Justin Levitt
@justinlevitt.bsky.social
If you're eligible & want to vote, making sure you can, it's meaningful, and it sticks. Pro-democracy, pro-republic. He/his. Loyola law prof, former WH, former DOJ, former Natl Voter Protection Dir, forever NJDevils fan
Good news! AI has finally made time travel possible.
October 15, 2025 at 10:20 PM
Good news! AI has finally made time travel possible.
I feel so sorry for the historians once again having to explain the relationship of “border control” to the country’s founding.
September 25, 2025 at 11:12 PM
I feel so sorry for the historians once again having to explain the relationship of “border control” to the country’s founding.
AI’s just choosing which laws are real and which are fictional now. No notes.
September 21, 2025 at 9:27 PM
AI’s just choosing which laws are real and which are fictional now. No notes.
“My idiot henchmen keep screwing this up. I keep telling DHS to throw you in miserable basement cells in shackles AFTER we’re done exploiting your technical expertise and trade secrets. If we promise to get the order right going forward, you’ll still come, right?”
September 14, 2025 at 9:37 PM
“My idiot henchmen keep screwing this up. I keep telling DHS to throw you in miserable basement cells in shackles AFTER we’re done exploiting your technical expertise and trade secrets. If we promise to get the order right going forward, you’ll still come, right?”
I understand this isn’t the primary problem here.
But “Chipocalypse Now” is just bursting with “Chili’s loaded nacho plate inflicting historic intestinal distress” energy.
But “Chipocalypse Now” is just bursting with “Chili’s loaded nacho plate inflicting historic intestinal distress” energy.
September 6, 2025 at 11:08 PM
I understand this isn’t the primary problem here.
But “Chipocalypse Now” is just bursting with “Chili’s loaded nacho plate inflicting historic intestinal distress” energy.
But “Chipocalypse Now” is just bursting with “Chili’s loaded nacho plate inflicting historic intestinal distress” energy.
Mid-howl. Full body.
The right way to do it.
The right way to do it.
August 26, 2025 at 10:42 PM
Mid-howl. Full body.
The right way to do it.
The right way to do it.
The WaPo editorial board is broken.
August 21, 2025 at 4:49 PM
The WaPo editorial board is broken.
Texas just issued its call for a 2d special session to re-gerrymander.
The first time, there was a nod to a (woefully shoddy) DOJ letter. In the new version, that's now gone.
Guess they finally realized the DOJ pretext didn't pass the laugh test. electionlawblog.org?p=151600
The first time, there was a nod to a (woefully shoddy) DOJ letter. In the new version, that's now gone.
Guess they finally realized the DOJ pretext didn't pass the laugh test. electionlawblog.org?p=151600
August 15, 2025 at 6:23 PM
Texas just issued its call for a 2d special session to re-gerrymander.
The first time, there was a nod to a (woefully shoddy) DOJ letter. In the new version, that's now gone.
Guess they finally realized the DOJ pretext didn't pass the laugh test. electionlawblog.org?p=151600
The first time, there was a nod to a (woefully shoddy) DOJ letter. In the new version, that's now gone.
Guess they finally realized the DOJ pretext didn't pass the laugh test. electionlawblog.org?p=151600
There’s something very familiar about most of the states still stuck in court, mid-decade, over congressional redistricting.
(MS has a state leg case in the mix too.)
Turns out the states with the biggest problems of fair representation still have the biggest problems of fair representation.
(MS has a state leg case in the mix too.)
Turns out the states with the biggest problems of fair representation still have the biggest problems of fair representation.
August 8, 2025 at 4:51 PM
There’s something very familiar about most of the states still stuck in court, mid-decade, over congressional redistricting.
(MS has a state leg case in the mix too.)
Turns out the states with the biggest problems of fair representation still have the biggest problems of fair representation.
(MS has a state leg case in the mix too.)
Turns out the states with the biggest problems of fair representation still have the biggest problems of fair representation.
* wheeze *
* wheeze *
oh, man i can’t
* wheeze *
* wheeze *
oh, man i can’t
* wheeze *
July 29, 2025 at 1:20 AM
* wheeze *
* wheeze *
oh, man i can’t
* wheeze *
* wheeze *
oh, man i can’t
* wheeze *
Unnamed “university officials” are displaying the level of object permanence normally reserved for Susan Collins’ credulity if they actually believe this nonsense.
A “deal” with this Administration lasts as long as a news cycle (and sometimes not even).
A “deal” with this Administration lasts as long as a news cycle (and sometimes not even).
July 28, 2025 at 10:40 PM
Unnamed “university officials” are displaying the level of object permanence normally reserved for Susan Collins’ credulity if they actually believe this nonsense.
A “deal” with this Administration lasts as long as a news cycle (and sometimes not even).
A “deal” with this Administration lasts as long as a news cycle (and sometimes not even).
Here's an example. Based on this order, somebody tell me which cases are sufficiently similar to this one to merit a similar disposition.
Can't do it?
Then any court not bound by THIS order should adjudicate as the law demands, and not spend a moment fretting about the lawless nonsense.
Can't do it?
Then any court not bound by THIS order should adjudicate as the law demands, and not spend a moment fretting about the lawless nonsense.
July 24, 2025 at 12:13 AM
Here's an example. Based on this order, somebody tell me which cases are sufficiently similar to this one to merit a similar disposition.
Can't do it?
Then any court not bound by THIS order should adjudicate as the law demands, and not spend a moment fretting about the lawless nonsense.
Can't do it?
Then any court not bound by THIS order should adjudicate as the law demands, and not spend a moment fretting about the lawless nonsense.
As any first-year law student learns, you can't possibly tell if two cases reflect "similar" facts or if they differ from each other "in any pertinent respect"
IF YOU DON'T ADEQUATELY EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR THE DECISION IN THE FIRST CASE.
Don't be fooled by the robes. This is power, not law.
IF YOU DON'T ADEQUATELY EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR THE DECISION IN THE FIRST CASE.
Don't be fooled by the robes. This is power, not law.
July 23, 2025 at 11:46 PM
As any first-year law student learns, you can't possibly tell if two cases reflect "similar" facts or if they differ from each other "in any pertinent respect"
IF YOU DON'T ADEQUATELY EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR THE DECISION IN THE FIRST CASE.
Don't be fooled by the robes. This is power, not law.
IF YOU DON'T ADEQUATELY EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR THE DECISION IN THE FIRST CASE.
Don't be fooled by the robes. This is power, not law.
Well, look, if the people are asking...
This is _only_ from voting-related letters.
There's an extra bonus #5 here (electionlawblog.org/wp-content/u...), which gets both the name of the statute and the email address of the DOJ voting section chief wrong.
This is _only_ from voting-related letters.
There's an extra bonus #5 here (electionlawblog.org/wp-content/u...), which gets both the name of the statute and the email address of the DOJ voting section chief wrong.
July 11, 2025 at 2:31 AM
Well, look, if the people are asking...
This is _only_ from voting-related letters.
There's an extra bonus #5 here (electionlawblog.org/wp-content/u...), which gets both the name of the statute and the email address of the DOJ voting section chief wrong.
This is _only_ from voting-related letters.
There's an extra bonus #5 here (electionlawblog.org/wp-content/u...), which gets both the name of the statute and the email address of the DOJ voting section chief wrong.
And also: * sigh *
Here's the new graph, after a NYT correction today (www.nytimes.com/2025/06/29/n...). Still _very_ impressive for the 25-29 set, and very impressive for 18-24, but less of the earthquake than it had been.
Here's the new graph, after a NYT correction today (www.nytimes.com/2025/06/29/n...). Still _very_ impressive for the 25-29 set, and very impressive for 18-24, but less of the earthquake than it had been.
June 30, 2025 at 10:05 PM
And also: * sigh *
Here's the new graph, after a NYT correction today (www.nytimes.com/2025/06/29/n...). Still _very_ impressive for the 25-29 set, and very impressive for 18-24, but less of the earthquake than it had been.
Here's the new graph, after a NYT correction today (www.nytimes.com/2025/06/29/n...). Still _very_ impressive for the 25-29 set, and very impressive for 18-24, but less of the earthquake than it had been.
It’s not the point of the story. (@chrislhayes.bsky.social is 100% right that it’s horrifying and unconstitutional.)
But as I have to tell my students, buying pot _is_ still a federal crime, and not just in the eyes of CBP. Commentators have misled a lot of people by describing it differently.
But as I have to tell my students, buying pot _is_ still a federal crime, and not just in the eyes of CBP. Commentators have misled a lot of people by describing it differently.
June 19, 2025 at 4:39 PM
It’s not the point of the story. (@chrislhayes.bsky.social is 100% right that it’s horrifying and unconstitutional.)
But as I have to tell my students, buying pot _is_ still a federal crime, and not just in the eyes of CBP. Commentators have misled a lot of people by describing it differently.
But as I have to tell my students, buying pot _is_ still a federal crime, and not just in the eyes of CBP. Commentators have misled a lot of people by describing it differently.
A+ timing for the Marines to be recruiting lawyers in LA.
June 11, 2025 at 5:08 PM
A+ timing for the Marines to be recruiting lawyers in LA.
@jonbois.bsky.social's take is still spot-on.
May 30, 2025 at 4:13 PM
@jonbois.bsky.social's take is still spot-on.
NYT graphics doing NYT graphics things again.
The votes are in. What we're doing now is counting them, in a way that is neither indicative nor random.
Stop presenting the counting process as if it's changing the answer rather than revealing the answer. PLEASE.
The votes are in. What we're doing now is counting them, in a way that is neither indicative nor random.
Stop presenting the counting process as if it's changing the answer rather than revealing the answer. PLEASE.
April 2, 2025 at 1:20 AM
NYT graphics doing NYT graphics things again.
The votes are in. What we're doing now is counting them, in a way that is neither indicative nor random.
Stop presenting the counting process as if it's changing the answer rather than revealing the answer. PLEASE.
The votes are in. What we're doing now is counting them, in a way that is neither indicative nor random.
Stop presenting the counting process as if it's changing the answer rather than revealing the answer. PLEASE.
Welcome back! Only news I know of is that Ajax is getting laser treatments now. He thinks the goggles are pretty sweet.
March 26, 2025 at 5:21 AM
Welcome back! Only news I know of is that Ajax is getting laser treatments now. He thinks the goggles are pretty sweet.
Not the main point of the USAID order, I know, but the dissent fails the basic object permanence test.
Sovereign immunity doesn’t mean the sovereign has complied with the law. It just means the courts are unavailable to enforce compliance. The law doesn’t vanish when the courts close their eyes.
Sovereign immunity doesn’t mean the sovereign has complied with the law. It just means the courts are unavailable to enforce compliance. The law doesn’t vanish when the courts close their eyes.
March 5, 2025 at 3:01 PM
Not the main point of the USAID order, I know, but the dissent fails the basic object permanence test.
Sovereign immunity doesn’t mean the sovereign has complied with the law. It just means the courts are unavailable to enforce compliance. The law doesn’t vanish when the courts close their eyes.
Sovereign immunity doesn’t mean the sovereign has complied with the law. It just means the courts are unavailable to enforce compliance. The law doesn’t vanish when the courts close their eyes.
This is on a different pediment of the same building. And at the moment, hurts more.
February 15, 2025 at 8:53 PM
This is on a different pediment of the same building. And at the moment, hurts more.