I want you to imagine a jurisprudence of blood and soil nationalism. Okay, now *that’s* the project of SCOTUS for the next 50 years. Act accordingly.

Not sure whether this is apt or terrible timing but here’s the official cover of my book due out with @uncpress.bsky.social W. Hodding Carter III imprint this fall. 🎉

Every dollar you people are sending to Annie Andrews rather than Mary Peltola or Roy Cooper or Sherrod Brown brings us closer to this day ...

You know it’s true.

Just imagined this happening and Trump standing off to the side thinking, “shit, I need to come to these more often.”

I too wished to attend oral arguments today. But then I remembered I would burst into flames upon crossing the threshold of the juristocratic temple.

Have to start asking yourself what justice Wurman is going to do.

Not to be a drag, but if SCOTUS *doesn’t* come for birthright citizenship now, the flag has been set. Wouldn’t bet on in not being chipped away in the next 20 years. If you care about this or the reconstruction constitution, the only answer is a massive incursion into the juristocracy.

Reifying the state police power is central to any reconstruction agenda in 21st ca. (yes, I am aware of the irony)

8-1. Let that sink in. I don’t know what it’s going to take for people to realize this isn’t a conservative problem. There isn’t anything to restore. The juristocracy is coming for all the shit you care about.

I see people post this sort of thing and just keep thinking, “shouldn’t we do this either way?”

So many people are upset about this ... I dunno, I just find it funny. He's gonna (a) piss off Roberts, Barrett, and maybe Kavanaugh by pulling this stunt, and (b) be bored out of his mind the entire time.

I want you to imagine a jurisprudence of blood and soil nationalism. Okay, now *that’s* the project of SCOTUS for the next 50 years. Act accordingly.

Have to start asking yourself what justice Wurman is going to do.

Not to be a drag, but if SCOTUS *doesn’t* come for birthright citizenship now, the flag has been set. Wouldn’t bet on in not being chipped away in the next 20 years. If you care about this or the reconstruction constitution, the only answer is a massive incursion into the juristocracy.

Reifying the state police power is central to any reconstruction agenda in 21st ca. (yes, I am aware of the irony)

8-1. Let that sink in. I don’t know what it’s going to take for people to realize this isn’t a conservative problem. There isn’t anything to restore. The juristocracy is coming for all the shit you care about.

I see people post this sort of thing and just keep thinking, “shouldn’t we do this either way?”

Every event opens with, “the Anglo-American constitutional project. Discuss!”

it's just crazy how *watchable* tony scott's movies are. you'll never have a bad time throwing one on.

Sometimes you have too much writing to do and you need to try something weird in a hurry. I give you The Weird Fit Pick ©️ of the day!

*Smashes like and retweet buttons* There are very few projects that have inspired Nolan-movie-esque levels of anticipation like this one. Preorder for the love all that is holy.

I think Lee Drutman is basically the most interesting guy in what I’ve called the “Congress caucus,” the loose alignment of academics and advocates who periodically surface and offer reforms to legislative power and American politics.

New piece makes the case: our rigid two-party system isn’t inevitable—it’s the product of rules. Reforms like fusion voting can open the door to new parties, stronger coalitions, and voter choice. @leedrutman.bsky.social @newamerica.org @politicalreform.newamerica.org substack.com/home/post/p-...

(1) Teaching a seminar-style UET intro at YLS and the most striking thing is the difference between “originalism” done in the 1990s and what someone like @jdmortenson.bsky.social does today.

Restoring legislative supremacy is not just a nerdy legal thing. Saving US science and innovation depends on it. The core change killing NIH, NSF, and cancer research and cures this year is the president taking control of these agencies. @nataliebaviles.bsky.social and I wrote abt this: 1/

RE: the whole "literature" that is now furiously being manufactured by a handful of law professors on birthright citizenship to backstop the unconstitutional EO, anyone can do historical analysis, but it take training + time to do it properly. There are standards of historical accuracy. See 👇 1/

🤯

As Mike used to say in a clipped and flat voice whenever someone said something insightful in class, “GOOD!”

The Admin wants you to forget the history of why birthright citizenship is in the Constitution. Here's the history of birthright citizenship and consequences for under-classes of people, particularly imported enslaved people, who lacked citizenship. By @garrettepps.bsky.social

I spoke to Prof. Anna O. Law (@unlawfulentries.bsky.social) about her upcoming book on birthright citizenship and why the attack on the 14th Amendment is an attack on multi-racial democracy. www.theredoubt.net/birthright-c...

I read Weimar just like the next guy. But in some ways, I’ve always felt the Italian example was (a) more interesting and (b) a better education for Americans. Major caveat on (b) is the way trad conservatives got rolled in Weimar just looks hella familiar to me.

I don't think I can do justice to this question via a Bluesky thread. Just a couple of pointers: /1 the Italian constitution when Mussolini took power (Statuto Albertino) was fully flexible, ie Mussolini had it easy and changed it via ordinary legislation ( see e.g Racial Laws). /1

Further reading on the Fourteenth Amendment and the contemporary constitutional politics to alter birthright citizenship without amending the Constitution: @bostonreview.bsky.social bit.ly/RTJones @motherjones.com bit.ly/3CHNu4a

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments about birthright citizenship. Here, for the NYTimes and with Kate Masur, I offer a view of what those of you who think historically should be listening for. www.nytimes.com/2026/03/30/o...

Much to like here. But maybe simultaneously simpler and more complicated. @anthonymkreis.bsky.social is probably the model. Reify reconstruction but don’t bother engaging with the juristocrats directly. You do the work then w/ out reifying juristocracy. @espinsegall.bsky.social

@jamellebouie.net: “The good news is that the 14th Amendment, and the larger Reconstruction story, is an important resource of an alternative vision — of an egalitarian society for all who claim this nation as their own.”

Large protests are common knowledge machines 🧠🔄🧠

No Kings Boston

if nothing else, there is something to be said for spending time outside in the sun with thousands of people who share your anger at the state of things

I’d never thought to use primary sources for historical research. Very cool.

He didn't even hedge or give himself an easy out. He pointed his finger at every liberal public law prof. Just astounding.

hey what do you know, "The False Promise of Progressive Originalism" is out in print: digitalrepository.unm.edu/nmlr/vol56/i...

Until the birthright citizenship saga, I had pleasant interactions with Kurt Lash and generally did not find much in his scholarship to find objectionable. I'll say the speed at which he produced this stuff didn't inspire confidence. But then, "Irish Yankees" happened, and I just don't know, y'all.

I think the political economy of the Constitution is similar to the political economy of other laws and contracts: much turns on what it says, but even more turns on who has the power to enforce their interpretations

The week in review: Sam Moyn and Jamelle Bouie respond to Beau Baumann's call for legislative supremacy, Mariano Féliz on Argentina’s debt sustainability, Ntina Tzvouala on dollar hegemony (x2), plus more!