If you think a technical tweak to university admissions generates a 5% swing in vote share in an actual election as opposed to a push poll I have several free transits of Hormuz to sell you.

Whom to believe? 🤡 @nytimes.com www.nytimes.com/2026/04/03/w...

The term @washingtonpost.com is searching for is "heresy."

As @mbkplus.bsky.social and I have argued on the pod, Columbia and other capitulating universities completely misunderstood the goals of the Trump administration.

It's real, and it's spectacular.

How the @nytimes.com describes aggression and ethnic cleansing:

Yet, some lawyers use AI to write briefs.

"AI will replace junior lawyers," they said.

2016 grad Elliot Gaiser is at it again.

It seems we just bombed some residential buildings in an attempt to kill a former diplomat who was trying to facilitate negotiations. A civilian trying to *end* hostilities, surrounded by other civilians in their homes. We are completely lost.

I know it's not in Democrats' nature, but they should point out daily that the US is losing bigly and that the President's plan is to whine and dream of his majestic ballroom.

👇

When the birthright citizenship decision comes out, people will say it could never have gone any other way, that the law was obvious. But the mere fact that SCOTUS took on the case is evidence enough that we are living in a time of democratic precarity.

Don't get me wrong: I'm relieved that this case is shaping up as either 8-1 or 7-2 against the Trump executive order. But the case is a gift to the Supreme Court. By rejecting an outlandish position, it will earn credibility as apolitical, even as the Overton window moves far to the right.

Brilliant and brutal hypothetical.

This was the Chin/Finkelman retort to Eastman. Bravo.

Sauer has a weak case (ridiculous academic efforts to rehabilitate it notwithstanding), but the focus on temporary sojourners would knock out most of the people covered by the EO, including children of visa holders, undocumented immigrants etc.,

Once again, this site has a significant problem with people who cannot distinguish between "here is what the law is"/"here is what happened" and "I endorse that law/what happened."

The best way to understand Barnett's op-ed is that we have reached the law professor as influencer/tastemaker stage of academic life.

objectively the funniest critique an american could level at another country

Four-byline alert: 🚨 “.. A broker for Pete Hegseth, the US defence secretary, attempted to make a big investment in major defence companies in the weeks leading up to the US-Israeli attack on Iran, according to three people familiar with the matter.” www.ft.com/content/744e...

"Lenders who originated data center loans—including the private credit facilities described in Section A—have begun pooling those loans and selling tranches to asset managers and pension funds, spreading risk well beyond the original lending institutions." www.quinnemanuel.com/the-firm/pub...

For dispute resolution colleagues: Country A says no negotiations are going on. Country B says its aim is to take A's most valuable asset, and that negotiations are going well except if A doesn't give in totally B will commit war crimes. Which is more plausible? Be specific.

The thing about international law is it (generally) lacks robust enforcement mechanisms. Its legitimacy depends entirely on the perception of its legitimacy. You don't get to turn it on and off to suit your fancy, or complain about breaches when you, yourself, are in grotesque breach of the law.

This is a phenomenally bad idea.

I am shocked that the FIRE rankings may be inaccurate.

I hope that this ugly episode provokes some soul-searching among legal academics generally. As long as the coin of the realm is convincing 2Ls of our brilliance, there will be a market for contrarian hot takes on high profile topics as well as professors who produce such work.

Gender pay disparities among private practitioners by academic achievement and role.

Law school grades are predictive of lawyers' incomes. But Gabriele Plickert and I found that women with the highest grades earned LESS than lower-achieving men in private practice.

Between AI and discourse policing by prominent professors (about the xenophobic anti-birthright campaign no less), it is not exactly the best of times for legal academia.

Just saw this and had to screenshot it because it’s just such perfect Blueskyism

Seems very likely the DOJ just got caught using ChatGPT or another LLM to write a brief.

These "pauses" undermine the already weak argument that the power plants are legitimate military targets.

Wikipedia has higher standards than legal academia.

This does not bode well for the Democratic Party. Platner is Trump-like in his relationship to the truth, and primary voters apparently love it. Mills seems like a perfectly fine candidate--one wonders if Schumer's support has backfired.

The total of $204.5 million for the Supreme Court works out to approximately $3.5 million per merits decision in the current term, if my math is not mistaken.

“As the system creaks under strain, more and more venues will be faced with an unpleasant choice: Restrict submissions, and add yet more work to their volunteer reviewers? Or loosen standards and risk problematic material slipping through?” thebulletin.org/premium/2026...

When I worked in WaPo Opinions in 2017-2018, senior editors specifically told junior editors not to factcheck Marc Thiessen and other MAGA columnists, otherwise they wouldn’t be able to publish anything by them at all, and “we need them for intellectual diversity.”

The discourse policing in legal academia is exhausting. It's fine to engage Wurman and Lash on the merits. It's also fine to question their motives/timing. The anti-birthright position was never going to stay "off-the-wall" regardless because it is supported by the President of the United States!

A great deal of AI marketed to lawyers is "LegalZoom but more unpredictable."

Anthony was all too correct. From 2024, "Georgia law may in fact contemplate prosecution...because it recognizes an affirmative defense that a woman "sought an abortion because she reasonably believed that an abortion was the only way to prevent a medical emergency.” papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

New study finds notion that humans can "double-check" AI to be flawed. Participants trusted AI 93% of the time when it was correct, but still trusted it 80% of the time when it was wrong, while being *more* confident in their conclusions. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Apollo's CEO has been too busy undermining higher education to run his underperforming asset management business.

Is market manipulation an official act? And can the President's lies about negotiations with a foreign power be entered into evidence?

I cannot imagine having to teach this man's musings.

the republican justices are as pickled in MAGA slop as any pardoned jan 6er

So it seems the US side was totally incompetent. Epic Fury of confused old men www.armscontrol.org/blog/2026-03...

How can this go on for another 3 years?

The media is indeed bad, but this is a boon to Democrats. If ICE can afford to send thousands of agents to airports, the logical question is why it needs more funding.

No US president—no Democrat, no Republican—should have a huge, vastly-resourced military force to be deployed in our homeland for tasks unrelated to its mission, at the personal urges of the president. It is far past time for our Congress to do its sacred duty. Americans REJECT authoritarian rule.