Pretty rare to watch an internet fight where I want both people to lose terribly.
@dadchats
-Lawyer / Law Prof / Screenwriter / Dad -Married to @momchats -2.5 million on TikTok @dadchats -1.3 million on IG @thedadchats -Once got dumped in HS because I wasn’t “Facebook pic material” -dillonmichaelwhite@gmail.com
Pretty rare to watch an internet fight where I want both people to lose terribly.
Landmark ruling from SCOTUS last week on police violence and excessive use of force cases. The impacts of this will be enormous.
Here’s everything you need to know about Barnes v. Felix.
They’re separate thoughts, but history is filled with constitutional amendments that upended Supreme Court precedent. That’s typically a large reason for trying to ratify a constitutional amendment.
Ruling that the union was perpetual and indissoluble, and secession was not constitutionally permissible. An amendment to the constitution, as I say, then changes the constitution under which that case arose and could fundamentally alter the answer.
Not a pivot at all. Laws are repealed and challenged all the time. Constitutional amendments, while capable of narrowing by SCOTUS in interpretation, cannot be overturned by SCOTUS.
(2) He is right about it being silent, which I also clearly state in the piece. However, the Supreme Court has not been silent on it.
That case appears to be about taxes and has nothing to do with secession at all. The article you posted was about how “all it would take is Congress to approve and the president to sign.” As I say in my piece, sure that’s true…it also will never happen. And yes I know Erwin. (1)
The article you posted is inaccurate and misleading. We can agree on reasons to secede, but the Supreme Court and the Constitution is clear. Your article uses a throwaway line about Congress and assumes it’s an easy hurdle. It’s not. Hence why people need actual legal articles from conlaw profs.
Can Trump actually make Canada the 51st state? Today’s constitutional law lesson: Article IV, Section III.
Secession. It’s one of the most commonly argued items in times of political turmoil. California should secede. Texas should secede. Maine should secede. But…can a state ACTUALLY do it? Legally? Constitutionally? Here’s the answer. Hint: it’s probably not what you think.
“Hunger Games: America” — can a few hundred words in the Constitution keep us from going full Katniss at the Capitol?
Today’s daily constitutional law lesson: Article IV, Section2. The Privileges and Immunities Clause.
Tomorrow’s constitutional law class post will be on presidential power. I have an outline already — but what do you want to know? If there’s something specific, leave it in the comments here and I’ll try to add it!
How does Congress function? Why do we have two chambers? What recent rule changes have blown the system up? Why don’t we trust them anymore? And what on EARTH is a filibuster? All that and more on today’s Constitutional Law Class Lesson.
“Nothing will ever be perfect” - Trump said today in response to the immigration debacles involving people wrongfully deported.
“It’s better to let 100 guilty people go free than imprison one innocent person” - the foundational philosophy of American criminal law.
We’re approaching DEFCON 1.
There’s been a lot of skepticism toward federal courts recently. Much of that is — truthfully — entirely justified. In today’s Constitutional Law class, we tackle the federal court system: why we have it, how it works, and the truth behind America’s seismic collapse in court confidence.
“Due process” has been thrown around a lot in recent weeks. And most of it has been…not right. In today’s Constitutional Law Class, let’s talk about due process…and what the heck is going on right now.
I’m dying
Putting on my constitutional law professor hat for a moment…what the heck is a constitutional crisis? And are we in one?
The world feels like it’s falling apart. But your kids aren’t watching the news. They’re watching you. Here’s how to navigate that.
I genuinely believe he doesn’t understand the distinction between Christians and Catholics. Or the difference between millions and billions.
Because I don’t get enough characters here. Here’s a more complete explanation.
The SAVE Act isn’t about voting. It’s about normalizing citizenship status on government identification. And in the process, deputizing state officials for otherwise federal purposes by triggering an immigration duty on routine local enforcement, letting the fed govt circumvent the constitution.
Divorce monkey strikes again
For those who haven’t seen this, I believe this is unprecedented. I may be wrong, but I doubt it. The ABA is the largest voluntary association of lawyers in the world and is not partisan.
Imagine the rioting and outrage from the other side if Kamala had won and Mark Cuban was in the Oval Office talking about everything he’s done to slash the government.
Again, the rate is still very very very low
The likelihood is still very low, but that’s likely more a medical decision than a legal one if you’re having no symptoms. I’d say talk to your doctor to get their opinion on it. Make sense?
^^this
Almost 20% of US women have taken Depo Provera. Recent studies show a 5x higher likelihood of brain/spine tumors (meningiomas) for those who used it. While the rate is still very low, we’re seeing a number of cases. If you’ve been diagnosed with one after Depo use, please email me. It’s a large MDL.