Cristian Farias

@cristianfarias.com

1812

Followers

216

Following

757

Posts

Legal journalist and beachgoer. I write about courts, the law, and the politics shaping them. I also edit inquest.org, an online magazine for decarceral ideas.

Posts Replies Media Lists

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

Still marveling at Gorsuch's Ohio v. EPA opinion, in which he confused nitrogen oxide (a pollutant) with nitrous oxide (laughing gas). He did this five times, never once getting it right—in an opinion overruling the EPA's own expert scientific analysis! s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24...

I’d add Elizabeth Prelogar. Her future and that of the administration’s policies before a hostile and revanchist Supreme Court largely rests on her shoulders.

Why is Biden only running in Biden? He should be running in Harris, Haaland, Buttigieg, Regan, Murthy, and all the rest of the people who come with him. And he’s not just running against Trump, but against Miller, Bannon, Kushner, Bolton, Kid Rock and Nazi ghouls who come with him. Message better.

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

Reply to

Asawin Suebsaeng

For most of its history, America hasn’t been a democracy, by any meaningful definition of the term! This isn’t some It Can’t Happen Here shit, in a way, it’s already happened. It just may not have directly affected you.

Kid 1: We should listen to some patriotic songs! Kid 2: Like “The Star Spangled Banner”! Me: Guys, I can’t really handle patriotic songs all that well. But I’ll make an exception for the classic “Party in the U.S.A.” by Miley Cyrus. Them: Yay! (And then Siri keeps the playlist non-patriotic.)

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

NEWS: Judge John Broomes, a Trump appointee in Kansas, today blocked the Biden admin Title IX rule as to Alaska, Kansas, Utah, & Wyoming — but also any school nationwide where Young America's Foundation members or the kids of Moms for Liberty go. Opinion: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

Breaking: Judge Ada Brown, a Trump appointee in N.D. Texas, has blocked the FTC’s noncompete rule, limited to the named plaintiffs, in an APA challenge as likely contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious. The rule is set to go into effect in September. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

As the nation and the rule of law burn all around us, we have no other choice but to tan.

I’d only add that: After decades of insistence that finality of state court judgments and no retroactivity are sacred, the Supreme Court can absolutely be expected to interfere with a final state-law judgment against Donald Trump, and to do so retroactively.

/3 5 or 6 SCOTUS judges, who normally love harmless error like a 15-year-old-boy loves a tube sock, will find that it doesn’t apply to introduction of evidence of Presidentially-immune acts, and that the NY court didn’t analyze official acts doctrine right and remand for more proceedings.

How quickly we forget: There are so many things from the first Trump presidency that were plainly unconstitutional that courts never adjudicated, much less touch. Emoluments, racism in policymaking, animus toward religious minorities, vindictive deployments of agencies. The courts won’t save us.

constitutional lawyers use your fucking brain challenge www.politico.com/news/2024/07...

The notion that a teenaged Neil Gorsuch developed some sort of lifelong trauma as a result of his mother quitting the EPA due to mismanagement, and that becoming a defining moment that led to deep-seated grievances against federal agencies is . . . quite something. Sounds like fanfic but maybe not.

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

if your instinct is "calm down, surely this is an exaggeration," allow me to assure you that it's really not

"Don't worry, if the president imprisons his political enemies, you can still get a writ of habeas corpus." "But to prove that's why you've been imprisoned requires proof of..." "Presidential motive!" "And under Trump v US, presidential motive is..." "Inadmissible!"

I’m so tired. www.washingtonpost.com/education/20...

Lawsuit: Northwestern’s law school is biased against White men in hiringwww.washingtonpost.com The lawsuit, filed by a prominent attorney, alleges the university’s law school gives hiring preference to women and people of color.

Almost no one paid attention to Corner Post yesterday, with good reason. But it was yet another power grab under which no government rule, no matter how old and settled, is safe. Not even the decades-old one approving mifepristone. slate.com/news-and-pol...

The Supreme Court Sneaked an Attack on the Abortion Pill Into Its Final Rulingslate.com To understand how disruptive the Supreme Court’s decision in Corner Post will be, consider another seemingly unrelated case.

From one of Donald Trump’s first acts in office, the Muslim ban, to one of his last, his lawless attempt to hold on to power, the Supreme Court has enabled, turned a blind eye to, and done nothing to prevent abuses that are bound to repeat themselves tenfold. Trumpism thrives under John Roberts.

“The Nixonian theory of presidential power is now enshrined as constitutional law.” And I’d add that John Roberts has all but effectively overruled United States v. Nixon. There’s no sense in being able to subpoena evidence of presidential lawlessness when that evidence can’t be used in court.

i think we should see the Trump v. United States ruling as a group of Republican apparatchiks taking their opportunity to vindicate Nixon and write the unitary executive into the Constitution. www.nytimes.com/2024/07/02/o...

Opinion | Your Get-Out-of-Jail-Free Card Is Ready, Sirwww.nytimes.com The Nixonian theory of presidential power is now enshrined as constitutional law.

Don’t lose sight of the Corner Post ruling today. Together with last week’s destabilizing administrative law cases, this one will render government rules vulnerable to facial challenges—no matter how old the rules. Ketanji Brown Jackson sounds the alarm. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23p...

Few things terrify a Jersey boy more than driving out of state and pumping his own gas. Ask me how I know.

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

I missed that Barbra Streisand weighed in on chevron

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

As I wrote in October: www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

Jailing people for being homeless is a classic American policy: stupid, brutal, and very expensive.

One problem of having so many former prosecutors as legal commentators is that people will think that the Supreme Court handing Capitol rioters a temporary win is the story of the day. When what should be leading every newscast is that is that the Supreme Court is making our nation ungovernable.

I'm A Legal Academic. The Supreme Court Just Destroyed My Syllabus for the Fall. In this essay, I will . . .

Another year, another chance for the Supreme Court to render so many people's legal education, including my own, appreciably irrelevant. So much of what we learned in constitutional and administrative law is no longer in the books.

The bottom-line of the end of the 40-year-old Chevron doctirne, from Justice Elena Kagan's dissent. Shorter: Judicial supremacy over policy. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23p...

I imagine it would be journalistic malpractice, after today’s Supreme Court ruling regarding emergency abortion care, to not ask the candidates whether they intend to maintain the Justice Department’s litigating position that federal law is supreme over—and thus preempts—extreme state abortion bans.

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

Thinking of Aaron Swartz and the miscarriage of justice in light of this announcement.

Nothing is sacred anymore.

Reposted by

Cristian Farias

The right to trial by jury is of such importance and occupies so firm a place in our history and jurisprudence that debt collectors can slip a fine print clause into an online form and block you from obtaining any meaningful relief for flagrant violations of the law.

Reading this while being aware of how the Supreme Court interprets the Federal Arbitration Act is going to kill me.

No need to dismantle administrative agencies in one fell swoop. The Supreme Court can just allow piecemeal litigation against them bit by bit, creating uncertainty and rendering government inadministrable for years and years—thanks to a newly discovered understanding of Our Highest Law.

The deregulatory, air-polluting Supreme Court is back, baby. Come back tomorrow for the likely end of administrative law as it's been known for many decades.

Bloomberg published more details about the EMTALA opinion that was inadvertently posted to the Supreme Court’s website. The vote was 6-3, with three conservatives joining the liberals, but one of them still lamenting the status quo. What a hot mess. news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/...