Jerry Edwards
@jerryedwards.bsky.social
Associate Professor of Law at West Virginia University College of Law. Formerly an ACLUFL Attorney. I nerd out over free expression, academic freedom, and American history.
All opinions are my own, not my employer's, and are correct, probably.
All opinions are my own, not my employer's, and are correct, probably.
Pinned
Jerry Edwards
@jerryedwards.bsky.social
· Aug 15
I am excited to announce that my article, Academic Freedom's Inflection Point, will be published in the Boston College Law Review in 2026. The SSRN link is below. I plan to make revisions to address feedback & new developments (ex. a terrible govt speech opinion). Comments are welcome & appreciated!
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
That question - that the agency head can refuse to make a rule that the president wants him to make - glosses over the problem that what Kavanaugh thinks is so abhorrent, that President's will could be flouted, is that he's trying to exercise an Article I power he doesn't actually have.
December 8, 2025 at 5:17 PM
That question - that the agency head can refuse to make a rule that the president wants him to make - glosses over the problem that what Kavanaugh thinks is so abhorrent, that President's will could be flouted, is that he's trying to exercise an Article I power he doesn't actually have.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
appreciate Kagan saying 'when I was a young lawyer and the unitary executive theory was getting its start--'
it gets absolutely lost that all of this 'this is how things are done, have been done, must be done' yadda yadda bullshit is *brand new bullshit*
none of this shit is set in stone
it gets absolutely lost that all of this 'this is how things are done, have been done, must be done' yadda yadda bullshit is *brand new bullshit*
none of this shit is set in stone
December 8, 2025 at 5:08 PM
appreciate Kagan saying 'when I was a young lawyer and the unitary executive theory was getting its start--'
it gets absolutely lost that all of this 'this is how things are done, have been done, must be done' yadda yadda bullshit is *brand new bullshit*
none of this shit is set in stone
it gets absolutely lost that all of this 'this is how things are done, have been done, must be done' yadda yadda bullshit is *brand new bullshit*
none of this shit is set in stone
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
the Trump admin's argument in Trump v. Slaughter is twofold--that laws saying presidents can only fire people for good cause are unconstitutional, *and that any court orders that block Trump from firing people are unconstitutional--and I wish there was some more discussion today of that second part
December 8, 2025 at 4:39 PM
the Trump admin's argument in Trump v. Slaughter is twofold--that laws saying presidents can only fire people for good cause are unconstitutional, *and that any court orders that block Trump from firing people are unconstitutional--and I wish there was some more discussion today of that second part
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
Yes, not to mention the legislation would have been signed by Pres. unless veto overridden by cong. supermajority! And Pres. oversight is not all or nothing - good cause Pres. removal still provides a lot of oversight pwr.
hey a fun thing is that if congress is delegating authority to an independent agency then by definition that agency is not "unaccountable." it is still accountable to congress. and it is interesting (read: extremely frustrating) to me that these people just write congress out of existence here.
Kavanaugh: Broad delegations to unaccountable agencies are dangerous for individual liberty! We have used the major questions doctrine to prevent agencies from overreaching.
Sauer: MQD not a substitute for the removal power for the president
Sauer: MQD not a substitute for the removal power for the president
December 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
Yes, not to mention the legislation would have been signed by Pres. unless veto overridden by cong. supermajority! And Pres. oversight is not all or nothing - good cause Pres. removal still provides a lot of oversight pwr.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
Gorsuch is fussing over this "conclusive and preclusive" language the attorneys are using saying 'yeah it rhymes but I don't know what it means' motherfucker ain't that language come from youuuu people in Trump v. United States? don't fault the lawyer for being unclear when it's your lack of clarity
December 8, 2025 at 4:25 PM
Gorsuch is fussing over this "conclusive and preclusive" language the attorneys are using saying 'yeah it rhymes but I don't know what it means' motherfucker ain't that language come from youuuu people in Trump v. United States? don't fault the lawyer for being unclear when it's your lack of clarity
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
also you know what else is dangerous to individual liberty? a totally unconstrained executive, which we're seeing right now thanks, in part, to kavanaugh's own actions as a justice!
December 8, 2025 at 4:18 PM
also you know what else is dangerous to individual liberty? a totally unconstrained executive, which we're seeing right now thanks, in part, to kavanaugh's own actions as a justice!
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
It's not a coincidence Scalia came up with all this stuff at a time when Republicans had won all but one of the last five presidential elections but had not held both houses of Congress in decades.
December 8, 2025 at 4:25 PM
It's not a coincidence Scalia came up with all this stuff at a time when Republicans had won all but one of the last five presidential elections but had not held both houses of Congress in decades.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
It is really, really hard to get your head around the raw hubris of the majority. They really will be destabilizing the operating structure of the entire U.S. government. Why? Because they believe they have a better idea about how the past century should've been done.
Justice Gorsuch: Is it possible--"just maybe"--that we're setting our sights far too low and we should be blowing up many more structures of modern government?
December 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM
It is really, really hard to get your head around the raw hubris of the majority. They really will be destabilizing the operating structure of the entire U.S. government. Why? Because they believe they have a better idea about how the past century should've been done.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
gorsuch in particular is just monstrously arrogant. the portrait of a fart sniffer.
It is really, really hard to get your head around the raw hubris of the majority. They really will be destabilizing the operating structure of the entire U.S. government. Why? Because they believe they have a better idea about how the past century should've been done.
Justice Gorsuch: Is it possible--"just maybe"--that we're setting our sights far too low and we should be blowing up many more structures of modern government?
December 8, 2025 at 4:25 PM
gorsuch in particular is just monstrously arrogant. the portrait of a fart sniffer.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
Why are we talking about Congress "taking over" departments? Congress created them in the first place!
December 8, 2025 at 4:19 PM
Why are we talking about Congress "taking over" departments? Congress created them in the first place!
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
hey a fun thing is that if congress is delegating authority to an independent agency then by definition that agency is not "unaccountable." it is still accountable to congress. and it is interesting (read: extremely frustrating) to me that these people just write congress out of existence here.
Kavanaugh: Broad delegations to unaccountable agencies are dangerous for individual liberty! We have used the major questions doctrine to prevent agencies from overreaching.
Sauer: MQD not a substitute for the removal power for the president
Sauer: MQD not a substitute for the removal power for the president
December 8, 2025 at 4:16 PM
hey a fun thing is that if congress is delegating authority to an independent agency then by definition that agency is not "unaccountable." it is still accountable to congress. and it is interesting (read: extremely frustrating) to me that these people just write congress out of existence here.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
👀 👀 in response to Trump's DOJ saying the president needs to directly control independent agencies in order to protect the people of the US, KBJ just said something like 'Congress thought replacing all the PhDs with loyalists who don't know anything is not in the interest of the people of the US?'
December 8, 2025 at 4:08 PM
👀 👀 in response to Trump's DOJ saying the president needs to directly control independent agencies in order to protect the people of the US, KBJ just said something like 'Congress thought replacing all the PhDs with loyalists who don't know anything is not in the interest of the people of the US?'
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
The Take Care Clause was a byproduct of the lessons learned from the Glorious Revolution that the executive should not be able to dispense with the law promulgated by the legislature. It was not a constitutional provision to empower the executive branch— but to constrain it!
December 8, 2025 at 3:32 PM
The Take Care Clause was a byproduct of the lessons learned from the Glorious Revolution that the executive should not be able to dispense with the law promulgated by the legislature. It was not a constitutional provision to empower the executive branch— but to constrain it!
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
The government is arguing that way the federal government has operated for the past century or so is a “distortion“ of some constitutional purity
December 8, 2025 at 3:14 PM
The government is arguing that way the federal government has operated for the past century or so is a “distortion“ of some constitutional purity
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
I know the Republican justices are going to overrule Humphrey's, either outright or in effect, but it's not yet clear to me *how they're gonna do so, and as such, what the full range of likely consequences looks like
what's other people's sense?
what's other people's sense?
December 8, 2025 at 3:55 PM
I know the Republican justices are going to overrule Humphrey's, either outright or in effect, but it's not yet clear to me *how they're gonna do so, and as such, what the full range of likely consequences looks like
what's other people's sense?
what's other people's sense?
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
Here's another implication of SG Sauer's argument: Purely legislative and purely judicial functions also can't be assigned to officers with removal protection because Articles I & III also respectively grant "all of" the legislative and judicial power to Congress and the federal courts.
December 8, 2025 at 3:28 PM
Here's another implication of SG Sauer's argument: Purely legislative and purely judicial functions also can't be assigned to officers with removal protection because Articles I & III also respectively grant "all of" the legislative and judicial power to Congress and the federal courts.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
The Supreme Court just set aside a 2nd Circuit decision upholding New York's requirement that all school students, public and private, obtain certain vaccinations, without any religious exemptions. It orders the 2nd Circuit to reconsider the ruling in light of SCOTUS' LGBTQ school books decision.
December 8, 2025 at 2:38 PM
The Supreme Court just set aside a 2nd Circuit decision upholding New York's requirement that all school students, public and private, obtain certain vaccinations, without any religious exemptions. It orders the 2nd Circuit to reconsider the ruling in light of SCOTUS' LGBTQ school books decision.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
Proud to be part of this effort @lpeproject.bsky.social/@lpeblog.bsky.social! Check out the great lineup for the upcoming ALPE conference and register! And pls consider joining the new org. All info is in the linked post: lpeproject.org/blog/lpe-2-0...
LPE 2.0: A New Association to Meet the Times
As the Trump administration attempts to suppress critical inquiry and operate outside of conventional legal boundaries, the work of LPE scholars, organizers, and practitioners has never been more…
lpeproject.org
December 8, 2025 at 1:54 PM
Proud to be part of this effort @lpeproject.bsky.social/@lpeblog.bsky.social! Check out the great lineup for the upcoming ALPE conference and register! And pls consider joining the new org. All info is in the linked post: lpeproject.org/blog/lpe-2-0...
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
To go after a family for no other reason than that their daughter sparked sympathy is appalling. Absolutely appalling. Beyond cruelty into outright sadism.
They are going after that college students' family now. JFC www.nytimes.com/2025/12/07/u...
Immigration Agents Target Family of Deported College Student
www.nytimes.com
December 8, 2025 at 1:44 PM
To go after a family for no other reason than that their daughter sparked sympathy is appalling. Absolutely appalling. Beyond cruelty into outright sadism.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
OMFG.
A post-C section mother who was an asylum seeker seeking a visa for crime victims who had a newborn baby struggling in the NICU was held in Broadview in Chicago w no medical attention (POST C SECTION), no breast pump (right after birth), and no treatment for her diabetes.
MONSTERS.
A post-C section mother who was an asylum seeker seeking a visa for crime victims who had a newborn baby struggling in the NICU was held in Broadview in Chicago w no medical attention (POST C SECTION), no breast pump (right after birth), and no treatment for her diabetes.
MONSTERS.
“Guzmán’s daughter was still in the NICU, unable to eat or breathe independently. The doctors had planned a meeting to review the baby’s prognosis and care plans… As Guzmán went to buckle her seatbelt, she looked out the window and noticed they were surrounded.”
Her baby was in the NICU. She was in ICE detention.
Before Trump took office, postpartum immigrants were rarely detained by ICE. Nayra Guzmán was detained while her 15-day-old baby was in the NICU.
19thnews.org
December 8, 2025 at 4:03 AM
OMFG.
A post-C section mother who was an asylum seeker seeking a visa for crime victims who had a newborn baby struggling in the NICU was held in Broadview in Chicago w no medical attention (POST C SECTION), no breast pump (right after birth), and no treatment for her diabetes.
MONSTERS.
A post-C section mother who was an asylum seeker seeking a visa for crime victims who had a newborn baby struggling in the NICU was held in Broadview in Chicago w no medical attention (POST C SECTION), no breast pump (right after birth), and no treatment for her diabetes.
MONSTERS.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
Hickenlooper is doing nothing to help, and he’s now facing a progressive primary challenge from a state senator. I’m absolutely donating.
I’m running for the U.S. Senate so the people who built Colorado can take back control of our healthcare, our homes, and our futures.
Working people built Colorado, we deserve a government that finally works for us.
Join our campaign: julieforcolorado.com
Working people built Colorado, we deserve a government that finally works for us.
Join our campaign: julieforcolorado.com
December 8, 2025 at 12:04 PM
Hickenlooper is doing nothing to help, and he’s now facing a progressive primary challenge from a state senator. I’m absolutely donating.
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
Amplifying the voices of people who tried for an entire year to come up with an “originalist” case against birthright citizenship and failed to persuade anyone who wasn’t already persuaded is not worth it.
Signed, a guy who spent an entire year refuting them
Signed, a guy who spent an entire year refuting them
December 7, 2025 at 8:39 PM
Amplifying the voices of people who tried for an entire year to come up with an “originalist” case against birthright citizenship and failed to persuade anyone who wasn’t already persuaded is not worth it.
Signed, a guy who spent an entire year refuting them
Signed, a guy who spent an entire year refuting them
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
On Aug 24, 1869, Ohio Rep. John Bingham, principal framer of the 14th amendment, gave a remarkable speech on “Equal Rights-Impartial Suffrage,” in which he said of those who sought to reject the principal of birthright citizenship, “no greater political atrocity than this can possibly be committed.”
December 7, 2025 at 1:52 PM
On Aug 24, 1869, Ohio Rep. John Bingham, principal framer of the 14th amendment, gave a remarkable speech on “Equal Rights-Impartial Suffrage,” in which he said of those who sought to reject the principal of birthright citizenship, “no greater political atrocity than this can possibly be committed.”
Reposted by Jerry Edwards
