Law Commons^™

Trump, Lawyer Regulation, And The Institutional Double Bind, Benjamin H. Barton

Scholarly Works

Scandals, news stories, and court setbacks that would have devastated other, more traditional Presidents have seemingly only made Donald Trump’s bond with his supporters stronger. This creates a challenge when institutions try to punish anyone in Trump’s orbit. Taking action against Trump only encourages his supporters, while inaction may lessen the left’s faith in institutions and leave opponents of President Trump wondering why nothing is being done to curtail what they see as flagrant criminal contempt. This is a problem the author calls the “institutional double bind.” This Essay discusses whether there is any solution for these institutions stuck in …

Designing Deregulation: The Potus's Place In The Process, Joan Macleod Heminway

Scholarly Works

Candidates for U.S. president — like those for any elected office or leadership position — make promises about what they will do if they are elected to office. If we take time to think through what must be done to fulfill those promises, however, we may find that the action or forbearance of Congress, the federal courts, or others is required to achieve the pledged objectives. Nevertheless, we expect the president to make good on those campaign commitments — and more. Our current president, for example, ran a campaign in which deregulation was a centerpiece.

This essay interrogates the role …

Promoting Executive Accountability Through Qui Tam Legislation, Randy Beck

Scholarly Works

For hundreds of years prior to ratification of the U.S. Constitution, Anglo-American legislatures used qui tam legislation to enforce legal constraints on government officials. A qui tam statute allows a private informer to collect a statutory fine for illegal conduct, even if the informer lacks the particularized injury normally required for Article III standing. This essay explores whether qui tam regulation should be revived as a means of ensuring executive branch legal accountability."

Suing The President For First Amendment Violations, Sonja R. West

Scholarly Works

On any given day, it seems, President Donald Trump can be found attacking, threatening, or punishing the press and other individuals whose speech he dislikes. His actions, moreover, inevitably raise the question: Do any of these individuals or organizations (or any future ones) have a viable claim against the President for violating their First Amendment rights?

One might think that the ability to sue the President for violation of the First Amendment would be relatively settled. The answer, however, is not quite that straightforward. Due to several unique qualities about the First Amendment and the presidency, it is not entirely …

Presidential Attacks On The Press, Sonja R. West

Scholarly Works

President Donald Trump’s habit of hurling invectives at the press is disturbing. It undermines the work of the press and breaks long-standing norms that presidents show respect for the role of the Fourth Estate. But insults alone rarely raise First Amendment issues. Presidents have long used the bully pulpit to respond to or criticize news reports. Even Trump’s near daily verbal assaults on reporters and news organizations can be considered part of our country’s “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open” marketplace of ideas. Presidents have opinions too, and journalists should be able to handle his rants.

Yet there are also times when …

A Politics-Reinforcing Political Question Doctrine, Harlan G. Cohen

Scholarly Works

The modern political question doctrine has long been criticized for shielding the political branches from proper judicial scrutiny and allowing the courts to abdicate their responsibilities. Critics of the doctrine thus cheered when the Supreme Court, in Zivotofsky I, announced a narrowing of the doctrine. Their joy though may have been short-lived. Almost immediately, Zivotofsky II demonstrated the dark side of judicial review of the separation of powers between Congress and the President: deciding separations of powers cases may permanently cut one of the political branches out of certain debates. Judicial scrutiny in a particular case could eliminate political scrutiny …

Who Has Standing To Sue The President Over Allegedly Unconstitutional Emoluments?, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

Three pending lawsuits challenge President Trump's practice of accepting payments and other benefits from foreign governments through his businesses as violative of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. They also allege that the President's practice of accepting payments and benefits from state or federal governmental units violates the Domestic Emoluments Clause. These actions raise interesting questions about the meaning of two little-discussed provisions of the Constitution. But before reaching the merits the courts will first have to grapple with issues of justiciability - in particular, with the question whether plaintiffs have "standing" to bring their claims in federal court. This article explains …

Making Sense Of Legislative Standing, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

Legislative standing doctrine is neglected and under-theorized. There has always been a wide range of opinions on the Supreme Court about the proper contours of legislative standing doctrine and even about whether the Court should adjudicate disputes between the other two branches at all. Perhaps owing to these disagreements, the full Court has never articulated a clear vision of the doctrine. While the Court has managed to resolve some cases, it has not achieved the consensus necessary to provide a comprehensive and coherent account of critical doctrinal issues such as what type of injury can give rise to legislative standing …

Return Of The Jrad, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

Ignacio Diaz Aguilar’s felony conviction for document forgery made him a priority for deportation and disqualified him from the possibility of discretionary relief from removal, despite apparently significant equities and mitigating factors. And yet, when Federal District Court Judge Jack B. Weinstein sentenced Mr. Aguilar, he recommended that the government not deport him, even though no legal rules provided him with a route to that result. This essay places Judge Weinstein’s recommendation in a broader context, explaining its importance within the modern deportation regime. Statutory reforms and new agency practices have made criminal history the primary marker of noncitizen undesirability. …

Two-Time Presidents And The Vice-Presidency, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

Does the Constitution limit the ability of a twice-before-elected President to serve as Vice-President? This question, as it turns out, presents an intricate constitutional puzzle, the solution of which requires working through four separate sub-inquiries: Is a two-term President totally ineligible for the Vice-Presidency? Is such a person barred from election to the Vice-Presidency even if that person remains appointable to that office? Is a twice-before-elected President, even if properly placed in the Vice-Presidency, incapable of succeeding from that office to the Presidency? And even if such a succession can occur, must the resulting term of service as President expire …

The Death Of Deference And The Domestication Of Treaty Law, Harlan G. Cohen

Scholarly Works

How much deference do courts give to Executive branch views on treaty interpretation? The Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States tells us that courts “will give great weight to an interpretation made by the executive branch,” and earlier empirical studies suggested that deference to Executive in such cases was robust. But is that still the case? The Supreme Court’s rejection of the Executive’s view in a series of high profile cases including Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, BG Group PLC v. Republic of Argentina, and Bond v. United States should raise some doubts. This short article investigates, …

Samantar And Executive Power, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

This essay examines Samantar v. Yousuf in the context of broader debate about the relationship between federal common law and executive power. Samantar represents simply the latest effort by the Executive Branch to literally shape the meaning of law through a process referred to in the literature as “executive lawmaking.” While traditional accounts of executive lawmaking typically have treated the idea as a singular concept, Samantar demonstrates the need to bifurcate the concept into at least two different categories: acts of executive lawmaking decoupled from pending litigation and acts of executive lawmaking taken expressly in response to litigation. As Samantar …

Review Essay: Religion And Politics 2008-2009: Sometimes You Get What You Pray For, Leslie C. Griffin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Presidential Ethics: Should A Law Degree Make A Difference?, Nancy B. Rapoport

Scholarly Works

Two of the nation's most controversial presidents, Nixon and Clinton, were both lawyers, and both of them had ethics-related problems while in office. This essay reviews whether any model ethics rules force lawyer-presidents to behave at a higher standard than non-lawyer-presidents; then it discusses the implications for legal education if we really do want lawyers to go above and beyond the norm of behavior.

Employment Discrimination And Presidential Immunity Cases, Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Who Executes The Executioner? Impeachment, Indictment And Other Alternatives To Assassination, Jay S. Bybee

Scholarly Works

This article addresses whether the Constitution protects a sitting President from indictment. The text of the Constitution is not clear on this question as it might be, but it is clear enough. No court has ever addressed the question of the President’s amenability to criminal charges, although the courts have considered the related question of whether federal judges can be subjected to criminal charges. Those courts have answered that judges and other officials are subject to criminal prosecution while in office. Congress has implicitly approved this conclusion in its passage of the Ethics in Government Act with its provision for …

Advising The President: Separation Of Powers And The Federal Advisory Committee Act, Jay S. Bybee

Scholarly Works

This Article examines the tensions between Congress, the judiciary, and the President over presidential use of advisory committees. It argues that courts, in attempting to avoid difficult constitutional questions, have misread the Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”). Properly construed, FACA violates separation of powers by limiting the terms on which the President can acquire information from nongovernmental advisory committees.

The author argues that the President does have the power to consult with outside advisers, and that FACA unconstitutionally infringes upon that power. FACA fails to draw a distinction between congressionally created advisory committees and presidentially created advisory committees, and assumes …

Taking Advice Seriously: An Immodest Proposal For Reforming The Confirmation Process, Glenn Harlan Reynolds

Scholarly Works

This brief Essay suggests a structural reform to the judicial nomination and confirmation process, designed to reduce the role of partisanship and special interest politicking. Though this proposal is aimed primarily at preventing logjams when the President and Senate are of different parties, it is likely to be beneficial even where that is not the case, to the extent that the opposition party is prone to filibuster nominees.