,
18 tweets,
10 min read
Read on Twitter
1/ In Preap, J. Kavanaugh stressed that "the strict 1996 illegal-immigration law" was "signed by President Clinton." The implication is that even a Democratic President favored a strict immigration law. Why make this political point in an opinion? #SCOTUS 
2/ In contrast, CJ Roberts's Windsor dissent did not name the "President who signed" DOMA. That is, a Democratic President--Clinton--who prohibited the federal recognition of same-sex marriage. #SCOTUS
3/ Scholars make this point all the time. For example, when discussing Hobby Lobby, I note that then-Rep. Schumer sponsored RFRA, and Pres. Clinton signed it into law. Judges should not make this sort of point. #SCOTUS
4/ Justice Breyer's fabrication of the presumptive "six month" rule reminds me of his fabricated standard in Noel Canning. It's like Goldilocks--not too long, but not too short. #SCOTUS
5/ I searched Westlaw #SCOTUS DB for <<president /3 signed>> That query generated 344 results. I found two references to "President Bush," five references to "President Clinton," 0 references to "President Reagan," two references to "President Carter." The usage is very rare
6/ Each result was descriptive. That is, identifying the POTUS who signed it, without suggesting that the identity of the incumbent was relevant to the analysis. J. Kavanaugh used "President Clinton" as part of an argument that the President signed a "strict" bill into law.
7/ @ProfDBernstein explained the import: the Court is "is interpreting bipartisan legislation" that President Clinton signed into law. In other words, "Don't blame me for interpreting IIRAIRA in a tough fashion. Everyone in Congress agreed it was tough."
8/ This usage is not always problematic. I find J. Kavanaugh's prior opinion, which mentioned the President by name, innocuous. The reference in Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc. was purely descriptive: "President Fillmore signed a comprehensive federal statute."
9/ The only other recent example, of course, was Trump v. Hawaii. #SCOTUS majority referred to "President Trump" because President Trump signed the proclamation, and was the lead defendant. His identity was essential to the fact pattern. Not so in other cases.
10/ I wrote about the issue of POTUS-naming in @CatoInstitute #SCOTUS review on Trump v. Hawaii. J. Sotomayor referred to the President as "President Donald Trump." The use of his given name, I wrote, was inappropriate. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
11/ Several former-Kavanaugh clerks wrote to inform me that then-Judge Kavanaugh would often mention the President's name on CADC. The Westlaw query JU(kavanaugh) & TE(president /3 signed) yielded 27 results.
12/ Each reference appears in a neutral fact section, along the lines of the President Fillmore reference. See supra at 8. I do not object to the fact that J. Kavanaugh mentioned Pres. Clinton's name. I object to the context in which it was used. See supra at 6, 7.
13/ I don't think there was any improper motivation. My observation only reflects how I (and several others who wrote to me) read the opinion.
14/ I'll close this thread on a more-light hearted note. In two opinions yesterday, Justices included meat-based hypotheticals. First, in Prep, J. Breyer had a long hypo about cooking an Angus steak. Second, in DeVries, J. Gorsuch had a hypo about a butcher's knife. #SCOTUS
15/ One more fun fact about yesterday's opinions, before moving to today's decisions. J. Scalia's writings were cited three times. Two citations to Reading Law (w @BryanAGarner) by J. Alito in Preap, and a very effective citation to "Law of Rules" by J. Gorsuch in DeVries #SCOTUS
16/ One final fact: J. Gorsuch's dissent in DeVries ends with a #TillmanPage -- All footnote, no text. My advice for J. Gorsuch is the same advice I give to @SethBTillman. If it is that important, put it above the line. #SCOTUS
17/ I converted the thread on presidential name-dropping by #SCOTUS into an essay for @TheAtlantic Ideas section--coming Thursday or Friday.
