I almost attended IU Maurer, and Prof. Almendares was very generous with his time and advice, even after I’d decided to enroll elsewhere. In sum, also recommended as a person, by me.

Jotwell: Meeting the Challenge of Civic Education in Hyperpolarized Times - Family Law family.jotwell.com/meeting-the-...

Almendares on Unitary Enforcement Nicholas Almendares (Indiana University Maurer School of Law) has posted Unitary Enforcement on SSRN. Here is the abstract: Enforcement is an essential part of law. Yet, increasingly Congress has no say over it. A full-throated embrace of the unitary executive…

John Rawls would have turned 105 today. Here he is at his best...

If they post the 10 Commandments in Hebrew, then no one can read them, and so the case is obviously not ripe.

WATCH: Following recent events in Minnesota, Profs. Rachel Harmon, @richschragger.bsky.social and @micahschwartzman.bsky.social ’05 examine legal issues with deploying federal immigration agents.

Profs. Rachel Harmon, @richschragger.bsky.social and @micahschwartzman.bsky.social ’05 will be panelists Tuesday for “The Crisis in Minnesota: Executive Power and Civil Liberties,” sponsored by #UVA’s Miller Center and #UVALaw’s Karsh Center for Law and Democracy.

This post by Joeseph Heath is wonderfully written and a concise overview of Rawls's main contributions to liberal thought (h/t @cbarzun.bsky.social). A few quibbles: (a) the persistence of his ideas is not unexpected ... /1

Trump’s SBA is targeting Planned Parenthood for accepting federal funding under PPP. This renews a threat made during the pandemic. But it can’t be constitutional to pay $3+ billion to Catholic dioceses and other religious orgs while denying funding to similarly structured secular nonprofits. /1

As part of @yalelawjournal.bsky.social’s new online Supreme Court review, my latest focuses on Catholic Charities. I ask about the role of religious motivation in granting exemptions and in limiting state support for religion — and why it matters for one but apparently not for the other.

A better title for this might be "Christian nationalism returns to federal court." Note how broad the argument is. The claim isn't that there is a secular purpose for posting the Ten Commandments in public schools. It's that in Kennedy v. Bremerton, the Court rejected a secular purpose test ... /1

Helpful thread below -- after listening to the en banc argument in Roake v. Brumley, a few more impressions: (1) it's hard to overstate how badly CA5 conservatives want to reverse the panel that invalidated laws requiring display of the 10 Commandments in public schools /1

I wandered over there to check on how things are looking from the right. I hadn’t realized we’re in the midst of a Rawls conniption. Is this displaced anxiety about going to war with Scandinavia? Or just the usual eruption?

Because I know some of you are here for the bagels. #Bodos #Migo

The best bagels in NYC are Bodos bagels that someone from Cville took up there. @profmmurray.bsky.social

Don't miss Prof. Frost at 54:27-57:55.

I had missed this CA10 decision supporting religious exemptions from a university’s vaccine requirement. The panel majority said the university was constitutionally forbidden from inquiring in any detailed way into the plaintiffs’ sincerity: /1 uploads-ssl.webflow.com/63d954d4e4ad...

Your regular reminder that prior to the Covid pandemic, no federal or state court in the history of the United States ever invalidated a vaccine requirement under the First Amendment, let alone in the midst of a pandemic that was killing thousands of people daily. coloradosun.com/2025/12/02/c...

Under this Ninth Circuit holding, which conservatives are lauding (as below), can religious hospitals fire employees who refuse to be vaccinated? What about religious health care providers that object on religious grounds to employees who invoke conscience protections, say, in emergencies?

My colleague @amandafrost.bsky.social is excellent on this panel about birthright citizenship. Her response on what sources to read to understand the issue (at ~1:14) — as compared to the other answers given — is notable. @uvalaw.bsky.social www.youtube.com/live/scYYIy9...

Dean Leslie Kendrick ’06 joined the awards ceremony recognizing Profs. @payvandahdout.bsky.social and @rachelbayefsky.bsky.social for their research in civil procedure at @theaals.bsky.social annual meeting Wednesday.

The Ninth Circuit today holds that religious organizations have a First Amendment right to discriminate based on religion in hiring/firing non-ministers. The panel grounds its decision in the “church autonomy doctrine,” which the Supreme Court recognized for the first time in 2020. /1

Religious exemptions in the workplace don’t get as much attention as they should. Good to see this coverage, especially given the flood of cases after the Court’s decision in Groff.

Not always.

Before self-denaturalizing for insufficiently enthusiastic celebration of Christmas (“nothing bad” would happen to the Jews, we’re told), maybe I’ll teach a seminar on Locke’s letter, if American citizens are still allowed to read it. Or given all this talk of family, the first treatise.

I don't think there's any understanding of the First Amendment under which this ("our Savior") is constitutional. Yet they don't care, and they've eliminated all the attorneys who would've objected. Kudos to the Goldwater and Cato Institutes for condemning it. www.nytimes.com/2025/12/25/a...

Subtle.

This is close — just replace “emphasizes” with “establishes” (h/t @martylederman.bsky.social)

The problem will only worsen as the Supreme Court encourages vaccine exemption claims in the lower courts.

I learned Morse code at 20 wpm for an Advanced Class ham radio license (under call sign KI5GW).

The Supreme Court signaling that Mahmoud may extend beyond curricular opt-outs. We anticipated this move in the vaccine context in our recent comment, @richschragger.bsky.social and @nelsontebbe.bsky.social, harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-13....

The measles epidemic that led to NY and CA repealing their religious exemptions happened just before COVID hit, and it’s as if the whole thing is being memory-holed.

Have been saying this for many years: “‘Postliberalism’ as a term is really a rebranding of Catholic integralism.” lawliberty.org/integralism-...

Still (and always) a sucker for the hard copy.

All the religious liberty clinics/litigation shops rushing to file amicus briefs opposing EEOC’s demand for lists of Jews, right?

Same for legal academics — need more who teach and write about the First Amendment.

Since postliberalism is having another moment where people seems to be confused about what it is, here are a few papers that might be helpful: 1. The intellectual energy comes from Catholic integralism — for an early critique, see digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol56/i...,

Suddenly antiliberals who defined “liberalism” to include pretty much the entire American political tradition — from Jeffersonian republicanism to Reagan fusionism, and everything in between — are quite particular about what counts under the recently manufactured concept of “postliberalism.”

Apparently, over at the other place, integralists are having a meltdown about the claim that they paved the way for groypers. Antisemitism couldn’t have anything to do with it, because “nothing bad” would happen to you in an integralist society (except for that Mortara thing).

This is on the right track, but not quite accurate. Even before Crean & Fimister, the integralists’ take on the Mortara Affair made the quick re-branding necessary. The need for an exoteric labeling was present at the launch of the integralist revival.

Your regular reminder that “postliberalism” is just Catholic integralism — the revival of which started in 2018 with a debate over whether it was ok for a 19th century pope to kidnap a Jewish child (recall firstthings.com/non-possumus/).

I don’t know anything about Nordic paganism, but I do know something about evidence of animus under Masterpiece Cakeshop — and no one has given this guy the talk.

The Supreme Court had three religious freedom cases last Term. With @richschragger.bsky.social and @nelsontebbe.bsky.social, our latest comments on them, extending our analysis of religious preferentialism under the First Amendment. harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-13...

Robbie George showing, perhaps unwittingly, that any decent political morality is going to have some conception of reasonableness.

This piece on Kagan/KBJ mainstreams discussion of an argument about judicial strategy that @nelsontebbe.bsky.social and I staked out in our article “Establishment Clause Appeasement” several years ago: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers..... /1

Does blocking people on twitter because they asked some critical/clarifying questions violate the Rapoport Rules and the internal morality of reasoned disagreement? (Asking for everyone who isn't an integralist.) papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

This from my incomparable colleague, Caleb Nelson, on originalism and the unitary executive theory.

Kansas passed a law making it illegal for hospitals (or any employer) to require COVID vaccination unless they grant a religious exemption -- with no inquiry into the sincerity of those who claim it. Basically, employers must allow automatic exemptions. (h/t @doritreiss.bsky.social). /1

Also exceedingly rare for a court to cite Schragger, Schwartzman, and Tebbe, but lo and behold.

📢 NOMOS 2025 Annual Conference: Capitalism and Socialism Panels on value & money 🗓 Sept 26, 12–6:45 PM EST | Hybrid: Harvard Safra Center + Zoom justmoney.org/2025-annual-...