Julian Davis Mortenson
@jdmortenson.bsky.social
University of Michigan law professor. Legal historian. Constitutional litigator. Walking thorny ground. Probably kidding.
Faculty bio at http://bit.ly/jdm-bio
Faculty bio at http://bit.ly/jdm-bio
Pinned
history of unitary executive theory, in one tweet
Step 1 - Formal logic requires you, a principled legal movement, to override centuries of tradition. Functionalism is irrelevant.
Step 2 - Functionalism requires you, a sensible legal movement, to create exceptions to the formal logic of Step 1.
Step 1 - Formal logic requires you, a principled legal movement, to override centuries of tradition. Functionalism is irrelevant.
Step 2 - Functionalism requires you, a sensible legal movement, to create exceptions to the formal logic of Step 1.
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
Yeah, I probably decline 2/3 of my interview requests. Assuming they're from a reputable outlet, I generally try to put them on to someone else, if I can.
It's actually my favorite thing, but yeah, this is the way.
I love hooking smart reporters up with subject experts they haven't discovered yet.
I love hooking smart reporters up with subject experts they haven't discovered yet.
My second favorite thing to do other than agreeing to do any interview?
“I’m not the person you want. Talk to my colleague at XYZ law school, ____.”
“I’m not the person you want. Talk to my colleague at XYZ law school, ____.”
January 26, 2026 at 7:38 PM
Yeah, I probably decline 2/3 of my interview requests. Assuming they're from a reputable outlet, I generally try to put them on to someone else, if I can.
worst structural con law decision in the 20th century
I've just uploaded a revised version of "The Chadha Presidency" to SSRN. The revisions both account for some incredibly helpful feedback I've gotten from colleagues and also bring the discussion of the Trump presidency up to date (as of today). papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
The <i>Chadha </i>Presidency
<p><span>Where is Congress? Why hasn’t it reined in some of the worst abuses of the Trump Administration? This Article argues that a significant part of the ans
papers.ssrn.com
January 26, 2026 at 7:37 PM
worst structural con law decision in the 20th century
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
I've just uploaded a revised version of "The Chadha Presidency" to SSRN. The revisions both account for some incredibly helpful feedback I've gotten from colleagues and also bring the discussion of the Trump presidency up to date (as of today). papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
The <i>Chadha </i>Presidency
<p><span>Where is Congress? Why hasn’t it reined in some of the worst abuses of the Trump Administration? This Article argues that a significant part of the ans
papers.ssrn.com
January 22, 2026 at 4:38 PM
I've just uploaded a revised version of "The Chadha Presidency" to SSRN. The revisions both account for some incredibly helpful feedback I've gotten from colleagues and also bring the discussion of the Trump presidency up to date (as of today). papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
This.
It’s not just the ethical thing to do; it’s super satisfying!
It’s not just the ethical thing to do; it’s super satisfying!
My second favorite thing to do other than agreeing to do any interview?
“I’m not the person you want. Talk to my colleague at XYZ law school, ____.”
“I’m not the person you want. Talk to my colleague at XYZ law school, ____.”
I love talking to the press. It's one of my favorite parts of my job, which I tell journalists when I talk to them. I think that part of my obligation is to help people make sense of things.
HOWEVER! The list of topics on which I am willing to speak is narrow. I'm not a dial-an-expert for my side.
HOWEVER! The list of topics on which I am willing to speak is narrow. I'm not a dial-an-expert for my side.
January 26, 2026 at 7:31 PM
This.
It’s not just the ethical thing to do; it’s super satisfying!
It’s not just the ethical thing to do; it’s super satisfying!
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
My second favorite thing to do other than agreeing to do any interview?
“I’m not the person you want. Talk to my colleague at XYZ law school, ____.”
“I’m not the person you want. Talk to my colleague at XYZ law school, ____.”
I love talking to the press. It's one of my favorite parts of my job, which I tell journalists when I talk to them. I think that part of my obligation is to help people make sense of things.
HOWEVER! The list of topics on which I am willing to speak is narrow. I'm not a dial-an-expert for my side.
HOWEVER! The list of topics on which I am willing to speak is narrow. I'm not a dial-an-expert for my side.
I always worry about where academics draw the line on their expertise. I avoid going on the news to speak on things that are on the edge of my expetise, though occasionally you can get blind sided. This is why if it isnt in my writings or in my syllabus, I avoid commenting with my professor hat.
January 25, 2026 at 8:47 PM
My second favorite thing to do other than agreeing to do any interview?
“I’m not the person you want. Talk to my colleague at XYZ law school, ____.”
“I’m not the person you want. Talk to my colleague at XYZ law school, ____.”
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
A video of Alex Pretti reading out the final salute of an unnamed veteran he cared for until the end of his life in the ICU, posted to Facebook by his son.
January 25, 2026 at 1:18 AM
A video of Alex Pretti reading out the final salute of an unnamed veteran he cared for until the end of his life in the ICU, posted to Facebook by his son.
structural arguments have their place but don’t ever ever ever ever forget that it’s just humans upon humans and that the battleground is to love or to hate, to see the humanity in the other or to be blind to it
January 25, 2026 at 12:37 AM
structural arguments have their place but don’t ever ever ever ever forget that it’s just humans upon humans and that the battleground is to love or to hate, to see the humanity in the other or to be blind to it
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
Nonviolence is, in fact, working. This administration is weaker than it was a year ago. More and more of the public is becoming galvanized against it; its agents are being impeded.
Do you honestly think people in the civil rights movement and other nonviolent movements faced no violence themselves? They practiced nonviolence because it works, because the oppressor wants a shooting war, which is the war it will win
How's your non-violent working Mr Gandhi stancil? They will kill each and everyone of you right if they had the chance and you will still be writing Kumbaya.
January 24, 2026 at 9:53 PM
Nonviolence is, in fact, working. This administration is weaker than it was a year ago. More and more of the public is becoming galvanized against it; its agents are being impeded.
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
this is what lies behind midwest nice
dont mistake us
dont mistake us
January 23, 2026 at 11:59 PM
this is what lies behind midwest nice
dont mistake us
dont mistake us
when i think about the amount of [Polish Tradition] Days and [Italian Tradition] Days and [Greek Tradition] Days we grew up with in school, the thought that any of this would be remotely contestable causes a brain bleed
January 24, 2026 at 12:26 AM
when i think about the amount of [Polish Tradition] Days and [Italian Tradition] Days and [Greek Tradition] Days we grew up with in school, the thought that any of this would be remotely contestable causes a brain bleed
WHO TOLD HIM THE SOCRATIC METHOD
every time someone says something really dumb on this website i might just start responding with "i don't understand. please explain"
January 24, 2026 at 12:22 AM
WHO TOLD HIM THE SOCRATIC METHOD
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
this is what lies behind midwest nice
dont mistake us
dont mistake us
January 23, 2026 at 11:59 PM
this is what lies behind midwest nice
dont mistake us
dont mistake us
o the happiness it gives me to use late 90s bill simmons screen shots for my leg reg class
January 23, 2026 at 11:52 PM
o the happiness it gives me to use late 90s bill simmons screen shots for my leg reg class
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
[For more on the unitary executive theory, check out our virtual event with @sam-breidbart.bsky.social @jdmortenson.bsky.social @wuc3.bsky.social and Yale Law Dean Cristina Rodriguez: www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Qvx...
YouTube
Share your videos with friends, family, and the world
www.youtube.com
January 20, 2026 at 7:26 PM
[For more on the unitary executive theory, check out our virtual event with @sam-breidbart.bsky.social @jdmortenson.bsky.social @wuc3.bsky.social and Yale Law Dean Cristina Rodriguez: www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Qvx...
Friedman & Mortenson Constitutional Law is currently sold out of literally every outlet because the uptake of adoptions continues at such an astonishing rate. (2x adoptions Spring 2026 vs Spring 2025 😱)
9 out of 10 dentists agree: don't walk, run to adopt this exceptional platform next year 😇
9 out of 10 dentists agree: don't walk, run to adopt this exceptional platform next year 😇
January 15, 2026 at 2:50 AM
Friedman & Mortenson Constitutional Law is currently sold out of literally every outlet because the uptake of adoptions continues at such an astonishing rate. (2x adoptions Spring 2026 vs Spring 2025 😱)
9 out of 10 dentists agree: don't walk, run to adopt this exceptional platform next year 😇
9 out of 10 dentists agree: don't walk, run to adopt this exceptional platform next year 😇
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
i think powell's response here is a demonstration of the folly of the idea that democratic accountability requires presidential control. what if the president is not acting in the public interest? you want independent agencies to be able to push back and pursue their *congressional mandate*
Powell, showing more guts than almost any GOP legislators:
"The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Fed setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President."
www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/s...
"The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Fed setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President."
www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/s...
January 12, 2026 at 1:43 AM
i think powell's response here is a demonstration of the folly of the idea that democratic accountability requires presidential control. what if the president is not acting in the public interest? you want independent agencies to be able to push back and pursue their *congressional mandate*
I absolutely thought the shares of this tweet were disinformation
no. this is in fact a currently available department of labor post
no. this is in fact a currently available department of labor post
January 12, 2026 at 12:46 AM
I absolutely thought the shares of this tweet were disinformation
no. this is in fact a currently available department of labor post
no. this is in fact a currently available department of labor post
“HALT, SIR, ARE YOU CURRENTLY ENGAGING IN CORRUPTION, I MUST FRISK YOU FOR EVIDENCE”
www.nytimes.com/live/2026/01...
www.nytimes.com/live/2026/01...
Trump Administration Live Updates: Noem Says ‘Hundreds More’ Agents Will Be Sent to Minnesota Over ‘Corruption’
www.nytimes.com
January 12, 2026 at 12:23 AM
“HALT, SIR, ARE YOU CURRENTLY ENGAGING IN CORRUPTION, I MUST FRISK YOU FOR EVIDENCE”
www.nytimes.com/live/2026/01...
www.nytimes.com/live/2026/01...
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
Part of the horror of Good’s killing, in the video, is precisely its deeply gendered dynamic: a man responded with murderous violence to a woman’s perceived subversion of his male authority. This gender violence aspect is not mooted by Ross’s simultaneous status as an enforcer of federal policy.
January 11, 2026 at 8:30 PM
Part of the horror of Good’s killing, in the video, is precisely its deeply gendered dynamic: a man responded with murderous violence to a woman’s perceived subversion of his male authority. This gender violence aspect is not mooted by Ross’s simultaneous status as an enforcer of federal policy.
I find myself with some prettay mixed feelings around social media’s egging on / celebration of people intensely confronting ice agents
Not despite but magnified by the Minneapolis homicide
Not despite but magnified by the Minneapolis homicide
January 12, 2026 at 12:14 AM
I find myself with some prettay mixed feelings around social media’s egging on / celebration of people intensely confronting ice agents
Not despite but magnified by the Minneapolis homicide
Not despite but magnified by the Minneapolis homicide
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
This is the REAL power of federalism.
Not the 10th Amendment, or the commerce clause (dormant or otherwise), or any of that stuff.
It's staffing. For all its bluster, fed law enforcement is REALLY thinly staffed for a nation of our size. Structurally, makes SUSTAINED authoritarianism REALLY hard.
Not the 10th Amendment, or the commerce clause (dormant or otherwise), or any of that stuff.
It's staffing. For all its bluster, fed law enforcement is REALLY thinly staffed for a nation of our size. Structurally, makes SUSTAINED authoritarianism REALLY hard.
January 8, 2026 at 3:58 PM
This is the REAL power of federalism.
Not the 10th Amendment, or the commerce clause (dormant or otherwise), or any of that stuff.
It's staffing. For all its bluster, fed law enforcement is REALLY thinly staffed for a nation of our size. Structurally, makes SUSTAINED authoritarianism REALLY hard.
Not the 10th Amendment, or the commerce clause (dormant or otherwise), or any of that stuff.
It's staffing. For all its bluster, fed law enforcement is REALLY thinly staffed for a nation of our size. Structurally, makes SUSTAINED authoritarianism REALLY hard.
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
From my colleague Clark Neily yesterday: "If you were stuck in a cage with a gun, two bullets, and qualified immunity, absolute prosecutorial immunity, and the judicially fantasized presumption of regularity for govt litigants, what would you do? Shoot the presumption of regularity—twice." /3
January 8, 2026 at 8:41 PM
From my colleague Clark Neily yesterday: "If you were stuck in a cage with a gun, two bullets, and qualified immunity, absolute prosecutorial immunity, and the judicially fantasized presumption of regularity for govt litigants, what would you do? Shoot the presumption of regularity—twice." /3
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
New from me at Cato: In the National Guard case, Justice Alito wrote in dissent that "under the presumption of regularity, the Court must presume that the President properly arrived at his determination.” That raises a good question: does the behavior of the Executive still merit that presumption?
Do the Feds Still Merit the Court's Presumption of Regularity?
Courts have long accorded an enormous benefit to the federal government as litigant through the presumption of regularity. At what point does factual unreliability and lack of candor create a need to ...
www.cato.org
January 8, 2026 at 3:39 PM
New from me at Cato: In the National Guard case, Justice Alito wrote in dissent that "under the presumption of regularity, the Court must presume that the President properly arrived at his determination.” That raises a good question: does the behavior of the Executive still merit that presumption?