Law professors continue to embarrass themselves in the pursuit of power and influence for want of expertise. Behold, the disease has now spread to George Mason.

March 29, 2026 - 12:20 UTC

12
3
267
Amazing how so many intellectuals are willing to placate to trump. Where is their argument to support their support for originalism. Is it based on factual history or is it based on today’s political safety net of trumpism.
0
0
4
I mean, logically speaking, wouldn’t their view imply that people without birthright citizenship also have immunity from the US sovereign?

They’d all be like children of diplomats who happen to be born here: subject to the sovereign of their home country but not ours.
0
0
5
well, we do call them "professors," after all. if research was so important, we'd call em "researchers"
0
0
1
Now spread? Jonathan Turley has taught there for a while. Has been a breeding ground for less intellectual Thomas, Kavanaugh, Alito, wannabes for at least 15 years. Leonard Leo loves George Mason. Law school is named after Scalia.
0
0
2
I hear George Mason & I can’t help but think ”Republican apologist?”, from even before Koch Bros flooded it with money (but even more since). It’s a place where people hungry for a rich sugar daddy/mommy to keep them overpaid as part of the right-wing think tank center world are in no short supply.
0
0
2
Unfortunately, "assumptions based on war" might be the argument the admin goes with considering they're claiming we've been at war with Latin America and Iran for the past 40 years!
1
0
0
*sorry, exceptions not assumptions
0
0
0
I started GMUSOL (ASSLAW or ASSOL only in derision) in 2002. The writing was already on the wall: "law & economics" Prof Walter Williams screeds on World Net fucking Daily, Federalist Society metastasizing, business profs saying laws exist only bc Congress "doesn't understand how they make money"
0
0
12
GMU being full of far right fanatics? Is the Pope Catholic as well?
0
0
0
It is equally embarrassing that Barnett and Lash have reposted this drivel.
4
0
64
Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t Trump, Barnett, Lash and Wurman all have different “theories” of why birthright citizenship is incorrect? It is impossible to agree with all of them.
1
0
3
I've followed Barnett's work and commentary for...a decade? Two? Beyod disappointing. Like if a slasher murdered my dad and I walked in on the slasher and my wife in bed together.
0
0
1
i’d say more
0
0
20
contrarianism is such an intoxicating thrill for right wingers
1
0
5
GM’s been diseased for decades, spreading germs that blossom into AI hallucinations.
1
0
1
AI is the product of a long game to destroy meaning.
0
0
0
Imagine Trump bothered to check the common law before issuing his executive order...😱😱😂😂
It's clear for everyone with eyes that they are working the other way round ("hey, common law is not in the statute book, so we can make it say quodcumque principi placuit, who can object?")
1
0
1
And if THIS is the method NOW, why can't we assume that they ALWAYS worked this way?
Originalism is not a method, is an end in itself, good for what it can deliver
And in fact cardinal Vermellardinus rejected it when he thought that other methods were more conducive to the agenda
0
0
0