Today at 2:30 ET: I'll be the minority witness at a (twice-postponed) hearing before Senator Cruz's subcommittee, titled "Impeachment: Holding Rogue Judges Accountable." Here's a link to the witness statements, and where you should also be able to find live video this afternoon:

Great discussion with @leahlitman.bsky.social and @gregsargent.bsky.social on the regime’s unlawful pursuit of Senator Mark Kelly and his video warning US service members to not follow illegal orders, and Kelly’s powerful response underscoring the president’s non-service to the nation.

New: I spoke with a Colombian asylum seeker who was the victim of a ‘Kavanaugh stop’ about what it was like to be racially profiled, abducted in front his family and held in ICE detention hours from home for more than a month—despite doing everything “the right way.” This is Nick’s story.

Everyone should watch Senator Mark Kelly's brutal video response to the corrupt Trump/Hegseth effort to punish him. As @leahlitman.bsky.social says on the pod: "They are saying it is illegal to encourage people to follow the law." Leah explains this all brilliantly: newrepublic.com/article/2049...

SF and LA: Strict Scrutiny is coming to you LIVE this March! SF is almost sold out. Get your LA tickets (3/7) at crooked.com/events while you still can!

Science, not politics, should drive health care decisions. CEO @skyeperryman.bsky.social joined @strictscrutiny.bsky.social to talk about our suit against the Trump-Vance admin for retaliatory grant cancellations against @ameracadpeds.bsky.social and its advocacy for evidence-based vaccine policy.

I finally received my final Christmas present from my favorite podcast host and professor @leahlitman.bsky.social of @strictscrutiny.bsky.social! And look at the note🤭🥲

Take a listen to our first episode of 2026!!

I read an earlier draft of this paper - and recommend. Very important work showing how courts - and appointees/nominees - actually function.

He's now talking about ... crime in DC?

"We are going to run the country" until such time as we decide????? There is no low they won't stoop to - the utter contempt for democracy, law, the Venezuelan people - is just horrifying.

Join us Wednesday, Jan 7 @ 5 PM PT for a live conversation with Leah Litman & Madeleine Brand! They’ll unpack Leah's book, “LAWLESS: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, & Bad Vibes” 🗓️ RSVP now & tune in: buff.ly/UKzVYyO @leahlitman.bsky.social

New Year’s resolution

Non fiction favorite bsky.app/profile/leah...

Final day of the year, so here are my Top 5 Books of 2025 that absolutely no one asked for. Leisure reading slowed down towards the end of the year after starting my PhD, but still made time for some absolute gems from @leahlitman.bsky.social, @juliaioffe.bsky.social, & @shannonmonaghan.bsky.social

Keeping the anchor chair warm for @arimelber.bsky.social tonight on The Beat on @msnowreports.bsky.social. Tune in!

At least 11 congressmen from 1865-1871 were arguably not citizens under Trump's interpretation of 14th A, our research finds. Yet no one challenged their eligibility to serve. Why not? Obviously, b/c no one who drafted or ratified the 14th A shared Trump's view. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

DOGE was A LOT less likely to cancel contracts from companies that donated money to Republicans than companies that donated to Democrats.

Thanks much, Leah. I think it's noteworthy that *no* Justices thought that the SG's unconvincing alternative argument that Trump had properly invoked the *rebellion* provision of 12406 was even worthy of discussion or refutation; and ... [1]

Wrote this re SCOTUS’s inevitably siding against Trump on birthright citizenship, but it also applies to tariffs and National Guard

Brett Kavanaugh (September 2025): The facts and how they relate to the law don’t matter. Assume ICE and other federal forces always act with integrity, always respect rights, and consistently impose minimal burden. Brett Kavanaugh (December 2025): Should I not have done that? Was that wrong?

Over public dissents from Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch, #SCOTUS refuses to allow President Trump to deploy federalized National Guard troops into and around Chicago. This is a major loss for President Trump, even if, per Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence, it’s temporary and on narrow legal Q:

(also, not to be a downer but … this) This ruling is a big deal; the deployment of the guard was awful, harmful, and autocratic. But SCOTUS isn’t all good now!!

In case people tell you that public criticism of the court doesn’t matter, here’s Brett Kavanaugh trying to walk back what he said in the ICE roving patrol case - when he blessed racial profiling & called the stops prompt. He was lambasted; @akalhan.bsky.social coined the term “Kavanaugh stops”

Genuinely shocked at a rule-of-law based result from this Court.

SCOTUS adopts @martylederman.bsky.social’s argument, which will also mean CA9 and CA7 will have to do so as well. The upshot? If Trump wants to occupy our cities, he’s gonna have to send in the military by finding a way around the Posse Comitatus Act.

Big ups to Marty Lederman @martylederman.bsky.social who flagged this argument that SCOTUS relied on (that regular forces refer to military forces, not federal law enforcement).

Wow. Genuinely shocked, and a hugely consequential decision. Importantly, this is a case where @martylederman.bsky.social's amicus brief appears to have made a MAJOR impact. Before he wrote it, courts were sidestepping the "regular forces" issue entirely. And that's what the Trump admin lost on.

Trump suddenly wishing he had installed Bari Weiss at DOJ/FBI so she could Bari the Epstein files as she (incompetently) did with the CECOT reporting.

1 - the exec branch can't decline to spend $ Congress appropriated 2- the fed govt can't use federal $ to extort states over policy/political disagreements 3-the fed govt can't use federal $ to impose conditions unrelated to the funding program 4-the fed govt can't use federal $ to coerce states

Airport travel reading for the day, @leahlitman.bsky.social Does it make airport travel less stressful? No. Does it make me feel better about the state of the Court? No. Am I nonetheless enjoying reading it? Absolutely.

A fantastic NYT report: Donors to Trump get pardons, jobs, & access - and benefited from regulatory decisions the Trump admin has made. SUPER timely as SCOTUS is about to kill agency independence & give POTUS more control over agencies (likely to donors' benefit) www.nytimes.com/interactive/...

did a video a few days ago making the case for supreme court expansion www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjB_...

Trump’s for they and them

A phenomenal piece by Adam Serwer @adamserwer.bsky.social in The Atlantic @theatlantic.com that explains the racial and class hierarchies that are part of the Republican Party, including the Supreme Court's, vision for the Constitution. www.theatlantic.com/politics/202...

I feel very seen by this piece: "This Is The Year Millennials Got Old" www.nytimes.com/2025/12/22/o...

A fantastic NYT report: Donors to Trump get pardons, jobs, & access - and benefited from regulatory decisions the Trump admin has made. SUPER timely as SCOTUS is about to kill agency independence & give POTUS more control over agencies (likely to donors' benefit) www.nytimes.com/interactive/...

This powerful video from our partner @interfaithalliance.org depicts ICE’s horrific and inhumane treatment of our friends and neighbors. When the Trump-Vance admin chooses cruelty – we choose compassion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eALKrOVaRGg

Fascinating discussion on The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City about trademark law this past week. Angie had insulted Brittany last season that she had "high body count hair," a phrase that then achieved some notoriety. On this week's episode, Brittany stated that she "trademarked HIGH BODY COUNT"

This this this. And if you, the public, cease to care, why should the President?

NB: When I, a professor of law, profess that an act is unlawful, I am not doing it to inform the lawbreaker, but rather to inform you, the reader. So the question “what, like you think he cares?” is inapposite. The question is whether *you* care. I think you should, which is why I bother.

Gift link: www.nytimes.com/2025/12/18/u...

No, Justice Kavanaugh, it's not the "interim" docket. Yes, Justice Kavanaugh, I would like you to answer for the consequences of your votes — especially when those consequences come from a vote on what you claim is the "interim" docket. No, you don't have to answer. Yes, I'll keep asking.

I’m on vacation but popping back in to recommend this @stevevladeck.bsky.social post on One First: www.stevevladeck.com/p/197-the-su...

The Supreme Court is hearing a case on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. I chatted with @leahlitman.bsky.social about what’s at stake.

It’s not the interim docket. A thread from me, someone who has been covering emergency applications since before Will Baude called it the shadow docket in a 2015 law review article.

Thanks to @notusperspectives.bsky.social for including my response to the “what’s the biggest SCOTUS case to watch this term” prompt! www.notus.org/perspectives...

WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING A federal judge BLOCKED feds from RE-DETAINING Kilmar Abrego Garcia this morning at an immigration check-in. A quick thread storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...