Steve Leben

This is an infuriating and shameful scandal. The Roberts Court is condoning Trump’s law breaking, again, pure and simple. There is no serious path forward for democratic government without Supreme Court reform.

His substack really is essential to anyone who wants a written source to understand the Supreme Court today. It’s hard to separate what’s important from what’s not. One First lays it out very clearly.

Yay to smiling faces, a good cause for joy (ice cream!), and the contributions each of you make to our world!

Sheena is the must-follow to understand what Kennedy et al are doing to US vaccines (and other medicines)

The Trump administration’s playbook of coercing speech comes into focus • Missouri Independent By threatening ABC over a comedian’s on-air comments, FCC chairman Brendan Carr violated core First Amendment limits on the government.

Last week, I was on a Missouri Bar conference panel to talk about current threats to the rule of law. Under FCC licensing threats, ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel the night before the presentation. It was a perfect (and transparent) example of a wider playbook. missouriindependent.com/2025/09/25/t...

What are the Chiefs chances either way on this week’s game? I’d guess it’s more significant for them.

The Trump administration’s playbook of coercing speech comes into focus • Missouri Independent By threatening ABC over a comedian’s on-air comments, FCC chairman Brendan Carr violated core First Amendment limits on the government.

Last week, I was on a Missouri Bar conference panel to talk about current threats to the rule of law. Under FCC licensing threats, ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel the night before the presentation. It was a perfect (and transparent) example of a wider playbook. missouriindependent.com/2025/09/25/t...

Today’s message of hope comes from a 1922 editorial by Pulitzer-Prize-winning Kansas newspaperman William Allen White. Still worth reading a century later.

174. Justice Gorsuch's Attack on Lower Courts Just like the earlier rulings that Justice Gorsuch claims lower courts are defying, his concurrence in the NIH grant cutoffs case would be a lot more convincing if it showed more of its work.

In the NIH funding case, Justice Gorsuch (joined by Justice Kavanaugh) claimed that this was the third time in recent weeks that lower courts had "defied" a #SCOTUS ruling.

As today's "One First" explains, that claim is not only nonsense; it's enabling a dangerous anti-court narrative on the right:

Gov. Laura Kelly selects Leawood attorney to fill vacancy on Kansas Supreme Court • Kansas Reflector Gov. Laura Kelly picks an attorney in private practice to serve on Kansas Supreme Court, bypassing two district court judges also nominated for the post.

Congratulations to Larkin Walsh, an excellent choice for the Kansas Supreme Court, chosen through merit selection. kansasreflector.com/2025/08/07/g...

Allen Rostron Named Edward A. Smith/Missouri Chair in Law, the Constitution and Society School of Law professor honored for commitment to students and community

Congratulations to my colleague, Allen Rostron, on being named the Edward A. Smith/Missouri Chair in Law, the Constitution and Society at ⁦‪@UMKCLaw‬⁩. He is a great teacher and scholar—and so easy to work with. Congrats, Allen! www.umkc.edu/news/posts/2...

Why did it happen to Liz???

Since @orinkerr.bsky.social asked, a thread, from limited information reported online, about how I see the US attorney mess in DNJ.

1. Trump picked Habba as interim US Attorney under 28 USC 546. Technically, the AG is supposed to pick, but whatever. She gets 120 days to serve.

Sorry, I’m not here daily. I will check on it.

Have you read a law review article recently that you thought was particularly great and deserving of a wider readership?

If so, leave a link to it as a reply, together with a quick take on what made it great.

In Flooded Texas, Questions About FEMA’s Role and Fate

Contra NY Times, there is not even an official acting FEMA head. Cameron Hamilton (pushed out) & now David Richardson don't qualify under the Vacancies Act, "leading" the agency through delegation as the "Senior Official Performing the Duties of FEMA Administrator." www.nytimes.com/2025/07/08/c...

Kristi L. Noem Harvard flouted the rules. Now, it’s getting a hard lesson.

Jeff Bezos: "We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets."

Today's Washington Post opinion page:

October 2024 Term #SCOTUS rulings to date from which all three Democratic appointees dissented:

On the merits docket: 3

On emergency applications: 9

That tells you quite a lot about where the most important action is...

SCOTUS allows Trump admin to deport people to random countries with no notice Justice Sotomayor called the order a "gross ... abuse" of the court's authority. Also: Law Dork in the media.

"SCOTUS allows Trump admin to deport people to random countries with no notice"

Honestly still can't believe that I wrote this headline today, let alone that the U.S. Supreme Court's majority did so.

Did you ever see the movie That Darn Cat?

🤔

Oooh. 100%. Well, maybe 98%. Lots of the actors in The Americans did great work.

But I would never substitute for Keri Russell.

161. The Court's Disastrous Ruling in the Third-Country Removal Case The majority did not just greenlight an especially odious immigration policy without any explanation; it did so in a case in which the government defied the district court—twice—with no consequence.

Today’s unsigned, unexplained #SCOTUS ruling clearing the way for removals of migrants to third countries without any additional process is a disaster—not just on the merits, but because of the government misbehavior that it not only refuses to punish, but effectively rewards.

Me, via “One First”:

The “Third Country Removal Case” means thousands of people will be deported to extremely dangerous countries they’re not from with no due process.

This decision represents something that should never happen in a justice system: the nation’s highest court has ruled on an issue affecting millions—without explanation. Courts don’t have absolute power; they should be following rules. Without an explanation, who knows?

RFK Jr. says his new vaccine panel has a GW University professor. The school says he doesn't work there Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said one of his picks for a crucial vaccine advisory panel is a professor at George Washington University. But News4 found the doctor hasn’t w...

RFK Jr. says his new vaccine panel has a GW University professor. The school says he doesn't work there

www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/r...

158. The Court's Unanimity is Greatly Exaggerated It's time for the annual influx of superficial (or otherwise overstated) claims about the justices' lack of division. There are at least four different reasons why such accounts fail to persuade.

#SCOTUS has recently issued a slew of unanimous (or near-unanimous) rulings in argued cases.

Today’s “One First” identifies at least four respects in which this is a mirage—and how one need look no further than the Trump emergency applications to see just how ideologically divided the justices are:

Ideally, citizens would be able to know their rights. But that’s hard when even experts who look at them closely, like Prof. Smith, have to spend considerable time to work through it.

No easy solutions, and I’m not a scholar in this area. But I did run into these issues as a state appellate judge.

We have the UCC because it’s too complicated for businesses and consumers to have non-uniform rules.

On state constitutions, it makes sense that differences in wording would lead to different results. But there is confusion there too when rules on, say, search and seizure change at the state line.

I know there's a lot going on, but the Secretary of Homeland Security declaring that federal troops are in California and Los Angeles to "liberate" the state and city from its duly-elected leaders really is a fourteen-alarm fire.

With the tragic assassination of a Minnesota Democratic leader, I’m going to underline this point again.