Battle for the Constitution: Week of June 22nd, 2020 Roundup
Below is a round-up of the latest from the Battle for the Constitution: a special project on the constitutional debates in American life, in partnership with The Atlantic.
The Trump Administration’s Incompetence Was the Saving Grace of 700,000 Dreamers
By Garrett Epps, Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law
Garrett Epps looks at the recent decision in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California—the DACA case—and says that the Trump administration may have been able to rescind the DACA policy, if only it had done so competently.
Why Trump Keeps Losing at the Supreme Court
By Neal Katyal, Former Acting Solicitor General of the United States and Joshua Geltzer, Executive Director, Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection
Neal Katyal and Joshua Geltzer say that, while the Trump administration’s loss in the DACA case may seem like a technical matter, it is actually part of Donald Trump’s pattern of abusing authority and the law.
DACA Isn’t What Made Me an American
By Jin K. Park, M.D.-Ph.D. candidate, Harvard Medical School
Jin K. Park writes that DACA isn’t what made him in American—his active involvement in our ongoing experiment of democratic self-governance, his passion for working to form a more perfect union, and his belief in the fundamental tenets of the American idea are.
The Hidden Constitutional Costs of the Carceral System
By Tahir Duckett, Lawyer, Relman Colfax
Tahir Duckett argues that courts have hollowed out the protections of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments—which put limits on law enforcement—and that doing so has helped give rise to mass incarceration and hurt African Americans.
By Deborah Pearlstein, Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University
Deborah Pearlstein contends that we should ensure Donald Trump’s precedent-setting actions are not allowed to in fact become precedent for future administrations by publicly and powerfully rebuking them in a bipartisan way.
The Trans Future I Never Dreamed Of
By Chase Strangio, Deputy Director for Transgender Justice, ACLU
Chase Strangio writes about the importance of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County—which held that sex discrimination protections in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to sexual orientation and gender identity—and says it was a sweeping victory for LGBTQ rights.
The Supreme Court Didn’t Have to Rely on Xenophobic Logic
By Leah Litman, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
Leah Litman asserts that the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam—a case about constitutional protections against expedited removal of immigrants unlawfully present in the United States—used xenophobic logic and endangers some immigrants, subjecting them to an administration’s whims.