South Texas College of Law / Cato Institute
Josh Blackman is an associate professor of constitutional law at the South Texas College of Law and an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute. He is the author of Unprecedented: The Constitutional Challenge to Obamacare.
Partial travel ban will test executive power The US Supreme Court reached a unanimous decision today – sort of. President Trump has the constitutional power to instigate a travel ban from six mostly Muslim countries. Parts of his order will be allowed to go forward, but there will still be hearings next October, after the summer recess.
Trump's First Constitutional Confrontation Refugees and visa-holders from seven mostly Muslim countries have been allowed into the US again since last Friday. That's when President Trump's order banning them was temporarily halted by Federal Judge James Robart in Seattle. America's new Chief Executive is outraged and has personally denounced Robart, labeling him "a so-called judge," for putting the country "in peril." The Administration's appealed, but three states, technology companies, foreign policy veterans and civil right groups say reinstating the ban would create more chaos than ever. As the issue winds through the court process, will Trump have a scapegoat to blame for a future act of terrorism?
Campaign promises aren't all made to be broken Candidate Trump said he'd build that wall on the Mexican border and crackdown on "sanctuary" cities that harbor undocumented immigrants. As President, he's ordering implementation — despite massive cost, dispute about whether America will be safer — and civil liberties issues. He doesn't need any new legislation to build the wall, but lawyers are lining up to argue about withholding federal money from sanctuary cities. It's still not clear what's in store for "dreamers" — who were brought here illegally as children and don't know any other country.
Supreme Court Deadlock Ends Obama’s Immigration Plan to Prevent Deportation A deadlocked Supreme Court affirmed the appeal which blocks President Obama’s sweeping immigration plan. The program would have deferred deportation for as many as 5 million immigrants. This effectively ends what the President had hoped would be an enduring legacy of his administration.
Will the US Supreme Court Shift into Neutral? Blockbuster decisions expected this year could end up instead with opinions divided between four conservatives and four liberals. Since Congress hasn't replaced the late Antonin Scalia, majorities have already been hard to come by, and some predict deadlock for as much as another year, although a decision that came down today may be an exception to what's on the agenda between now and next Monday. We hear about the possible options for race-based college admissions , deportation of undocumented immigrants and unwanted pregnancies .
Undocumented Parents and the Supreme Court Today the Supreme Court heard a case that could determine the fate of President Obama's most sweeping executive action on deportation. It would also drastically change the lives of some four million undocumented immigrants in the US. The President's 2014 plan would delay the deportation of parents of children who are US citizens or permanent legal residents, and offer them temporary work permits. But it's been on hold since it was announced 18 months ago because of court challenges, leaving immigrants across the nation in limbo -- the majority of whom have been in the country for ten years or more. The case lands in a presidential campaign already swirling with talk of a wall on the Mexican border. Will the shorthanded high court end in a 44 deadlock?
Is the White House Overstepping Its Bounds? This week President Obama said that if Congress won’t pass sweeping immigration reform, he’d take executive action and do it himself by sending resources to help fix the border crisis. This wasn’t the first time that Obama has decided to go it alone in the face of Congressional obstinance. He’s taken executive action on a number of policies and issues including major ones like gun control, marijuana laws, climate change and the prisoner swap for Bowe Bergdahl. Republicans are calling Obama a “tyrant” and a “king.” Now House Speaker John Boehner has a plan: it’s simple -- sue the President. But what exactly would he sue Obama for, and what does he expect to accomplish? Are Obama’s executive actions a sign of over-reach or a last-ditch solution to obstructionism?
Terrorism and tweets, hate speech and murder Just days before an election, Britain is coping with a rash of deadly terrorism, and Prime Minister Theresa May is on the defensive. And again today, President Trump has tweeted criticism of the Mayor of London. Later, a double murder in Portland, Oregon has revealed the ugly past of a supposedly “progressive” city. One immediate question: is “hate speech” protected by the First Amendment?
Trump's new look at civil rights and global warming President Trump is reportedly ready to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. We look at the possible consequences. On the second half of the program, we hear about cuts in Obama-Era civil rights programs called for by the Trump Administration's first budget plan.
Replacing Obamacare: Now you see it… now you don’t As the Senate deliberates replacing Obmacare, health coverage for millions of people is at stake. There've been no public hearings, and a draft measure won't be made public. Is the House version so unpopular that that Senate is hiding a version that looks much the same?
