A sensible, cautious, and careful opinion. It will probably drive Trump nuts.
Recent Bluessky Posts- Fails to disprove the hypothesis they want to make us all unsafe. June 8, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- @dfroomkin.bsky.social and @amandaweiss.bsky.social got married! June 5, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Jotwell Tax: Susan Morse, Jury Rights in Civil Tax Cases??, JOTWELL (June 5, 2026) (reviewing Steve R. Johnson, Jarkesy, the Seventh Amendment, and Tax Penalties, 79 U. Mia. L. Rev. 461 (2025)), tax.jotwell.com/jury-rights-.... June 5, 2026 Jotwell
- Jotwell Torts: Anita Bernstein, Male Supremacy as a Products Liability Defect, JOTWELL (June 4, 2026) (reviewing Melissa F. Wasserman, Products Liability in a World Designed for Men, 105 Tex. L. Rev. __ (forthcoming 2027)), torts.jotwell.com/male-suprema.... June 4, 2026 Jotwell
- May I suggest jotwell.com as a very partial substitute? June 4, 2026 Michael Froomkin
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…