In response to concerns about family separation, Trump stated that keeping families together necessitates the return of all members to their country of origin, regardless of legal status. He acknowledged potential negative public reaction to deporting even legal residents, particularly women accompanying criminal family members. However, he justified this policy by emphasizing the need for strict immigration enforcement and adherence to established laws. Ultimately, he asserted that current immigration issues necessitate firm action, despite potential emotional consequences.
Read More
Judge Richard Bennett ruled that the U.S. Naval Academy may continue considering race in admissions, citing a compelling national security interest in a diverse officer corps. The judge found that the academy’s use of race is narrowly tailored to achieve this interest, rejecting arguments from Students for Fair Admissions that the Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling should apply. While race is a minor factor, the court recognized the military’s need for a representative and cohesive force, emphasizing the importance of diversity for mission effectiveness. Students for Fair Admissions plans to appeal the decision.
Read More
At a rally outside the Supreme Court preceding oral arguments in *US v Skrmetti*, Marjorie Taylor Greene faced significant backlash for her anti-transgender remarks. Greene’s speech, filled with false claims about gender-affirming care, was met with loud boos from a predominantly pro-transgender crowd. The Supreme Court case itself will determine the constitutionality of state bans on gender-affirming care for transgender minors. Arguments presented emphasized the discriminatory nature of such bans and highlighted the crucial role of this care in alleviating suffering for transgender youth.
Read More
McConnell cries foul over two Democratic judges rescinding their retirements following Trump’s victory, a move he labels as “open partisanship.” This accusation rings particularly hollow given McConnell’s own extensive history of partisan maneuvering, particularly regarding Supreme Court nominations. His outrage feels less like genuine concern for judicial integrity and more like a calculated response to actions that disrupt the power balance he’s carefully cultivated.
The hypocrisy is striking. McConnell’s pronouncements on decorum and norms seem to apply selectively, conveniently ignored when his own actions benefit his party. This blatant double standard fuels the perception of him as a cynical player, prioritizing political gain above any purported commitment to principles.… Continue reading
Eighteen state attorneys general, primarily from Republican-led states, filed briefs supporting a Massachusetts middle school student, Liam Morrison, whose First Amendment rights were allegedly violated when he was suspended for wearing a “There are only two genders” shirt. Lower courts ruled against Morrison, finding the shirt demeaned transgender students, but the AGs contend this lacked evidence of substantial disruption. They argue the school’s evidence was insufficient, and supporting organizations warn of a chilling effect on free speech in schools. The case, backed by Alliance Defending Freedom and the Massachusetts Family Institute, awaits potential Supreme Court review.
Read More
Attorney General Merrick Garland’s delayed appointment of a special counsel in the January 6th case remains questionable, potentially impacting the timing and outcome of investigations. Trump’s legal victories, including favorable judicial assignments and Supreme Court rulings, highlight his remarkable luck and the strategic timing of key legal decisions. These rulings significantly bolster Trump’s legal position, potentially leading to dismissals of criminal charges and favorable civil case outcomes. The Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity further empowers Trump, suggesting a significant impact on future presidential actions.
Read More
In essence, the Trump administration’s actions wouldn’t abolish birthright citizenship, but rather hinder undocumented immigrants’ ability to prove their citizenship if challenged. This strategy relies on manipulating documentation processes to create a legal challenge, potentially forcing the Supreme Court to reinterpret the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court’s willingness to overturn precedents raises the possibility of this occurring, mirroring the historical significance of cases like *Dred Scott*, which profoundly impacted legal interpretations of citizenship. Ultimately, the administration’s efforts aim to achieve through judicial action what it cannot accomplish directly.
Read More
A federal appeals court has upheld an Indiana law banning puberty blockers and hormones for transgender children under 18, mirroring similar legislation passed in other Republican-led states. The court rejected arguments that the law discriminates based on sex or violates parental rights, concluding that the law applies equally to all minors and that parents do not have an unfettered right to any medical treatment for their children. This decision aligns with rulings in other states and sets the stage for the Supreme Court to potentially decide the fate of such laws nationwide, with proponents arguing they protect children from experimental treatments and opponents citing the positive mental health outcomes associated with these treatments.
Read More
Today, I am pleased to announce my nomination of Tali Farhadian Weinstein and Chief Judge Frances Marie Tydingco-Gatewood to the United States District Courts for the Southern District of New York and Guam, respectively. Both nominees are highly qualified individuals with extensive legal experience, demonstrating a deep commitment to the rule of law and our Constitution. These nominations continue my administration’s commitment to building a judiciary that reflects the diversity of our nation, highlighting the rich tapestry of backgrounds and expertise that strengthens our nation’s legal system. These nominations mark the fifty-sixth round of judicial nominations, bringing the total number of announced nominees to 261.
Read More
While President-elect Trump’s proposed tariffs are unwise, they are not unconstitutional, as federal law grants the president significant power to impose them. The Supreme Court, however, has established a “major questions doctrine” that allows it to veto executive branch actions deemed too ambitious. Given the Court’s recent history of using this doctrine to strike down Biden administration policies, it remains unclear whether they will apply it to Trump’s tariffs, potentially setting a dangerous precedent for future presidents. The upcoming legal battle over tariffs presents a dilemma: a ruling against them would further empower an already powerful Court, while a ruling in favor would cause economic hardship for many Americans.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood