Ian Coghill
LightNews LightNews
icoghill.bsky.social
Ian Coghill
@icoghill.bsky.social
75 followers 360 following 6 posts
Nonprofit environmental lawyer; motorcycle rider; northeast transplant living in Denver area; proud alum of WilmerHale
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Ian Coghill
marcelias.bsky.social
Dems should fight on every front.

If Texas steals 5 seats, Dem states should redistrict 30 GOP members out of their districts.

We should insist DOJ release the entire Epstein File.

Not only shouldn't we bring knives to a gun fight, if they bring pistols, we should bring machine guns.
August 5, 2025 at 11:33 PM
icoghill.bsky.social
This is so pathetic and cowardly.
axios.com Axios @axios.com · Jul 24
Columbia University agreed to pay a $200 million fine to resolve a Trump administration investigation "into alleged violations of federal anti-discrimination laws," the college announced today.
Columbia agrees to pay $200 million fine to settle Trump admin dispute
The agreement will see the restoration of federal funding that the Trump administration had pulled.
www.axios.com
July 24, 2025 at 12:44 AM
Reposted by Ian Coghill
benjaminwittes.lawfaremedia.org
Maurene Comey's goodbye note to SDNY colleagues:
July 17, 2025 at 3:35 PM
Reposted by Ian Coghill
kenwhite.bsky.social
It’s crucial to keep emphasizing that these EOs were lawless. There was never a plausible argument they were constitutional. This administration has nothing but contempt for the constitution and the rule of law.
chrisgeidner.bsky.social Chris Geidner @chrisgeidner.bsky.social · May 23
BREAKING: Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, holds that Trump's executive order targeting Jenner & Block is likely unconstitutional — "doubly" — and will be blocked in full. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Case 1:25-cv-00916-JDB Document 138 Filed 05/23/25 Page 1 of 52 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JENNER & BLOCK LLP, Plaintiff, V. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 25-916 (JDB) MEMORANDUM OPINION In our constitutional order, few stars are as fixed as the principle that no official "can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics. W. Va. State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 642 (1943). And in our constitutional order, few actors are as central to fixing that star as lawyers. This case arises from one of a series of executive orders targeting law firms that, in one way or another, did not bow to the current presidential administration's political orthodoxy. Like the others in the series, this order which takes aim at the global law firm Jenner & Block- makes no bones about why it chose its target: it picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer Jenner once employed. Going after law firms in this way is doubly violative of the Constitution. Most obviously, retaliating against firms for the views embodied in their legal work— and thereby seeking to muzzle them going forward-violates the First Amendment's central command that government may not "use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression." Nat'l Rifle Ass'n of Am. v. Vullo, 602 U.S. 175, 188 (2024). More subtle but perhaps more pernicious is the message the order sends to the lawyers whose unalloyed advocacy protects against governmental viewpoint 1 Case 1:25-cv-00916-JDB Document 138 Filed 05/23/25 Page 2 of 52 becoming government-imposed orthodoxy. This order, like the others, seeks to chill legal representation the administration doesn't like, thereby insulating the Executive Branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers. It thus violates the Constitution and the Court will enjoin its operation in full. Conclusion Jenner raises many more claims of unconstitutionality. These present interesting, difficult, and potentially meritorious questions about the scope of presidential power and more. What has been said here of the First Amendment (and in passing of the Fifth and Sixth), however, is sufficient to declare Executive Order 14246 unlawful and enjoin its operation, eliminating the need to explore those other questions. So the Court need not break new ground: 51 Case 1:25-cv-00916-JDB Document 138 Filed 05/23/25 Page 52 of 52 Executive Order 14246 violates settled First Amendment law and its operation must be enjoined in full. Jenner's motion for summary judgment is granted; the defendants' motion is denied. A separate order will issue. Is/ JOHN D. BATES United States District Judge Dated: May 23, 2025
May 23, 2025 at 8:50 PM
Reposted by Ian Coghill
coghillforcongress.bsky.social
All the news around Harvard has gotten me thinking about education. When I had my shot to get a good education, I took it. Republican lawmakers want to keep you dumb, and use your kids' lunch money for a tax break on their vacation home. We'll remember come January 2027.
www.coghillforcongress.com
Coghill for Congress | Join the Movement Now
Morgan Coghill is a proud Illinoisan, community advocate, and unapologetic dirt road Democrat. He is a successful small business owner who knows what it means to build something from nothing.
www.coghillforcongress.com
May 23, 2025 at 10:39 PM
Reposted by Ian Coghill
evanbernick.bsky.social
More law profs need to bring this energy to discussions of student speech and antisemitism on campus (via @gowder.io) stop-authoritarianism.beehiiv.com/p/thinking-l...
By Way of Preface: Fuck Antisemites
May 22, 2025 at 4:11 PM
Reposted by Ian Coghill
chrisgeidner.bsky.social
Everything is awful, but Sam Alito is really mad, so there's that.
May 16, 2025 at 9:20 PM
icoghill.bsky.social
I'm new to posting on Bluesky, but I had to now. I'm super excited that my brother Morgan Coghill is running for Congress in Illinois' 10th District.

With @katmabu.bsky.social running in the District next door, Illinois will gain two strong, progressive Reps.
Coghill for Congress
www.coghillforcongress.com
May 16, 2025 at 10:53 PM