Justin Levitt
@justinlevitt.bsky.social
If you're eligible & want to vote, making sure you can, it's meaningful, and it sticks. Pro-democracy, pro-republic. He/his. Loyola law prof, former WH, former DOJ, former Natl Voter Protection Dir, forever NJDevils fan
So when the money runs out without a new funding bill on January 30, we now shut down the government of Venezuela, just like the founding fathers anticipated.
January 3, 2026 at 10:03 PM
So when the money runs out without a new funding bill on January 30, we now shut down the government of Venezuela, just like the founding fathers anticipated.
Crash Davis said it so much better.
January 2, 2026 at 11:20 PM
Crash Davis said it so much better.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
This is perfect. The DOJ's embarrassing snafu with disappearing redactions was the fault of Elon Musk. Musk cancelled government subscriptions to Adobe programs that would have made the redactions permanent. What a pack of fools.
December 26, 2025 at 9:02 PM
This is perfect. The DOJ's embarrassing snafu with disappearing redactions was the fault of Elon Musk. Musk cancelled government subscriptions to Adobe programs that would have made the redactions permanent. What a pack of fools.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
The Cracker Barrel thing was THIS YEAR. We have three more years of this shit. Anybody who makes it to 2028 without looking like Nosferatu will be required by the state to start a skincare brand.
December 23, 2025 at 5:39 PM
The Cracker Barrel thing was THIS YEAR. We have three more years of this shit. Anybody who makes it to 2028 without looking like Nosferatu will be required by the state to start a skincare brand.
Is CBS irrevocably on the path to becoming as reliable as Twitter, or are these shadows of things that may be, only?
December 22, 2025 at 4:31 PM
Is CBS irrevocably on the path to becoming as reliable as Twitter, or are these shadows of things that may be, only?
Reposted by Justin Levitt
In its complaint against D.C., DOJ voting lawyer Brittany Bennett — who was previously involved in a lawsuit seeking to ban Dominion voting machines in Georgia — appears to have accidentally left annotation comments on the filing.
December 18, 2025 at 8:41 PM
In its complaint against D.C., DOJ voting lawyer Brittany Bennett — who was previously involved in a lawsuit seeking to ban Dominion voting machines in Georgia — appears to have accidentally left annotation comments on the filing.
You all have seen the new “History of the White House building” page already, right?
www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh...
Make sure to scroll all the way through to the right.
When they say that history is written by the winners, sometimes those winners are real losers…
www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh...
Make sure to scroll all the way through to the right.
When they say that history is written by the winners, sometimes those winners are real losers…
December 18, 2025 at 12:52 AM
You all have seen the new “History of the White House building” page already, right?
www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh...
Make sure to scroll all the way through to the right.
When they say that history is written by the winners, sometimes those winners are real losers…
www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh...
Make sure to scroll all the way through to the right.
When they say that history is written by the winners, sometimes those winners are real losers…
DOJ's complaint against Fulton County says that a statute expressly limited to records for an election in the past 22 months allows them to access records for an election 61 months ago.
I'd say that this violates Rule 11, but I don't want to use any numbers the DOJ attorneys don't understand.
I'd say that this violates Rule 11, but I don't want to use any numbers the DOJ attorneys don't understand.
www.justice.gov
December 12, 2025 at 11:25 PM
DOJ's complaint against Fulton County says that a statute expressly limited to records for an election in the past 22 months allows them to access records for an election 61 months ago.
I'd say that this violates Rule 11, but I don't want to use any numbers the DOJ attorneys don't understand.
I'd say that this violates Rule 11, but I don't want to use any numbers the DOJ attorneys don't understand.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
1. Trump 1.0 was more corrupt than even Nixon.
2. Trump 2.0 is Trump 1.0, but to coin a phrase, ON STEROIDS.
3. Yet the challenge for Democrats is world weary cynicism that all politicians are the same.
Unforced errors like this reinforce 3 & are really bad for the party!
2. Trump 2.0 is Trump 1.0, but to coin a phrase, ON STEROIDS.
3. Yet the challenge for Democrats is world weary cynicism that all politicians are the same.
Unforced errors like this reinforce 3 & are really bad for the party!
"House Democrats on Thursday voted to return Rep. Henry Cuellar to his leadership role on the House Appropriations Committee following his presidential pardon on federal corruption charges."
JICYMI - Shameful, repulsive move by House Democrats and their leaders. Disgraceful.
JICYMI - Shameful, repulsive move by House Democrats and their leaders. Disgraceful.
Democrats Return Henry Cuellar to Powerful Spending Post After Trump Pardon
“We got ratified,” Cuellar told reporters after the vote.
www.notus.org
December 12, 2025 at 10:30 PM
1. Trump 1.0 was more corrupt than even Nixon.
2. Trump 2.0 is Trump 1.0, but to coin a phrase, ON STEROIDS.
3. Yet the challenge for Democrats is world weary cynicism that all politicians are the same.
Unforced errors like this reinforce 3 & are really bad for the party!
2. Trump 2.0 is Trump 1.0, but to coin a phrase, ON STEROIDS.
3. Yet the challenge for Democrats is world weary cynicism that all politicians are the same.
Unforced errors like this reinforce 3 & are really bad for the party!
Trump already “pardoned” Tina Peters on Nov. 7, when he pardoned everyone connected to the 2020 election.
The reason that Tina Peters hasn’t been released from jail in the last month is that that pardon, like the one announced today, doesn’t in any way affect state charges.
Law isn’t magic, kids.
The reason that Tina Peters hasn’t been released from jail in the last month is that that pardon, like the one announced today, doesn’t in any way affect state charges.
Law isn’t magic, kids.
December 12, 2025 at 12:39 AM
Trump already “pardoned” Tina Peters on Nov. 7, when he pardoned everyone connected to the 2020 election.
The reason that Tina Peters hasn’t been released from jail in the last month is that that pardon, like the one announced today, doesn’t in any way affect state charges.
Law isn’t magic, kids.
The reason that Tina Peters hasn’t been released from jail in the last month is that that pardon, like the one announced today, doesn’t in any way affect state charges.
Law isn’t magic, kids.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
🚨Judge Xinis finds that, incredibly, Mr. Abrego Garcia was never ordered deported in 2019. She notes that every since this saga began all the way back in March, the government has NEVER been able to produce any evidence that the immigration judge actually issued a removal order.
December 11, 2025 at 4:13 PM
🚨Judge Xinis finds that, incredibly, Mr. Abrego Garcia was never ordered deported in 2019. She notes that every since this saga began all the way back in March, the government has NEVER been able to produce any evidence that the immigration judge actually issued a removal order.
The headlines should all read “Indiana Senate Republicans vote to uphold Constitution despite Trump cajoling.”
Subhead: “Indiana legislators refused to join Texas, North Carolina, Missouri, Utah counterparts in violating their oaths of office.”
Subhead: “Indiana legislators refused to join Texas, North Carolina, Missouri, Utah counterparts in violating their oaths of office.”
December 12, 2025 at 12:05 AM
The headlines should all read “Indiana Senate Republicans vote to uphold Constitution despite Trump cajoling.”
Subhead: “Indiana legislators refused to join Texas, North Carolina, Missouri, Utah counterparts in violating their oaths of office.”
Subhead: “Indiana legislators refused to join Texas, North Carolina, Missouri, Utah counterparts in violating their oaths of office.”
“The Department’s new rule ensures that recipients of federal funding will be judged on their actual conduct, not on statistical outcomes or circumstances beyond their control.”
The whole point of liability for _unjustified_ disparate impact is that the impact is absolutely in the entity’s control.
The whole point of liability for _unjustified_ disparate impact is that the impact is absolutely in the entity’s control.
Department of Justice Rule Restores Equal Protection for All in Civil Rights Enforcement
Today, the Justice Department issued a final rule updating its regulations under Title VI of the Civil Rights of 1964. This rule ensures that our nation’s federal civil rights laws are firmly grounded...
www.justice.gov
December 9, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“The Department’s new rule ensures that recipients of federal funding will be judged on their actual conduct, not on statistical outcomes or circumstances beyond their control.”
The whole point of liability for _unjustified_ disparate impact is that the impact is absolutely in the entity’s control.
The whole point of liability for _unjustified_ disparate impact is that the impact is absolutely in the entity’s control.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
"This fucking sucks" and "all is lost" are two different sentences.
Don't say the second when you mean the first.
Don't say the second when you mean the first.
October 27, 2025 at 3:29 PM
"This fucking sucks" and "all is lost" are two different sentences.
Don't say the second when you mean the first.
Don't say the second when you mean the first.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
Here's Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.) raging about Missouri's elections being "decided in California" in response to an article about Missourians protesting a gerrymandering petition in California -- except the article is about the town of California in Missouri.
December 8, 2025 at 4:14 PM
Here's Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.) raging about Missouri's elections being "decided in California" in response to an article about Missourians protesting a gerrymandering petition in California -- except the article is about the town of California in Missouri.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
The Court will also soon be reviewing whether the 13th Amendment's bar on slavery is constitutional.
Supreme Court Agrees to Review Trump Order Restricting Birthright Citizenship
www.nytimes.com
December 5, 2025 at 9:35 PM
The Court will also soon be reviewing whether the 13th Amendment's bar on slavery is constitutional.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
Robert Jackson has always been my favorite justice in American history because he understood the dangers of this world and the blessings of our Constitution better than anyone else from firsthand expierence, and so he laid out the stakes of cases in plain terms.
December 5, 2025 at 1:43 AM
Robert Jackson has always been my favorite justice in American history because he understood the dangers of this world and the blessings of our Constitution better than anyone else from firsthand expierence, and so he laid out the stakes of cases in plain terms.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
Why are they making factual determinations on the CA lawsuit that does not exist and has no factual record to review? What is SCOTUS even doing here?
December 4, 2025 at 11:45 PM
Why are they making factual determinations on the CA lawsuit that does not exist and has no factual record to review? What is SCOTUS even doing here?
Reposted by Justin Levitt
Florida's state constitution expressly prohibits partisan gerrymandering.
I've said there's next to nothing left to the ISLT idea that fed courts can't second-guess whether state courts are following state law on fed elections. But a mid-decade FL gerrymander would be an interesting test of that.
I've said there's next to nothing left to the ISLT idea that fed courts can't second-guess whether state courts are following state law on fed elections. But a mid-decade FL gerrymander would be an interesting test of that.
December 5, 2025 at 12:41 AM
Florida's state constitution expressly prohibits partisan gerrymandering.
I've said there's next to nothing left to the ISLT idea that fed courts can't second-guess whether state courts are following state law on fed elections. But a mid-decade FL gerrymander would be an interesting test of that.
I've said there's next to nothing left to the ISLT idea that fed courts can't second-guess whether state courts are following state law on fed elections. But a mid-decade FL gerrymander would be an interesting test of that.
Reposted by Justin Levitt
I actually read the district court's 160-page opinion. That seems to be more than what SCOTUS did.
It's an extremely impressive opinion, by the way—all the more so given the very short timetable. And even though there's a lot of dense legal discussion, it's a model of clarity. Worth your time.
It's an extremely impressive opinion, by the way—all the more so given the very short timetable. And even though there's a lot of dense legal discussion, it's a model of clarity. Worth your time.
Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction AND Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction AND Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction AND Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction – #1437 in Leagu...
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 1142 Plaintiff Texas NAACP's Motion for Preliminary Injunction; GRANTING 1143 Plaintiff-Intervenors Motion for Preliminary Injunction; GRANTING 1149 Gonzale...
www.courtlistener.com
December 5, 2025 at 12:19 AM
I actually read the district court's 160-page opinion. That seems to be more than what SCOTUS did.
It's an extremely impressive opinion, by the way—all the more so given the very short timetable. And even though there's a lot of dense legal discussion, it's a model of clarity. Worth your time.
It's an extremely impressive opinion, by the way—all the more so given the very short timetable. And even though there's a lot of dense legal discussion, it's a model of clarity. Worth your time.
NY may not be able to effectuate a mid-decade gerrymander before 2026. But there's literally nothing stopping IL.
(Congress could stop _all_ of this with a sentence, tomorrow, if it wanted to.)
(Congress could stop _all_ of this with a sentence, tomorrow, if it wanted to.)
December 5, 2025 at 12:26 AM
NY may not be able to effectuate a mid-decade gerrymander before 2026. But there's literally nothing stopping IL.
(Congress could stop _all_ of this with a sentence, tomorrow, if it wanted to.)
(Congress could stop _all_ of this with a sentence, tomorrow, if it wanted to.)
Reposted by Justin Levitt
One note about the Texas stay order:
Although SCOTUS granted the stay, it did not go ahead & note probable jurisdiction (i.e., agree to hear the case on the merits). While it is all but certain the court will take the case, there will first be another round of briefing. #txlege
Although SCOTUS granted the stay, it did not go ahead & note probable jurisdiction (i.e., agree to hear the case on the merits). While it is all but certain the court will take the case, there will first be another round of briefing. #txlege
December 4, 2025 at 11:23 PM
One note about the Texas stay order:
Although SCOTUS granted the stay, it did not go ahead & note probable jurisdiction (i.e., agree to hear the case on the merits). While it is all but certain the court will take the case, there will first be another round of briefing. #txlege
Although SCOTUS granted the stay, it did not go ahead & note probable jurisdiction (i.e., agree to hear the case on the merits). While it is all but certain the court will take the case, there will first be another round of briefing. #txlege
Reposted by Justin Levitt
The main institutions of the Federal Government—White House, Supreme Court and Congress—are in complete shambles.
December 4, 2025 at 11:39 PM
The main institutions of the Federal Government—White House, Supreme Court and Congress—are in complete shambles.
Keep in mind that the Louisiana case is a racial gerrymandering case. Like the Texas case is a racial gerrymandering case.
Several Justices are going to be gunning for the gold medal in logical gymnastics.
Several Justices are going to be gunning for the gold medal in logical gymnastics.
December 5, 2025 at 12:13 AM
Keep in mind that the Louisiana case is a racial gerrymandering case. Like the Texas case is a racial gerrymandering case.
Several Justices are going to be gunning for the gold medal in logical gymnastics.
Several Justices are going to be gunning for the gold medal in logical gymnastics.