New @dividedargument.bsky.social episode: "Majordoma" We take a medium-deep dive into LA v. Callais. dividedargument.com/episode/majo...

Law profs - ICYMI, @washulawreview.bsky.social just posted a Call for Papers on Scholastica for their upcoming Symposium on "The Many Faces of the State." What a great idea for a symposium - very timely and innovative.

🎙️ New episode: "Even Eve-ier" We cover leaked SCOTUS memos, shadow docket reversals, Sotomayor's Kavanaugh apology, and a contractor preemption case narrowing a Scalia opinion. https://dividedargument.com/podcast/divided-argument/episode/even-eve-ier

Unfortunately, there are some features of legal cites that aren't possible to implement using a CSL style. (For example, generating "hereinafters" for two cites by the same author in the same FN. I'm working on some plugins that might fix that (using Claude ofc). Please flag other things like that!

Law profs/students/anyone doing legal scholarship: If you're not using @zotero.org to manage cites and research, you should. An unbelievable time saver. I've revised the Bluebook style for rendering footnotes, w/ detailed instructions on using Zotero: danepps.github.io/bluebook/

Agree or disagree: the length of a dissent is inversely related to its persuasiveness.

Some big professional news: I’m thrilled to be joining the amazing faculty at @fordhamlawnyc.bsky.social this fall! 🧵

For more on my and @willsortman.bsky.social's Defender General, see this NYT article by @adamliptak.bsky.social: www.nytimes.com/2020/01/27/u...

A great development, but I disagree w/ the article's claim that this is totally different from my & @willsortman.bsky.social's "Defender General." This helps w/ problems we identified & resembles our proposal even if it doesn't go far enough. Article here: repository.law.upenn.edu/Documents/De...

At the 2026 National Conference of Constitutional Law Scholars. The Rehnquist Center at Arizona Law puts together a great program. Neat to see tomorrow’s debates forming…and the sunsets aren’t bad.

I am 43 years old. I would like to think that if 13-year-old me could see the life I would build three decades hence, he would be pleased.

I very much appreciate Mark’s engagement and think he makes some good points worth reading!

New post from me on the @dividedargument.bsky.social blog: "Case v. Montana and the General Law Approach to the Fourth Amendment" blog.dividedargument.com/p/case-v-mon...

What you want today: Tariffs, Voting Rights What you’ll (probably) get instead: USPS v. Konan (liability for undelivered mail); Coney Island Auto Parts (time limits for motions to set aside void judgments)

NEW EPISODE: "The Marshal and the Margarine" We catch up on Trump v. Illinois, the national guard case, after first warming up with new Erie scholarship, state criminal jurisdiction over federal officers, and some recent online discourse. dividedargument.simplecast.com/episodes/the...

When you’re waiting for huge opinions, never, ever underestimate the Court’s ability to disappoint you.

The entire thread is worth your time. The portion around and including this post gets at a point I tried to make in my book - the less common ground within the profession about what the rule of law entails, the less likely we are to be able to sustain the rule of law.

Regardless of one's view of politics, is it a better world if courts declare—even in ordinary breach-of-contract cases—that "Plaintiff wins because he's a Dem" (or R based on who appointed the judge)? Even if you dislike judicial review, we need courts for ordinary disputes. We need law for those.

Pretty sure I'm one of the folks Mark's subtweeting. While I don’t feel compelled to respond, this actually provides a beautiful lesson for how academics and other serious observers might think about engaging with the Court and law. (thread)

I was not tagged so did not see my thread was screenshot-ported here from X until now. I'd add that I don't think profs (or any lawyers) should advance arguments they believe to be dishonest. But I also think. . . .

I'm quoted in this @wsj.com story about what to call SCOTUS's interim/shadow/emergency/whatever docket: www.wsj.com/us-news/law/...

A follow-up on Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence in Trump v. IL over at @scotusblog.com: www.scotusblog.com/interim-dock...

Quick reactions to the National Guard ruling at the @SCOTUSblog Interim Docket blog: www.scotusblog.com/interim-dock...

This is not a remotely fair characterization of what I or Jack said. Fact-free caricatures are good for RTs and clicks from co-partisans, but critics of the Court (of which I am often one!) do their cause no service when they don't even pretend to engage on the merits with different views.

Paging @stephenesachs.bsky.social

Steve, can clarify whom specifically you are accusing of "deliberately misleading" people?

Today seems as good a time as any to note my extended discussion of SCOTUS expansion here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.... Also, @epps.bsky.social and @ganeshsitaraman.bsky.social specifically propose a lottery along @mmasnick.bsky.social's lines here: yalelawjournal.org/pdf/EppsSita...

In case anyone is curious: even if this dismissal becomes final/upheld on appeal, because the dismissal is w/o prejudice, the government will have 6 months to reindict even though the statute of limitations would have otherwise run. Statute:

NEW EPISODE: "Counter-Counter-Counter-Designations" Live from Wilkinson Stekloff's attorney retreat, we dive into the legal (and ethical?) issues in Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited v. Burton before revisiting last Term's DIG'd case LabCorp v. Davis. dividedargument.simplecast.com/episodes/cou...

I'm quoted in this @nytimes.com piece by @jodikantor.bsky.social about the quandaries faced by the liberal SCOTUS justices today. (link below).

I'm quoted in this @nytimes.com piece by @jodikantor.bsky.social about the quandaries faced by the liberal SCOTUS justices today. (link below).

Just got my copy of Justice Kennedy’s memoir, LIFE, LAW & LIBERTY. I was grateful to have been asked to perform an unusual bit of empirical research while he was writing it.

This @rollingstone.com piece by @andrewlseidel.bsky.social is embarrassing. A judge must recuse from any case in which he actually participated, not from all cases involving *legal issues* on which he ever took a position as an attorney on behalf of a client.

Losing my ever-loving-mind watching the same people who were just clutching their pearls claiming censorship over mean emails from WH staffers to Twitter about COVID misinfo are now HAVING THE FCC CHAIR openly threaten broadcast licenses over a joke about the president AND THE BROADCASTERS CENSOR IT

I'm thrilled to have been named the Howard and Caroline Cayne Distinguished Professor of law here at WashU Law! I'm very grateful to the Law School, the University, and my Dean for their support.

www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty... The free speech crusade will continue until complete conformity and submission are achieved.

Case Viewer, my quirky side project of building my ideal legal search & reading app, has come a long way. With lots of help, it's grown into the best way to find & read cases on a Mac, iPhone, or iPad. Check it out or download on the App Store below. And follow @CaseViewerApp for updates!

I filed an amicus brief in Callais, this fall's blockbuster voting rights case. I make three arguments. First, the Fifteenth Amendment is the constitutional provision that bans racial discrimination in voting. Second, Shaw should be overturned. Finally, Section 2 of the VRA is constitutional.

The Divided Argument podcast had me on to talk about my new book *The Oldest Constitutional Question: Enumeration and Federal Power.* Very much enjoyed the conversation. Listen here: www.dividedargument.com/episodes/bed... @dividedargument.bsky.social @williambaude.bsky.social‬ @epps.bsky.social‬

NEW PAPER: "Justifying the Fourth Amendment," forthcoming in the Vanderbilt Law Review, now up on @ssrn.bsky.social: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

NEW EPISODE: "Originalism Hulk" It's fraud day as we dig into Kousis v. US and Thompson v. US! dividedargument.simplecast.com/episodes/ori...

Justice Sotomayor thinks that Justices have "earned" their seats, so even a constitutional amendment can't limit their tenure. Justiceships are guaranteed by pre-constitutional meta-due process? Surprisingly dumb view... (via @rickpildes.bsky.social) electionlawblog.org?p=151478

This paper provides a detailed analysis of how the U.S. Executive Branch interprets and practices constitutional #law. spkl.io/63323AHGX1#law@epps.bsky.social @conorclarke.bsky.social #LawSky

Spotted in the air above Salisbury beach, MA. This is not going away.

NEW ARTICLE on SSRN: "The Practice of Executive Constitutionalism," by me and @conorclarke.bsky.social, forthcoming in the Virginia Law Review. Check it out! papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Last fall, the editors of the Harvard Law Review invited me to write the Foreword for this year's Supreme Court issue. My working draft is below, and comments are most welcome. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

10 year old has had an Apple watch for about 24 hours and has already mastered the art of the passive aggressive text

I’m very sad about the death of Richard Fallon, an amazing scholar, teacher, and person. He was my fed courts prof—one of my favorite classes ever. An unsolicited email from him complimenting my harmless error piece is one of the academic honors of which I’m proudest. A big loss.

I’m quoted in this @adamliptak.bsky.social @nytimes.com piece on unexplained SCOTUS orders (🎁 link): www.nytimes.com/2025/07/16/u...

"Divided Argument" with @epps.bsky.social and @williambaude.bsky.social is always a must-listen for SCOTUS nerds, and I thought this latest episode—focusing on Mahmoud and Paxton—was particularly interesting. Good stuff. dividedargument.com/episodes/did...