Professor Shapiro discusses the Electoral College on “Chicago Tonight”

Professor Carolyn Shapiro was a guest on WTTW’s “Chicago Tonight” on December 12, 2016, to discuss what the Founding Fathers intended when they created the Electoral College and whether President-elect Trump’s actions after the election could influence how the electors vote on December 19.

Professor Shapiro writes about the Electoral College for Washington Monthly

Professor Carolyn Shapiro wrote an article titled “States Can’t Stop Electors From Voting Their Conscience” that appeared on the Washington Monthly website on December 9, 2016, in which she explains the constitutional responsibilities of the Electoral College as well as the role of the states under the Constitution and federal law.

Dean Krent explains the Emoluments Clause on “Chicago Tonight”

Dean Harold Krent spoke to “Chicago Tonight” host Phil Ponce on December 1, 2016, about how President-elect Donald Trump’s business entanglements create an ethical minefield and could violate the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause.

Professor Shapiro writes in the Huffington Post about how the Electoral College could prevent a Trump presidency

In a guest blog post for the Huffington Post on December 1, 2016, Professor Carolyn Shapiro explained how the Electoral College could prevent Donald Trump from becoming president and outlines the reasons why she thinks he’s unfit for office.

Dean Krent’s letter to the Chicago Tribune editor: “American law professors didn’t forget the rule of law — and neither should Trump”

In response to a Chicago Tribune op-ed by Northwestern law professor Stephen Presser titled “What American law professors forgot and what Trump knew” (11/18/2016), Dean Harold Krent wrote a letter to the editor, published November 25, 2016, refuting Professor Presser’s claim that American law professors are out of touch.

Professor Schmidt on “The Trump Presidency and the Supreme Court”

By Professor Christopher W. Schmidt

What does a Trump Presidency have in store for the Supreme Court? Answering this question requires considering two separate, albeit related, questions: (1) the impact of one or more Trump nominees on the Supreme Court, and (2) the possible legal challenges to policy Trump has endorsed that might end up in the Supreme Court. In this post, I’ll focus on the first question; in a subsequent post, I’ll look at the second.

One of the immediate implications of Trump’s victory is that President Obama nominee Merrick Garland’s hopes of getting on the Supreme Court are over. The seat left vacant by Justice Scalia’s death in February will remain open until the new President has an opportunity to make his own nomination. (Some have urged Obama to simply give Garland his seat based on the fact that the Senate’s refusal to hold hearings constitutes some sort of consent. But it is hard to imagine the current President seriously considering this constitutionally questionable path.) The Republican strategy of refusing to hold Senate hearings on the nominee until after the election worked. What looked a few weeks ago like a desperate stalling action that had run its course now looks like a high-stakes gamble that paid off.

Continue reading “Professor Schmidt on “The Trump Presidency and the Supreme Court””

Professor Shapiro discusses the Supreme Court and a Trump presidency on “Chicago Tonight”

Professor Carolyn Shapiro appeared on WTTW’s “Chicago Tonight” on November 15, 2016, to discuss how a Trump presidency might shape the U.S. Supreme Court.

Professor Kreis expresses concerns in Slate survey for LGBTQ civil rights under Trump presidency

Professor Anthony Michael Kreis responded to a survey of LGBTQ people across the country for Slate in which he expressed his concerns that President-elect Trump would roll back LGBTQ civil rights gains of the last eight years by reversing President Obama’s executive orders and by appointing anti-gay judges.