Ruth Marcus
@ruthmarcus.bsky.social
Washington Post columnist, mom of two grown women and one adorable Bernedoodle stuck in mischievous adolescence. Knitting, cooking, hiking, Wyoming.
law, which lets private parties sue on behalf of federal government. Barr/Luttig thought it was unconstitutional; Starr disagreed. Dick Thornburgh, then the AG, threatened to quit if Starr were tapped for SCOTUS. And this gave us David Souter, because WH was not ready with another backup.
May 9, 2025 at 1:38 PM
law, which lets private parties sue on behalf of federal government. Barr/Luttig thought it was unconstitutional; Starr disagreed. Dick Thornburgh, then the AG, threatened to quit if Starr were tapped for SCOTUS. And this gave us David Souter, because WH was not ready with another backup.
Jan Crawford writes in her book about how Souter was chosen instead of Ken Starr, then the Solicitor General, to replace Justice Brennan. Bill Barr, then head of Office of Legal Counsel, and Michael Luttig--yes, that Judge Luttig--were upset about Starr's position on the "qui tam."
May 9, 2025 at 1:36 PM
Jan Crawford writes in her book about how Souter was chosen instead of Ken Starr, then the Solicitor General, to replace Justice Brennan. Bill Barr, then head of Office of Legal Counsel, and Michael Luttig--yes, that Judge Luttig--were upset about Starr's position on the "qui tam."
Will the administration demonstrate a learning curve? It’s been pretty flat line, so far, but they are reaping the consequences.
April 22, 2025 at 12:27 PM
Will the administration demonstrate a learning curve? It’s been pretty flat line, so far, but they are reaping the consequences.
I have overestimated this Supreme Court before, and this may be another instance, but at least this instance of Trumpian insubordination appears to have been too much for the justices to stomach. Except two, of course.
April 22, 2025 at 12:26 PM
I have overestimated this Supreme Court before, and this may be another instance, but at least this instance of Trumpian insubordination appears to have been too much for the justices to stomach. Except two, of course.
Also notably, the government lawyer's assertion was no flights were "then planned." In fact, he said the government reserved the right to have flights Saturday. So you have to bend over backwards, and then some, to trust administration in this situation (and others).
April 20, 2025 at 9:07 AM
Also notably, the government lawyer's assertion was no flights were "then planned." In fact, he said the government reserved the right to have flights Saturday. So you have to bend over backwards, and then some, to trust administration in this situation (and others).
His colleagues in majority clearly did not think that assertion was trustworthy--with good reason. Notably, even Alito/Thomas stress the "Executive must proceed under the terms of our order," which requires sufficient notice and time to challenge removal. Trump administration on thin ice w/ Court.
April 20, 2025 at 9:03 AM
His colleagues in majority clearly did not think that assertion was trustworthy--with good reason. Notably, even Alito/Thomas stress the "Executive must proceed under the terms of our order," which requires sufficient notice and time to challenge removal. Trump administration on thin ice w/ Court.
As Judge Wilkinson reminded us in Abrego Garcia, the government should have nothing to fear from due process if it is confident in its case, here that that migrants are in fact gang members and that the Alien Enemies Act can be used against them.
April 19, 2025 at 9:59 AM
As Judge Wilkinson reminded us in Abrego Garcia, the government should have nothing to fear from due process if it is confident in its case, here that that migrants are in fact gang members and that the Alien Enemies Act can be used against them.
This extraordinary speed and apparent supermajority is the predictable and deserved result of the administration’s duplicity and defiance. The justices are signaling that they’ve had it. Will the administration get the message? Let’s hope, although past performance suggests no learning curve
April 19, 2025 at 9:51 AM
This extraordinary speed and apparent supermajority is the predictable and deserved result of the administration’s duplicity and defiance. The justices are signaling that they’ve had it. Will the administration get the message? Let’s hope, although past performance suggests no learning curve
Deporting them. The administration’s compliance was a scant paper in English, with scantier notice. The court has just stepped in, 7-2, to block any removal until further order. The two of course, are Alito and Thomas. But what a rebuke.
April 19, 2025 at 6:31 AM
Deporting them. The administration’s compliance was a scant paper in English, with scantier notice. The court has just stepped in, 7-2, to block any removal until further order. The two of course, are Alito and Thomas. But what a rebuke.