Is the president tampering with a witness by means of public tweets and media interviews?
The Supreme Court's decision Tuesday in Trump v. Hawaii decisively puts to bed the “preliminary injunction” round of litigation over President Trump’s travel ban. In a 5-4 decision, with the majority opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court issued two core holdings: (a) that the latest ban does not exceed the president’s authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA); and (b) that ban does not violate the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.
A review of Nitsana Darshan-Leitner and Samuel Katz's Harpoon: Inside the Covert War Against Terrorism’s Money Masters (Hachette, 2017).
Editor's Note: The discussion of section 7(b) of the Jerusalem Embassy Act has been revised since original publication.
Updates from the Military Commissions, 11/14-11/16: Wrapping Up the Physical Evidence Witnesses in al-Nashiri
Following the events of Nov. 13 summarized in the last post in this series, the military commission in United States v. al-Nashiri reconvened on Tuesday, Nov.
When last we left Lawfare readers, the prosecution in the United States v. al-Nashiri military commission had begun “preadmission” of evidence despite the ongoing refusal of defense counsel to participate.
President Trump is expected to announce that he will not certify the Iran deal in a speech on Friday, October 13.