President/Executive Department Commons^™

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 …

Crisis Management Lessons From The Clinton Administration's Implementation Of Presidential Decision Directive 56, Leonard R. Hawley

The US Army War College Quarterly: Parameters

Drawing on personal experience, the author asks what the current administration can learn from the Clinton administration’s implementation of Presidential Decision Directive 56, examines the real-world application of the directive during the Clinton administration and the pitfalls of its agency-centric successor during the Bush administration, and identifies recurring problems and best practices for successfully responding to current global crises.

United States V. Muhammad: Brief Of Evidence Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Richard D. Friedman

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae teach, research, and write about the law of evidence. Amici share the view that the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit correctly remanded this case to the District Court for an in camera review of the Executive’s claim of the state secrets privilege.<\p>

The concept of “state secrets” is an evidentiary privilege. It is occasionally confused with other doctrines. Privileges are to be strictly construed and narrowly interpreted because they impede the search for truth. The state secrets privilege should not operate as a monarchal “Crown Privilege.” When courts are confronted with state secrets claims, …

National Security Rules: America's Constitution Of Law And War, Kyle L. Greene

Maine Law Review

Contemporary debates over the appropriate allocation of war powers between the political branches overemphasize the rigidity of the Constitution’s framework. This style of academic discussion sacrifices the lessons of practice in search of steadfast, yet empty, principles. Even beyond the practical failings of this approach, there is no constitutional basis for the notion that either Congress or the President has a singular, fixed role when dealing with national security issues. In fact, the Founders developed a constitutional structure capable of continually reshaping—within parameters—the government’s division of national security power to match the nation’s security challenges. Rather than scouring the constitutional …

Partisan Or Precedent: The History Of Nominating Supreme Court Judges In Presidential Election Years, Hattie Jefferies

Helms School of Government Undergraduate Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abdication Through Enforcement, Shalini Ray

Indiana Law Journal

Presidential abdication in immigration law has long been synonymous with the perceived nonenforcement of certain provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. President Obama’s never-implemented policy of deferred action, known as DAPA, serves as the prime example in the literature. But can the President abdicate the duty of faithful execution in immigration law by enforcing the law, i.e., by deporting deportable noncitizens? This Article argues “yes.” Every leading theory of the presidency recognizes the President’s role as supervisor of the bureaucracy, an idea crystallized by several scholars. When the President fails to establish meaningful enforcement priorities, essentially making every deportable …

The President And Individual Rights, Mark Tushnet

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

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 …

Executive Unilateralism And Individual Rights In A Federalist System, Meredith Mclain, Sharece Thrower

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Presidents have a wide array of tools at their disposal to unilaterally influence public policy, without the direct approval of Congress or the courts. These unilateral actions have the potential to affect a variety of individual rights, either profitably or adversely. Governors too can employ unilateral directives for similar purposes, often impacting an even wider range of rights. In this Article, we collect all executive orders and memoranda related to individual rights issued between 1981 and 2018 at the federal level, and across the U.S. states, to analyze their use over time. We find that chief executives of all kinds …

The Original Meaning Of The Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause, The Right Of Natural Liberty, And Executive Discretion, John Harrison

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause of Article I, Section 9, is primarily a limit on Congress’s authority to authorize detention by the executive. It is not mainly concerned with the remedial writ of habeas corpus, but rather with the primary right of natural liberty. Suspensions of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus are statutes that vest very broad discretion in the executive to decide which individuals to hold in custody. Detention of combatants under the law of war need not rest on a valid suspension, whether the combatant is an alien or a citizen of the United States. …

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 …

Who Constrains Presidential Exercise Of Delegated Powers?, Rebecca L. Brown

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Building on the work of administrative law scholars who have identified and illuminated the several components of the problem over the years, this Article will seek to show what has happened when a cluster of separate circumstances have come together to create a new and serious threat to individual liberty when the President exercises expansive delegated authority. Several doctrinal components lead to this confluence: First, the moribund “intelligible principle” test has evolved to provide little or no constraint on this or any other delegation. Second, a delegation to the President, specifically, is not subject to the procedural requirements of the …

United Nations At 75 And The Challenges Facing International Law, Ved Nanda

Pace International Law Review

On September 21, 2020, the Member States celebrated the seventy-fifth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. In the Declaration marking the occasion, world leaders recounted the achievements of the body, including catalyzing decolonization, promoting and protecting human rights, working to eradicate disease, helping mitigate dozens of conflicts, and saving lives through humanitarian action. They also enumerated challenges the world faces, such as “growing inequality, poverty, hunger, armed conflicts, terrorism, insecurity, climate change, and pandemics.” These challenges, the Declaration said, are interconnected and can only be addressed through reinvigorated multilateralism, which, it emphasized, “is not an option but a …

The Constitution, Covid-19, And Civil Disobedience: Federalism In Flames And The Slippery Slope To Socialism, Savannah Snyder

Helm's School of Government Conference - 2021-2024

Our Constitution has been devastatingly corrupted from its original design and vision amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Governors usurped authority in the name of crisis mitigation. Our unalienable rights have been macerated and pulverized by droves of executive orders, each delivering a calamitous blow to the integrity of the American republican framework. Socialized medicine is on the horizon as our compliance is coerced. Conventional civil disobedience has been regulatorily revoked. We have succumbed to the decrees of depraved men who maintain that education, religious expression, and pursuits of happiness can be invalidated by whatever transgressions the state deems necessary. For the …

Judicial Autonomy V. Executive Authority: Which Prevails In The Case Of A Postcommutation Collateral Attack?, Vincent A. Marrazzo

Notre Dame Law Review

An inmate with a commuted sentence will sometimes collaterally attack his already commuted sentence. This raises the question: Does an act of executive clemency divest the courts of authority to hear the collateral attack? In other words, does clemency moot the issues involved in the collateral attack? While multiple circuit courts have weighed in on this question, the Fourth and Sixth Circuits have developed the most robust discussions, disagreeing about whether federal courts may hear these cases. The Fourth Circuit has held that a collateral attack postcommutation is moot as the “President’s commutation order simply closes the judicial door.” In …

Serving A Lawless President, William R. Casto

Mercer Law Review

What does an Attorney General do when confronted with a lawless President? At first glance, the answer is easy, but on second thought, a realistic answer is complicated. The answer is complicated because the phrase “lawless president” is not necessarily pejorative. In fact, western leaders have always exercised a prerogative power to throw the law overboard when they see fit. Some of our greatest Presidents have followed this path. Thomas Jefferson did, as did Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt.

So what does the President’s Attorney General do? The law and principles of professional responsibility offer a clear answer to the …

The Error Of The Paquete Habana: U.S. Naval Forces In The Safe Harbor Of Commander-In-Chief Discretion And The Law Of War, T. Nelson Collier

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Gundy V. United States: How Justice Gorsuch’S Dissent And Changing Judicial Philosophy In Federal Courts May Lead To A Revived Nondelegation Doctrine And Diminish The Purpose Of The Administrative Procedure Act, Zachary Pfrang Olvera

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Robert Jackson's Critique Of Trump V. Hawaii, William R. Casto

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Over seventy years ago, United States Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson accurately predicted the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Hawaii. As he foresaw, the Court rubberstamped a President’s purposeful discrimination against a minority religion. This brief Essay explains Trump using Jackson’s critique of judicial review in national-security cases. The Essay also uses Trump to examine a flaw—probably structural—in the constitutional theory of process jurisprudence. The Trump case involved the Court’s construction of congressional legislation apparently limiting the President’s authority, but the present Essay does not address that aspect of the opinion.

Pandemic, Politics, Public Health , And The Fda, Jordan Paradise, Becky Bavlsik

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief For Plaintiff-Appellee, Carroll V. Trump, No. 20-3977 (2nd Cir. Apr. 16, 2021), Leah Litman, Roberta A. Kaplan, Joshua A. Matz, Raymond P. Tolentino

Appellate Briefs

Introduction

In June 2019, E. Jean Carroll revealed that former President Donald J. Trump had sexually assaulted her decades earlier. Trump denied it, saying he did not know who Carroll was and had never met her. But he did not stop there. He launched a series of vicious, personal attacks. He implied that she was too ugly to rape; that she had falsely accused other men of sexual assault; and that she had invented her story for money, or to sell books, or to advance a political plot. None of this was true. Trump knew that he had assaulted Carroll. …

If Not Now, When? Finding Jurisdiction To Review Immigration Enforcement Action In The Trump Era, Elizabeth L. Jackson

Et Cetera

The Trump Presidency left an indelible mark on the U.S. immigration system. From extreme enforcement practices to unconstitutional policies, the vast power of the executive branch and the underutilized strength of the judicial branch was thrust into a harsh light. The failure of lower courts to adequately understand and apply the narrow construction of jurisdiction-limiting statutes created unjust and absurd results on a number of issues, from the targeting of immigration activists for enforcement actions to the so-called Migrant Protection Protocols. The consistent application of Supreme Court precedent allowing for Federal jurisdiction in this area remains absolutely necessary to right …

A Concept Of Shared Principles And The Constitutional Homogeneity In Europe: The Case Of Subsidiarity, Volker Roeben

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

The article explores the concept of subsidiarity as a shared legal principle in both the European Union (EU) and German law, focusing on its role in ensuring the accountability of central authority while safeguarding the autonomy of peripheral legislatures. It highlights the convergence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on a rationale of legality, aimed at preventing central overreach into peripheral competences. Despite this alignment, the article notes divergent outcomes in the application of subsidiarity, with the FCC more frequently invalidating federal legislation compared to the CJEU's more restrained …

Prosecuting Executive Branch Wrongdoing, Julian A. Cook

Scholarly Works

Attorney General William Barr's handling of Robert Mueller's Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election was undeniably controversial and raised meaningful questions regarding the impartiality of the Department of Justice. Yet, Barr's conduct, which occurred at the conclusion of the Mueller investigation, was merely the caboose at the end of a series of controversies that were coupled together from the outset of the investigation. Ensnarled in dissonance from its inception, the Mueller investigation was dogged by controversies that ultimately compromised its legitimacy.

Public trust of criminal investigations of executive branch wrongdoing requires prosecutorial independence. To …

We Need A Cole Memorandum For Magic Mushrooms, Robert A. Mikos

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In fall 2020, as the nation elected Joe Biden to be our Forty-Sixth President, Oregon voters also passed a noteworthy new drug law reform. Known as Measure 109, Oregon’s path-breaking law legalizes the use of psilocybin, a hallucinogenic substance found in magic mushrooms. Measure 109 is designed to unlock the therapeutic potential of psilocybin, which advocates tout as an effective and safe treatment for depression and other psychological conditions.

Given the burgeoning interest in psychedelics, many people are excited to see how Oregon’s psilocybin experiment pans out. But at this point, it remains unclear whether the experiment will even get …

Presidential Transitions Within The Administrative State, Michael E. Herz, Katherine A. Shaw

Articles

No abstract provided.

Article I: Reforming The War Powers Resolution For The 21st Century, Rebecca Ingber

Testimony

Professor Rebecca Ingber testified at a U.S. House Committee on Rules hearing on March 23, 2021, titled "Article I: Reforming the War Powers Resolution for the 21st Century."

Relentless Pursuits: Reflections Of An Immigration And Human Rights Clinician On The Past Four Years, Sarah H. Paoletti

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

No abstract provided.

Deconstructing Invisible Walls: Sotomayor's Dissents In An Era Of Immigration Exceptionalism, Karla Mckanders

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

No abstract provided.

“Drive-By” Jurisdiction: Congressional Oversight In Court, Daniel Epstein

Pepperdine Law Review

On July 9, 2020, in Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP and Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, the Supreme Court held that the lower courts did not adequately consider the separation of powers concerns attendant to congressional subpoenas for presidential information. Given that the question presented in Mazars concerned whether Congress had a legitimate legislative purpose in subpoenaing the President’s personal records, the Supreme Court’s decision is anything but a model of clarity. The Court simultaneously opined that disputes “involving nonprivileged, private information” “do[ ] not implicate sensitive Executive Branch deliberations” while claiming “congressional subpoenas for the President’s information unavoidably pit …