Anthony Sanders
@ijsanders.bsky.social
Center for Judicial Engagement @IJ. Host of the Short Circuit podcast. Read my book "Baby Ninth Amendments"! https://press.umich.edu//12676756 Opinions = mine.
All it would take is a little ingenuity from the SCOTUS clerk's office. For example, this could have been "The Universal Injunction Cases." Gratz and Grutter perhaps the "Michigan Affirmative Action Cases."
WE USED TO DO THIS. What happened? When did it all go wrong?
WE USED TO DO THIS. What happened? When did it all go wrong?
November 24, 2025 at 8:01 PM
All it would take is a little ingenuity from the SCOTUS clerk's office. For example, this could have been "The Universal Injunction Cases." Gratz and Grutter perhaps the "Michigan Affirmative Action Cases."
WE USED TO DO THIS. What happened? When did it all go wrong?
WE USED TO DO THIS. What happened? When did it all go wrong?
Why don't we have cases with cool names like these anymore? Today it's all Smith v. Jones, et al. and then if it's consolidated with another matter it just has a longer heading. A sign of a lost Golden Age if you ask me.
November 24, 2025 at 7:57 PM
Why don't we have cases with cool names like these anymore? Today it's all Smith v. Jones, et al. and then if it's consolidated with another matter it just has a longer heading. A sign of a lost Golden Age if you ask me.
Supreme Court of Hawaii makes clear Parliamentary Supremacy does not apply there in . . . 1870 (when it was still an independent kingdom).
November 19, 2025 at 6:25 PM
Supreme Court of Hawaii makes clear Parliamentary Supremacy does not apply there in . . . 1870 (when it was still an independent kingdom).
You mean A.J. Ayer isn't available?
November 18, 2025 at 11:02 PM
You mean A.J. Ayer isn't available?
But it’s not all bad news! Some states have adopted “converse 1983s” allowing suits for federal constitutional violations in *state* court against federal officials. They’re untested, but arguably work even under current precedent and statutes. 5/
November 18, 2025 at 6:16 PM
But it’s not all bad news! Some states have adopted “converse 1983s” allowing suits for federal constitutional violations in *state* court against federal officials. They’re untested, but arguably work even under current precedent and statutes. 5/
… The FTCA doesn’t apply “during time of war.” That doesn’t matter, though, right, as that’s just about foreign, actual, conflicts? Maybe! But what if—totally hypothetically, of course—Trump says he’s “at war” with a city? Could the judiciary question that? Um, I hope? 4/
November 18, 2025 at 6:15 PM
… The FTCA doesn’t apply “during time of war.” That doesn’t matter, though, right, as that’s just about foreign, actual, conflicts? Maybe! But what if—totally hypothetically, of course—Trump says he’s “at war” with a city? Could the judiciary question that? Um, I hope? 4/
There are plenty of barriers to civil justice when state & local police do bad things. But avenues exist. However, as many of you know, when it comes to federal agents it’s worse. Bivens is almost dead & the Federal Tort Claims Act is a mine field. And even there … 3/
November 18, 2025 at 6:11 PM
There are plenty of barriers to civil justice when state & local police do bad things. But avenues exist. However, as many of you know, when it comes to federal agents it’s worse. Bivens is almost dead & the Federal Tort Claims Act is a mine field. And even there … 3/
Just out by me at @theunpopulist.net. We all know using soldiers as law enforcement is bad. But if it happens what remedies do Americans have if their rights are violated? I have bad news: much less than against local cops. And if Trump declares “war” maybe none. 1/
November 18, 2025 at 6:07 PM
Just out by me at @theunpopulist.net. We all know using soldiers as law enforcement is bad. But if it happens what remedies do Americans have if their rights are violated? I have bad news: much less than against local cops. And if Trump declares “war” maybe none. 1/
Delighted to be featured in @umnlawschool.bsky.social's alumni mag alongside @nicholasbednar.bsky.social @khickmanjd.bsky.social @jillhasday.bsky.social @rwpusa.bsky.social & others. I will add that I have never worn a purple suit, but everything else is accurate.
November 18, 2025 at 4:42 PM
Delighted to be featured in @umnlawschool.bsky.social's alumni mag alongside @nicholasbednar.bsky.social @khickmanjd.bsky.social @jillhasday.bsky.social @rwpusa.bsky.social & others. I will add that I have never worn a purple suit, but everything else is accurate.
It was this. Seems pretty mild today, tbh.
November 13, 2025 at 4:33 PM
It was this. Seems pretty mild today, tbh.
Just gonna take a small victory lap here.
November 13, 2025 at 4:16 AM
Just gonna take a small victory lap here.
The bibliography for contemporary periodicals of the period is this! That’s it! So for quotes from “The Times” you’re shown in the bibliography that you can look to “The Times” for the source. Super helpful, thanks! 3/4
November 12, 2025 at 6:56 PM
The bibliography for contemporary periodicals of the period is this! That’s it! So for quotes from “The Times” you’re shown in the bibliography that you can look to “The Times” for the source. Super helpful, thanks! 3/4
None! It’ll says stuff like “The Times said this about the incident …” but no note of when that story was published, let alone the page number. It does have a bibliography, but that’s it. So you’d have to read through all these to substantiate the propositions in the book. Also … 2/4
November 12, 2025 at 6:54 PM
None! It’ll says stuff like “The Times said this about the incident …” but no note of when that story was published, let alone the page number. It does have a bibliography, but that’s it. So you’d have to read through all these to substantiate the propositions in the book. Also … 2/4
It’s crazy how different contemporary U.S. law review citation standards are from other areas/locations/periods. Example: a book from 1982 I just finished. Basically about scandals involving barristers & judges. Chock full of quotes, anecdotes, specific facts. Guess how many footnotes? 1/4
November 12, 2025 at 6:51 PM
It’s crazy how different contemporary U.S. law review citation standards are from other areas/locations/periods. Example: a book from 1982 I just finished. Basically about scandals involving barristers & judges. Chock full of quotes, anecdotes, specific facts. Guess how many footnotes? 1/4
This is very teenage but ... in my defense I was a teenager.
Donna Tartt's The Secret History. Fell in love with Classics because of it.
Donna Tartt's The Secret History. Fell in love with Classics because of it.
November 12, 2025 at 2:52 AM
This is very teenage but ... in my defense I was a teenager.
Donna Tartt's The Secret History. Fell in love with Classics because of it.
Donna Tartt's The Secret History. Fell in love with Classics because of it.
Thanks, i had no idea! Here's our scene.
November 12, 2025 at 1:39 AM
Thanks, i had no idea! Here's our scene.
This is like citing Johnny Cash's autobiography for the proposition that Santa Cruz is 2 hours south of San Francisco. I mean, you could, sure.
November 10, 2025 at 10:39 PM
This is like citing Johnny Cash's autobiography for the proposition that Santa Cruz is 2 hours south of San Francisco. I mean, you could, sure.
That time that the Supreme Court of the United States made the uncontroversial proposition that Parliament can pass bills of attainder & cited for authority . . . Edward Gibbon's autobiography? From Farrington v. Tenn. (1877).
November 10, 2025 at 7:51 PM
That time that the Supreme Court of the United States made the uncontroversial proposition that Parliament can pass bills of attainder & cited for authority . . . Edward Gibbon's autobiography? From Farrington v. Tenn. (1877).
Now @dbrodriguez.bsky.social & Judge Sutton on the perils of nationalizing rights. Says because of the earlier successful backlash, if Kelo is overturned it might be a tree falling in a forest with no one hearing. With all due respect some of my colleagues may disagree . . .
November 6, 2025 at 4:00 PM
Now @dbrodriguez.bsky.social & Judge Sutton on the perils of nationalizing rights. Says because of the earlier successful backlash, if Kelo is overturned it might be a tree falling in a forest with no one hearing. With all due respect some of my colleagues may disagree . . .
At the @brennancenter.org @northwesternlaw.bsky.social conference on state constitutions. @mawaldman.bsky.social tells an OG story about how he was in the room where it happened when Justice Brennan gave a state constitutions lecture at NYU.
November 6, 2025 at 3:33 PM
At the @brennancenter.org @northwesternlaw.bsky.social conference on state constitutions. @mawaldman.bsky.social tells an OG story about how he was in the room where it happened when Justice Brennan gave a state constitutions lecture at NYU.
This is old news. Toddy Zywicki and I were arguing for this back in 2008. (I will add, this traditional approach is much more defensible for common law adjudication. For statutes and constitutions it's more fraught, and Hayek didn't address that as much.)
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
October 23, 2025 at 2:18 PM
This is old news. Toddy Zywicki and I were arguing for this back in 2008. (I will add, this traditional approach is much more defensible for common law adjudication. For statutes and constitutions it's more fraught, and Hayek didn't address that as much.)
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
Hey Tom Emmer, you might need POTUS to fire missiles into downtown Minneapolis. There are scary people here wearing extremely old shirts they bought from @scottlincicome.bsky.social & Josh Jordan that say terroristy-things.
October 18, 2025 at 6:03 PM
Hey Tom Emmer, you might need POTUS to fire missiles into downtown Minneapolis. There are scary people here wearing extremely old shirts they bought from @scottlincicome.bsky.social & Josh Jordan that say terroristy-things.