kurt lash
@kurtlash1
E. Claiborne Robins Distinguished Chair in Law; Richmond School of Law; Constitutional History & Law; https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=2
This sort of thing is unprofessional no matter which side of the aisle it comes from
A prominent legal prof podcast described Amy Barrett as a “school marm” and “stone cold b*****.” I stopped listening at that point. I agree with @WilliamBaude that her Casa opinion was correct and excellent. Even if that’s wrong, hard to see how this is good academic behavior.
Great and troubling piece by Megan McArdle at WP. One wonders how this same fear-driven false consensus affects others areas of media and the academy. washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/…
Thoughts on Skrmetti: 1st, no originalist analysis in any opinion other than a suggestive footnote in Thomas' concurrence (see below). 2d, remarkable rehabilitation of Geduldig over past few decades. 3d, the entire Court seems uneasy with EP sex jurisprudence (as they shd be!)
Good (but hardly surprising) news for religious liberty: A federal district judge in Washington state has granted a preliminary injunction against a state law that would require Catholic priests to violate their absolute religious duty to keep confessions confidential. 1/
St. Camillus de Lellis, ora pro nobis! catholicnewsagency.com/saint/st-camil…
New Paper with @WilliamBaude , forthcoming in the Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities: "Yes, The Framers Were Originalists" A critical review of Jonathan Gienapp (@TheGNapp)'s Against Constitutional Originalism. @SSRN link below, and comments welcome!
New from Christian Burset: The Founders' Common Law Empire. This reappraisal of the Nw Ordinance looks extremely interesting. Looking forward to reading! papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
NEW: West Virginia v. Barnette: Forcing the Pledge of Allegiance? Can the government demand that you publicly declare your loyalty to the country? @kurtlash1, Professor of Law at the University of Richmond, discusses why the answer to that question is so significant. 👇
“[W]hat do we mean by ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.” Lyman Trumbull (1866).
“Bernick, Shawhan, and Story on Domicile” by Andrew Hyman, The Originalism Blog (07/09/2025). originalismblog.typepad.com/the-originalis… @kurtlash1 @ilan_wurman @provoter
I imagine Jackson’s eight colleagues are rather tired of such over the top public disparagement of the court. She’s writing herself into permanent irrelevance.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and…
Given the Volokh Conspiracy's signal-to-partisan-noise ratio ain't what it used to be, where does one go for reliably solid middle of the road legal analysis of current cases and issues?
Ok. Done with Finnis. On to summer book 2: Robert George’s “Conscience and its Enemies.”
Justice Department Sues Washington State Over its new anti-Catholic law, Senate Bill 5375 Read more: justice.gov/opa/pr/justice…
Re Justice Barrett, "animus" and Skrmetti. Be careful about overreading (or misreading) Barrett's reference to "animus." It is the Chief who first refers to "animus" and he does so with a cite to Romer (where it was embraced). Barrett (with Thomas) acknowledges the doctrine, but…
Summer reading (1/2 finished). Yes, I know some got this in high school. But even old dogs. . .
