President/Executive Department Commons^™

Conserving A Vision: Acadia, Katahdin, And The Pathway From Private Lands To Park Lands, Sean Flaherty, Anthony L. Moffa

Maine Law Review

Although a century separates the official designations, the strategies required to ensure federal protection of Maine’s two National Park Service areas—Acadia National Park and Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument—closely track one another. In both cases, a handful of enterprising conservationists shared the vision for conservation. Both areas depended on the private acquisition, and donation, of title to the numerous parcels that comprised them before the land could garner federal protection. Politics in the early 20th and 21st centuries had to be overcome. This work tells the stories in parallel, highlighting and analyzing four strands of similarity to not only …

Immigration Detention: Perspectives From Maine Law Students Working On The Ground At The Laredo Detention Center In Texas, Joann Bautista, Katie J. Bressler, Nora R. Bosworth

Maine Law Review

Since 2017, students enrolled in the University of Maine School of Law Refugee and Human Rights Clinic have traveled to Laredo, Texas to participate in a program, sponsored and run by the law firm Jones Day in collaboration with Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, to provide representation for women in the Laredo Detention Center. Alongside Jones Day attorneys, the students conduct client intake interviews, draft memos detailing each woman’s experiences and any potential legal claims, and assist in the representation of clients. This article will provide a glimpse into the experiences of three Maine Law student attorneys during their time in …

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 …

Prosecuting The Executive, Tiffany R. Murphy

San Diego Law Review

A special counsel is appointed to investigate and potentially prosecute any criminal activity involving those in the Executive Branch. When an attorney general makes such a decision, the individual should consider not only the scope of the appointment but whether the special counsel will protect the fundamental rules of law upon which the Constitution rests; no one person is above the law. Recent history illustrates the abuses of the special prosecutor’s role where it was used as a political weapon or for low level officials. Instead, a special counsel should be used only when the crisis is severe enough that …

A Presidential Power Of Monumental Proportions: Does The Antiquities Act Permit The Review And Revision Of National Monuments Or Can The President Steal Your Land?, Maureen A. Mccotter

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Rediscovering The Journal Clause: The Lost History Of Legislative Constitutional Interpretation, Nicholas Handler

Faculty Scholarship

Article I, Section 5 of the United States Constitution requires that each house of Congress keep a Journal of its proceedings. Contemporary observers have largely ignored this provision, treating it as a vestigial record-keeping requirement with little significance for modern law. This dismissive attitude is misguided. Historically, legislative Journals were one of the primary mechanisms by which Parliament, and later Congress, made and interpreted constitutional law. Journals are the official histories of legislatures’ activity. They record what legislatures do as institutions—what powers they exercise, what procedures they use, and what actions by the coordinate branches they protest or resist. In …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Weed Whacking Through The Tenth Amendment: Navigating A Trump Administration Threat To Withhold Funding From Marijuana-Friendly States, Arlen Gharibian

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The Trump administration has taken a firm stance against marijuana legalization at the state level. While an official federal policy is still pending, this Article focuses on whether the Trump administration’s threats to preventCalifornia from pursuing its duly enacted marijuana legalization law violates the Tenth Amendment. This Article then addresses how the federal government could achieve its goal while remaining within the bounds of the Constitution.

Between "The Rock" And A Hard Case: Application Of The Emoluments Clauses For A New Political Era, Douglas R. Hume

Pepperdine Law Review

The election of Donald Trump in 2016 rewrote some of the traditional rules for electing presidents in the United States. Does his election portend a new breed of presidential candidate, arising from the business and celebrity arena rather than traditional government service? If so, the potential for candidates with more diverse and global business interests (and the conflicts of interest that come along with them) becomes more likely. This Essay discusses the historical intent of the Emoluments Clauses and the issue of potential presidential conflicts of interest. This Essay also examines the litigation efforts filed against President Trump to force …

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 …

Special Counsel Investigations And Legal Ethics: The Role Of Secret Taping, Peter A. Joy

Duquesne Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Is The Best Model For Investigating Presidential Wrongdoing, Today?, Bruce Ledewitz

Duquesne Law Review

No abstract provided.

I, Too, Sing America: Presidential Pardon Power And The Perception Of Good Character, Jalila Jefferson-Bullock

Duquesne Law Review

No abstract provided.

Faithful Nonexecution, Peter M. Shane

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

Decisions by the federal executive branch to under-enforce statutes, whether on a case-by-case or programmatic basis, are a commonplace feature of the modern administrative state. Critics may challenge "nonexecution" decisions in court or otherwise as inconsistent with the President's constitutional duty to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Such decisions, however, are most helpfully viewed not as instances of the executive's failure to act, but rather as part and parcel of an agency's affirmative strategies for implementing its statutory mandates. As such, their legality is appropriately judged not under the terms of Article II, but rather according to …

Congress-In-Chief: Congressional Options To Compel Presidential War-Making, Clark H. Campbell

American University National Security Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Disgorging Emoluments, Caprice L. Roberts

Marquette Law Review

This Article is about unjust enrichment. It includes a theory of an unjust

enrichment cause of action against executive actors who receive unlawful

emoluments. Interpretations of the boundaries of unlawful emoluments range

from receipt of a gift or benefit because of the position of power held to quid

pro quo exchanges of a thing of value in exchange for government information

or advantage. Wherever the proper line, the purpose of the law of unjust

enrichment is to prevent and undo benefits one has no right to retain. It

achieves those goals with the use of restitution remedies including

disgorgement of …

Presidential Responses To Protest: Lessons Jefferson Davis Never Learned, Ashlee Paxton-Turner

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Article Ii And Antidiscrimination Norms, Aziz Z. Huq

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court’s opinion in Trump v. Hawaii validated a prohibition on entry to the United States from several Muslim-majority countries and at the same time repudiated a longstanding precedent associated with the Japanese American internment of World War II. This Article closely analyzes the relationship of these twin rulings. It uses their dichotomous valences as a lens on the legal scope for discriminatory action by the federal executive. Parsing the various ways in which the internment of the 1940s and the 2017 exclusion order can be reconciled, the Article identifies a tension between the Court’s two holdings in Trump …

Information Mischief Under The Trump Administration, Nathan Cortez

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The Trump administration has used government information in more cynical ways than its predecessors. For example, it has removed certain information from the public domain, scrubbed certain terminology from government web sites, censored scientists, manipulated public data, and used “transparency” initiatives as a pretext for anti-regulatory policies, particularly environmental policy. This article attempts to tease out an emerging “information policy” for the Trump administration, explain how it departs from the information policies of predecessors, and evaluate the extent to which both legal and non-legal mechanisms might constrain executive discretion.

Life Becoming Hazy: The Withdrawal Of The United States From The Paris Agreement And How The Youth Of America Are Challenging It, Anne Ustynoski

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

This Comment covers the ways in which each presidential administration has viewed the United States’ role and responsibilities in combating climate change. It discusses the ways in which the Clean Air Act has evolved and changed, as well as the ways in which the United States has been involved in environmental protection initiatives undertaken by the United Nations. The Comment also examines the ways in which individual states and groups have taken the initiative to combat climate change. Finally, this Comment discusses alternative approaches to combating climate change. For example, it focuses on how youths in America are arguing that …

The Trump Administration And The International Criminal Court: A Misguided New Policy, Milena Sterio

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

In a recent speech, National Security Advisor John Bolton delivered remarks on "Protecting American Constitutionalism and Sovereignty from International Threats." In his remarks, Bolton announced a new American policy vis-a-vis the International Criminal Court (ICC or Court). According to Bolton, the ICC "has been ineffective, unaccountable, and indeed, outright dangerous." While Bolton and others in the Trump Administration are at liberty to craft new policies, it is important that such policies be based on accurate facts and an accurate understanding of the law.

This Article highlights factual errors from Bolton's remarks and criticizes some of his arguments as misguided and …

The Cultural Politics Of Dan Quayle And Mike Pence, Steve Sanders

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This essay was part of an Indiana Law Review symposium on the five U.S. vice presidents who have hailed from Indiana.

The Gallup polling organization classifies Indiana as a “pink” state, rather than a “red” state, meaning it leans Republican but is not solidly in the GOP column. Yet, if an image of Indiana persists in many people’s minds as a bastion of social conservatism and tradition, that image likely has been shaped in part by the two most recent vice presidents the Hoosier state has sent to Washington: Dan Quayle and Mike Pence.

In selecting their running mates, major …

The Constitutionality Of Appropriations Transfer Authority Under The Nondelegation Doctrine, Shelby Begany Telle

Catholic University Law Review

Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution provides the Legislative Branch with the power of the purse by granting it the exclusive authority to designate how federal dollars may be spent via appropriations laws. Congress often includes transfer authority, which provides Executive Branch recipients of appropriations the ability to shift funds from one budget account to another. Allowing an agency to transfer funds from one non-specific appropriation to another is arguably an unconstitutional abdication of the Legislative Branch’s exclusive power over the purse strings.

Appropriations transfers are unconstitutional under the nondelegation doctrine. Certain attempts to alleviate these nondelegation concerns …

Sticks, Stones, And So-Called Judges: Why The Era Of Trump Necessitates Revisiting Presidential Influence On The Courts, Quinn W. Crowley

Indiana Law Journal

This Note will be primarily divided into three main sections. Part I of this Note will begin by discussing the importance of judicial independence in modern society and the role of elected officials in shaping the public perception of the courts. Additionally, as problems of judicial legitimacy are age-old and date back to America’s founding, Part I will include a brief discussion of an early clash between President Thomas Jefferson and the courts.

Parts II and III of this Note will seek to place President Trump’s conduct towards the judicial branch within the proper historical context. Part II examines the …

Legislatively Overturning Fort Stewart Schools: The Trump Administration's Assault On Federal Employee Collective Bargaining, Richard J. Hirn

Indiana Law Journal

In his Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Submission, President Trump noted that about 60 percent of Federal employees belong to a union and lamented that dealing with Federal employee unions ostensibly “consume[s] considerable management time and taxpayer resources, and may negatively impact efficiency, effectiveness, cost of operations, and employee accountability and performance.” Although he acknowledged that Federal employee unions can negotiate over fewer matters than can unions in the private sector, he nonetheless claimed that collective bargaining contracts can negatively impact agency performance, workplace productivity, and employee satisfaction. The President told Congress that “[a]gency managers will be encouraged to restore management …

Toward Restoring Rule-Of-Law Norms, Dawn E. Johnsen

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Congress Strikes Back: The Institutionalization Of The Congressional Review Act, Sam Batkins

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Winter Of Discontent: A Circumscribed Chevron, Nicholas R. Bednar

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Gun To Whose Head? Federalism, Localism, And The Spending Clause, Daniel S. Cohen

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

President Trump’s executive order rescinding federal funds from “sanctuary jurisdictions” has brought a critical, but overlooked, question of constitutional law to the forefront of the political debate: how does the Spending Clause apply to local governments? The purpose of the Spending Clause is to empower the federal government to bargain with the states to enact policies it cannot enact itself. This power, however, is constrained within the confines of federalism. The Supreme Court has sought to restrict the Spending Clause by crafting the Dole-NFIB framework, a test to determine whether a federal grant has compromised federalism. At its …