Profile avatar
jacobdcharles.bsky.social
Law prof, Pepperdine Law; Affiliated Scholar, Duke Center for Firearms Law. I write about constitutional law, especially the Second Amendment. Bio: https://t.co/yVUcs14NoK Papers: http://bit.ly/3HleQND
1,111 posts 5,479 followers 1,961 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter

Much of the debate here is over past equity practice, BUT there’s also a lot about method: how tethered should we be today to history & tradition, what presumption do we give to historical silence. Those Qs are relevant more broadly to this Court’s ascendant historical approaches across con law.

It’s just so galling that the conservatives refused to rein this practice in when injunctions operated against a Dem president, but when it confronts one against what is a demonstrably unlawful & anticonstitutional order from an R president, it springs into action.

This really makes it clear how enabling the Court has been — and the administration has received the message loud & clear. District courts, to their great credit, still refuse to abdicate their responsibility, no matter what SCOTUS will ultimately do.

Legitimately what is this framing?!?! “Mr. Trump may have a chance to claim a diplomatic achievement…” www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06...

This is really really gross, and the law professors who joined in these kind of allegations should be ashamed.

Have we really not raised any nondelegation concerns here?!

Gotta say, @mikesacks.bsky.social may be on to something. What if we did constitutional law in a way that didn’t tie us to the decisions a group landed men made in the 14th century? Can you imagine!

Check out my blog post @statecourtreport.bsky.social on a new gun decision from the Georgia Supreme Court that asks, in part, what happens to original meaning when state constitutional language is readopted over time... statecourtreport.org/our-work/ana...

“Liberating” the city from its democratically elected leaders = liberating it from democracy. The blunt and ugly truth.

Love this back to back in my feed. Crypto bounties from the proud boys & heading for a new measles record. Cool cool cool.

Reading Will Baude's new piece, Fear of Balancing, & it's dead on about the problems, fully on display in Rahimi concurrences, w/ the conservative justices distaste for "balancing tests" & how that distaste conflicts with founding-era rights adjudication! www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1...

Well it took until 9:30am on the first day of summer to hear, "I'm sooo bored!! I want to go do something!"

I think this opinion has to be right that (a) the order to federalize must be justifiability or else the executive would have the sole unchecked power over when to use federalize, (b) there is no rebellion (though I’m less confident the opinion is correct that, eg, Molotov cocktails & concrete

Well put: "[T]he federal government cannot be permitted to exceed its bounds and in doing so create the very emergency conditions that it then relies on to justify federal intervention."

If for any reason you find yourself in need of some reading. "The assault became a departure point for contemporaries to explore the meaning and relationship among slavery, race, democracy, and republican government in 19th-century America." [email protected] www.jstor.org/stable/3125037

Maddening beyond words that media pundits are literally jumping to tsk tsk both sides here.

I'm curious about this--if CA's arg is that the Nat'l Guard wasn't properly federalized, then isn't it saying Newsom can still give the Guard orders? I get that it would be *bad* to have the Guard forced to choose b/t conflicting orders from POTUS & the Gov, but isn't that what this arg entails?

This is remarkably bad. The simultaneous combination of Noem saying the feds are here to "liberate" Californians, despite our own choices in policies and elected officials, & the quick and easy resort to violence against one of those elected representatives marks a new, alarming & dangerous low.

Hegseth is going to be so bewildered when he learns that executive branch lawyers argue it’s the word “the” in Article II.

This is the thing! Literally nothing so demonstrates the vacuity of the anti-tyranny view of the second amendment than the silence (or, worse, cheerleading) for the *exact* poster child of the stated authoritarian fears of gun rights extremists for decades.

NEW: The 2d Circuit joins the fray, upholding the felon gun ban against Second Amendment challenge & deepening an ongoing circuit split. It also cites my work with @brandonlgarrett.bsky.social on the real problems with this law. cases.justia.com/federal/appe...

NEW: The 2d Circuit joins the fray, upholding the felon gun ban against Second Amendment challenge & deepening an ongoing circuit split. It also cites my work with @brandonlgarrett.bsky.social on the real problems with this law. cases.justia.com/federal/appe...

PEACEFULLY going about their day working a job. This isn’t about crime, gangs, terrorism, or disorder. We know the administration’s despicable aims, announced in every press release and enforcement action.

Los Angeles is still, for the record, a great American City.

The way the officer seems to have recognized this as a journalist and specifically turned, aimed toward her & fired is really appalling

My Bluesky feed is an interesting mix of broadway favorites & resistance to authoritarianism

Heard the parents of one of my kids’ classmates call it “social suicide” to give their SIXTH GRADER an outdated version of an iPhone & folks, I’m out.