Author: bakhtawar

From the decision Monday written by Judge Tracy M. Smith in Nygard v. Walsh (Minn. Ct. App.); it strikes me as quite correct; This dispute is between two neighbors …. At issue in this action are three surveillance cameras that [Patrick] Walsh and his wife, Nancy Walsh, installed on their property. The district court found that the … Continue reading Plaintiff Distressed by Neighbors’ Cameras—Because of His PTSD—Can’t Get Restraining Order Continue Reading →

The Sierra Club has asked the Supreme Court to lift its stay in the border wall case. The plaintiffs assert that they have an equitable cause of action to challenge ultra vires action. The court of appeals correctly found that Plaintiffs can proceed in equity to seek relief from ultra vires and unconstitutional actions by executive officers. “Where, as … Continue reading The Sierra Club Asked The Supreme Court To Lift The Stay in The Border Wall Case. But There Is No “Equitable Ultra Vires Cause Of Action” Continue Reading →

On Tuesday, I blogged about Judge Andrew Brasher’s recusal from the Eleventh Circuit’s en banc felon disenfranchisement case. Judge Brasher made that decision on his own accord. The plaintiffs in that case had previously sought his recusal; that motion became moot. The plaintiffs also seek the recusal of two other judges on the Eleventh Circuit: Judges Luck … Continue reading Can the impartiality of a judge be reasonably questioned if she asks questions during oral arguments, but does not decide the case? (Updated) Continue Reading →

I have written two posts about the felon disenfranchisement case pending before the Eleventh Circuit. I think Judge Brasher made the correct decision to recuse himself, because his former employer (the Alabama Attorney General) filed an amicus brief. I do not think Judges Luck and Lagoa are disqualified, based on their service on a related case before the Florida … Continue reading Democratic Senators Demand 11th Circuit Judges “Explain” their involvement in Felon Disenfranchisement Case. Continue Reading →

The Department of Homeland Security has deployed federal agents to help quell unrest in Portland. This move has been controversial, as have the efforts of DHS to defend the conduct of federal agents. In one high-profile instance, federal agents appear to have engaged in unconstitutional conduct, and the officials in charge do not seem to understand what’s wrong. … Continue reading The Headless Department of Homeland Security Continue Reading →

Yesterday President Trump announced that since his “first duty as President is to protect the American people,” the administration was directing a federal response to end “the bloodshed” in American cities. As had been anticipated, he wants to roll-out nationally the wildly successful model of law enforcement that federal officers had demonstrated in Lafayette Park in Washington, … Continue reading Federalism and Law and Order Continue Reading →

Back in 2012, I published an article in the Texas Review of Law & Politics on this subject, trying to describe such laws. I’m not sure where I stand on them as a policy matter. On one hand, they restrict private employer choice, and can often undermine private employers’ legitimate policy interests, much as other antidiscrimination laws … Continue reading Laws Protecting Private Employees’ Speech and Political Activity Against Employer Retaliation: Introduction Continue Reading →

Today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decided Bearden v. Ballad Health. As the brief opinion makes amply clear, the judges did not think much of the appellant’s advocacy. The opinion by Judge Thapar begins: As our court has previously explained, there are good reasons not to disparage your opponent, especially in court filings. … Continue reading “There Are Good Reasons Not to Disparage Your Opponent, Especially in Court Filings” Continue Reading →

SCOTUSBlog published my new essay, titled Invisible majorities: Counting to nine votes in per curiam cases. Here is the introduction: When the Supreme Court issues a signed opinion, each of the nine justices will indicate their position: affirm, reverse or recuse. But not all opinions are signed. The court sometimes issues unsigned per curiam decisions – … Continue reading New on SCOTUSBlog: “Invisible majorities: Counting to nine votes in per curiam cases” Continue Reading →

The QSIDE Institute has released a comprehensive dataset of federal court sentencing data, cobbled together from a number of sources, including PACER. The dataset has over 570,000 records, each corresponding to a single sentencing, from 2001-2018. The project represents a phenomenal investment, and it should help make sentencing more transparent. In particular, because the dataset includes judge … Continue reading Transparency in Sentencing Continue Reading →