DOCSLIB.ORG

Quinta Jurecic's CV

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

QUINTA JURECIC EMPLOYMENT Brookings Institution Fellow May 2021—present Research Analyst July 2017 — April 2018 Research Assistant July 2016 — July 2017 Lawfare Senior Editor May 2021—present Managing Editor April 2018 —May 2021 Deputy Managing Editor January 2018 — April 2018 Associate Editor July 2016 — August 2017 The Atlantic May 2018 — present Contributing Writer Contribute essays regularly to the publication. From November 2019 through August 2019, wrote a weekly feature with Benjamin Wittes on the impeachment of President Trump and its aftermath. Georgetown School of Foreign Service August 2019 — December 2019 Adjunct Professor Taught undergraduate writing seminar on “Writing About Law.” Washington Post August 2017 — January 2018 Editorial Writer Wrote unsigned editorials for the Washington Post Editorial Board, focusing on law and national politics. Contributed multiple op-eds for publication on the paper’s editorial page. EDUCATION Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT B.A. in Government, High Honors and University Honors (the University’s highest award) 2015 Additional Honors: Phi Beta Kappa Honors Thesis: “Records of Anguish: Democracy, Dirty Hands, and the Myth of the Tragic Politician” FELLOWSHIPS Craig Newmark Cyber Journalism Fellow October 2019 1 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT Co-host of “Arbiters of Truth,” Lawfare’s weekly podcast series on disinformation and misinformation. Contributed commentary on MSNBC and radio networks including WNYC, WHYY, and KCRW, as well as print outlets including the New York Times, the New Yorker, and Politico. CONFERENCE PARTICIPATION Colloquium Participant, “Illiberal Politics in America,” University of Virginia School of Law (February 2020) Moderator, “Fireside Chat” on national security policy planning, NatSecGirlSquad Conference (December 2019) Panelist, “The Battle for the Constitution,” The Atlantic Festival (August 2019) Panelist, “Truth Decay: Deep Fakes and the Implications for Privacy, National Security, and Democracy,” Maryland Law Review Symposium (February 2019) Moderator, “Communicating National Security to Non-Experts,” NatSecGirlSquad Conference (November 2018) Presenter, “Social Media and National Security,” Hoover Institution National Security, Technology and Law Working Group (April 2018) Working Group Facilitator, “Protecting the Independence of Federal Law Enforcement,” National Summit for Democracy (February 2018) RESEARCH & WRITING Papers “Platform Justice: Content Moderation at an Inection Point,” with Danielle Citron. Hoover Working Group on National Security, Technology, and Law, Aegis Series Paper No. 1811, September 5, 2018. “Sextortion: Cybersecurity, Teenagers, and Remote Sexual Assault,” with Benjamin Wittes, Cody Poplin, and Clara Spera. Brookings Institution, May 11, 2016. “Closing the Sextortion Sentencing Gap: A Legislative Proposal,” with Benjamin Wittes, Cody Poplin, and Clara Spera. Brookings Institution, May 11, 2016. 2 Op-Eds “Trump thinks everyone breaks the rules. No wonder he does it, too.” The Washington Post, August 27, 2020. “The Comey Circus Rolls On.” The New York Times, August 30, 2019. “Did the ‘Adults in the Room’ Make Any Dierence With Trump?” The New York Times, August 29, 2019. “Will Trump Succeed in Prosecuting Andrew McCabe?” The New York Times, August 28, 2019. “Who Owns the Amazon?” The New York Times, August 27, 2019. “Is Trump Risking Re-election Really the Only Step Too Far?” The New York Times, August 26, 2019. “Look at the Mueller Report as a Detective Story. It Will Blow Your Mind.” The New York Times, August 2, 2019. “4 Disturbing Details You May Have Missed in the Mueller Report.” The New York Times, June 7, 2019. “Will There Be Smoking Guns in the Mueller Report?” The New York Times, March 11, 2019. “Robert Mueller Is No Match for Fox News.” The New York Times, December 1, 2018. “What to Care About When Everything Is Terrible.” The New York Times, August 17, 2018. “The Real Risk of the John Brennan Episode.” The New York Times, August 16, 2018. “Why We Obsess Over the Next Trump Tape.” The New York Times, August 15, 2018. “Was Another F.B.I. Agent Thrown Under the Bus for Trump?” The New York Times, August 14, 2018. “How Will ‘Collusion’ Play in the Midterms?” The New York Times, August 13, 2018. “Trump is tightening his grip around the neck of the Justice Department.” The Washington Post, May 31, 2018. “A Cheat Sheet to the Trump Circus.” The New York Times, May 4, 2018. “It’s Mueller, Not Trump, Who Is Draining the Swamp.” The New York Times, April 10, 2018. “The Trump administration’s disturbing ght to stop teenagers from getting abortions.” The Washington Post, December 31, 2017. “Trump should face harassment allegations under oath.” The Washington Post, December 17, 2017. 3 “For President Trump, the truth is beside the point.” The Washington Post, December 4, 2017. “Facebook, Twitter, and Google put our ugliness on the market.” The Washington Post, November 3, 2017. “John Kelly’s politics of grief in the public sphere.” The Washington Post, October 21, 2017. “Robert Mueller can’t save us.” The Washington Post, October 10, 2017. Book Reviews “James Comey explains the values of the justice system, and why they matter.” The Washington Post, January 8, 2021. “Explaining the Steele dossier — and how information ows in Washington.” The Washington Post, November 27, 2019. “Finding truth and civility in court.” The Washington Post, March 22, 2019. “A book about impeachment that Donald Trump likes so much, he tweeted about it.” The Washington Post, August 3, 2018. Journalism “The Ringmaster is Gone.” The Atlantic, May 6, 2021. “The Evolution of Trump’s Threat to America.” The Atlantic, February 18, 2021. “Don’t Move On Just Yet.” The Atlantic, January 23, 2021. “Nihilism is Destroying Our Democracy.” The Atlantic, January 5, 2021. “There Aren’t Serious-Enough Consequences for Those Trying to Break American Democracy.” The Atlantic, November 30, 2020. “The Reckless Race to Conrm Amy Coney Barrett Justies Court Packing,” with Susan Hennessey. The Atlantic, October 4, 2020. “The Tedium of Trump.” The Atlantic, September 28, 2020. “Trump is Terried of Losing,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, August 4, 2020. “The Revenge of the Never Trumpers,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, July 28, 2020. 4 “Nothing Can Justify the Attack on Portland,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, July 21, 2020. “How to Corrupt the Justice Department,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, July 13, 2020. “Mazars Is a Victory for Rule of Law.” The Atlantic. July 11, 2020. “Trump is Campaigning on a Platform of Abject Failure,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, July 7, 2020. “Trump is Exploiting D.C.’s Lack of Statehood.” The Atlantic, June 24, 2020. “Three Plausible—And Troubling—Reasons Why Barr Tried to Force Berman Out,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, June 22, 2020. “Despise Bolton, But Read His Book Anyway,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, June 16, 2020. “Yet Another Week of Trump Failing to be an Actual Authoritarian,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, June 9, 2020. “The Law Enforcement Abuses That Don’t Bother Trump,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, June 1, 2020. “Worse Than a Pardon,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, May 26, 2020. “‘Obamagate’ Is Just Trump’s Latest Eort at Distraction,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, May 19, 2020. “What Judge Sullivan Should Do,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, May 11, 2020. “The Supreme Court Case That Could Destroy the Balance of Powers.” The Atlantic, May 11, 2020. “To Trump, ‘Complete and Total Exoneration’ Is Always Right Around the Corner,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, May 5, 2020. “The Democrats Have No Good Options,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, April 28, 2020. “Being an Actual Authoritarian Is Too Much Work for Trump,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, April 14, 2020. “Trump’s Allies Know He Has Failed,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, April 7, 2020. “This Isn’t All Trump’s Fault (But He Isn’t Helping Either),” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, March 31, 2020. “Trump Can’t Even Imitate a Normal President,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, March 24, 2020. 5 “Trump Seems to Be Missing His Old Scandals,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, March 17, 2020. “Incompetence Exacerbated by Malevolence,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, March 10, 2020. “Trump’s Playbook Is Terribly Ill-Suited to a Pandemic,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, March 3, 2020. “Trump’s Most Dangerous Destruction Yet,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, February 25, 2020. “Imagine If a Democrat Behaved Like Bill Barr,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, February 18, 2020. “The Oversight Wars Are Not Going Away,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, February 11, 2020. “How to Avoid Despair.” The Atlantic, February 9, 2020. “23 Dangerous Propositions the Senate Just Ratied,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, February 5, 2020. “The Utter Ridiculousness of the U.S. Senate,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, January 27, 2020. “Trump’s Impeachment Brief Is a Howl of Rage,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, January 20, 2020. “The Senate Trial Will Be Totally Predictable—With One Potential for Surprise,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, January 13, 2020. “Pelosi and McConnell Are Playing High-Stakes Poker,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, January 7, 2020. “The Serious Silliness of Impeachment,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, December 23, 2019. “The Remedy for Mitch McConnell,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, December 16, 2019. “If the Witnesses Could Exonerate Trump, Why Aren’t They Testifying?” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, December 9, 2019. “How to Tell If Trump Is Winning,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, November 18, 2019. “Stop Waiting for a Savior.” The Atlantic, November 15, 2019. “The Ukraine Transcripts Are a Road Map for Impeachment,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, November 11, 2019. “Trump Is Running Out of Defenses,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, November 4, 2019. “The Humiliation of Katie Hill Oers a Warning.” The Atlantic, October 31, 2019. 6 “Trump’s Tantrums Won’t Make Impeachment Go Away,” with Benjamin Wittes. The Atlantic, October 29, 2019. “Why the Kavanaugh Conrmation Still Haunts Us.” The Atlantic, September 18, 2019.
Recommended publications
  • February 23, 2017 VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION the Honorable

    February 23, 2017 VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION the Honorable

    February 23, 2017 VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION The Honorable Jeff Sessions Attorney General U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Dear Attorney General Sessions: In the midst of ongoing, fast-paced litigation challenging Executive Order 13769, titled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,” Acting Attorney General Sally Yates ordered the Department of Justice not to defend the Order. In a number of those cases, Justice Department attorneys had only a few days to draft briefs or prepare for hearings at the time of Ms. Yates’ order to stop working on them. Given the very short timeframe the Department attorneys had, Ms. Yates’ instruction to them not to defend the Executive Order meaningfully reduced their preparation time, even though she was fired late on the night of January 30. As a result, the Department attorneys were not as prepared to defend the Executive Order in court as they would have been without Ms. Yates’ interference. For example, just a few days later at the hearing on the state of Washington’s motion for a temporary restraining order, the Department attorneys did not have relevant factual information on hand to answer the judge’s question about the number of terrorism-related arrests of nationals from the countries at issue in the Executive Order. As a result, they were unable to enter facts into the record to dispute the judge’s false claim that there had been none. This likely affected his decision to grant the motion for a temporary restraining order. In the appeal on that issue, the importance of that omission became clear, and was part of the basis of the appeals court’s ruling against the President.
  • Trump Lawyer Seeks to Block Insider Book on White House

    Trump Lawyer Seeks to Block Insider Book on White House

    The Washington Post Politics Trump lawyer seeks to block insider book on White House By Josh Dawsey and Ashley Parker January 4 at 9:30 AM A lawyer representing President Trump sought Thursday to stop the publication of a new behind-the-scenes book about the White House that has already led Trump to angrily decry his former chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon. The legal notice — addressed to author Michael Wolff and the president of the book’s publisher — said Trump’s lawyers were pursuing possible charges including libel in connection with the forthcoming book, “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House.” The letter by Beverly Hills-based attorney Charles J. Harder demanded the publisher, Henry Holt and Co., “immediately cease and desist from any further publication, release or dissemination of the book” or excerpts and summaries of its contents. The lawyers also seek a full copy of the book as part of their investigation. The latest twist in the showdown came after lawyers accused Bannon of breaching a confidentiality agreement and Trump denounced his former aide as a self-aggrandizing political charlatan who has “lost his mind.” It marked an abrupt and furious rupture with the onetime confidant that could have lasting political impact on the November midterms and beyond. The White House’s sharp public break with Bannon, which came in response to unflattering comments he made about Trump and his family in a new book about his presidency, left the self-fashioned populist alienated from his chief patron and even more isolated in his attempts to remake the Republican Party by backing insurgent candidates.
  • Dead Precedents Riley T

    Dead Precedents Riley T

    Notre Dame Law Review Online Volume 93 | Issue 1 Article 1 8-2017 Dead Precedents Riley T. Svikhart Notre Dame Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr_online Part of the Jurisprudence Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation 93 Notre Dame L. Rev. Online 1 (2018) This Essay is brought to you for free and open access by the Notre Dame Law Review at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review Online by an authorized editor of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ESSAY DEAD PRECEDENTS Riley T. Svikhart* INTRODUCTION Shaun McCutcheon’s was the “next big campaign finance case to go before the Supreme Court.”1 When the Alabama GOP warned the conservative businessman that his 2010 federal campaign contributions might soon exceed a congressionally imposed limit, he decided to “take a stand.”2 Together, McCutcheon and the Republican National Committee (RNC)—which “wish[ed] to receive the contributions that McCutcheon and similarly situated individuals would like to make” in the absence of such aggregate contribution limits3—challenged the responsible statutory regime4 on First Amendment grounds and attracted national attention en route to a victory before the Supreme Court.5 But while McCutcheon and the RNC prevailed in their case, they failed in another noteworthy regard—Chief Justice Roberts’s controlling opinion declined their request to squarely overrule a relevant portion of the landmark campaign © 2017 Riley T. Svikhart. Individuals and nonprofit institutions may reproduce and distribute copies of this Essay in any format, at or below cost, for educational purposes, so long as each copy identifies the author, provides a citation to the Notre Dame Law Review Online, and includes this provision and copyright notice.
  • Oppose Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Nomination to the Supreme Court

    Oppose Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Nomination to the Supreme Court

    TAKE ACTION TO SAVE ROE: Oppose Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Nomination to the Supreme Court With the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the American people lost a champion for gender equality and reproductive rights. President Trump’s nominee to replace her, Judge Amy Coney Barrett, has the most extreme anti-reproductive rights record of any Supreme Court nominee since the rejected nomination of Judge Robert Bork over 30 years ago. Reproductive rights should not be open for debate. The ability to make these highly personal decisions is central to a person’s dignity and liberty and to gender equality. Take action today to make your voice heard about why Judge Barrett’s nomination must not proceed. PRESIDENT TRUMP’S NOMINEE: WHAT CAN I DO TO STOP THIS NOMINATION AND JUDGE AMY CONEY BARRETT HELP SAVE ROE? Senators need to hear directly from their constituents President Trump has made reversing Roe v. about why abortion rights and this nomination matters Wade a litmus test for his Supreme Court to you. nominees. Judge Barrett’s record supports that test. Her approach to constitutional 1. Tell your Senators to vote NO on Judge Barrett’s interpretation, opinions as a federal appellate confirmation and urge them to vocally stand up for judge, and vitriolic public advocacy disparaging reproductive rights and the ACA. Click here to send a contraception, opposing abortion, and message or call 202-224-3121. defending “the right to life from fertilization” 2. Share your story or viewpoint on why access to lay bare a deep disagreement with the abortion is important to you by publishing op-eds, established constitutional protections for letters to the editor, and social media posts.
  • Minority Views

    Minority Views

    MINORITY VIEWS The Minority Members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 26, 2018 submit the following Minority Views to the Majority-produced "Repo11 on Russian Active Measures, March 22, 2018." Devin Nunes, California, CMAtRMAN K. Mich.J OI Conaw ay, Toxas Pe1 or T. King. New York F,ank A. LoBiondo, N ew Jersey Thom.is J. Roonev. Florida UNCLASSIFIED Ileana ROS·l chtinon, Florida HVC- 304, THE CAPITOL Michnel R. Turner, Ohio Brad R. Wons1 rup. Ohio U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WASHINGTON, DC 20515 Ou is S1cwart. U1ah (202) 225-4121 Rick Cr.,w ford, Arka nsas P ERMANENT SELECT C OMMITTEE Trey Gowdy, South Carolina 0A~lON NELSON Ellsr. M . S1nfn11ik, Nnw York ON INTELLIGENCE SrAFf. D IREC f()ti Wi ll Hurd, Tcxa~ T11\'10l !IV s. 8 £.R(.REE N At1am 8 . Schiff, Cohforn1a , M tNORllV STAFF OtR ECToq RANKIN G M EMtlER Jorncs A. Himes, Connec1icut Terri A. Sewell, AlabJma AndrC Carso n, lncli.1 na Jacki e Speier, Callfomia Mike Quigley, Il linois E,ic Swalwell, California Joilq u1 0 Castro, T exas De nny Huck, Wash ington P::iul D . Ry an, SPCAl([ R or TH( HOUSE Noncv r c1os1. DEMOC 11t.1 1c Lr:.11.orn March 26, 2018 MINORITY VIEWS On March I, 201 7, the House Permanent Select Commiltee on Intelligence (HPSCI) approved a bipartisan "'Scope of In vestigation" to guide the Committee's inquiry into Russia 's interference in the 201 6 U.S. e lection.1 In announc ing these paramete rs for the House of Representatives' onl y authorized investigation into Russia's meddling, the Committee' s leadership pl edged to unde1take a thorough, bipartisan, and independent probe.
  • This Is Almost Certainly James Comey's Twitter Account

    This Is Almost Certainly James Comey's Twitter Account

    Log in / GIZMODO DEADSPIN FUSION JALOPNIK JEZEBEL KOTAKU LIFEHACKER THE Sign ROOT up This Is Almost CertainlyVIDEO SPLOID JamesPALEOFUTURE Comey’sIO9 SCIENCE REVIEWS FIELD GUIDE Twitter Account Ashley Feinberg 3/30/17 3:29pm · Filed to: JAMES COMEY 2.8M 675 226 Digital security and its discontents—from Hillary Clinton’s emails to ransomware to Tor hacks—is in many ways one of the chief concerns of the contemporary FBI. So it makes sense that the bureau’s director, James Comey, would dip his toe into the digital torrent with a Twitter account. It also makes sense, given Comey’s high profile, that he would want that Twitter account to be a secret from the world, lest his follows and favs be scrubbed for clues about what the feds are up to. What is somewhat surprising, however, is that it only took me about four hours of sleuthing to find Comey’s account, which is not protected. Last night, at the Intelligence and National Security Alliance leadership dinner, Comey let slip that he has both a secret Twitter and an Instagram account in the course of relating a quick anecdote about one of his daughters. Kevin Rincon Follow @KevRincon Fun fact: #FBI director James #Comey is on twitter & apparently on Instagram with nine followers. 8:11 PM - 29 Mar 2017 150 139 Who am I to say no to a challenge? As far as finding Comey’s Twitter goes, the only hint he offered was the fact that he has “to be on Twitter now,” meaning that the account would likely be relatively new.
  • The Wit and Wisdom of Donald J. Trump - Volume One : 8X10 College Ruled - 200 Blank Notebook Pages Pdf, Epub, Ebook

    The Wit and Wisdom of Donald J. Trump - Volume One : 8X10 College Ruled - 200 Blank Notebook Pages Pdf, Epub, Ebook

    THE WIT AND WISDOM OF DONALD J. TRUMP - VOLUME ONE : 8X10 COLLEGE RULED - 200 BLANK NOTEBOOK PAGES PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Buckskin Creek Journals | 202 pages | 11 Aug 2018 | Createspace Independent Publishing Platform | 9781725123359 | English | none The Wit and Wisdom of Donald J. Trump - Volume One : 8x10 College Ruled - 200 Blank Notebook Pages PDF Book Molly Olmstead: Conservatives are already playing up hypothetical anti-Catholic bias against Amy Coney Barrett : Because we all know how concerned conservatives are when it comes to prejudice against minorities? Matties, You are not suspicious of Biden and all the other globalist but suspicious of Trump? Most of them lack context, and may err by omission, but they're not fake news. Romney too wants to reach across the aisle. As former KGB and Washington swamp know now. I have a sister who now is looking for work in Canada because of this election, as well as many other twitter people I follow. The communities welcomed him. Dollar Index at that time, I suggest. To Mr. Read the thread!! But minority rule is on the ballot. The illusion of governance overshadows the chaos in the nuts and bolts of implementation situated in the agencies charged with making it happen. The decision is simple for me. Ever since, the right has mounted an hysterical campaign to take away the rights granted by the Court -- especially abortion, but also the constitutional right to privacy free choice is based on -- and to secure ever greater privileges for the rich as evidenced most clearly by the Court's recent claim that unlimited campaign spending is protected "free speech".
  • Fight Terror, Not Twitter: Insulating Social Media from Material Support Claims

    Fight Terror, Not Twitter: Insulating Social Media from Material Support Claims

    Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Volume 37 Number 1 Article 1 Fall 2016 Fight Terror, Not Twitter: Insulating Social Media From Material Support Claims Nina I. Brown Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the Internet Law Commons Recommended Citation Nina I. Brown, Fight Terror, Not Twitter: Insulating Social Media From Material Support Claims, 37 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 1 (2017). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr/vol37/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ELR – BROWN (V4) (DO NOT DELETE) 1/17/2017 5:09 PM FIGHT TERROR, NOT TWITTER: INSULATING SOCIAL MEDIA FROM MATERIAL SUPPORT CLAIMS NINA I. BROWN Social media companies face a new threat: as millions of users around the globe use their platforms to exchange ideas and information, so do terrorists. Terrorist groups, such as ISIS, have capitalized on the ability to spread propaganda, recruit new members, and raise funds through social media at little to no cost. Does it follow that when these terrorists attack, social media is on the hook for civil liability to victims? Recent lawsuits by families of victims killed in terrorist attacks abroad have argued that the proliferation of terrorists on social media—and social media’s reluctance to stop it—violates the Antiterrorism Act.
  • Trump Judges: Even More Extreme Than Reagan and Bush Judges

    Trump Judges: Even More Extreme Than Reagan and Bush Judges

    Trump Judges: Even More Extreme Than Reagan and Bush Judges September 3, 2020 Executive Summary In June, President Donald Trump pledged to release a new short list of potential Supreme Court nominees by September 1, 2020, for his consideration should he be reelected in November. While Trump has not yet released such a list, it likely would include several people he has already picked for powerful lifetime seats on the federal courts of appeals. Trump appointees' records raise alarms about the extremism they would bring to the highest court in the United States – and the people he would put on the appellate bench if he is reelected to a second term. According to People For the American Way’s ongoing research, these judges (including those likely to be on Trump’s short list), have written or joined more than 100 opinions or dissents as of August 31 that are so far to the right that in nearly one out of every four cases we have reviewed, other Republican-appointed judges, including those on Trump’s previous Supreme Court short lists, have disagreed with them.1 Considering that every Republican president since Ronald Reagan has made a considerable effort to pick very conservative judges, the likelihood that Trump could elevate even more of his extreme judicial picks raises serious concerns. On issues including reproductive rights, voting rights, police violence, gun safety, consumer rights against corporations, and the environment, Trump judges have consistently sided with right-wing special interests over the American people – even measured against other Republican-appointed judges. Many of these cases concern majority rulings issued or joined by Trump judges.
  • Download the Full What Happened Collection [PDF]

    Download the Full What Happened Collection [PDF]

    American Compass December 2020 WHAT HAPPENED THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY IN REVIEW AMERICAN COMPASS is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, launched in May 2020 with a mission to restore an economic consensus that emphasizes the importance of family, community, and industry to the nation’s liberty and prosperity— REORIENTING POLITICAL FOCUS from growth for its own sake to widely shared economic development that sustains vital social institutions; SETTING A COURSE for a country in which families can achieve self-sufficiency, contribute productively to their communities, and prepare the next generation for the same; and HELPING POLICYMAKERS NAVIGATE the limitations that markets and government each face in promoting the general welfare and the nation’s security. www.americancompass.org [email protected] What Happened: The Trump Presidency in Review Table of Contents FOREWORD: THE WORK REMAINS President Trump told many important truths, but one also has to act by Daniel McCarthy 1 INTRODUCTION 4 TOO FEW OF THE PRESIDENT’S MEN An iconoclast’s administration will struggle to find personnel both experienced and aligned by Rachel Bovard 5 A POPULISM DEFERRED Trump’s transitional presidency lacked the vision and agenda necessary to let go of GOP orthodoxy by Julius Krein 11 THE POTPOURRI PRESIDENCY A decentralized and conflicted administration was uniquely inconsistent in its policy actions by Wells King 17 SOME LIKE IT HOT Unsustainable economic stimulus at an expansion’s peak, not tax cuts or tariffs, fueled the Trump boom by Oren Cass 23 Copyright © 2020 by American Compass, Inc. Electronic versions of these articles with hyperlinked references are available at www.americancompass.org.
  • The Contributions of the Obama Administration to the Practice and Theory of International Law

    The Contributions of the Obama Administration to the Practice and Theory of International Law

    \\jciprod01\productn\H\HLI\57-2\HLI205.txt unknown Seq: 1 14-OCT-16 13:24 Volume 57, Number 2, Spring 2016 The Contributions of the Obama Administration to the Practice and Theory of International Law Jack Goldsmith* My aim in this essay is to give a tour of the horizon of the Obama admin- istration’s international law record in order to identify the distinctiveness of its approach and to tie it in to some general themes in international and foreign relations law. Due to his upbringing and education, Barack Obama came to the Presi- dency with a cosmopolitan outlook and an informed commitment to inter- national law. This attitude differed sharply from his predecessor, George W. Bush, who was suspicious of international law and generally viewed it as an obstacle to the exercise of American power. By contrast, Obama devoted a chapter of his 2006 book The Audacity of Hope to international relations and made plain that he understood international law intimately and viewed it as a constructive force in international relations.1 He criticized the view that “international law [was] an encroachment on American sovereignty [and] a foolish constraint on America’s ability to impose its will around the world”—a position that Obama associated with Henry Cabot Lodge, but one that might also describe the early Bush administration.2 And Obama argued it was “in America’s interest to work with other countries to build up international institutions and promote international norms . because the more international norms were reinforced and the more America sig- naled a willingness to show restraint in the exercise of its power, the fewer the number of conflicts that would arise.”3 On the campaign trail Obama gave voice to this attitude when he criticized the Bush administration for its weak compliance with U.S.
  • Attorney General Barr Letter on Mueller Report, LAWFARE (Mar. 24, 2019, 3:44 PM)

    Attorney General Barr Letter on Mueller Report, LAWFARE (Mar. 24, 2019, 3:44 PM)

    April 11, 2019 VIA ONLINE PORTAL Douglas Hibbard Chief, Initial Request Staff Office of Information Policy U.S. Department of Justice 1425 New York Avenue NW Suite 11050 Washington, DC 20530-0001 Via FOIAOnline Re: Expedited Freedom of Information Act Request Dear Mr. Hibbard: Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the implementing regulations of the Department of Justice (DOJ), 28 C.F.R. Part 16, American Oversight makes the following request for records. Requested Records American Oversight requests that DOJ produce the following within twenty business days and seeks expedited review of this request for the reasons identified below: 1. All communications (including emails, email attachments, letters, messages sent by courier, and other communications) attaching or otherwise including any draft, or any portion of a draft, of Attorney General William Barr’s March 24, 2019 letter to the Judiciary Committees of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives concerning Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.”1 2. All records reflecting communications (including emails, email attachments, telephone call logs, talking points, electronic or handwritten notes, or drafts used as reference documents during oral communications) between DOJ and any employee or official at the White House regarding Attorney General William Barr’s March 24, 2019 letter to the Judiciary Committees of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives concerning Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “Report on the Investigation into Russian 1 A copy of Attorney General Barr’s letter can be viewed here: Quinta Jurecic, Document: Attorney General Barr Letter on Mueller Report, LAWFARE (Mar.