Skip to main content
Leah Litman on Muck Rack

Leah Litman

Ann Arbor
As seen in: Strict Scrutiny, Apple Podcasts, CNN, Medium, MSN, The New York Times, Post Outlook, The Guardian, The Washington Post, TIME, Washington Post Opinions and
Prof. @Umichlaw. Con law & fed courts. Cohost @StrictScrutiny_ co-founder @womenknowlaw. LAWLESS: Out May 13!!
Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work. Claim your profile

Get in touch with Leah

Contact Leah, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.

Learn more about Muck Rack

Actions

Share this page

Is this you?

As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile

Articles

How the Supreme Court Is Reshaping American Government (with Leah Litman)

|
By Joyce Vance, Leah Litman, Jake Kaplan
| Substack
On this week’s Insider podcast, Joyce Vance speaks with Leah Litman while Preet is out. Litman is a professor at the University of Michigan Law School and co-host of the Strict Scrutiny podcast. They discuss the central themes from this Supreme Court term, and they make sense of multiple high-profile decisions: – Wolford v. Lopez, a gun possession case; – Mullin v. Doe and Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, two immigration cases; and – The Court’s order rejecting President Trump’s appeal in E.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?

The Supreme Court’s Era of Meaningless Rights

|
By Leah Litman
| Reader Supported News
The Supreme Court is not saying people don’t have certain rights, just that no courts can help them when those rights are violated. The six Republican appointees on the Supreme Court have made one thing clear: People may have rights, but in many cases they have no way to enforce them. Four decisions released this week have that paradox at their core. Two of them, both issued Tuesday, held that the plaintiffs lacked “causes of action”—the legal authorization to sue to vindicate their federal rights.
Open in Who Shared View Duplicates (3) Issue with article?

The Supreme Court’s Era of Meaningless Rights Original

|
By Leah Litman
| The Atlantic Verified
The six Republican appointees on the Supreme Court have made one thing clear: People may have rights, but in many cases they have no way to enforce them. Four decisions released this week have that paradox at their core. Two of them, both issued Tuesday, held that the plaintiffs lacked “causes of action”—the legal authorization to sue to vindicate their federal rights. In Cisco v.
Open in Who Shared View Duplicates (3) Issue with article?
See all 255 licensed articles (278 Total)