Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 15/09/2026Agree with everything Steve says but we also learned that when the President and his advisors identify a pot of millions of votes that they know favor their opponents and design procedurally rules that will inevitably invalidate the bulk of those ballots not one Justice will say that out loud. 020
Reposted by Andrew SiegelEric Columbus @ericcolumbus.bsky.social · 08/09/2026Happy 72nd Birthday to Ruby Bridges, who at the age of 6 desegregated the New Orleans public schools. She’s younger than 30 senators and our last two presidents—and only 7 years older than Barack Obama. The past isn’t past. 5599453395
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 01/09/2026I’ll do you one better. There should be a “standing against dictatorship” or “autocracy” doctrine that allows citizen standing or something similar when the executive takes patently unauthorized actions that threaten to undercut basic checks and balances or undermine democratic accountability. 150
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 15/07/2026Help me understand. Even leaving aside everything else wrong with this argument, wouldn’t a group of people leaving societies generally “unfit for liberal democracy” to come to countries known for their commitment to liberal democracy be affirmatively selected for affinity for liberal democracy? 2314
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 06/07/2026Three true things: 1)There are six partisan Republicans on the Supreme Court; 2)some of them are more overtly MAGA than others; 3)the partisan makeup of the Court is historically disconnected from election results as the Dems won the popular vote 7 out of 8 times while the Reps built a ct majority. 810821
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 28/06/2026The official Democratic Party position should be: “Like so much else the Trump administration has done, this is a crime. The Supreme Court gave Donald Trump vast immunity but that doesn’t apply to his subordinates. We look forward to prosecuting all of you to the full extent of the law.” 051
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 25/06/2026Sam Alito continuing to demonstrate that his primary identity is not “federal judge” but “random aggrieved 80-year-old white guy who has Fox News on all day.” 082
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 09/06/2026Thought experiment: if for whatever reason we used a first in, last counted system of announcing results and the Republicans gained every vote drop, would we hear one syllable about fraud? 020
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 18/05/2026Something that is consistently missed: Public opposition to FDR’s court-packing plan was galvanized by fear that he was in danger of becoming a dictator. In contrast, current support for adding Justices to the Court is motivated by a desire to prevent a right-wing dictator. Valences have flipped. 052
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 07/05/2026Henry Friendly’s greatest flaw was that he had no qualms treating the products of his judicial imagination as if they were apolitical. William Rehnquist’s greatest flaw was that he was a segregationist. They were John Roberts’ mentors. You do the math. 031
Reposted by Andrew SiegelGillian Branstetter @gbbranstetter.bsky.social · 07/05/2026Three weeks ago 471639320
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 03/05/2026Every time he talks I can’t figure out whether he is really dumb or whether he thinks we are really dumb. 131
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 02/05/2026We can argue about whether it is prudence or timidity that has prevented the broad use of jurisdiction stripping, but it is at minimum a break glass in case of emergency option and the building is on fire. 034
Reposted by Andrew SiegelJay Willis @jaywillis.net · 30/04/2026I have spent my entire career listening to FedSoc types complain about liberal “activist judges” who “legislate from the bench,” and none of them are going to say a single blessed thing about Sam Alito rewriting the Voting Rights Act to say what he thinks Congress ought to have saidballsandstrikes.orgSix Conservative Activists Killed the Voting Rights ActThe Supreme Court's conservatives have spent their careers working to kill the Voting Rights Act. They just did it. 9343621379
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 29/04/2026There are different kinds of Supreme Court dissents with different objectives: cataloging errors, demonstrating an alternative path, laying bare hidden motives, explainig the stakes, calling the public to battle. Justice Kagan just set a new benchmark for hitting all the bases in one opinion. 050
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 26/04/2026Two questions: (1) Does this letter violate the rules of professional conduct? (2) If not, how can we edit the rules to fix that oversight? 010
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 01/04/2026For the many students, relatives, colleagues, and softball team parents who asked “WTF is going on here,” @jamellebouie.net has got you covered. 010
Reposted by Andrew SiegelJay Willis @jaywillis.net · 31/03/2026It’s genuinely a challenge for legal journalists to cover the birthright citizenship case, because one side’s argument is “the Fourteenth’s Amendment intent and text and a century of uninterrupted Supreme Court precedent all support birthright citizenship,” and the other side’s argument is “nuh-UH” 462932681
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 03/03/2026I co-sign all the procedural, jurisdictional, and hypocrisy points, but the most galling thing in these opinions is the way Alito and crew justify it all by dressing themselves up as civil rights crusaders while running roughshod over the rights and dignity of minorities and trans youth. 000
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 28/02/2026The idea that the federal government through its military brought its coercive weight down upon a famously independent private association because the President and the Secretary of Defense didn’t like its values is one of the most totalitarian things I have heard in awhile. 010
Reposted by Andrew SiegelNathan K. Hensley @nathankhensley.bsky.social · 23/01/2026This must be weird news to see if you’re one of the literally hundreds or even thousands of university administrators who preemptively censored faculty, scrubbed websites, changed the names of centers, etc. 11583412945
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 26/12/2025@atg.wa.gov, if the facts check out this looks like the easiest prosecution of ICE agents you will ever find. Can’t imagine a remotely plausible argument for any immunity doctrine. 173
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 23/12/2025This has been one of my biggest worries for awhile. Given their propensity to lie about basic facts and the courts’ invention of absurd deference, immunity, and remedial doctrines, it is not clear we could stop a cynical illegal push to indiscriminately deport citizens. 073
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 19/12/2025Brilliant? Sure. Kind? More than you will ever know. But what made him special was the quiet confidence that motivated him to stand up against cheats, bullies, and bigots who threatened fairness, justice, and the rule of law. I hope his spirit lives on among his many Article III admirers. 0132
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 09/12/2025The core arguments around many of the right’s pet theories are not serious but instead of dismissing them as such we relied on logical argument and voting to defeat them. The latter didn’t work, as consistent popular vote victories didn’t flip the court, and the former only legitimized them. 061
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 05/12/2025How do I explain the Trump-FIFA relationship to my soccer-obsessed children without ruining the hometown World Cup they have been looking forward to for years? 250
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 05/12/2025I literally cannot get non-lawyers to believe that we are stuck with a dangerous and illogical system of government because the framers used a definite article in introducing the office of the President. 020
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 05/12/2025Another amazing and important essay from fabulous scholars. I still lament a world where we are focused on these questions. If the text and structure of the constitution allow for this crucial category with this historical evidence, they should also allow for it without. 051
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 29/11/2025Roasted by my former Con Law Student @bakarisellers.bsky.social 040
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 28/11/2025This is not an exaggeration. This is one of the five most consistent and important themes in American history, arguably number one. Every journalist or commentator who covers these comments but doesn’t call out this hypocritical bigotry is complicit. 030
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 21/11/2025Guess the thousand movies, miniseries, and documentaries about Nuremberg weren’t enough. 030
Reposted by Andrew SiegelRenee DiResta @noupside.bsky.social · 16/11/2025This newsletter pulls a few things together, including my Atlantic essay on working the referees, and @mantzarlis.com’s fantastic new analysis on what exactly is in Grokipedia. 2174
Reposted by Andrew Siegel Ernest Luckman @ernieluckman.bsky.social · 06/11/2025What’s the problem? We’re just displaying a historical fact that this person is a Jew by forcing them to wear a yellow star. 115238
Reposted by Andrew SiegelSanho Tree @sanho.bsky.social · 04/11/2025Dick Cheney dreamt of a unitary executive and now we all have to live in his nightmare. 213529
Reposted by Andrew SiegelThe Onion @theonion.com · 31/10/2025ICE Agent, 7-Year-Old Both Wearing Same ‘Military Commando’ Halloween Costume 307124192704
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 23/10/2025. . . and no member of the opposition spoke of impeachment or the 25th Amendment.” 010
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 22/10/2025It’s like talking to a toddler. “You said I needed permission to do new construction. You never said anything about destruction.” 031
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 16/09/2025I am glad that the student who sent this to me recognized it as an example of what not to do as a lawyer. 010
Reposted by Andrew Siegeljae holzman @jael.bsky.social · 12/09/2025that wsj story now feels like a culmination of anti-trans panic that should prompt a reckoning in the mainstream media. was totally bunk, false, peddled. it’s the kind of thing that has led to reconciliation before, and it should now. news editors should be looking at themselves in the mirror 8044011096
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 11/08/2025Wait! The Solicitor General signed a letter saying “one year ago the United States was a dead country”? What lawyer would do that? How are those words defined? What is his argument? What is his evidence? What are his sources? How does any of this connect to a legal argument? To plausible expertise? 071
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 11/08/2025One of the overlooked problems with otherwise sensible deference doctrines like rational basis review and presumptions of regularity is that they require courts to declare that important people are liars or bigots or filled with animus. Hard thing for them to do even when the evidence is this stark. 010
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 09/08/2025Some nutty things about this excerpt: (1) It says facts are “undisputed” and then cites only press releases for those facts; (2) It defines giving people’s names as “doxxing”; (3) It conflates bureaucrats with street cops when making arguments about physical danger. 729895
Reposted by Andrew SiegelMatthew Stiegler @matthewstiegler.bsky.social · 08/08/20251. We lawyers have done a lousy job so far of explaining to the public how the current Supreme Court is seizing power from the lower federal courts. Professor Vladeck & others have done invaluable work by bringing attention to the shadow docket, which is a critical aspect of that story. 27420
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 31/07/2025@dorfonlaw.bsky.social speaking with moral and tactical clarity about the meaning and stakes of the Brown settlement. 130
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 12/07/2025If I had polled con law students or professors in 2010 and asked them to rank potential impeachable offenses, “threatened to unilaterally strip American citizen of citizenship for voicing criticism of him” would surely have made the top ten, likely the top five. 060
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 12/07/2025This is the part I don’t get. The reason the traditional rules of presidential behavior don’t apply to him is because we refuse to apply the traditional rules of presidential behavior to him. And the press have been thr worst offenders since day one. 071
Andrew Siegel @amsprof.bsky.social · 09/07/2025I really don’t know what to say. In addition to the incoherence, illegality, and substantive stupidity of the policy, this violates every norm of communication, professionalism and punctuation. If this is his idea of a government letter, no wonder he thinks government can be run by seven interns 030
Reposted by Andrew SiegelTony Varona @tonyvarona.bsky.social · 29/06/2025REMINDER! Join us at 10 a.m. PDT/1 p.m. EDT TOMORROW, June 30, for our Third Annual Supreme Court Rapid Response Webinar, to discuss the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. Nationally recognized experts in law and history will discuss the significance of the decision... 1/2 111