Constitutional Law Court Decisions Government Law School 
JonathanTurley
JULY 8, 2024
Below is my column in The Hill on the over-wrought reaction to the Supreme Court decision in Trump v. Commentators seemed to compete for the most alarmist accounts from court-sanctioned death squads to political assassinations to the death of democracy. United States. Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C.
JonathanTurley
JANUARY 27, 2022
The court has spent decades issuing often conflicting and vague 5-4 rulings on the use of race in admissions. Bollinger , the Court divided 5-4 on upholding admissions criteria used to achieve “diversity” in a class at Michigan Law School. In 2003 in Grutter v.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
JonathanTurley
JULY 12, 2022
She has called for “genuine” law professors not to fall “into complicity with lawlessness” in teaching such subjects. It is the latest voice of intolerance and orthodoxy at a leading law school. In the age of rage, calls for radical action from both professors and students have been particularly amplified at Georgetown University.
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 13, 2022
History has vindicated John Marshall Harlan, who dissented in some of the Supreme Court’s worst decisions concerning race and limiting the scope of federal power. He was prescient in recognizing the need for a strong national government to deal with urgent issues, such as civil rights. — Erwin Chemerinsky (June 25, 2021).
JonathanTurley
JUNE 30, 2024
Below is my column on the Supreme Court decision on Friday in Fischer v. It is only the latest blow to efforts to portray the riot as a massive conspiracy to overthrow the government. As shown by polls , most citizens view January 6 as a protest that became a riot, not as an attempt to overthrow the government.
JonathanTurley
JANUARY 9, 2024
Wolfe rattles off extreme proposals matter-of-factly as all viable options: Anyone concerned about the Supreme Court today should be working to prise that window open further. What these ideas share is a recognition that the rights-giving 20th-century Court that liberals came to respect, even revere, is gone.
JonathanTurley
DECEMBER 27, 2020
The threat to the free press is obvious and was the basis for foundational court decisions. The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision over 50 years ago in New York Times v. Like “disinformation,” it is heavily laden with subjectivity.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content