Law Commons^™

Asylum Ban Litigation: Supreme Court Declines To Stay Injunction, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Litigation Over The Asylum Ban Continues: District Court Grants Preliminary Injunction, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Plus Ça Change: A Century-Old Removal For Cause, Michael E. Herz

Online Publications

Lots of ink has been spilled over when Congress can give federal officials for-cause protection. One would think that a necessary antecedent to that discussion would be a determination of exactly what for-cause protection entails. What is “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office”? Yet no one knows; the debate over the permissibility of that restriction proceeds in blissful uncertainty as to its scope.

Rwu First Amendment Blog: David Logan's Blog: Recognizing The Free Press In The Crosshairs Across The Globe 12-12-2018, David A. Logan

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Ninth Circuit’S Asylum Ban Ruling Is A Message To Trump, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Collusion, Obstruction Of Justice, And Impeachment, Ediberto Roman, Melissa Gonzalez, Dianet Torres

Journal of Legislation

No abstract provided.

Executive Power, Drone Executions, And The Due Process Rights Of American Citizens, Jonathan G. D'Errico

Fordham Law Review

Few conflicts have tested the mettle of procedural due process more than the War on Terror. Although fiery military responses have insulated the United States from another 9/11, the Obama administration’s 2011 drone execution of a U.S. citizen allegedly associated with al-Qaeda without formal charges or prosecution sparked public outrage. Judicial recognition that this nonbattlefield execution presented a plausible procedural due process claim ignited questions which continue to smolder today: What are the limits of executive war power? What constitutional privileges do American citizens truly retain in the War on Terror? What if the executive erred in its judgment and …

The Take Care Clause, Justice Department Independence, And White House Control, Andrew Mccanse Wright

West Virginia Law Review

Problematic relations between the White House and the U.S. Department of Justice stand out even amidst the broader tumult of President Donald Trump's first year in office. With respect to written policy restricting contacts between the White House staff and the Department, the Trump White House has followed the general contours of predecessor administrations. Those policies recognize that White House contacts restrictions vary with the Department’s complex functions, restrict channels of contact, and restrict personnel authorized to make contacts. They also grant limited exceptions where White House-Department contact is required to assist the President in the performance of a constitutional …

The Temporary Restraining Order Against Trump’S Asylum Ban: Statutory Structure And Agency Discretion, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Barring Asylum Claims: The President Versus The Statute, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Executive Authority And The Take Care Clause, Colleen E. O'Connor

Notre Dame Law Review

Part I of this Note will discuss the Department of Homeland Security’s authority to regulate immigration and focuses on DACA and DAPA. Part II will address the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel Opinion on DAPA’s legality. Part III will turn to the lack of judicial constraints on or legislative responses to the executive branch’s enforcement discretion. Part IV will propose that the executive branch should take a more active role in ensuring that the President remains faithful to the Take Care Clause when exercising prosecutorial discretion. Expounding upon the Office of Legal Counsel’s multifactor framework is a …

Bureaucratic Resistance And The National Security State, Rebecca Ingber

Faculty Scholarship

Modern accounts of the national security state tend toward one of two opposing views of bureaucratic tensions within it: At one extreme, the executive branch bureaucracy is a shadowy “deep state,” unaccountable to the public or even to the elected President. On this account, bureaucratic obstacles to the President’s agenda are inherently suspect, even dangerous. At the other end, bureaucratic resistance to the President represents a necessary benevolent constraint on an otherwise imperial executive, the modern incarnation of the separation of powers, as the traditional checks on the President of the courts and Congress have fallen down on the job. …

Much Ado About Nothing?: Local Resistance And The Significance Of Sanctuary Laws, Alyssa Garcia

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment explores the current constitutional discourse of sanctuary laws and compares their various components. Part I provides background on the basic policy components of sanctuary laws and modern policies. Part II explores and compares the substantive legal and political value of sanctuary laws. This section will first assess the impact of sanctuary policies on existing immigration and constitutional law. In doing so, specific sanctuary jurisdictions involved in litigation, Seattle, San Francisco, and Chicago, and their likelihood of withstanding preemption under existing doctrine will be compared. The impact sanctuary laws may have on the Tenth Amendment will next be discussed. …

Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jenna Wims Hashway's Blog: First Amendment Lets Officials Mute But Not Block Twitter Critics 10/09/2018, Jenna Wims Hashway

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

The Trump Effect On Power Plant Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Thomas O. Mcgarity

San Diego Journal of Climate & Energy Law

This Article will probe the legal, technological and economic underpinnings the Trump Administration initiatives and the viewpoint that their initiatives will have little impact on CO2 emissions from power plants. Part II will highlight the Trump Administration’s views on the extent to which human activities are the leading contributing factor. Part III will describe the radical change in direction that that the Trump Administration is taking with respect to regulations designed to reduce GHG emissions from power plants. Part IV will offer predictions about the likely effect of the Trump Administration’s rollbacks on the electric power and coal industries, on …

Presidential Permitting For Pipelines: Constitutionality And Reviewability, Joan Campau

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Federal oversight of cross-border pipelines occurs during the presidential permitting process. Pursuant to Executive Order 13337, the Department of State is authorized to review applications and grant permits to projects that “serve the national interest.” Scholars and litigants have questioned the constitutionality of this process and reviewability under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”). This Note argues that the permitting process is constitutional and derives legitimacy from both the executive powers explicitly enumerated in the Constitution as well as an implicit sanction from the legislative branch. Further, this Note argues that APA review is appropriate for at least one component of …

How Safe Is Too Safe? Exemption 7(F) And The Withholding Of Critical Documents, Grant Snyder

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is one of the main tools used by the American public to investigate the actions of its government. Congress created FOIA in an attempt to make most government documents available to the public. Today, the FOIA process favors government withholding. This bias comes from institutional issues in courts’ review of FOIA challenges.

In the environmental and administrative law context, federal agencies use many exemptions to withhold government records from citizen and non-profit groups. Agencies that are tasked with permitting and regulating energy pipelines and other environmentally-sensitive infrastructure now regularly cite Exemption 7(F). These agencies …

All The President's Privileges, Ann M. Murphy

Journal of Law and Policy

This article provides a historical perspective of the evidentiary privilege doctrines that are in play in the current Special Counsel investigation. New issues of waiver by tweet are addressed. It is well established that a sitting president is subject to judicial process in certain circumstances, and that President Trump and his close advisors have and will continue to claim one or both of these privileges. I predict that these privileges will be inapplicable, applicable but waived, or applicable but fall within the crimefraud exception to the privileges. The crime-fraud exception has never been raised in a Special Counsel investigation of …

Contemporary Practice Of The United States Relating To International Law (112:4 Am J Int'l L), Jean Galbraith

All Faculty Scholarship

This article is reproduced with permission from the October 2018 issue of the American Journal of International Law © 2018 American Society of International Law. All rights reserved.

Section 6: Separation Of Powers, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Mobilizing A Community: The Effect Of President Trump's Executive Orders On The Country's Interior, Enid Trucios-Haynes, Mariana Michael

Faculty Scholarship

Utilizing his executive powers, one of President Trump’s first actions denied entry into the U.S. to individuals from seven different countries. This action immediately set into motion many relief efforts undertaken by attorneys around the nation and showcased lawyers’ work on high impact cases through suits brought by organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union. While the media attention focused on these efforts in coastal cities at international airports, cities in the interior United States struggled to gather resources and effectively provide legal assistance to affected individuals. The participatory action research (PAR) model emerges as a means to bridge …

Testimony Of Rebecca Ingber Before The United States Senate Committee On The Judiciary On The Nomination Of Brett Kavanaugh For Associate Justice Of The U.S. Supreme Court, Rebecca Ingber

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Rebecca Ingber testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee as it considered the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh for Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Her testimony focused on Judge Kavanaugh's national security and international law jurisprudence, in particular, the court's role in considering international law constraints on the President's war powers, and the potential effects of this judicial approach on executive power.

Sg’S Brief In Lucia Could Portend The End Of The Alj Program As We Have Known It, Jeffrey S. Lubbers

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Lucia Et Al. V. Securities And Exchange Commission: Opinion Of The Court, Elena Kagan

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Lucia Et Al. V. Securities And Exchange Commission: Brief Amicus Curiae Of Administrative Law Scholars In Support Of Neither Party, Richard J. Pierce Jr.

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Lucia Et Al. V. Securities And Exchange Commission: Brief Of Amicus Curiae The Forum Of United States Administrative Law Judges In Support Of Neither Party, Gerald Marvin Bober

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Lucia Et Al. V. Securities And Exchange Commission: Brief Amicus Curiae Of Federal Administrative Law Judges Conference In Support Of Neither Party, John M. Vittone

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Introduction To Lucia Et Al. V. Securities And Exchange Commission, Selina Malherbe

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Debate Over Bears Ears National Monument, Emilie Johnson, Nicholas Joy

GGU Law Review Blog

President Trump attempts to reduce the size of Bears Ears National Monument.

Co-Parenting War Powers: Congress's Authority To Escalate Conflicts, Russell A. Spivak

West Virginia Law Review

This article argues that Congress has the ability to force a President to escalate military intervention when he is otherwise unwilling to do so. The article begins by exploring the constitutional powers at Congress's disposal-the Declare War Clause, the Taxing and Spending Clause, and the Commander-in-Chief Clause-and their historical application. It then establishes that, under Justice Jackson's Youngstown framework, the Executive would be acting in Category Three, meaning that the President may "rely only upon his own constitutional powers minus any constitutional powers of Congress over the matter." Citing multiple Article I clauses, this article argues that Executive action in …