When we talk about the contributing causes to our hyperpolarized politics, we do not often talk about the role of philanthropic organizations. This piece from Daniel Stid, who comes out of the philanthropic world from his years at the Hewlett Foundation, shines a light on this

V.. m
C

What a wonderful webinar with an arguably the greatest living philosopher of law, on his new book about the rule of law. From the left: Lisa Burton Crawford, Jeremy Waldron Jeremy Waldron (on the screen, author of Thoughtfulness and the Rule of Law) and me, W. Sadurski.

This is a nice example of what I call the tension between institutional realism and institutional formalism in judicial decision-making. Alito here gives a realist account of the Federal Reserve's origins, which means it should not be seen to reflect any more general principle

I put up this post at ELB on the Court's stay in the LA redistricting case:electionlawblog.org/?p=143080
Steven Mazie Steve Vladeck

'Progressives have resisted the dominance of the district-school-only model as an oppressive form of individualism, unresponsive to the needs of cultural minorities, and failing to provide academic rigor and depth for all.' Bernardo Cardoso JHU School of Education
cardus.ca/research/educa…

In today's Court decision in Warner Chappell, the copyright case, I noticed this strong reprimand of WC's lawyers for insufficiently heeding the terms of the Question Presented, as the Court reformulated it.
This is particularly surprising, because counsel of record,

I interviewed Rick Hasen about the Trump hush money trial and he interviewed me about the Trump immunity case on this podcast that just posted:electionlawblog.org/?p=142879

As unexciting as this sounds, this simple change is enormously important to avoid a repeat of 2020 in a key swing state.

x.com/DemocracyDocke…

Looks like Lessig 🇺🇦 agrees with me that the Court need not decide in this case whether an ex-President has any immunity at all for 'official acts.' My view adds the caveat that, even if certain acts would be considered 'official,' and even if there were immunity for those acts,

.Jack Goldsmith: 'I have never seen such catastrophizing about a Supreme Court oral argument as the reaction to last week’s argument in Trump v. United States.'
Jack also flags my view of how to design a narrow ruling that provides the quickest practical path to decision (I'm

Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)🌻 Rick Pildes Andrew Weissmann Exactly. The nature of the SCOTUS holding will be very important here as to how/if official act conduct can be used even if its not culpable conduct and it will set how acts are determined to be official in the first case and whether there will be dispute on that leading to delay