she/her. Counsel @myconstitution (but tweets =my own); former fellow @Georgetownlaw; @pennhistory
Washington, DC
Joined August 2010
- Tweets609
- Following718
- Followers340
- Likes653
Smita Ghosh retweeted
HAPPENING TODAY: Join @MyConstitution's Praveen Fernandes, @AHoagFordjour, and @wuc3 on December 4 for our virtual conversation, “Back to the Future: Embracing the Progressive Aims of the Constitution."
theusconstitution.org/events…
Smita Ghosh retweeted
Looking forward to this upcoming conference at UChicago on “Sovereign Power and the Constitutional Text.” Great lineup, addressing an array of topics, including Indian law, immigration law, extradition, and the extraterritorial application of criminal law. law.uchicago.edu/events/sove…
"No basis in originalism." . . . "As an originalist, I'm embarrassed." . . . Important conversation about the complete absence of historic basis for the conservative majority's immunity decision last week.
Thanks to @SeattleULaw for convening
"There's no constitutional provision stating that the president cannot be tried for actions taken during his presidency, and there is historical evidence suggesting that was intentional." Watch the full @seattleulaw panel featuring @eeksmita: law.seattleu.edu/about/newsc…
With @lee_kovarsky; @Rachel_E_Lopez; @robertltsai;
@dissentingj; @steve_vladeck; @IlyaSomin; @Amsprof
@earlymodjustice; @jedshug; @doctoresque; @_justinlevitt_ and more
Smita Ghosh retweeted
"There's no constitutional provision stating that the president cannot be tried for actions taken during his presidency, and there is historical evidence suggesting that was intentional." Watch the full @seattleulaw panel featuring @eeksmita: law.seattleu.edu/about/newsc…
Smita Ghosh retweeted
If the Court wanted to resolve this case quickly, it could avoid for now resolving all the complex issues about the boundary of any presidential immunity. It could say we assume for purposes of this decision that immunity exists for official acts (though we don't decide that or whether it exists for only some official acts) -- contrary to the DC Circuit.
Even so, most of the acts charged in the indictment involve private acts, as the President's lawyer conceded at argument. In addition to the acts already conceded to be private, the Court could also decide now whether any additional acts charged in the indictment similarly involve purely private acts. There is no immunity for any of those acts, even under the President's own theory. The trial could proceed based just on the acts considered personal.
But it does not seem the Court is going to do that. It seems inclined to a broader opinion that grapples more generally with the novel questions of the scope of any possible immunity for former presidents from criminal prosecution.
Smita Ghosh retweeted
love to listen to Supreme Court oral arguments about fun hypotheticals like “if you have a womb is it possible you aren’t a person” and “should we have a king”
Smita Ghosh retweeted
God bless you, KBJ! Now asking why the President alone gets to break the law when everyone else with difficult consequential jobs has to make their decisions against the backdrop of possible criminal prosecution.
Yes! More here: theusconstitution.org/litiga…
(brief filed by @MyConstitution with @tribelaw, @petermshane, @FOBowman3, @kewhittington, @ProfBrianKalt, and Michael Gerhardt ...).
Great speaking with @LeverNews about Cantero v. BOA--a case that @ktyschwnk connects to the 2008 financial crisis. Prof. Wilmarth (writing for @CSBSNews as amicus) helps connect the dots...
As CAC's @eeksmita explains in @LeverNews, Cantero v. Bank of America will determine whether "the power of states to make rules that protect their residents apply to national banks."
levernews.com/the-supreme-co…
Smita Ghosh retweeted
Exactly right. This is inexcusable, from how long it took SCOTUS to decide to hear the case, to giving the parties so long before the argument in late April. But the initial problem was how slow AG Garland was out of the gate.
Smita Ghosh retweeted
Bottom line: The silence of SCOTUS on the immunity case tells us almost nothing.
But every additional day of silence increases the odds that the news isn’t good for anyone who wants Trump’s shocking conduct around the 2020 election to be adjudicated before the 2024 election.
The Supreme Court just released its orders list for this week. The Trump immunity case was not on the list. This itself means little. The case is at the Supreme Court in an emergency stay posture, and so the court can act anytime. I suspect we will know whether the court will hear the case within the next 72 hours or so.
Smita Ghosh retweeted
As long as Alicia approves 🙏🏾💚
Did you hear the good news? Prof. @AHoagFordjour will be joining @MyConstitution as their first-ever Scholar-in-Residence! Congratulations! #womenknowlaw
Smita Ghosh retweeted
Our Constitution created a government with presidents, not kings. CAC Appellate Counsel @eeksmita wrote in @newsweek about why the DC Circuit's decision rejecting Trump's immunity claim was supported by the text and history of the Constitution: newsweek.com/founding-father…
Inauspicious start…
astrotalk.com/astrology-blog…
Totally agree -- "a gerrymandered rule designed to benefit only your client"...
theusconstitution.org/news/r…
Looks like a fascinating article from @BrianDeLay on the use of history/presumption of continuity in Second Amendment challenges
I'm thrilled that "The Myth of Continuity in American Gun Culture," a long (35k word) article that I spent most of the past year working on, will be published by the California Law Review in Feb. 2025 papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.…
“Trump’s lawyers claim that the framers of the 14th Amendment intended to ban former officials who engage in insurrection from holding office, unless they held the most powerful office in the United States government.”
This quoted post is unavailable.
Smita Ghosh retweeted
Must read from my @MyConstitution colleague @eeksmita!
For those justices who profess to care about the text and history of the Constitution, the Trump ballot case should be an easy one. slate.trib.al/mtcJkN9
