreign influence in violation of the Emoluments Clause. CREW states that these "entanglements between American officials and foreign powers could pose a creeping, insidious threat to the Republic." CREW argued that President Trump violated the Emoluments Clause because the clause "cover[s] …

Interpreting Emoluments Today: The Framers’ Intent And The “Present” Problem, Bianca Spinosa

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Maturity, Or Reading Weber In The Age Of Trump, Josh Chafetz

Josh Chafetz

Anxiety abounds about the state of American constitutional democracy in “the age of Trump.” A wide range of commentators have raised serious and profound questions about the resilience of our political institutions and the capacity of our current political leadership.

This Essay, written for a Constitutional Commentary symposium on “Constitutional Law in the Trump Era,” attempts to get a handle on that anxiety by taking a step back and viewing our contemporary situation through a broader lens—a lens crafted in a different time and place, but responsive to a related set of political questions.

In particular, this Essay turns to …

Immigration Policy: A Look At Its History And Its Future, Melisa Fumbarg

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This comment will examine immigration in the United States, specifically by addressing questions involving the constitutionality of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and removal procedures. Part II will look at the historical background of immigration policy in the United States, including past amnesties and the latest reform, DACA. Part III will analyze DACA and why it was rescinded. Part IV will discuss one the most detrimental consequences of DACA being rescinded—deportation, and the constitutional limits of removal procedures. Part V will deploy some future predictions on immigration and the next steps Congress should take to ensure that there is …

Rules To Impeach By - What It Takes To Remove A President, David Dittfurth

Faculty Articles

Professor David Dittfurth explains the steps that must be taken by Congress to impeach a president or other official.

The White House And Congress Are Heading For A Collision. Who Will Win?, Katherine A. Shaw

Online Publications

With the 116th Congress up and running, President Trump is facing meaningful congressional oversight for the first time. On Monday, the House Judiciary Committee embarked on a major investigative mission, sending letters to 81 witnesses seeking documents and testimony relating to possible “obstruction of justice, public corruption and other abuses of power” by Mr. Trump and his administration.

But the White House shows no signs of rolling over. It has indicated for months that it is prepared to assert the president’s executive privilege to keep congressional investigators from gathering information about Mr. Trump — including his conversations with high-level advisers. …

Withdrawing From Nafta, Alison Peck

Faculty & Staff Scholarship

Since the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump has threatened to withdraw from NAFTA. Can he? The question is complex. For one thing, NAFTA is not a treaty negotiated under the Treaty Clause of the Constitution, but rather a congressional–executive agreement, a creature of dubious con- stitutionality and ill-defined withdrawal and termination parameters. This Article reviews the scope of those restrictions and concludes that unilateral presidential withdrawal from NAFTA, although not without support, is ultimately unlawful. On one hand, unilateral presidential withdrawal would be valid as a matter of international law, and the NAFTA Implementation Act appears to be designed to terminate …

President Trump's Big Beautiful Wall: Discrimination, Eminent Domain, And The Public Use Requirement, Meghan K. Tierney

Chicago-Kent Law Review

At a press conference held in Trump Tower New York City on June 16, 2015, Donald Trump announced his candidacy for President of the United States by promising to expand the border wall along the Southern United States. President Trump has insisted that his only reasons behind completely separating the United States from Mexico are to curtail illegal immigration and curb drug cartel activity, but many argue that his statements indicate a much more sinister motive based in racial discrimination. The public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause allows the federal government to take private land for the …

Constitutional Maturity, Or Reading Weber In The Age Of Trump, Josh Chafetz

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Anxiety abounds about the state of American constitutional democracy in “the age of Trump.” A wide range of commentators have raised serious and profound questions about the resilience of our political institutions and the capacity of our current political leadership.

This Essay, written for a Constitutional Commentary symposium on “Constitutional Law in the Trump Era,” attempts to get a handle on that anxiety by taking a step back and viewing our contemporary situation through a broader lens—a lens crafted in a different time and place, but responsive to a related set of political questions.

In particular, this Essay turns to …

Why Kavanaugh Should Not Attend The White House Ceremony, Michael Herz

Online Publications

Brett Kavanaugh is now Justice Kavanaugh. He has been nominated, confirmed and — in a private ceremony on Saturday conducted by Chief Justice John Roberts and the retired Justice Anthony Kennedy — sworn in. There is nothing left to do. So why is he scheduled to be at the White House on Monday evening for a public ceremony, one that President Trump has inaccurately called a “swearing-in ceremony”?

The Forgotten Issue? The Supreme Court And The 2016 Presidential Campaign, Christopher W. Schmidt

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This Article considers how presidential candidates use the Supreme Court as an issue in their election campaigns. I focus in particular on 2016, but I try to make sense of this extraordinary election by placing it in the context of presidential elections over the past century.

In the presidential election of 2016, circumstances seemed perfectly aligned to force the Supreme Court to the front of public debate, but neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton treated the Court as a central issue of their campaigns. Trump rarely went beyond a brief mention of the Court in his campaign speeches; Clinton basically …