Brandon Johnson

@bjeromy.bsky.social

Asst. Professor at University of Nebraska College of Law. Northwestern Law alum. Admin Law, Election Law, & Separation of Powers research at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=3048278

To sum up, the Unitary Executive Theory now appears to be: "The President must be in charge, the Constitution demands it! ... Unless we might lose some money, then, maybe the Constitution is um... less on point? Yeah! And we should, I don't know, look at the statute...yeah, that's it. Nailed it!"

Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito pride themselves on being immune to empiricism. It doesn't matter what lessons of history teach us or the current state of the world - their visions of the Constitution will not yield to such petty realities. They are the anti-pragmatists.

Dan Walters@profdanwalters.bsky.social · last mo.

This passage from Justice Gorsuch is just so revealing of the tortured psychology of the Court's motivations: we have to risk authoritarianism in order to understand the necessity of building a libertarian utopia; there is no alternative between authoritarianism and absolute economic freedom.

The Slaughter and Cook opinions provide a perfect distillation of the rhetorical disdain for political reality that characterizes CJ Roberts’ (and his Court’s) view of American Democracy and the American electorate, and they way he employs that rhetoric to cement his own preferred view of democracy.

for all of the bleating by conservative justices that they decide cases on law, not politics, the choice to release the opinion RIGHT NOW is so brazen: it's far enough away from the election for Republicans to weaponize it, but close enough to allow Purcell to be invoked in the subsequent lawsuits

Subscribe to Radio Free America (link in bio)@kleinman.bsky.social · 3mo ago

We're headed toward a Congress where like 40 states send a single-party delegation, indistinguishable from just electing everyone at large and a population-based replica of the Senate. Thank you, John Roberts, for ushering in this nonsense era.

The Court's Callais decision has generated significant criticism (rightfully so). But I wanted to flag a passage in Justice Alito's opinion that is receiving slightly less attention, but which reveals just how partisan the opinion is. /1

In my completely subjective opinion, Justice Kagan has been the best writer on the Court for at least a decade. But she really outdid herself on her Callais dissent. It's rare to see such clear and profound sadness and anger in a SCOTUS opinion coupled with such strong legal analysis.

Today's "One First" explains why Stephen Miller is wrong that ICE officers have "federal immunity" from prosecution for all actions they take in their official duties, and that anyone attempting to prosecute them is committing a felony. Supremacy Clause immunity is a thing, but it's *not* absolute:

186. When Can States Prosecute Federal Officers?

Stephen Miller claims that ICE officers have "immunity" for anything they do while enforcing immigration law. Even as an argument about *state* criminal prosecutions, that claim is overstated at best.

stevevladeck.com

This is 100% right - though I think it's deeper than that. People don't necessarily think it's a person who will step in but that the system just does things automatically to stop bad things. But it doesn't work that way. Laws, courts, the Constitution -- nothing happens automatically.

Popehat@kenwhite.bsky.social · 2y ago

I think Americans, blessed with relatively stable government for a long time, assume there is someone, some adult, who will step in and make things right before the President does anything REALLY bad. There’s not.

If we as a country survive this descent into authoritarian madness, we will need a massively robust reckoning and reconciliation process to come to terms with the horrors our government will have inflicted on our most vulnerable. This is shameful, this is heartbreaking.

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social · last yr.

At the DeSantis Everglades detention camp, people with green cards are being held in terrible conditions, with maggots in the food, the lights kept on 24 hours a day, and delayed access to medicine. One guy had his Bible taken and was told "here there is no right to religion."

This was always going to be the end result of villainizing agencies, and placing political loyalists in leadership positions, who not only have no experience, but also actively disdain the agency they are supporting be leading. I fear this is going to become an all too familiar pattern.

Marisa Kabas@marisakabas.bsky.social · last yr.

"Despite Trump officially activating FEMA on Sunday, FEMA has just 86 total staff deployed at this point [to Texas], according to figures shared with staff Monday evening...In the past it would normally be in the several hundreds at this point in the disaster recovery process." My latest:

Number 3 here is hugely important, and not unique to the U.S. system. Even in the German courts of the Third Reich, which were notoriously complicit in the horrors which took place, there were *some* lower court rulings that pushed back on the regime, but these were always reversed by higher courts.

Evan Bernick, a finite mode with a smol hooman and a lorg floof@evanbernick.bsky.social · last yr.

3 themes in the history of U.S. legal resistance to fascistic forces: (1) It often works way better than you might expect under the circumstances (2) It is never enough on its own, and fails to prevent a lot of harm (3) The Supreme Court specifically is very rarely helpful, usually the opposite

Harvard sociologist/polisci Theda Skocpol explains how the vast expansion of ICE in BBB may be Trump's secret weapon to overcome the barriers of federalism and complete his autocratic takeover of the American state. (History from Germany & Hungary in 20s/30s.) talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/criti...

Critical Read About the BBB, Federalism and the Future of American Democracy

TPM Reader TS (Harvard sociologist/political scientist Theda Skocpol) and I often compared...

talkingpointsmemo.com

Coming soon: “The Originalist Case for Why the President Actually Does Have a Dispensation Power, which We Totally Knew All Along, but Didn’t Want to Say until We had A President We Trusted to Use It ‘Correctly.’”

Kim Lane Scheppele@kimlanelaw.bsky.social · last yr.

Trump has turned the constitutional mandate that he ‘take care’ that the laws be faithfully executed into its opposite. He now claims the power to pick and choose the laws to be enforced. www.nytimes.com/2025/07/03/u...