U.C. Davis law professor Vikram David Amar continues his discussion of the Arizona redistricting commission case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. Amar considers both the question of standing and the actual merits of the issue presented.

George Washington University law professor and economist Neil Buchanan discusses what we should expect from the people whom we hire to teach our children and dispels the notion of the “superstar” teacher.

Hofstra University law professor Joanna Grossman describes the path that the issue of same-sex marriage has taken to finally reach the U.S. Supreme Court this term.

Cornell University law professor Michael Dorf argues that the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to recognize a right to same-sex marriage in a ruling this term and discusses the different theories on which the Court could do so.

Former counsel to the president John W. Dean argues that it is high time for a woman—and most likely Hillary Clinton, in particular—to become our country’s next transformational president.

Cornell University law professor Sherry Colb discusses a recent New York law that bans tattoos of companion animals and compares it to a hypothetical law banning other types of animal cruelty.

Cardozo law professor Marci Hamilton discusses the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Holt v. Hobbs, holding that the Arkansas prison system’s beard-length requirements violate the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

George Washington University law professor and economist Neil Buchanan discusses the importance of civilian leadership of law enforcement and describes the dangers of an “us-against-them” mentality among law enforcement officers.

U.C. Davis law professor Vikram David Amar evaluates the merits of the arguments of the Arizona legislature in its Supreme Court challenge to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.

Cornell University visiting law professor Joseph Margulies continues his discussion of torture and its place in American politics. Margulies describes how torture gained popularity only after it became a partisan issue, and only after its supporters assembled an argument making its use seem consistent with American values.

Cornell University law professor Michael Dorf discusses the extent to which various forms of protest by NYPD officers do (and don’t) threaten to undermine civilian control of the police.

Chapman University law professor Ronald Rotunda comments on the President’s asserted power to waive U.S. immigration laws.

Former counsel to the president John W. Dean reflects on a visit he had with the late California Justice Mildred Lillie, who, due to gender discrimination, was denied appointment on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Cardozo law professor Marci Hamilton explains how the “religious liberty” supported by conservative Republicans is thinly veiled discrimination against the LGBTQ community and women.

Cornell University law professor Sherry Colb discusses the differences between the Fourth Amendment and the First Amendment with respect to the “fruit of the poisonous tree,” in the context of the recent Sony hack and widescale publication of the private data exposed by the cyber-attack.

Hofstra University law professor Joanna Grossman discusses the recent crackdown by the federal Office for Civil Rights on sexual assault and violence in schools.

In this first of a two-part series of columns, Cornell University visiting law professor Joseph Margulies debunks the widespread belief that Americans’ support for torture occurred immediately following the attacks of 9/11. In Part II, Margulies will discuss how support for torture took off only after it became a partisan issue, and an argument took shape that made torture sound congenial to American values.

UC Davis law professor Vikram David Amar continues his discussion of the low 2014 bar pass rates in California and throughout the country.