All articles tagged with #jurisprudence
Slate’s Jurisprudence column argues that Trump’s fixation on the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool has sparked a politically charged legal fray, from an investigation into a prosecutor’s handling of the pool controversy to discussions of potential new charges, all under Todd Blanche’s watch as the DOJ leader-in-waiting, signaling a high-stakes struggle where partisan pressure and accountability collide.
Slate argues that Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s stance on birthright citizenship helped set up President Trump’s latest bid to redefine who is a citizen, as Trump issues two executive orders expanding exceptions and targeting birth tourism, despite the Constitution guaranteeing birthright citizenship; the piece contends the court’s conservative tilt and a narrow Barbara ruling leave room for further challenges to the 14th Amendment’s protections.
Trump asks the Supreme Court to fast-track an emergency order that would let the administration impose a nationwide mail-ballot restriction tied to citizenship rolls, prompting lower courts to block the plan for risking voter confusion and disenfranchisement. The move centers on the Purcell principle—the unwritten rule against changing election rules at the last minute—and could test whether the Court continues to apply that doctrine when the request comes from the executive branch rather than plaintiffs. The Court’s ruling will signal how much self-restraint remains in election cases as the fall midterms approach.
The Tate brothers, facing new sex-trafficking and rape charges in the U.K. and Romania, await extradition from the U.S. in a high-stakes collision of international law and politics. The case probes whether Trump-era influence and media networks can shape a legal process that spans multiple countries, with a U.S. judge weighing the extradition and the secretary of state ultimately determining the outcome.
A federal judge faulted acting Attorney General Todd Blanche for aligning the DOJ with Donald Trump’s interests in the IRS tax‑return leak lawsuit, calling Blanche’s arguments weak and noting a settlement that created an $1.8 billion anti‑weaponization fund. The judge reopened the case, demanded sanctions, and cast doubt on Blanche’s suitability for the AG post as he faces a Senate confirmation hearing.
In Chatrie v. United States, Justice Elena Kagan rejects evaluating surveillance piece-by-piece, holding the Fourth Amendment protects against comprehensive digital data collection—from location history to cloud data—regardless of duration, and extends Carpenter’s emphasis on what data reveals to modern technology, signaling stronger constitutional privacy against fragmented or voluntary data sharing.
The Supreme Court, in a 6–3 decision, overruled Humphrey’s Executor and held that the president may remove heads of independent agencies (as with the FTC), advancing the Project 2025 blueprint; in a separate 5–4 ruling it preserved the Federal Reserve’s independence by allowing Lisa Cook to remain on the board after concerns about due process. The paired rulings mark a major shift toward executive control over agency officials, while preserving a narrow exception for the Fed.
Slate argues the Supreme Court’s June shadow-docket decision enshrined a colorblind interpretation of the 14th Amendment that blocks race-conscious remedies and will likely worsen racial discrimination in voting, policing, education, housing, and employment.
In a 6–3 ruling on FS Credit v. Saba Capital, Barrett’s majority narrows the private right to sue under the Investment Company Act, while Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s blistering dissent accuses the majority of openly showing contempt for Congress and elevating judicial policy preferences over legislative history, arguing that relying on legislative history preserves congressional will and keeps the court in its constitutional lane.
Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick argues that Todd Blanche’s bid to be attorney general could become a GOP test of independence and accountability, given his Trump-aligned DOJ tenure, the controversy over a $1.776 billion slush fund settlement and a broad civil release, and whether Senate Republicans will demand real scrutiny or yield to total deference to the president—shaping the future handling of the rule of law.
A planned $10 billion IRS settlement over a leaked tax-return scandal would immunize Trump and his family and create a $1.7 billion anti-weaponization fund, but courts and lawmakers have derailed the deal: acting AG Todd Blanche says the fund isn’t moving forward, a temporary restraining order blocked it, and Judge Kathleen Williams reopened the Trump–DOJ case to probe collusion and legitimacy, with Democrats promising to curb presidential tax immunity—potentially affecting Trump’s holdings and the rule of law.
An unsigned Supreme Court order handed Alabama a sweeping victory by reinstating a long-disputed 2023 map that heavily dilutes Black voters, expanding a Callais-like standard into constitutional voting-rights rules, and eroding a key remedy against racial gerrymandering; dissenters warn the move invites chaos in elections, undermines democratic norms, and signals that minority rights in redistricting can be sacrificed for partisan ends.
Slate reports that the DOJ is reportedly investigating E. Jean Carroll for not disclosing that Reid Hoffman funded part of her legal defense in her civil case against Donald Trump; Hoffman is also under a separate DOJ inquiry over funding suits against Trump. Critics say the move appears to be retaliation intended to intimidate witnesses and chill disclosures, while a U.S. attorney’s office denied opening Carroll’s case. Legal experts say the prosecution chances are slim, suggesting the aim may be political pressure rather than a pursuit of justice.
Slate’s Lithwick and Stern argue the Supreme Court is broadly enabling Donald Trump’s maximized executive power through rapid and secretive shadow-docket decisions, with Chief Justice Roberts shaping optics to advance judicial supremacy; even as the court occasionally pushes back, the pattern risks eroding checks and balances and could precipitate a constitutional crisis if Trump refuses to concede gains or accepts losses.
In Pitchford v. Cain, the Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision joined by Chief Justice Roberts and the court’s liberals, held that Mississippi trial courts violated Batson by allowing Black jurors to be struck and denying the defense a chance to rebut the reasons, a procedural error that could lead to a new trial. The opinion highlights Kavanaugh’s historically clear-eyed stance on jury racism, while also noting Roberts’ selective approach to racism in other contexts and suggesting that the court’s colorblind framework can, in limited cases, promote equality.