Three senators—Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)—have sued President Trump and Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker over Trump’s installation of Whitaker at the Justice Department’s helm.
Latest in Appointments, Confirmations & Budgets
As Lawfare readers have probably noticed, there has been a fair amount of controversy over Matthew Whitaker's designation as acting attorney general as of late. To keep track of it all, we at Lawfare have put together a resource page collecting all litigation documents regarding Whitaker's appointment, ranging from outright challenges to Whitaker's role as acting attorney general (Maryland v. U.S., Blumenthal v. Whitaker, and Michaels v.
On Monday, Sens. Richard Blumenthal, Sheldon Whitehouse and Mazie K. Hirono filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia asking a federal judge to decide the legality of Matthew Whitaker's service as acting attorney general. The senators argue that Whitaker's appointment is in violation of the Appointments Clause as Whitaker was not confirmed by the U.S. Senate in his prior post. The full complaint is below.
On Nov. 14, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel released a memo defending the legality of President Donald Trump’s Nov. 7 designation of Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general. Read the document in full below.
On Tuesday, in litigation related to the Affordable Care Act in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, the state of Maryland filed a motion to substitute the acting attorney general for former Attorney General Jeff Sessions as a defendant. In the motion, the state asks the judge for expedited consideration declaring Matthew Whitaker is not the lawful acting attorney general. The motion is below.
The president shouldn’t hold his breath for the court to have any serious objections to the special counsel’s appointment.
When the Supreme Court first encountered the internet, the justices expressed wonder at its potential. “It is ‘no exaggeration to conclude that the content on the Internet is as diverse as human thought,’” marveled Justice John Paul Stevens, then the court’s oldest member. The court decided that, unlike the more regulated television and broadcast media, this “‘unique and wholly new medium of worldwide human communication” was entitled to full First Amendment protection.
During the fourth day of hearings on Judge Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court, two experts testified on matters that may be of interest to Lawfare readers. Rebecca Ingber, associate professor at Boston University School of Law and contributing editor for Lawfare, testified about Judge Kavanaugh's approaches to executive deference on national security matters and to international law.
The White House’s announcement of the intended nominations of Travis LeBlanc and Aditya Bamzai to be members of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) is a welcome development for this low-profile but increasingly significant board.
On Monday, Judge Dabney Friedrich of the the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled against a motion challenging the constitutionality of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment. The full order is below: