President/Executive Department Commons^™

Procedural Drift: How Judicial Restraint Enables Legalized Backsliding, Dessie Otachliska

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Article introduces Procedural Drift, a new theory of constitutional erosion in which legality itself enables democratic decline. Legal forms remain intact, but their constraining force quietly recedes as procedural doctrines withdraw courts from sites of contestation. Executive power expands not by defying law, but by strategically complying with it—exploiting judicial restraint to evade review.

Building on Bruce Ackerman’s theory of constitutional moments and Kim Lane Scheppele’s concept of autocratic legalism, this Article develops a U.S.-specific account of democratic backsliding that is lawful, gradual, and institutionally embedded. It traces how judicial restraint—operating amid partisan alignment and epistemic fragmentation—erodes legal checks …

How Many Supreme Court Justices Can Stand On The Point Of A Needle? Originalist Scholarship, Political Neutrality, And Other Constitutional Nonsense, Stephen M. Feldman

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

In the 1935 article, "Transcendental Nonsense and the Functional Approach," Felix Cohen compared formalist legal reasoning, as practiced by traditional legal scholars and Lochner-era Supreme Court justices, to the philosophical musings of scholastic theologians. Unconnected to empirical reality, formalist legal reasoning was as nonsensical as a disquisition on “‘[h]ow many angels can stand on the point of a needle?’” Nowadays, originalist scholars are similarly engaged in nonsense. These scholars defend, refine, and practice originalist methods of constitutional interpretation as if the Supreme Court justices truly decided cases in accordance with the theory. Regardless, the justices—even the avowed originalists—do not consistently …

The People, The Branches, And The Pearl Of Independence, Brian C. Murchison

Scholarly Articles

What will be the fate of the independent agencies?  Since 1887, Congress has seen fit to address an array of contemporary issues by creating expert federal agencies, such as the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and others.  The principal officers of these agencies are appointed by the President on advice and consent of the Senate, serve limited staggered terms, are bipartisan in the sense that only a bare majority of the agency’s officers can be members of the same political party, and are “independent” in the sense that the officers are removable only …

Pardon Me Please: Evaluating Clemency For Marijuana Offenders, Mitchell F. Crusto

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

Since 2012, several states and municipalities have decriminalized the non-violent use and possession of small amounts of recreational marijuana by adults. These criminal law reforms raise the issue of whether individuals who were convicted in the past should be exonerated retroactively by way of pardons or clemency. Consequently, many past marijuana offenders remain in state prisons for committing acts that are no longer deemed illegal in many states. Furthermore, these prisoners, as well as persons who were formerly accused or imprisoned, suffer from the stigma and negative collateral consequences of their alleged criminality. In response to these injustices, many governors …

“No Superior But God”: History, Post Presidential Immunity, And The Intent Of The Framers, Trace M. Maddox

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

This essay is directly responsive to one of the most pressing issues currently before the courts of the United States: the question of whether former Presidents enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution for acts they committed in office. Building upon the recent ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in United States v. Trump, 91 F.4th 1173 (D.C. Cir. 2024) this essay argues that the clear answer to that question is a resounding “no”.

Former President Trump, who has now appealed the D.C. Circuit’s ruling to the Supreme Court, contends that post-presidential criminal immunity is …

Implied Consent In Administrative Adjudication, Grace Moore

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

Article III of the Constitution mandates that judges exercising the federal judicial power receive life tenure and that their pay not be diminished. Nonetheless, certain forms of adjudication have always taken place outside of Article III—in state courts, military tribunals, territorial courts, and administrative tribunals. Administrative law judges, employed by various federal administrative agencies, decide thousands of cases each year. A vast majority of the cases they decide deal with public rights, which generally include claims involving federal statutory rights or cases in which the federal government is a party. With litigant consent, however, the Supreme Court has upheld administrative …

What Roosevelt Did To Brown V. Board Of Education, Or Race And Court Packing, Jill M. Fraley

Scholarly Articles

Roughly one-third of American schools remain segregated. Scholars have offered a variety of explanations, mostly social and cultural, but sometimes legal, for why desegregation did not proceed effectively after Brown v. Board of Education. This Article articulates a less expected and previously undocumented cause: President Roosevelt's prior attempt at court packing slowed--even derailed--desegregation.

The story of what Roosevelt's court packing did to make the work of integration harder is a cautionary tale, particularly for those who want to alter the U.S. Supreme Court now in furtherance of a modern cause. The only reasonable route for reforming the Supreme Court must …

Superpowers With Villainous Objectives: How The Executive Branch’S Immigration Enforcement “Powers” Utilize Technology To Violate Noncitizens’ Privacy, Nina-Simone Edwards

Library Scholarship

The United States border, for noncitizens, has a unique quality to it. Each time a noncitizen crosses that border, they are no longer private individuals. They can no longer choose to give up their information–instead, there is a forced exchange: data for entry. Who they are, what they are, and everything that connects them to the world is given up in exchange for a new life in a new land. Once the border is crossed, noncitizens no longer have the privacy that they may have known before. This Note first builds on scholarship theorizing that noncitizens do have a right …

How Biden Could Keep Filling The Federal Circuit Court Vacancies, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In October 2020, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden speculated that the fifty-four talented, extremely conservative, and exceptionally young, appellate court judges whom then-President Donald Trump and two relatively similar Grand Old Party (GOP) Senate majorities appointed had left the federal appeals courts “out of whack.” Problematic were the many deleterious ways in which Trump and both of the upper chamber majorities in the 115th and 116th Senate undermined the courts of appeals, which are the courts of last resort for practically all lawsuits, because the United States Supreme Court hears so few appeals. The nomination and confirmation processes which Trump …

An Administrative Solution To The Student Loan Debt Crisis, Justin C. Van Orsdol

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

To say that the student loan debt crisis is out of control is a massive understatement. Although solutions such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness and the recent temporary payment/interest rate freeze have provided some relief for borrowers, more can be done. Of course, as with any large outlay of taxpayer dollars, opposition is sure to be heated. Given the current political climate, the likelihood of any legislative fixes seems unlikely.

But what if there was an administrative solution that could do more to address this crisis without the cost of the legislative process? This essay proposes such a solution. It …

How Biden Began Building Back Better The Federal Bench, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In October 2020, Democratic presidential nominee Joseph Biden famously expressed regret that the fifty-four accomplished, conservative, and young federal appellate court jurists and the 174 comparatively similar district court judges whom former– Republican President Donald Trump and the recent pair of analogous Grand Old Party Senate majorities in the 115th and 116th Congress appointed had left the courts of appeals and the district courts “out of whack.” Lamentable were the numerous detrimental ways in which President Trump and these Republican Senate majorities attempted to undercut the appeals courts and district courts, which actually constitute the tribunals of last resort in …

Biden's Prosecutors, Melanie D. Wilson

Scholarly Articles

In President Biden’s inauguration speech, he offered us hope, while acknowledging America’s challenging history. He also promised progress––real progress––on racial justice. “A cry for racial justice some 400 years in the making moves us. The dream of justice for all will be deferred no longer[,]” he said.

Meaningful progress toward racial equality begins with a fairer criminal justice system. We must take an anti-racist, anti-xenophobic, anti-homophobic, and anti-classist approach to prosecutions. In turn, that type of progress demands sound leadership at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and from the ninety-three United States attorneys whom the President appoints. The lead prosecutors …

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 …

Servant Leadership And Presidential Immigration Politics: Inspiration From The Foot-Washing Ritual, Victor C. Romero

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda has been criticized by pundits and scholars alike and has been thwarted by courts concerned about executive overreach. This Article contributes to this chorus of critics by viewing the current immigration regime from a Christian perspective on servant leadership, contrary to the stereotype that Christianity necessarily aligns with any one particular political brand. Jesus Christ’s entreaty that his disciples wash each other’s feet provides a useful lens through which to evaluate whether this Administration’s work effectively advances communitarianism, a value consistent with Christian immigration ethics. An examination of a range of immigration policies—from the Muslim …

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 …

Filling The New York Federal District Court Vacancies, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

President Donald Trump contends that federal appellate court appointments constitute his foremost success. The president and the United States Senate Grand Old Party (GOP) majority have compiled records by approving forty-eight conservative, young, accomplished, overwhelmingly Caucasian, and predominantly male, appeals court jurists. However, their appointments have exacted a toll, particularly on the ninety-four district courts around the country that must address eighty-seven open judicial positions in 677 posts.

One riveting example is New York’s multiple tribunals, which confront twelve vacancies among fifty-two court slots. The Administrative Office of the United States Courts considers nine of these openings “judicial emergencies,” because …

Demystifying Nationwide Injunctions, Alan M. Trammell

Scholarly Articles

The phenomenon of nationwide injunctions—when a single district court judge completely prevents the government from enforcing a statute, regulation, or policy—has spawned a vigorous debate. A tentative consensus has emerged that an injunction should benefit only the actual plaintiffs to a lawsuit and should not apply to persons who were not parties. These critics root their arguments in various constitutional and structural constraints on federal courts, including due process, judicial hierarchy, and inherent limits on “judicial power.” Demystifying Nationwide Injunctions shows why these arguments fail.

This Article offers one of the few defenses of nationwide injunctions and is grounded in …

The Constitutional Nature Of The United States Tax Court, Brant J. Hellwig

Scholarly Articles

Is the United States Tax Court part of the Executive Branch of government? One would expect that question would be capable of being definitively answered without considerable difficulty. And as recently expressed by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, that indeed is the case. In the course of addressing a challenge to the President's ability to remove a judge of the Tax Court for cause on separation of powers grounds, the D.C. Circuit rejected the premise that the removal power implicates two branches of government: "the Tax Court exercises Executive authority as part of the Executive …

A Cautionary Tale: The Obama Coalition, Anti-Subordination Principles And Proposition 8, Jennifer Holladay, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

In his journey to the White House, Barack Obama demonstrated that he could be, in the words of Dr. King, not merely "a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus," creating a coalition that called us to "look after not only ourselves but each other."

To be sure, Obama's coalition is an imperfect one. Proposition 8's passage reminds us that we still fall too readily into the categories of "us and them"--categories in which subjugated groups fight against each other, rather than alongside each other.

Still, Obama has set us on a new path in America's long journey toward …

May The President Appropriately Invoke God? Evaluating The Embryonic Stem Cell Vetoes, Samuel W. Calhoun

Scholarly Articles

President George W. Bush twice vetoed measures to provide federal funds for embryonic stem cell research requiring the destruction of human embryos. Each veto was premised in part upon his religious beliefs. President Bush’s reliance upon his faith provoked a strong negative reaction. This essay argues that this criticism is baseless.

The essay demonstrates that important political leaders spanning three centuries— including Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Martin Luther King Jr.—have invoked religious beliefs in explaining their positions. The principle of “separation of church and state,” properly understood, is not a persuasive basis for criticizing this religious heritage. President Bush, …

Reviving The Nixon Doctrine: Nsa Spying, The Commander-In-Chief, And Executive Power In The War On Terror, David Cole

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Ombudsmen For American Government? Edited By Stanley V. Anderson, Robert H. Haggerty

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Presidency And Congress, Charles L. Black, Jr.

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fragile Coalition Interviews - Group - Tape 6, July 12, 1975, M. Caldwell Butler

Fragile Coalition Interviews

No abstract provided.

Fragile Coalition Interviews - Group - Tapes 4&5, July 11-12, 1975, M. Caldwell Butler

Fragile Coalition Interviews

No abstract provided.

Fragile Coalition Interviews - Group - Tapes 2&3, July 11, 1975, M. Caldwell Butler

Fragile Coalition Interviews

No abstract provided.

Fragile Coalition Interviews - Group - Tape 1, July 11, 1975, M. Caldwell Butler

Fragile Coalition Interviews

No abstract provided.

M. Caldwell Butler Audio Diary - Digest Of Transcripts, July 10,1975, M. Caldwell Butler

Butler-Woodlief Recordings

No abstract provided.

Fragile Coalition Interviews - Hamilton Fish Jr., June 26, 1975, M. Caldwell Butler

Fragile Coalition Interviews

No abstract provided.