Julian Davis Mortenson
@jdmortenson.bsky.social
University of Michigan law professor. Legal historian. Constitutional litigator. Walking thorny ground. Probably kidding.
Faculty bio at http://bit.ly/jdm-bio
Faculty bio at http://bit.ly/jdm-bio
lol it was 9-0
November 27, 2025 at 1:16 AM
lol it was 9-0
November 27, 2025 at 1:03 AM
GET OUT OF MY BRAIN BILL
November 27, 2025 at 1:00 AM
GET OUT OF MY BRAIN BILL
Maybe the 14th Amdt used "all persons ... subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to mean something different for babies?
Different precise words!
Different age groups!
Who can say really
Different precise words!
Different age groups!
Who can say really
Plyler v Doe (S.Ct. 1982) held that the 14th Amdt EPC applies to "any person within its jurisdiction" regardless of immigration status: "That a person's initial entry into...the United States was unlawful...cannot negate the simple fact of his presence within the State's territorial perimeter."
November 27, 2025 at 12:50 AM
Maybe the 14th Amdt used "all persons ... subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to mean something different for babies?
Different precise words!
Different age groups!
Who can say really
Different precise words!
Different age groups!
Who can say really
Plyler v Doe (S.Ct. 1982) held that the 14th Amdt EPC applies to "any person within its jurisdiction" regardless of immigration status: "That a person's initial entry into...the United States was unlawful...cannot negate the simple fact of his presence within the State's territorial perimeter."
November 27, 2025 at 12:49 AM
Plyler v Doe (S.Ct. 1982) held that the 14th Amdt EPC applies to "any person within its jurisdiction" regardless of immigration status: "That a person's initial entry into...the United States was unlawful...cannot negate the simple fact of his presence within the State's territorial perimeter."
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
💯 these guys were super entertaining, what with their whist games and dinner parties, their legislation-writing, & running for president. The only problem is figuring out which era of the 19th c. would be most fun to watch…
What would actually work great is a TV show about the *nineteenth* century supreme court, where (per @rachelshelden.bsky.social's straight FIRE forthcoming book) all this implausible activity by the Justices was just another day in the Capitol basement ballsandstrikes.substack.com/p/a-brief-hi...
A Brief History Of Awful TV Shows About the Supreme Court
The concept of “The West Wing for the Supreme Court” might be the only thing more upsetting than the actual Supreme Court.
ballsandstrikes.substack.com
November 18, 2025 at 12:47 AM
💯 these guys were super entertaining, what with their whist games and dinner parties, their legislation-writing, & running for president. The only problem is figuring out which era of the 19th c. would be most fun to watch…
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
Can’t believe people are pitching new SCOTUS shows while my spec script for William O. Douglas: Vampire Hunter is just sitting in a pile somewhere, SMH.
What would actually work great is a TV show about the *nineteenth* century supreme court, where (per @rachelshelden.bsky.social's straight FIRE forthcoming book) all this implausible activity by the Justices was just another day in the Capitol basement ballsandstrikes.substack.com/p/a-brief-hi...
A Brief History Of Awful TV Shows About the Supreme Court
The concept of “The West Wing for the Supreme Court” might be the only thing more upsetting than the actual Supreme Court.
ballsandstrikes.substack.com
November 18, 2025 at 3:00 AM
Can’t believe people are pitching new SCOTUS shows while my spec script for William O. Douglas: Vampire Hunter is just sitting in a pile somewhere, SMH.
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
realizing this should have been in either [stares directly into radio] or [stares directly into fireplace]
i'll do better. i promise.
i'll do better. i promise.
November 18, 2025 at 12:08 AM
realizing this should have been in either [stares directly into radio] or [stares directly into fireplace]
i'll do better. i promise.
i'll do better. i promise.
What would actually work great is a TV show about the *nineteenth* century supreme court, where (per @rachelshelden.bsky.social's straight FIRE forthcoming book) all this implausible activity by the Justices was just another day in the Capitol basement ballsandstrikes.substack.com/p/a-brief-hi...
A Brief History Of Awful TV Shows About the Supreme Court
The concept of “The West Wing for the Supreme Court” might be the only thing more upsetting than the actual Supreme Court.
ballsandstrikes.substack.com
November 18, 2025 at 12:11 AM
What would actually work great is a TV show about the *nineteenth* century supreme court, where (per @rachelshelden.bsky.social's straight FIRE forthcoming book) all this implausible activity by the Justices was just another day in the Capitol basement ballsandstrikes.substack.com/p/a-brief-hi...
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
"Watson! Can you hear me? I need you."
What perfect album came out the year you turned 16
November 17, 2025 at 1:27 AM
"Watson! Can you hear me? I need you."
What perfect album came out the year you turned 16
November 17, 2025 at 1:20 AM
What perfect album came out the year you turned 16
never apologize for citing Matthew Hale, change my mind
November 17, 2025 at 1:17 AM
never apologize for citing Matthew Hale, change my mind
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
'Camden Town, London' (1940) by Priscilla Ann Siebert
(Dresden State Art Collections)
(Dresden State Art Collections)
November 12, 2025 at 9:21 PM
'Camden Town, London' (1940) by Priscilla Ann Siebert
(Dresden State Art Collections)
(Dresden State Art Collections)
why is this not sufficient, i ask you
November 16, 2025 at 12:18 AM
why is this not sufficient, i ask you
this ish is so important to say
Whatever else you might be, Anna, you’re certainly one of us!
November 16, 2025 at 12:17 AM
this ish is so important to say
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
Whatever else you might be, Anna, you’re certainly one of us!
November 15, 2025 at 7:17 PM
Whatever else you might be, Anna, you’re certainly one of us!
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
BREAKING: @janemanners.bsky.social, a legal historian and member of the Brennan Center’s Historians Council, filed a brief with the Supreme Court in Trump v. Slaughter, a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s attempt to remove a commissioner of the FTC without cause: bit.ly/4nSvm9B
November 14, 2025 at 8:39 PM
BREAKING: @janemanners.bsky.social, a legal historian and member of the Brennan Center’s Historians Council, filed a brief with the Supreme Court in Trump v. Slaughter, a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s attempt to remove a commissioner of the FTC without cause: bit.ly/4nSvm9B
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
This work builds on research by many others, including @beaubaumann.bsky.social and Emily Bremer. @nwdonahue.bsky.social and I are still at work on the law review version. In the meantime, you can read the brief at the link below! 3/3
www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25...
www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25...
November 14, 2025 at 10:52 PM
This work builds on research by many others, including @beaubaumann.bsky.social and Emily Bremer. @nwdonahue.bsky.social and I are still at work on the law review version. In the meantime, you can read the brief at the link below! 3/3
www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25...
www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25...
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
The main question is whether to overturn Humphrey’s Executor, a 1935 case that said statutes can limit presidential removal of “quasi legislative” and “quasi judicial” officers. Modern courts say those terms are made up, but they are not. In fact, they are deeply rooted in administrative law. 2/3
November 14, 2025 at 10:52 PM
The main question is whether to overturn Humphrey’s Executor, a 1935 case that said statutes can limit presidential removal of “quasi legislative” and “quasi judicial” officers. Modern courts say those terms are made up, but they are not. In fact, they are deeply rooted in administrative law. 2/3
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
"The Cavalier Daily corresponded with former Rector Robert Hardie, whose term ended June 30, regarding the two accounts. He confirmed that he agreed with Ryan’s account.
'I concur fully with President Ryan’s recollection of events,' Hardie said."
Welp
www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2025...
'I concur fully with President Ryan’s recollection of events,' Hardie said."
Welp
www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2025...
Ryan and Sheridan provide full accounts of Ryan’s resignation. They differ significantly
“I concur fully with President Ryan’s recollection of events,” former Board Rector Robert Hardie said.
www.cavalierdaily.com
November 14, 2025 at 7:46 PM
"The Cavalier Daily corresponded with former Rector Robert Hardie, whose term ended June 30, regarding the two accounts. He confirmed that he agreed with Ryan’s account.
'I concur fully with President Ryan’s recollection of events,' Hardie said."
Welp
www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2025...
'I concur fully with President Ryan’s recollection of events,' Hardie said."
Welp
www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2025...
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
This is one of the most important issues that AJIL has put out in recent years.
The elongated section on “Contemporary Practice of the US” represents an effort by the AJIL Board to set out and critically examine the US approach to intl law at our current moment, through a series of focused essays.
The elongated section on “Contemporary Practice of the US” represents an effort by the AJIL Board to set out and critically examine the US approach to intl law at our current moment, through a series of focused essays.
The October issue of AJIL is now available online! This issue places special focus on the CPUS section, where members of the Board have written essays on the various policies and changes under the second Trump administration. www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
November 14, 2025 at 3:17 PM
This is one of the most important issues that AJIL has put out in recent years.
The elongated section on “Contemporary Practice of the US” represents an effort by the AJIL Board to set out and critically examine the US approach to intl law at our current moment, through a series of focused essays.
The elongated section on “Contemporary Practice of the US” represents an effort by the AJIL Board to set out and critically examine the US approach to intl law at our current moment, through a series of focused essays.
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
Correct. 1.18(b)(1). The confidentiality rules are quite strong, as the drafters take that as the core pillar supporting effective lawyer/client relationships. www.americanbar.org/groups/profe...
Rule 1.18: Duties to Prospective Client
Client-Lawyer Relationship | A person who consults with a lawyer about the possibility of forming a client-lawyer relationship with respect to a matter is a prospective client.
www.americanbar.org
November 14, 2025 at 3:40 PM
Correct. 1.18(b)(1). The confidentiality rules are quite strong, as the drafters take that as the core pillar supporting effective lawyer/client relationships. www.americanbar.org/groups/profe...
November 14, 2025 at 3:45 PM
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
Former UVA president Jim Ryan, who resigned over the summer due to pressure from the Trump Administration, just shared this 12-page letter with the Faculty Senate, detailing his experience with the Board of Visitors and DOJ.
It's a surreal--and troubling--read.
drive.google.com/file/d/1Is6x...
It's a surreal--and troubling--read.
drive.google.com/file/d/1Is6x...
November 14, 2025 at 2:15 PM
Former UVA president Jim Ryan, who resigned over the summer due to pressure from the Trump Administration, just shared this 12-page letter with the Faculty Senate, detailing his experience with the Board of Visitors and DOJ.
It's a surreal--and troubling--read.
drive.google.com/file/d/1Is6x...
It's a surreal--and troubling--read.
drive.google.com/file/d/1Is6x...
Reposted by Julian Davis Mortenson
The lawyer might rely upon the state version of 1.6(b)(1), but I wouldn’t.
November 14, 2025 at 3:35 PM
The lawyer might rely upon the state version of 1.6(b)(1), but I wouldn’t.