Happy birthday to @dorfonlaw.bsky.social, a wicked smart first team academic every year not to mention just a great guy.

reading it on a metal box in my living room yup

Writing this from a metal tube flying 35,000 feet over the Atlantic and I think you will see it, and with all the terrible happening everywhere still should pause to reflect that this is even possible.

On the blog, I argue that Trump is a literal law breaker: He does not merely violate the law; he and his administration seek to render it inoperative, broken. Examples: might-makes-right military actions; J6 pardons; censure of Sen Kelly; and firing members of independent agencies w/o cause. 👇

Current state of mind leaving London back to US.

In an accompanying essay on my blog, I discuss a new book on the Revolutionary War and offer thoughts on how to make use of the Revolution's ideals even while recognizing its inextricable links to the evils of slavery and Indian removal. 👇

The Monroe Doctrine was aimed at European interference in western sovereigns; it did not assert a U.S. interest in doing that interfering itself. That conception arose in the late 19th century. But gunboat diplomacy was only ever a U.S. policy, never a legal justification. Details on the blog. 👇

Even when grey, London is something.

“The legal fights, policy battles, and elections that could define 2026” electionlawblog.org?p=153719

Nothing like a cute London cafe with your honey.

David is a must-follow in these times.

Ok, I totally get why my colleague and friend @anthonymkreis.bsky.social loves Oxford so much.

What is the Roberts Court? Not originalist. Not textual. Not true to precedent. Then what? By process of elimination, Catholic Integralism is the only legal theory that explains the Leonard Leo Roberts court. @espinsegall.bsky.social @thelisagraves.bsky.social papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

But Gorsuch.

What?

Coming up on CBS News: We interviewed a white man watching Fox News while getting his car serviced about what he thinks about the American takeover of Venezuela. #Satire

This was something.

And dinner with a, well everything.

Great day in the UK.

What I’m talking about.

My annual “did you know that select reporters get to see the Chief Justice’s report (that for bizarre reasons comes out on 12/31) early and that the report is quarantined for hours.” Luckily, this year like every year the report says nothing and thus no need for a link.

Room with a view!

“I’m a law professor not a mechanic Jim!”

The part that angers me the most is their Trump v US arguments. It's not breaking the law if he can't be prosecuted for breaking the law, they say. But rather than taking that as a condemnation of the immunity decision, they utilize it to say "This other law doesn't apply, either."

And now we have Reverse Originalism where Blackman and Tillman use an awful 21st century case on POTUS immunity that everyone thinks is wrong to interpret a centuries old statute to make POTUS more of a dictator. Wow. reason.com/volokh/2025/...

And Josh Blackman goes full Trump can be a dictator mode by arguing he can use the military anytime, anywhere, anyplace despite a clear federal law to the contrary. Sigh. reason.com/volokh/2025/...

So glad @chrisgeidner.bsky.social wrote about this. I happened to catch Crawford’s statement as well and was equally appalled. Jan Crawford's attack on SCOTUS "corruption" narrative was its own substance-free narrative open.substack.com/pub/chrisgei...

Dog under window under sky.

must read

This is the real tragedy. And there is no good way of pushing back against the firehose of historical errors done in the pursuit of litigation relevance and citations.

On the blog, @espinsegall.bsky.social critiques 3 SCOTUS decisions he regards as extremely poorly reasoned (2 conservative; 1 liberal), and urges others in the academy in joining his condemnation of the justices as result-oriented ideologues.

My last blog post of the year: “Goodbye and Good Riddance to 2025: Let's Stop Accepting Frivolous Constitutional Arguments.” www.dorfonlaw.org/2025/12/good...

Next year will bring law profs saying insane things about birthright citizenship that are completely inconsistent with text, history, tradition, and precedent. Don’t buy it. Law profs can hide frivolous arguments behind technical gibberish. The Court may rule otherwise though because broccoli.

2025 has been a decade.

On reflection, I think Bari Weiss would have gladly spiked that story too

Tired Reindog.

You can dress a dog for Xmas but can’t put her in the spirit.

Elf is an underrated movie. That’s all.

I'm aware there's breaking news--some of it, like the SCOTUS ruling in the National Guard case, even good--but I'm on break, so I've posted a classic about the "War on Christmas." The Intro contains new bonus content about how the culture war is going (spoiler: not so well but could be worse). 👇

A week and a half ago the Thunder were on pace for the best season in NBA history and now the Spurs are three games behind them in the loss column.

That’s not how GDP works. But it is how propaganda works.

Let us Out!!!

Court denies stay of lower court ruling that Trump can’t federalize national guard in Illinois. Gorsuch, Alito, Thomas dissent. Big. s3.documentcloud.org/documents/26...

40 Minutes?

I told a 19 year old about being in high school during that era and mentioned that we debated gay marriage and he was flabbergasted like “what do you mean you “debated” gay marriage???”

So all those people who said same-sex marriage would somehow hurt “traditional marriage.” Yeah. No. One of the stupidest arguments in con law history.

One of those reasons is the chance that SCOTUS will invalidate Trump's tariffs after rebate check go out, creating a fiscal gap. In an accompanying blog post, I discuss a remedial problem in the removal power case and offer delayed invalidation as a possible solution. 👇

In my latest column for @justiaverdict.bsky.social, I explain that Trump's "warrior dividend" has no legal connection to tariff revenues and that his other plan to rebate tariff revenues is unlawful absent new legislation and, in any event, a bad idea for multiple reasons. 👇

Josh Blackman resigns from Heritage (way too late but still). reason.com/volokh/2025/...

I truly don’t understand why the GOP wants America less healthy, less fed, less safe. I really don’t. Seriously.