Last month, President Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. We reviewed several of Barrett’s writings to glean what they might reveal about her views on issues important to Lawfare readers.
Latest in Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today ruled in two cases related to President Trump’s financial records. Both cases were 7-2, with Justices Thomas and Alito dissenting in each. The parties will not get immediate access to Trump’s financial records in either case.
On Sept. 11, the Supreme Court stayed a preliminary injunction imposed by Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the third country asylum rule recently issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The rule would bar foreign nationals who cross the U.S.-Mexico border from receipt of U.S. asylum when they transit through a third country without applying for protection in that country.
On July 12, the government filed an application before the Supreme Court for a stay pending appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Trump v. Sierra Club, concerning the president’s use of military funds to construct his wall along the southern border. The government argues that the district court’s decision to grant an injunction was based on a misreading of the relevant statutory text and that the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the policy.
The Supreme Court had denied a writ of certiorari in the case of Al-Alwi v. Trump. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote separately. The denial, and Justice Breyer’s statement, can be read here and below.
The Supreme Court will soon hear oral arguments in Jam v. International Finance Corp. The case, which will be argued on October 31, 2018, raises an important threshold question about the immunity of international organizations from suit in the United States. But the briefing does not provide the full answer.
Document: Trump Administration Seeks Emergency Stay of Order to Produce Privilege Log in Transgender Servicemember Ban Litigation
On Monday, the Trump administration applied to the Supreme Court for an emergency stay of a district court order in litigation related to the transgender servicemember ban. A district court ordered the government to produce a log of evidence it believes is subject to presidential communications privilege. The government argues that a 2004 case should protect the government from doing so. The full application is below.
A kerfuffle erupted in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday over the committee’s access to a series of documents from Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s time in the Bush White House. The conflict concerned the withholding of material under an implied assertion of executive privilege and the relevance of the documents in question. There are a few different caches of documents and different reasons why senators do not have access to them.
Hot on the heels of the Kennedy retirement announcement, we’ve got our special Supreme Court finale episode! This is the show for you if you would enjoy detailed and amicable debate and discussion concerning:
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.