🔥The 9th Round of Easy Loan, Earn $40 Reward is in progress❗️ ⏰ Promotion Period: January 15th - Feburary 15th, 2025 👉 Register now and check more details at gate.io/campaigns/358

Today's decision on universal injunctions in CASA v. Maryland is big, and correct.

bUt BArreTt iS SOutEr!

Having a trust-falling-through-the-floor-of-the-sub-basement moment (again!) reading liberal legal writers' takes on Skrmetti. I need someone to pull me out of this because I'm very suspicious that someone like me, with no legal expertise, can be identifying such basic errors!

Politico for some reason didn't point out that Ketanji Brown Jackson "got personal" last week when she accused conservative justices of being swayed by "moneyed interests." x.com/politico/statu…

some new york times pieces hit different two weeks later

I've just revised my lunch plans. McD's it is.

I understand why some of my libertarian brethren like universal injunctions against the federal government, but the utility of such orders for advancing libertarian preferences says little about whether they are lawful or constitutional.

Today's CA6 en banc decision on class certification may take on increased importance after today's SCOTUS opinion on universal injunctions. opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/2…

Good. That's how it's supposed to work.

⚖️📢 For analysis of this Term's rulings with a focus on executive power & the media, join National Constitution Center & Texas A&M School of Law Center on the Structural Constitution for a #SCOTUS Review Tues. July 8 in-person in Philly & online! Free to attend. Register ⬇️ constitutioncenter.org/calendar/2025-…

Having written during the Biden Administration of universal injunctions that it "seems bananas to me that a rando trial judge could have that power," I am predisposed to think this, but I found Justice Barrett's opinion in Trump v. CASA persuasive.

The second sentence simply does not follow (without a whole lot of unstated arguments and assumptions) from the first here.

Interesting speculation

Congratulations Will Peterson! (Plus some personal news. UTexasLaw.)

Meanwhile, in the nice place, folks ate suggesting the Dems' big mistake vis-a-vis SCOTUS was . . . not cutting money for judicial security after Dobbs.

The SCOTUSblog StatPack put together by yours truly and Jake S. Truscott, Ph.D is now up for all of your data dives. Come by and check it out. scotusblog.com/stat-pack-2025/

From the archives: Justice Kagan Enters the Debate on the National Injunction reason.com/volokh/2022/09… via reason

Twitter's algorithm in action: The version of my post that had a screen-cap of the website where it's posted had 10X as many impressions (17K) as the one with a hyperlink to the actual post (1.7K). They don't like the risk of pulling eyes off the site.

Solo dissents should, by their nature, be more coherent and persuasive than other opinions because there's no need to compromise or trim arguments. #justsaying