A sensible, cautious, and careful opinion. It will probably drive Trump nuts.
Recent Bluessky Posts- I'll be virtual. Immunocompromise, alas. April 8, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Are you clean sheeting or working in shadow of equal sufferage clause? papers.ssrn.com/abstract=379... April 8, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Looking forward to this! Have very much enjoyed past editions. April 8, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Jotwell Crim: Maartje van der Woude, Bordering on Indifference: The Moral Work of Immigration Enforcement, JOTWELL (April 8, 2026) (reviewing Irene Vega, Bordering on Indifference: Immigration Agents Negotiating Race and Morality (2025)), crim.jotwell.com/bordering-on.... April 8, 2026 Jotwell
- Jotwell Librianship: Kristina Niedringhaus, Can your AI Think Like a Lawyer?, JOTWELL (April 7, 2026) (reviewing Lee F. Peoples, Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analysis: Implications for Legal Education and the Profession/em>, 117 Law Lib. J. 52 (2025).), lex.jotwell.com/can-your-ai-.... April 7, 2026 Jotwell
stretching the third party standing doctrine to its outermost limits. i.e. equating the fact that schools have standing for students in some situations to schools having standing for aliens
10:1 the standing part of the decision holds up. States own universities, their universities have pled loss of specific students and employees, that is enough for direct standing. The third party stuff is needed for other parts of the order, but if the court correctly characterized the precedents it is not odd either.
I only thought that the third party standing analysis was odd, because I think there is a difference between students that are citizens being represented by a school when the students lack standing and aliens being represented by a school when the aliens lack standing…but not going to take a bet against you, even at 10:1…