In a University of Minnesota law school commencement address, Governor Tim Walz, the 2024 vice presidential nominee, decried President Trump’s actions as a national emergency, accusing him of repeatedly violating the rule of law and undermining fundamental rights. Walz urged graduating lawyers to resist abuses of power, emphasizing their crucial role in defending against tyranny. He specifically cited Trump’s immigration policies and questionable dealings as examples of this erosion of the rule of law. Walz also criticized certain large law firms for their complicity, calling on graduates to reject such organizations.
Read More
At the University of Minnesota’s law school graduation, Governor Tim Walz, the 2024 Democratic vice presidential nominee, decried President Trump’s actions as a national emergency, citing violations of the rule of law including immigration crackdowns and acceptance of gifts from foreign entities. Walz urged graduating lawyers to uphold their oaths and resist abuses of power, criticizing both Trump and “feckless” law firms complicit in his actions. The White House responded by criticizing Walz’s record as governor and his association with the Harris/Biden administration. Walz’s speech reflects a broader Democratic debate about effectively countering the Trump administration.
Read More
The Supreme Court heard arguments regarding President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship, focusing less on the order’s constitutionality and more on the use of nationwide injunctions by lower courts. The administration argued that these injunctions create inefficiencies and encourage forum shopping, while Justice Jackson countered that eliminating them would force countless individual lawsuits, effectively allowing the government to circumvent judicial review indefinitely. This debate highlights the tension between individual rights and the efficient implementation of federal policy, with the Court’s decision to potentially limit nationwide injunctions having far-reaching consequences. The case touches upon historical precedent, the 14th Amendment, and the practical implications of resolving such disputes on a case-by-case basis.
Read More
Chief Justice Roberts warned Georgetown law students that the rule of law is under threat, citing recent attacks against Supreme Court justices as exceeding acceptable criticism. He emphasized the rarity of the rule of law globally and historically, while acknowledging that criticism of court decisions is beneficial, provided it remains focused on legal arguments rather than personal attacks. Roberts’ comments followed attacks on justices, including Amy Coney Barrett, by President Trump and his allies, who have disregarded court rulings and even called for impeachment of judges. This behavior prompted a rare statement from Roberts defending the judiciary’s independence.
Read More
Stephen Miller’s recent statement regarding the Trump administration “actively looking at” suspending habeas corpus is deeply troubling. The very suggestion of such an action strikes at the heart of fundamental American legal principles and raises serious concerns about the potential for authoritarian overreach. The idea that the government could detain individuals indefinitely without due process, without the right to challenge their imprisonment before a court, is a stark departure from the established rule of law.
This proposed suspension, even if framed within the context of the Constitution’s provision allowing for such action in cases of rebellion or invasion, is alarmingly vague.… Continue reading
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defied a unanimous Supreme Court order to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the U.S., claiming there is no scenario where he will return. Despite the court mandating the administration “facilitate” Garcia’s return due to a lack of due process, Noem insisted Garcia, deported to El Salvador, is a dangerous individual and will be deported again if he returns. Senator Chris Murphy deemed Noem’s statements “incredibly chilling” for the balance of powers, while other senators criticized her for evading questions and employing political rhetoric. The administration’s actions are a potential violation of a Supreme Court order.
Read More
Judge Jamal Whitehead ordered the Trump administration to admit approximately 12,000 refugees, rejecting the administration’s narrow interpretation of a 9th Circuit appeals court ruling. The administration argued for admitting only 160 refugees, a claim the judge deemed a misrepresentation of the court’s decision. This order stems from a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s suspension of the refugee admissions program, which the judge initially blocked as a nullification of congressional authority. The 9th Circuit partially stayed the initial block, but mandated processing for those with pre-existing travel plans.
Read More
In a recent interview, President Trump expressed uncertainty regarding the extent to which due process rights apply to both citizens and non-citizens, stating he was unsure and not a lawyer. He downplayed the likelihood of military intervention to annex Canada, despite previous pronouncements, but remained less certain about Greenland. While pushing back against recession predictions and attributing economic downturn to his predecessor, he also played down the possibility of a third presidential term despite previous suggestions to the contrary. He highlighted his administration’s accomplishments and the continued strength of his political movement.
Read More
The courts must stop presuming Donald Trump is a regular president. This presumption of normalcy, this tacit acceptance of his actions as within the bounds of acceptable presidential behavior, is a dangerous and unsustainable approach. It allows a man who openly flouts court orders and democratic norms to operate with impunity, eroding the very foundations of the justice system.
The lack of consequences for violating court orders is particularly alarming. The point of a legal system is to enforce its rulings, and when those rulings are ignored without repercussions, the system itself becomes meaningless. This inaction sends a clear message: that power, not law, dictates the outcome.… Continue reading
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell permanently blocked President Trump’s executive order targeting Perkins Coie, deeming it an unconstitutional attack on the American legal system’s foundational principles. The order, unprecedented in its targeting of a law firm for representing clients with opposing viewpoints, imposed punitive measures including suspension of security clearances and contract terminations. Judge Howell’s ruling highlights the order as an assault on the independence of the legal profession and the right to counsel. This decision follows temporary injunctions for other firms similarly targeted, with some reportedly reaching settlements with the president.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood