Can Presidents Exempt People from US Law?

After the Supreme Court struck down his first order restricting birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara, President Trump signed a new order on August 6. At first blush, the new order seems like only a blatant attempt to ignore the Supreme Court. That might be true, but there’s an alternative reading that is more bizarre and potentially frightening: The president might believe he can unilaterally decide whether US law applies to any particular person or groups of people.

The entire order rests on the assertion that presidents can decide who is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and, therefore, US law. In a way, this is a far more dangerous claim. For instance, diplomats receive immunity not only from federal but also from state and local prosecution. If the president can suspend the laws—not just the enforcement of them but the laws themselves—the order would not only strip citizenship from many Americans, it would also create a massive new power for presidents to abuse.

The strange new order is already being challenged in court, but we still don’t know how the government will defend it.

Read the rest here.

The Right to Worship

Synagogues are becoming recurring targets in America. Just days ago, Kabbalat Shabbat services at Central Synagogue in the heart of New York City were disrupted when a man violently assaulted a congregant and a security guard.  

Last November, at Park East Synagogue in Manhattan, congregants were greeted by roughly 200 protesters chanting “Globalize the intifada,” “Death to the IDF” and “We need to make them scared,” forcing synagogue attendees to face a torrent of antisemitic slurs and threats. Then, in May, the harassment returned. This time, demonstrators waved a Hezbollah flag and screamed “rapist” and “pedophile” at Jewish people simply trying to enter the synagogue.  

The fact that American houses of worship require police protection just to let its congregation through the door should alarm every American.   

The pattern goes beyond New York: in Los Angeles, a group of masked antisemitic protesters gathered outside Wilshire Boulevard Temple, shouting “baby killers” and “Zionist pigs” at those seeking to enter. Two protesters eventually were arrested, for battery and destruction of property, after forcing their way inside of the synagogue. 

These are not isolated incidents. They represent a dangerous escalation threatening the fundamental right to worship freely and safely.     

In 2025 alone, ADL documented dozens of protest-related antisemitic incidents and nearly 530 incidents of harassment at synagogues in the United States. While overall antisemitic incidents declined since the year prior, physical assaults reached record levels.

And the crisis extends beyond the Jewish community. An LDS church was besieged and burned to the ground last fall in Michigan, and in May, three people were killed protecting students and worshipers at San Diego’s largest mosque. Houses of worship across the U.S. increasingly are being turned into flashpoints for confrontation rather than havens for reflection and community.  

Read the rest here.

California Moves to Reclassify Jews as an Ethic Group - Not Just a Religion

The state of California recognizes nearly 50 racial and ethnic identities for data collection, from American Indian to Samoan. Now it is considering adding one more: Jewish.

A bill that passed a crucial committee vote on Thursday would require state agencies to include an optional box for Jewish ethnicity on all demographic data forms, from college applications to public assistance programs. Its passage would make California the first state to officially treat Jewishness as something more than a religion in this fashion — a shift more significant than it might seem.

Scholars of Jewish identity say that it has long posed challenges to American law and public discourse, because Jews have never fit into contemporary conceptual categories. In fact, the challenges — and misconceptions — go back centuries.

“When Jews received the rights of citizenship in European nation states, Jews were forced to think of themselves as a religion,” said Leora Batnitzky, professor of religion at Princeton University and author of “How Judaism Became a Religion.” “But this was always contested from an internal Jewish point of view.”

Plenty of proudly identified Jews do not attend synagogue or even believe in God — and Jewish tradition considers them to be Jews just the same. Jewish identity, like ethnic identity, is generally passed through parentage. But while outsiders cannot convert to another race or ethnicity, they can convert to Judaism. In 2021, the Pew Research Center found that only 11 percent of American Jews said that “being Jewish is mainly about religion,” with most preferring some combination of religion, ancestry and culture.

For its proponents in California, the bill, S.B. 1387, is an attempt to counter this confusion by making clear that “Jewish” means more than religion. Practically speaking, the bill aims to help the state quantify its Jewish population and to enable better data collection for hate crimes tracking and public health purposes — for example, by determining where to promote genetic screenings for diseases common in Jewish communities, or ensuring that antisemitic attacks are not misclassified on reporting forms.

Read the rest here.

Trump's 2nd Bogus Indictment of James Comey

If it’s possible, the Trump Justice Department’s new indictment of former FBI Director James Comey is even more absurd than the previous indictment. That one failed to state a crime. This one fabricates a crime.

The new charges, which have not been released as this is written, reportedly stem from an Instagram post Comey moronically published last year, showing seashells arranged to form the message “86 47.” Even more moronically, the Trump administration interpreted the message as a threat to assassinate the 47th president.

The number “86” is sometimes used in organized crime or gang circles to suggest killing; in more common parlance, however, it connotes getting rid or something, tossing something in the trash, etc. It is not even clear that Comey himself arranged the seashells in his photo, but the claim that, by posting what he’d observed, he was calling for Trump to be assassinated is ridiculous. In the United States, where political speech is protected by the First Amendment, the government may not criminalize the expression of opinion that the incumbent president should be removed or otherwise rejected. (I won’t try to count the number of times Trump did it while Biden was president.)

After uproar generated by the administration, Comey took down the post and publicly asserted that he opposes violence and meant no such suggestion. He also voluntarily submitted to interviews with the Secret Service — which proceeded to drop what should never have been a criminal investigation. There was not a threat of violence against the president, much less an unambiguous call for his assassination. Nor would it be remotely possible, on the known evidence, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Comey intended violence.

Read the rest here.

Alarming news from Finland

The Supreme Court of Finland on Thursday (March 26) found a former government minister guilty of “hate speech” for her biblical views on marriage following two prior acquittals by lower courts.

In a 3-2 decision, the court ruled against Päivi Räsänen for expressing her beliefs on marriage and sexual ethics in a 20-year-old church pamphlet. The court also criminally convicted Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola for publishing the 2004 pamphlet, according to legal rights group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) International.

The court levied fines of several thousand euros on both Räsänen and Pohjola and ordered the removal and destruction of the impugned statements. Räsänen has been sentenced to a fine equivalent to 20 days’ wages (in her case, 1,800 euros) and she will also have to pay her own legal costs, according to Evangelical Focus. Pohjola was also given a 20-day fine, and his publishing house, Finnish Lutheran Foundation, must pay a fine of 5,000 euros.

The convictions were based on “making and keeping available to the public a text that insults a group,” the court ruled.

Read the rest here.

cf: This

Quote of the day...

“You have lost the confidence and the trust of this court. You have lost the confidence and the trust of the New Jersey legal community, and you are losing the trust and confidence of the public.” 

- US Federal District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi to the US Prosecutor 3/16/2026

Anarchists, Political Violence, and Legal Isonomia

The anarchist as a figure in crime is distinct. His goals are not financial, and the terrorist acts committed under the heading of anarchism have ranged from assassinations of public figures to bombings of random civilians. He has also slid far enough into history to seem quaint, or vaguely romantic, from the vantage point of the twenty-first century. 

The anarchist “movement” (if we could apply such a concept to a decentralized group) was the beginning of modern global terrorism. The idea that killing, bombing, were a tactic to bring adversaries to the negotiating table, in the age of mass media, was a novel concept, in the late nineteenth century. It would be a model followed by various political sects to come. But anarchists did not want negotiations. 

Their nihilism marks them out against groups like the Fenians (roughly contemporary, and operating mostly in Britain, with some activities in North America), who had a clear political goal. The Fenians wanted Ireland to be independent from Britain. Whether one agreed with their tactics, the motive was coherent (if alarming to the British authorities). 

Meanwhile, the anarchists (unlike socialists) tended to offer vague ideals as their results. They did not participate in elections or seek to gain support through normal political means. “Burn it all down” was their message. One that was resonant for disaffected young men - as it always has been. There’s a reason terrorist groups and street gangs alike all recruit from this particular demographic.

Read the rest here.

DOJ seeks tighter grasp on state bar ethics probes

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is turning its focus to state bar associations in its quest to clamp down on the weaponization of the justice system. 

As DOJ lawyers face piling complaints, the government is seeking greater control over the ethics probes that can result in disciplinary actions including disbarment.  

It has prompted a firestorm of questions about the agency’s bid for a tighter grasp on the consequential investigations. 

“It is a DOJ power grab,” said Stephen Gillers, a legal ethics scholar at New York University School of Law. 

In a notice posted online in the Federal Register, the Justice Department proposed a new regulation that would let it intervene in state bars’ disciplinary investigations, including with the authority to review any allegations against DOJ lawyers first.  

It would amount to a request for state bar authorities to suspend their probes until Attorney General Pam Bondi completes her own, though DOJ itself could not force the state bars to halt their reviews. DOJ declined to comment on the matter Thursday.   

Such investigations can eventually lead to disbarment, but the process can take years to complete.    

The Justice Department casts the proposed rule as an extension of President Trump’s day-one directive to end perceived weaponization of the federal government.  

The notice suggests that “political activists” have used bar complaints and probes to target DOJ lawyers, and that state bars’ willingness to investigate those complaints are “troubling.” Trump’s “broad pronouncements” necessitate a review of how Bondi manages and disciplines DOJ lawyers, it says. 

“This unprecedented weaponization of the State bar complaint process risks chilling the zealous advocacy by Department attorneys on behalf of the United States, its agencies, and its officers,” read DOJ’s submitted overview of the proposed rule. “That chilling effect, in turn, would interfere with the broad statutory authority of the Attorney General to manage and supervise Department attorneys.” 

Since Trump’s return to the White House, several of his top Justice Department officials have faced such complaints from watchdog groups, including Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, the former No. 3 DOJ official who is now a federal appellate judge. Rank-and-file prosecutors have also faced complaints.  

Read the rest here.

The Corruption of the Legal System

Andrew Wiederhorn lived large. His Oregon estate, on a bluff overlooking downtown Portland, had 10 bedrooms, a 2,000-square-foot pool and an indoor basketball court. Even after he lost the property, he flew on private jets, took luxury vacations and in less than four years spent nearly $700,000 on shopping and jewelry alone.

How did Mr. Wiederhorn get this money? According to the Justice Department, largely through fraud. Mr. Wiederhorn was the chief executive of the fast-food company that owns Johnny Rockets and Fatburger, and according to prosecutors, he stole some $47 million from the business in secret payments disguised as loans. (Mr. Wiederhorn and his legal team denied any wrongdoing.) This wasn’t even the first time Mr. Wiederhorn was accused of a criminal scheme: Two decades earlier, he spent over a year in prison for his role in a plan to steal from a union pension fund.

Mr. Wiederhorn was never convicted for the secret payments; his case never even went to trial. In late 2024, his company donated $100,000 to President Trump’s second inaugural committee. A few months later, the prosecutor on his case was fired by a White House official, and a few months after that, the government dropped the criminal case entirely. Mr. Wiederhorn, who had left his job after being indicted, returned to running the business he allegedly stole from. Shortly after, the company went bankrupt.

Mr. Wiederhorn is one of many defendants helping to forge a new path in American justice, one that takes the rich quite literally beyond the reach of the law. Their corruption threatens our economy and our democracy, and is so widespread and so brazen that it is easy to feel powerless. But we are not. There are legal tools that we can use to stop this corruption without waiting for the Justice Department, or anyone else, to act. We can fight back. But first, we need to understand who we’re fighting.

Consider, for instance, Trevor Milton, who was convicted of defrauding investors in his electric vehicle company. (Among other tricks: A video of his electric semi truck was allegedly forged by simply dragging the inoperable vehicle to the top of a hill and then letting it roll down.) Mr. Milton was sentenced to four years in prison. After he gave nearly $2 million to Trump-allied political committees, the president pardoned him. This meant that, among other things, Mr. Milton would not have to pay the $660 million that prosecutors demanded be returned to his defrauded investors.

Read the rest here.

How Virginia's top court might decide Democrats' gerrymandering fate

Virginia Democrats are moving forward with plans to gerrymander their way to four more congressional seats — but they need help from the state’s top court.

After a lower court blocked Democrats’ efforts to amend the state Constitution and redraw federal congressional lines ahead of this fall’s midterm elections, the Virginia Court of Appeals requested the Virginia Supreme Court weigh in.

That puts the fate of the map — and potentially congressional control after the 2026 midterms — in the hands of a group of justices that observers say can be hard to predict.

Political and legal experts in Virginia agree the state Supreme Court is not overtly ideological, with many describing it as “small-c conservative,” leaning heavily on tradition and precedent rather than handing down ideologically right-wing rulings. And many observers say the court is wary of wading too heavily into political fights. But this time, it’s unavoidable.

“It’s kind of a state Supreme Court tradition to stay away from political matters whenever they can. They like to leave the legislating to the legislature. So this is going to be a really interesting test of that tradition,” said Carolyn Fiddler of the Democratic Attorneys General Association, who attended William & Mary Law School in Virginia and worked in state politics.

Read the rest here.

Demanding Political Loyalty, Trump's DOJ Struggles With Staffing

Chad Mizelle, a former chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, hung an online help wanted sign for federal prosecutors last weekend that perhaps explained why so many valuable Justice Department staff members have left, and why so few candidates want in.

Assistant U.S. attorneys are not typically recruited, as Mr. Mizelle sought to do, by a former federal employee who asks potential candidates to send a private message to his X account. Nor have they been asked in the past to prove political or ideological fealty.

“If you are a lawyer, are interested in being an AUSA, and support President Trump and anti-crime agenda, DM me,” wrote Mr. Mizelle, a fierce Trump supporter who remains close with Justice Department leaders and senior officials in the West Wing.

Mr. Mizelle was acting as a private citizen expressing his own views. But the post reflected the prevailing sentiment inside the department — that Mr. Trump has the right to hire only those willing to execute his agenda. It also highlighted the dynamic that appears to be contributing to the very staffing shortages Mr. Mizelle tried to address.

The intermingling of law enforcement and political goals has made the department, long a magnet for platinum legal talent, an unappealing landing spot, according to current and former officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters.

The number of applications is down significantly from previous years, officials said, even as Trump loyalists have publicized vacancies through official and unconventional channels. Some of those applying are generally not as qualified as those who sought the position in the recent past, they added.

A Justice Department spokesman did not respond to specific questions, but said all of the department’s actions reflected Ms. Bondi’s February 2025 memo requiring all employees to “zealously advance, protect and defend” the interests of Mr. Trump in his role as the nation’s chief executive.

The White House has exercised extraordinary control over the Justice Department, with prosecutors pressured to investigate and prosecute the president’s enemies, all in the name of reversing purported politicization under Democrats.

Applications for vacant slots in U.S. attorneys’ offices, once apolitical questionnaires, now often include requirements to weigh in on Mr. Trump’s policies.

“How would you help advance the president’s executive orders and policy priorities in this role?” read one of the queries on an application for a job in the U.S. attorney’s office in Minnesota, whose ranks have drastically thinned after the killing of two protesters in Minneapolis spawned an exodus of prosecutors.

“Identify one or two relevant executive orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired,” reads another.

Read the rest here.

Squatting Isn’t a Housing Policy. It’s Theft

In October last year, Absolum, age 18, finally got to visit the $115,000 home. But as he approached it, he realized something was wrong — someone was already living in the house.

Absolum called the police, who told him there was nothing they could do. The family living in the house had been scammed into believing they were renting it, and Absolum would have to go to court to evict the squatters.

“He was a victim once, and he’s a victim again,” his mother, Avril Absolum, told the Baltimore Banner in an article published this week. “He did the right thing. And there were people in his house.”

The case is pending in court, and Absolum still has not moved into his home.

Back in 2024, when “squatting” was having a moment, Republican governors such as Georgia’s Brian Kemp and Florida’s Ron DeSantis signed legislation making it much easier to evict people who took up residence either in people’s homes or in vacant buildings. Yet for around half the country, squatting is still only a civil matter; if a vacationing family returns home to find someone has moved into their residence, it could be months or years before they are able to expel the interlopers.

Read the rest here.

In the News

White House downplays new Epstein emails that mention Trump

MAGA World's Evolving Views on L'Affaire Epstein

Reagan-appointed judge resigns, warns of Trump's 'assault on the rule of law'

October jobs data may never be released, White House says

Ex Top Aid to Gavin Newsom Indicted for Corruption

Trump Receives Military Options for Attack on Venezuela 

Germany decides against conscription (for now)

Masked Israeli settlers attack Palestinian villages and IDF soldiers in the West Bank

Ukraine’s Dilemma as a City Teeters: Save Lives or Keep Holding On

Rubio dismisses criticism of U.S. Caribbean strikes at G7 meeting

DOJ drops charges against another client of AG Pam Bondi's brother Brad

For the second time in less than a month, the Justice Department on Wednesday abruptly dropped charges against a client represented by Brad Bondi, the brother of U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Federal prosecutors in Missouri this week agreed to voluntarily dismiss an indictment against Sid Chakraverty, a property developer who faced felony wire fraud charges. Prosecutors under the Biden administration accused Chakraverty in 2024 of lying about hiring women- and minority-owned subcontractors on a housing development in order to allegedly secure favorable tax incentives.

As recently as three weeks ago, career prosecutors held that Chakraverty should face criminal penalties for his alleged scheme.

But on Wednesday, the newly installed U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, Thomas Albus, a Trump appointee, filed court papers informing the judge overseeing the case that the "defendants have agreed to make restitution of the taxes" and that it is therefore "prudent for the government to end this criminal prosecution."

Read the rest here.

Various 07-09-25

Trump Hits Brazil With 50% Tariff Over Bolsanaro Trial

Trump sends more letters dictating high tariff rates around the world

Judge orders Jan. 6 rally organizer to pay $2K daily until compliance with subpoena

US sees record number of measles case

Abbott announces redistricting will be included in Texas special session

Greene says she’ll move to stop additional military aid to Israel

Trump's 50% copper tariff could raise the cost of appliances, EVs and other goods

FBI launches probes into former FBI, CIA directors

Senate GOP not happy with Trump beatdown of Tillis 

Trump's Assault on the Rule of Law via Abuse of the Pardon

President Trump is employing the vast power of his office to redefine criminality to suit his needs — using pardons to inoculate criminals he happens to like, downplaying corruption and fraud as crimes, and seeking to stigmatize political opponents by labeling them criminals.

In the past few days, Mr. Trump has offered pardons or clemency to more than two dozen people embraced by his obstreperous right-wing base, or favored by people in his orbit. Most are political allies, some are former officeholders accused of abusing power for personal gain, and almost all were convicted of white-collar crimes like fraud, tax evasion and campaign finance violations — not far removed from accusations Mr. Trump himself has faced.

“No MAGA left behind,” crowed Ed Martin, the pardon attorney at the Justice Department who suggested that the department should investigate Mr. Trump’s adversaries to shame them if there was insufficient evidence to charge them.

Mr. Trump has used his pardon power, like nearly every other executive tool in his kit, to assert personal dominance over processes generally, if not always, governed by established ethical and institutional guardrails. He professes to abide by the rule of law, but has often shown a willingness to do so only when he defines the rules and the laws.

Mr. Trump has said the current wave of pardons is justified by President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s last-minute reprieves for inmates on federal death row, and pardons he issued to his family — which Mr. Trump called “disgraceful.”

Yet, critics say, Mr. Trump has used the pardon powers of the presidency not to settle accounts, as Mr. Biden did, but to burn the ledger.

“Granting pardons or commuting sentences of public officials or other white-collar criminals convicted of fraud, tax evasion and other breaches of trust is likely to have the effect of normalizing nonviolent crimes,” said Barbara L. McQuade, a University of Michigan law professor who served as a U.S. attorney in the state during the Obama administration.

“Of course, stealing by fraud is still stealing,” she added. “It’s just that this is the way rich people do it.”

Mr. Trump made no secret of his intention to seek retribution against those who prosecuted him at the local, state and federal levels, whom he has described collectively as “scum.” The new pardons are necessary to right the wrongs of a politicized Biden Justice Department that twice indicted him, he has claimed.

Read the rest here.

Urgent Prayers

I do not know the details, however there are widespread reports that an Egyptian court has issued a ruling allowing the government to seize St. Catherine's Monastery in Sinai. This apparently includes all of its property, ancient treasures, manuscripts, icons &c. It would also involve the eviction of the monks. As of this post, the reports are somewhat contradictory, with some being quite alarming and others suggesting that Egypt has no plans to seize the ancient monastery. Updates will be posted as more information becomes available.

HT: Blog reader John L.

Update: Good news. It looks like this was a false alarm. Recent reports and statements from the Egyptian government are categorically denying any change in the monastery's status. 

A (rare) Victory for Legal Sanity

LONDON — Britain’s highest court ruled Wednesday that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex.

The Principled Resignation

Take notes please. This is how it's done.

What we have here is a Justice Department using its prosecutorial powers and discretion as an instrument of political extortion. The DOJ should be sanctioned. The Attorney General, and all those involved in this affront to the rule of law, should be disbarred for official misconduct and corruption. As much as I think Mayor Adams was very probably guilty as sin, the judge should dismiss all charges against him with prejudice to prevent any further abuse of power by the DOJ in that direction. Whether or not these orders originated in the White House is unclear. Unfortunately, with this Congress no investigation is likely to be undertaken. 

When Leniency Is the Goal, a Justice System Breaks Easily

Last week was not a good one for New York’s sense of public safety. That Monday a man with two knives roamed across Manhattan and is now accused of killing three strangers — Angel Gustavo Lata Landi, Chang Wang and Wilma Augustin — in separate attacks. The next day a man with a gun reportedly robbed a Queens bodega and a smoke shop before being fatally shot by the police after he shot and wounded an officer and a bystander.

The episodes exacerbated New Yorkers’ sense that cascading failures of state and city government have left the city out of control. A criminal justice system transformed with a goal of keeping as few people in jail or prison as possible, for as short a time as possible, has no room for error, and yet it keeps making errors. All it takes for a potentially violent suspect to go free is one weak link — and state lawmakers and city officials have constructed a chain of weak links.

Over the past six years, under two supposedly moderate governors, Andrew M. Cuomo and Kathy Hochul, New York’s progressive-dominated State Legislature radically changed the state’s criminal justice system. In 2019, for example, the state eliminated cash bail for misdemeanors and most nonviolent felonies; in 2021 it eased its parole practices to prevent people from being sent back to prison for violations such as missing a parole meeting.

After decades of declining crime and imprisonment, these abrupt changes accelerated the decarceration trend until the state and city could no longer keep reducing crime. From 2019 to 2021, the average daily population in city jails fell to 4,921 from 7,938, a 38 percent drop. The number of people in prison for crimes that took place in New York City fell to 13,020 from 18,903. Prison readmissions for parole violations fell to 2,591 from 7,277.

It’s impossible to prove that New York would have avoided any single crime had its perpetrator been jailed or imprisoned for a previous crime.

But for progressive criminal justice policies to have even a chance of working, the state’s judges, prosecutors and mental health officials would have to be much better at predicting, out of a broad group of people accused or convicted of crimes, who, exactly, is likely to repeat or escalate his behavior.

Last week’s tragedies reveal no evidence that we’ve gotten better at such predictions. Monday’s knife attacks show that even one point of misplaced leniency can undo the protections of the whole criminal justice system.

Read the rest here.