During a nuclear emergency, the government might be tempted to actions that violate or nearly violate our civil liberties traditions. Such actions would create practical precedents affecting future official attitudes; moreover, such actions might be upheld by the courts, creating formal legal precedents as well. And, regardless of what the government does or does not do, a nuclear emergency might create public demands for increased govern-mental powers that could later infringe upon civil liberties. This paper attempts to evaluate these risks to civil liberties.
DOJ guidance for mentally impaired detainees in immigration removal proceedings should be amended to provide counsel at earlier signs of incompetence.
Experts discuss legal developments and related ramifications one year after President Trump declared a national emergency at the U.S. Southern Border with Mexico in order to build a wall.
This study uses interviews with judges to examine the role of remorse in judicial decisionmaking.
Voting rights advocates should explore section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act as a vehicle to combat voter intimidation.