A 25th Amendment reading list - Prof. Garrett Epps
Prof. Garrett Epps has developed a 25th Amendment reading list. Prominent is the work of my Fordham colleague and former Dean John Feerick.
A 25th Amendment reading list - Prof. Garrett Epps
Prof. Garrett Epps has developed a 25th Amendment reading list. Prominent is the work of my Fordham colleague and former Dean John Feerick.
By Robert Reich [former U.S. Secretary of Labor]
Friends,
Last night, 90 minutes before Trump said he’d cause the death of a “whole civilization” if Iran didn’t open the Strait of Hormuz, an Iranian official said the shipping channel would be reopened for two weeks if the United States stopped bombing Iran. The U.S. has now stopped bombing Iran.
So we’re back to the status quo before Trump began his war. Only now, Iran can credibly threaten to close the strait if it doesn’t get what it wants from Trump — thereby causing havoc to the U.S. (and world) economies. Trump’s only remaining bargaining leverage is the threat of committing war crimes.
In other words, last night’s showdown was a clear victory for Iran and a clear defeat for Trump (although he’ll frame it as a victory).
The Iran fiasco is only the latest in a host of examples revealing how to defeat Trump.
In addition to Iran, similar strategies have been used by China, Russia, Canada, Mexico, and Greenland. Inside the United States, the people of Minneapolis have used them, as have Harvard University, comedian Jimmy Kimmel, writer E. Jean Carroll, and the law firms Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, Susman Godfrey, and WilmerHale.
What’s the strategy that connects them all?All refused to cave to Trump, despite his superior military or economic power. Instead, they’ve engaged in a kind of jujitsu in which they use Trump’s power against him, while allowing Trump to save face by claiming he’s won. Consider:
Iran knew it was no match for the superior might of the U.S. (and Israel). So it used cheap drones and missiles to close the Strait of Hormuz and incapacitate other Gulf oil installations, thereby driving up the prices of oil and gas at the pump in the U.S., which has put growing political pressure on Trump, months before a midterm election. Hence, Trump has been forced stop his war.
Representatives Veronica Escobar (TX-16) and Maria Elvira Salazar (FL-27), along with 18 of their colleagues, announced the reintroduction of their historic, bipartisan immigration reform bill; now, the Dignity Act of 2025. After more than two years of negotiation, there is an updated compromise that addresses legal status and protections for undocumented immigrants, border security, asylum reform, and visa reform.
As people of faith and conscience, we are called to respond to immigration not with fear or cruelty, but with compassion, dignity, and moral clarity. Representative Veronica Escobar’s reintroduction of the Dignity Act is a direct response to the inhumane policies that define the Trump administration’s approach to immigration. At Vote Common Good, we believe it’s time to align our laws with our values—welcoming the stranger, protecting the vulnerable, and ensuring justice and due process for all.
See how faith and fairness are guiding immigration reform →
Read the Dignity Act of 2025 →
Docket: Secretary, Homeland Security v. Doe
Search - Mullin v. Doe - Supreme Court of the United States 25A953
Secretary v. Doe - U.S. Application to stay order below
Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Rules of this Court and the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651, the Solicitor General—on behalf of applicants Kristi Noem, et al.—respectfully files this application to stay the order postponing agency action issued by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. [And for the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.]
...both times, the Court’s orders reflected that the government established irreparable harm and that the balance of the equities weighed in its favor. See Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009)
Related proceedings:
United States District Court (S.D.N.Y.): Doe v. Noem, No. 25-cv-8686 (Nov. 19, 2025) (order granting motion to postpone agency action) United States Court of Appeals (2d Cir.): Doe v. Noem, No. 25-2995 (Feb. 17, 2026) (order denying motion for stay pending appeal)
In essence the U.S. asserts that unexplained orders by two other courts establishes the law of the case allowing the termination of Temporary Protected Status enjoyed by refugees from Syria.
The Solicitor General argues that
"given the lower courts’ persistent disregard for this Court’s stay orders, this Court should also grant certiorari before judgment. Otherwise, lower courts will continue to impermissibly bypass an unambiguous judicial-review bar and displace the Secretary’s judgment on matters committed to her unreviewable discretion by law; continue to twist APA review to substitute their own judgment for the Secretary’s; and continue to impede the termination of temporary protection that the Secretary has deemed contrary to the national interest, tying those decisions up in protracted litigation with no end in sight. "
The U.S. Supreme Court has in fact stayed the orders below and granted cert before judgment.
Brief amicus for 150 former U.S. and State court judges
The judges, appearing as amicus curiae, argue:
I. Unexplained interim orders do not bind courts in different cases. ................... 6
II. The Government overstates the significance of the NTPSA stay orders. ........ 9
III. The decision to deny a stay was a reasonable application of this Court’s
precedents.......................................................................................................... 11
IV. The court of appeals should address the Government’s merits
arguments in the first instance.
Syria is a country in humanitarian crisis. In recognition of a brutal civil war that began in 2011, the United States has repeatedly granted Syrian nationals a form of statutory and humanitarian protection called Temporary Protected Status (“TPS”), which protects certain individuals from removal to countries designated unsafe on account of dire country conditions like armed conflict, natural disaster, or other extraordinary circumstances. TPS provides eligible beneficiaries with the right to live and work legally in the United States during a period when it is unsafe for them to return to their countries of origin. Over 6,100 Syrian nationals currently have TPS and, as a result, find refuge in the United States; and over 800 Syrian nationals have pending applications hoping for that same protection. 2. Plaintiffs are seven Syrian nationals with TPS or pending applications for TPS, who have lived in the United States for years and have deep ties to this country and their communities. They bring this class action to challenge Defendants’ remarkable and unlawful decision to terminate Syria’s TPS designation, effective November 21, 2025.
350,000 Haitians are protected by TPS. In a powerful amicus brief authored principally by lawyers from the multi-national law firm Bryan Cave, argue that the actions against Syrian refugees endangers similarly situated persons who fled Haiti.
The amici judges continue their argument:
Defendants’ actions put Plaintiffs with existing TPS at imminent risk of losing the critical humanitarian protection that TPS provides and rob Plaintiffs with pending applications of the opportunity to have their applications adjudicated. Should TPS for Syria be terminated, all Plaintiffs will face impossible choices: to uproot their lives yet again in search of a pathway to safety in a third country; to remain in the United States without lawful immigration status, at risk of imminent immigration detention and removal; or to relocate—some for the first time—to Syria, a country plagued by violent conflict, including air strikes, civil unrest, humanitarian crisis, and volatile country conditions.
Noem v. Doe: The government filed an application
on February 26 requesting the Supreme Court stay pending appeal of a
preliminary injunction issued by a district court preliminarily enjoining
Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem from terminating temporary
protected status designation for Syria. The government asked the Court to
construe the application as a petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment
and grant the petition. On March 16, the Court consolidated the case with a
challenge to the Department of Homeland Security’s termination of Temporary
Protected Status designations for Haiti and granted certiorari before judgment
of the consolidated cases while deferring action on the government’s request
for a stay.
The current status is:
| Mar 16 2026 | Consideration of the application for stay (25A952) presented to Justice Sotomayor and by her referred to the Court is deferred. Consideration of the application for stay (25A999) presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is also deferred. The applications are also treated as petitions for a writ of certiorari before judgment (25-1083, 25-1084), and the petitions are GRANTED. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. The cases will be heard during the second week of the April 2026 argument session. Petitioners’ brief on the merits, and any amicus curiae briefs in support or in support of neither party, are to be filed on or before Monday March 30, 2026. Respondents’ briefs on the merits and any amicus curiae briefs in support, are to be filed on or before Monday, April 13, 2026. The reply brief, if any, is to be filed on or before Monday, April 20, 2026. |
It is a federal offense to intentionally select for killing
Ed Martin, Acting U.S. Attorney faces ethics charges - TPM
Then-acting D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin already had plenty of trouble on his hands, all of his own making, when D.C. Bar disciplinary counsel last year began looking into his extortionist threat against Georgetown University. But good ol’ Ed, with characteristic aplomb, managed to make things a whole lot worse for himself.
In a newly filed two-count disciplinary case against Martin in DC, half of the complaint is devoted to his unconstitutional pressure campaign against the Jesuit University and half to Martin’s ham-handed efforts to block the probe by threatening the bar’s disciplinary counsel and by going over his head to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals while the probe was still underway.
In short, Martin managed to get a second count lodged against himself in the course of unsuccessfully fighting off the first count. Well done, sir, well done.
Morning Memo covered last March the details of Martin’s anti-DEI-fueled threat to Georgetown Law School Dean William M. Treanor. (He subsequently upped the ante by threatening Georgetown’s president and board of directors, too, according to the bar complaint.) So let me zero in on Count II, which is where the real comedy is.
Martin went nuclear on the disciplinary counsel right off the bat, according to the complaint:

That letter earned Martin an admonishment from the chief judge, who told him in a follow-up letter that the judges couldn’t meet with him ex parte — that is, without disciplinary counsel present — and that he needed to go through the normal bar disciplinary process.
A week later, Martin cc’ed the chief judge on an email to the disciplinary counsel, which earned him another admonishment from the chief judge:

A month later, after allegedly failing to respond to communications from the disciplinary counsel, Martin sent yet another letter to the chief judge, now taking aim at the disciplinary counsel himself:

That earned Martin a third admonishment from the chief judge.
As President Donald Trump prepares to convene the first official meeting of his speciously named Board of Peace on Thursday, he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have re-escalated demands that Hamas and other Palestinian resistance factions imminently disarm—with Netanyahu insisting that all small arms must be turned over before the Israeli military withdraws any of its forces.
“Very importantly, Hamas must uphold its commitment to Full and Immediate Demilitarization,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Sunday.
This demand is being presented as a condition for any reconstruction to begin in Gaza, with no guarantees for Palestinian security or sovereignty. A senior Israeli official also claimed Monday that Trump is considering imposing a two-month deadline for Palestinians to surrender their weapons. Both Trump and Netanyahu have threatened that a large-scale war against Gaza could resume if Hamas refuses to capitulate.
Meanwhile Hamas has not been part of any formal negotiations for several months. Amid media reports of new drafts and U.S. preparation for negotiations, Hamas leaders say there has been nothing formally presented to the movement and that no official meetings have been held with the group to discuss possible scenarios.
Jerome Cohen, the late lawyer and NYU Law Professor was our leading
"China hand". He was an advocate for democracy in China while maintaining the ability to be heard in China.
I am grateul for his inviting me to join him and Judges John Walker and Jed Rakoff in China fifteen years ago.
Here Fordham and Princeton Professor Martin Flaherty offers his own reflections and tribute:
I think of summer with its luminous fruit,
blossoms rounding to berries, leaves,
handfuls of grain.
Maybe what cold is, is the time
we measure the love we have always had, secretly,
for our own bones, the hard knife-edged love
for the warm river of the I, beyond all else; maybe
that is what it means the beauty
of the blue shark cruising toward the tumbling seals.
In the season of snow,
in the immeasurable cold,
we grow cruel but honest; we keep
ourselves alive,
if we can, taking one after another
the necessary bodies of others, the many
crushed red flowers.
—Mary Oliver, “Cold”
250 years ago!
“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. ”
Thomas Paine The Crisis, December 23 1776
Reality Distortion in the Age of Trump and the Corrupt Court
With a hearing on the constitutionality of birthright citizenship now on the calendar, I want to return to a basic point we’ve discussed several times over the last year. Given our experience living mostly in “normal” times, many of us are used to the idea that the law evolves over time. When judges create new case law, the law evolves and changes. And we accept that it has “changed” — in a certain meaning of the word — even when we may not agree with the change. But with so many other things that have changed slowly since 2016 and then rapidly from early 2025, these are outdated ideas, outdated understandings of how the world and the law works.
Birthright citizenship is a key example of this.
Birthright citizenship is clearly, explicitly and incontestably written into the U.S. Constitution. It’s the country’s fundamental law and more than 150 years of American history have been lived on that basis. There’s a reason why no one has doubted this over all those years even if many have opposed it.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/reality-distortion-in-the-age-of-trump-and-the-corrupt-court
Cardinals Joseph Tobin- Newark, Cupich - Chicago, and McElroy - D.C. Say NO to ICE - National Catholic Reporter
A high-ranking Catholic leader is ratcheting up criticism of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown and urging people of faith to be more vocal in calling out injustice.
Responding to a sense of helplessness many people are feeling in the wake of violence at the hands of federal immigration officials, Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, urged people of faith not to shy away from the news and to use their voices to say, "No."
In a reflection delivered Jan. 26 during an online interfaith prayer service hosted by Faith in Action, Tobin employed some of the strongest language yet by a U.S. cardinal to condemn the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, describing Immigration and Customs Enforcement "lawless" and urging Catholics to tell their lawmakers to vote against additional funding.
Recounting a story from Bread and Wine, a 1936 novel by Ignazio Silone, Tobin described a character lamenting the incursion of fascist forces who asks a priest, "Father, what can we do?" With "the machinery of death" set in motion, as Tobin put it, the priest tells the young woman that what worries dictators and authoritarian regimes is the person who scrawls on the piazza wall, "No."
"I think if we are serious about putting our faith in action, we need to say 'no,' each one of us," Tobin said. What saying "no" looks like today, he continued, is by telling the truth about what is happening and honoring those whose lives are upended.
Over the weekend, immigration enforcement agents killed Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old Minneapolis resident and intensive care nurse who was filming at the protest. Federal authorities say that Pretti was armed and a threat to law enforcement, but video analysis by The New York Times and other media outlets dispute that account. According to reports, Pretti's gun had already been secured by officers before two agents shot him at least 10 times.
"One way that we say 'no' is that we mourn, we do not celebrate death, and, what is probably worse, we do not pretend it doesn't happen. We say names. We pray for the dead," Tobin said. "We mourn for a world, a country, that allows 5-year-olds to be legally kidnapped and protesters to be slaughtered."

One of three U.S. cardinals who recently signed a statement condemning President Donald Trump's foreign policy aims and calling for the White House to focus on peace, Tobin noted that he was speaking within a few miles from two detention centers.
"Everyday people from many faith communities go to Delaney Street here in Newark, and to the Elizabeth Detention Center, and they say 'no' by standing at the gates, by talking with the ICE personnel, by insisting on the rights of the detainees within," he said. "They bring them human comfort, they console the families of those who aren't always admitted to see their loved ones. How will you say 'no?' How?"
Citing the Gospel story of the Good Samaritan, and invoking the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Tobin asked how people will say "no" to what's happening today.
"How will you say 'no?' How will you say 'no' to violence?" he said. "How will you say 'no' this week when an appropriations bill is going to be considered in Congress? Will you contact your congressional representatives, the senators and representatives from your district? Will you ask them, for the love of God and the love of human beings, which can't be separated, to vote against renewing funding for such a lawless organization?"
Full text of statement by Chicago Cardinal Blase J. Cupich, Washington Cardinal Robert W. McElroy, and Newark Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin:
Charting A Moral Vision of American Foreign Policy: