Simon Lazarus
As seen in:
MSN,
Yahoo News,
Slate,
Brookings Institution,
Flipboard,
Yahoo,
National Law Journal,
RealClear Politics,
The New Republic,
AlterNet
and
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 by Simon Lazarus
The Jewish Case for Electing Abdul El-Sayed
Jews in Michigan, and across America, would do well to reframe the terms on which they are weighing the choice posed by Abdul El-Sayed’s candidacy for the U.S. Senate. Such a reframe is in order, however individuals align with the candidate’s antagonism to the Israeli government’s policies toward Palestinians. There is work to be done. There is no mission more vital than unstitching Trumpism from our nation’s civic fabric, and El-Sayed stands to be a major player in that task.
The Jewish Case for Electing Abdul El-Sayed
Jews in Michigan, and across America, would do well toreframe the terms on which they are weighing the choice posed by AbdulEl-Sayed's candidacy for the U.S. Senate. Such a reframe is in order, howeverindividuals align with the candidate's antagonism to the Israeli government'spolicies toward Palestinians. There is work to be done. There is no mission more vital than unstitching Trumpism fromour nation's civic fabric, and El-Sayed stands to be a major player in thattask.
OPINION: How the Chinese are taking the Swiss head on
Chinese watchmaking is making the Swiss stand up and pay closer attention. Far beyond cheap quartz models sold by the millions, a new generation of Chinese brands is offering surprisingly sophisticated watches at prices that Swiss and Japanese brands often can’t match. So, what is driving this trend, and how is the future of luxury watchmaking shaping up? Simon Lazarus, head of PR and content at Chrono Hunter, digs deeper.
The most likely avenue for Supreme Court reform
; ; ; ; Continue reading More for You
The Most Likely Avenue for Supreme Court Reform Original
Supreme Court reform is all the rage among Democratic leaders in Washington. For decades, with few if notable exceptions, these politicians stood mutely impotent in the face of ultraconservative Republican-appointed justices incinerating hard-won, long-entrenched constitutional and statutory foundations of liberal governance. At last, it appears that they have taken note of the destruction. What’s more, they have decided that a package of enactments to reform the court is their answer.
Q&A: Bulgari’s Brinbaum talks iconography and Dua Lipa
Founded in Rome in 1884, Bulgari has developed a reputation for creating luxurious timepieces that combine innovative design with sophisticated craftsmanship. With bold shapes, elegant refinement, and architectural innovation, the brand has developed some of the most iconic jewellery watches and ultra-thin mechanical movements of all time.
Q&A: Bulgari’s CEO talks iconography and Dua Lipa
Founded in Rome in 1884, Bulgari has developed a reputation for creating luxurious timepieces that combine innovative design with sophisticated craftsmanship. With bold shapes, elegant refinement, and architectural innovation, the brand has developed some of the most iconic jewellery watches and ultra-thin mechanical movements of all time.
IN-DEPTH: How does the Vacheron CPO programme stack up?
With pre-owned sales of Rolex worth a staggering $10 billion+ according to EveryWatch, of which $385 million amounted to Certified Pre-Owned sales, how does the Vacheron Constantin Certified Pre-Owned (CPO) programme stack up? Simon Lazarus, head of PR & content at online watch platform Chrono Hunter, finds out. We can’t ignore it — supply and demand. Two integral players that have a key role in not only value retention but desirability.
OPINION: What is Philippe Stern’s legacy at Patek Philippe?
After the passing of Philippe Stern, honorary president of Patek Philippe, in June 2026, what does it mean for the one of the last standing family-owned luxury watch brands? Simon Lazarus, head of PR & content at Chrono Hunter takes a look. There is much to praise about the man who was president from 1993 to 2009. But where did his horological journey begin?
The Supreme Court’s Most Brazen Attack on Congress Yet Original
The Supreme Court’s end-of-term blockbuster cascade of decisions marked new heights of the right-wing majority’s lust for power over the other two branches of government, especially Congress; its disdain for the text of laws and the Constitution and their Framers; and its exhuming of doctrinal artifices, long simmering within the conservative legal movement after being beaten back decades ago.
What does ‘House of Brands’ mean to the industry?
If you have had time to think about anything else aside from the Swatch AP ‘Royal Pop’ collab that closed 20 stores, you may have missed another watch group making their move. Introduced at Dubai Watch Week last year, Breitling has been overhauled to encompass a trio of watchmakers, with an all-in-one operational banner — ‘House of Brands.’ The decision to become House of Brands covers numerous market segments. The portfolio houses: Universal Genève: The ultra-premium, high-horology tier.
Trump Derangement Syndrome Is a Self-Destructive Distraction
In recent weeks, Trumpian excesses have—finally—provoked some visible setbacks: These include his firing of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem; the scaling back of the grandiose “regime-change” goal of his Iran war; and the grudging acquiescence, at least purported, in repeated judicial rejections of unlawful planks of his policy and political agendas. This is all good news, but let’s remember: These retreats are merely tactical.
Trump Derangement Syndrome Is a Self-Destructive Distraction
Among other initiatives, Claremont commissioned a "79 Days Report" prior to the 2020 election, which was effectively a playbook for overturning a feared Trump loss to Biden. Written by the subsequently disbarred attorney John Eastman, the report guided the thinking of the postelection Stop the Steal campaign. All four "Natcon" conferences have been heavily attended by activists, academics, think tankers, and politicians, including representatives of European far-right parties and factions.
The Right-Wing Justices Know Their Favorite Legal Theory Is Bunk
Sports betting via online platforms such as FanDuel and DraftKings is legal in some form in more than three dozen states, but an even more lucrative …
The Right-Wing Justices Know Their Favorite Legal Theory Is Bunk
The media’s takeaways from the December oral arguments in the Trump Justice Department’s bid to the Supreme Court to invalidate multi-member “independent agencies,” were unanimous: It was a big win for Trump and for legal conservatives’ decades-long drive to free presidents from congressionally imposed checks on presidential control over executive agencies and personnel.
The Right-Wing Justices Know Their Favorite Legal Theory Is Bunk
In post-revolutionary America, the agencies that Congress saw fit to wall off from presidential at-will removal wielded significant economic and societal power. An example was the Revolutionary War Debt Commission, enacted in 1790, in response to a proposal by Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton. He called for an entity to be run by "commissioners, vested with ... final authority," not, "with the President ...
The Supreme Court's Trump Enablers May Have Screwed Themselves Original
The Supreme Court's conservatives spent most of last term accepting, then granting, an unprecedented slew of heretofore-rare DOJ "emergency applications" from the court's so-called "shadow docket," most in the service of staying lower court bars against myriad Trump administration actions bloating presidential powers. Thereby, the justices enabled Trump to continue breaching preexisting boundaries without having to decide on the merits whether his power grabs actually violate relevant law.
Supreme Court Cannot Keep Fed Independent but Shove Other Agencies Under President’s 'Unitary Executive' Thumb
In a terse opinion published May 22 on its emergency or so-called shadow docket, a 6-3 majority of the Supreme Court has foreshadowed stripping Congress of its authority to protect the independence of sensitive multi-member agencies from improper White House meddling, and arrogated to itself the power to cherry-pick agencies that merit continued safeguards. Such longstanding congressional authority had been upheld in a 1935 case known as Humphrey's Executor v.
Will the Supreme Court Crash the Global Economy? Original
On April 10, Chief Justice John Roberts placed a case on the Supreme Court’s docket that could potentially entrench far more devastating and irremediable damage to the global economy than Trump’s tariffs; eviscerate American democracy more than the president’s maneuvers to crush critics in academia, law, and business; and undermine rule-of-law governance more than the court’s widely covered April 7 procedural finesse of Trump officials’ defiance of district judges’ orders to halt unlawful...
The Supreme Court Must Rescue Itself From Its Own Madness
To belabor the obvious, given the Senate Republicans’ stubbornly lockstep devotion to Trumpification, the only civic bastion potentially able to brake this flamboyantly lawless White House’s drive for unbounded power is the federal judiciary, in particular the Supreme Court. Long aware of this last potential obstacle to their ambitions, Trump and his team have been unreserved about impugning the court’s authority to dispute their sweeping definition of presidential power.
The Supreme Court Must Rescue Itself From Its Own Madness
To belabor the obvious, given the Senate Republicans’ stubbornly lockstep devotion to Trumpification, the only civic bastion potentially able to brake this flamboyantly lawless White House’s drive for unbounded power is the federal judiciary, in particular the Supreme Court. Long aware of this last potential obstacle to their ambitions, Trump and his team have been unreserved about impugning the court’s authority to dispute their sweeping definition of presidential power.
There May Be Enough Supreme Court Votes to Save the Government
17 hours ago Fox’s John Roberts Challenges Karoline Leavitt on Trump’s Gaza Plan: ‘Exact Opposite’ of His Campaign Fox News anchor John Roberts pressed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Thursday over President Donald Trump’s recent plan for a U.S. … 1 day ago Rapid City church's request to start warming center denied, council avoids considering appeal Residents speaking on behalf of the First Presbyterian Church in Rapid City told City Council Monday night they want to live out...
There May Be Enough Supreme Court Votes to Save the Government
But on examination, Vought’s interpretation plainly fails, even—especially—with a court whose members all espouse fidelity to the text of statutes they are asked to apply, for two reasons: First, Vought mischaracterizes the statutory language on which he relies.
There May Be Enough Supreme Court Votes to Save the Government
It probably goes without saying, but the Trump administration’s blizzard of executive orders have been more numerous, far-reaching, and cataclysmic than liberals—and even conservatives—foresaw. Naturally, this has provoked instant pushback in courts, the op-ed pages, and press releases from elected officials.
Democrats Have Bigger Problems Than the Electoral College
That Donald Trump managed to win both the electoral vote and the popular vote has finally provided Democrats and liberals with the chance to correct a deeply ingrained misconception: the reflexive meme that the Electoral College is a structural barrier that systematically stacks the national electoral playing field against them. Factually, that grievance may have seemed correct in 2016, but historically, it is very wrong.
The Democrats Are the Only True Defenders of the Constitution
For liberal leaders of all stripes, branding “polarization” as a dire threat to “democracy” is a constant meme. It was the central motif of President Joe Biden’s abbreviated reelection campaign, repeated most recently at his October 4 press conference. However, liberal leaders have been less prone to showcase a banner likely to broaden their non- and bipartisan appeal—namely, that the MAGA right’s antidemocratic shenanigans are threats to “the Constitution.” It’s a missed opportunity.
The Democrats Are the Only True Defenders of the Constitution
For liberal leaders of all stripes, branding “polarization” as a dire threat to “democracy” is a constant meme. It was the central motif of President Joe Biden’s abbreviated reelection campaign, repeated most recently at his October 4 press conference. However, liberal leaders have been less prone to showcase a banner likely to broaden their non- and bipartisan appeal—namely, that the MAGA right’s antidemocratic shenanigans are threats to “the Constitution.” It’s a missed opportunity.
Jamie Raskin’s Battleplan for Liberals in the War Over the Constitution
In May, Representative Jamie Raskin, the ranking member of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, lead manager in the second impeachment of Donald Trump in 2021, a member of the January 6 Select Committee, and a prolific constitutional law scholar participated in an interview with Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick.
Liberals, Stop Mocking Originalism—and Start Claiming It Original
Last month, the conservative writer Ramesh Ponnuru published anop-ed in The Washington Post arguing that Democrats “have lost the debate about the role of courts in our democracy.” He detailed how conservatives over two generations “developed a comprehensive strategy, including politically powerful rhetoric,” to shift the federal courts toward their way of thinking.
Liberals Still Have a Chance to Save the Administrative State Original
On January 17, the Supreme Court hosted oral arguments which, while over a hyper-technical legal issue, lasted more than three hours, drawing wide coverage from mainstream media. At issue was whether the court should overturn what’s become known as “Chevron deference.” Established as a precedent in a 1984 decision, Chevron v.
Liberals Are Wrong to Trash the Supreme Court’s New Code of Ethics
This Thanksgiving, liberals should have spent some time showing gratitude for a historic victory—namely, the Supreme Court’s November 12 adoption of an ethical code of conduct. But many liberal pundits opted to pooh-pooh the measure instead, panning the code as “nonbinding,” “a joke, worse than nothing,” that “does nothing to address the ethical issues that have been following the justices,” and “doesn’t change anything.” Why so Grinchy?
Liberals Are Wrong to Trash the Supreme Court’s New Code of Ethics
This Thanksgiving, liberals should have spent some time showing gratitude for a historic victory—namely, the Supreme Court’s November 12 adoption of an ethical code of conduct. But many liberal pundits opted to pooh-pooh the measure instead, panning the code as “nonbinding,” “a joke, worse than nothing,” that “does nothing to address the ethical issues that have been following the justices,” and “doesn’t change anything.” Why so Grinchy?
The Case for Optimism on the Supreme Court’s Next Term Original
On October 2, when the Supreme Court hosts its first oral argument of the 2023–24 term, members of its right-wing 6–3 supermajority will be in the spotlight and on the spot. One question in particular will rivet attention on all sides: During the previous term, the court registered something of an unexpected turn toward the center—a move that was partial and inconsistent but still startling to foes and fans alike.
The Liberal Case for Celebrating the Supreme Court’s Last Term
If by interspersing unexpected liberal wins with expected wins for the right, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’s ploy was to confuse liberal critics, defuse their fervor, and brake the precipitous drop in the Court’s public approval ratings, as many skeptics have inferred, then Roberts must be off for a pleasant summer. Liberals and Democrats have been all over the map trying to decipher the 2022–23 term’s mixed record.
The Democrats’ Appalling Failure to Confront the Rogue, Right-Wing Supreme Court
President Biden and his allies in Congress and state capitols have coalesced around one big strategic idea, to reinvigorate and update the New Deal–Great Society–Obama Democrat policy agenda—the better to demonstrate the Democratic Party’s desire and capacity to address the needs of working- and middle-class constituencies, broaden the party’s resonance with professional and suburban voters, and revitalize unions and other institutional bases of political support.
The Democrats’ Appalling Failure To Confront the Rogue, Right-Wing Supreme Court
President Biden and his allies in Congress and state capitols have coalesced around one big strategic idea, to reinvigorate and update the New Deal–Great Society–Obama Democrat policy agenda—the better to demonstrate the Democratic Party’s desire and capacity to address the needs of working- and middle-class constituencies, broaden the party’s resonance with professional and suburban voters, and revitalize unions and other institutional bases of political support.
The Democrats’ Appalling Failure to Confront the Rogue, Right-Wing Supreme Court
President Biden and his allies in Congress and state capitols have coalesced around one big strategic idea, to reinvigorate and update the New Deal–Great Society–Obama Democrat policy agenda—the better to demonstrate the Democratic Party’s desire and capacity to address the needs of working- and middle-class constituencies, broaden the party’s resonance with professional and suburban voters, and revitalize unions and other institutional bases of political support.
Liberal SCOTUS Judges are Calling Out the Court's Crisis of Legitimacy. Why Aren't Dem Politicians?
SOURCE: The New Republic 4/21/2023 Breaking News tags: legal history, Supreme Court by Simon Lazarus Simon Lazarus served as associate director of President Jimmy Carter’s White House Domestic Policy Staff, and since then with private and public-interest law firms in Washington, D.C. President Biden and his allies in Congress and state capitols have coalesced around one big strategic idea, to reinvigorate and update the New Deal–Great Society–Obama Democrat policy agenda—the better to...
Liberal SCOTUS Judges are Calling Out the Court's Crisis of Legitimacy. Why Aren't Dem Politicians?
SOURCE: The New Republic 4/21/2023 Breaking News tags: legal history, Supreme Court by Simon Lazarus Simon Lazarus served as associate director of President Jimmy Carter’s White House Domestic Policy Staff, and since then with private and public-interest law firms in Washington, D.C. President Biden and his allies in Congress and state capitols have coalesced around one big strategic idea, to reinvigorate and update the New Deal–Great Society–Obama Democrat policy agenda—the better to...
Sorry, Clarence Thomas, but Supreme Court Ethics Reform Is on the Table
Not long ago, I wrote that liberals had a heaven-sent opportunity to push back against the ultraright, ultraactivist supermajority on the Supreme Court by coalescing behind legislation to end Supreme Court justices’ anomalous status as the only federal judges who are not subject to an ethical code of conduct.
Bipartisan Supreme Court Reform Is Not a Pipe Dream
Liberals hoping to stymie an ultra-right, ultra-activist Supreme Court have one option that hasn’t garnered the attention of institutional makeover proposals such as expanding the court or imposing term limits: Supreme Court ethics reform.
How the Supreme Court Plans to Undermine Future Elections
Democratic politicians, along with independents and Republicans who likewise revere democracy, are justifiably savoring 2022 midterm voters’ historic affirmation of the core principle of government by representatives elected by popular majorities. But these pro-democracy leaders must now pivot to confront an as yet unacknowledged elephant (pun intended) in the room—the activist reactionary 6-3 supermajority controlling the Supreme Court. In a case scheduled for argument on December 7, Moore v.
How the Supreme Court Plans to Undermine Future Elections
Democratic politicians, along with independents and Republicans who likewise revere democracy, are justifiably savoring 2022 midterm voters’ historic affirmation of the core principle of government by representatives elected by popular majorities. But these pro-democracy leaders must now pivot to confront an as yet unacknowledged elephant (pun intended) in the room—the activist reactionary 6-3 supermajority controlling the Supreme Court. In a case scheduled for argument on December 7, Moore v.
How the Supreme Court Plans to Undermine Future Elections
Democratic politicians, along with independents and Republicans who likewise revere democracy, are justifiably savoring 2022 midterm voters’ historic affirmation of the core principle of government by representatives elected by popular majorities. But these pro-democracy leaders must now pivot to confront an as yet unacknowledged elephant (pun intended) in the room—the activist reactionary 6-3 supermajority controlling the Supreme Court. In a case scheduled for argument on December 7, Moore v.
How to Rein in the Supreme Court’s Radical Conservatives
As the Supreme Court prepares to kick off its next, sure-to-be-eventful term, the high court faces ballooning public skepticism about its evident appetite to “take” what President Ronald Reagan’s solicitor general, Charles Fried, labeled, “a constitutional wrecking ball to generations of Supreme Court doctrine.” Three major public opinion pollshave shown sharp declines in the court’s favorability since Justice Samuel Alito’s draft decision in Dobbs v.
(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
The Supreme Court Appoints Itself to Be America’s Regulatory Czar
The members of the ultra-conservative Supreme Court super-majority have, of late, repeatedly insisted that they are conscientious jurists, not “political hacks.” This pose is getting harder to sustain. In fact, it now appears that these headstrong right-wing justices no longer care enough to keep up appearances as judicious callers of balls and strikes. The masks are off: This is the unavoidable takeaway from their end-of-term decision in West Virginia v.
Liberals Need to Beat Samuel Alito at His Own Game
For the moment, no one outside the Supreme Court knows whether Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade will ultimately win five votes. No matter how the final decision turns out, however, the leaked draft has done liberals an unexpected favor: It has disclosed the hard right’s strategy for framing the next stage of the war over the Constitution and the courts.
How to rein in partisan Supreme Court justices
The civics class model of the Supreme Court is that of an impartial adjudicator, above politics. It is an ideal still prized by the American public. Recently, however, the Supreme Court is looking more and more partisan. In a statement that reminds one of Shakespeare’s famous line, “the lady doth protest too much,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett proclaimed that “this court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks.” Nonetheless that is exactly what many are thinking.
The future of regulation at the Supreme Court
Twitter Join the conversation on Twitter using #DelegationDoctrine Two important cases at the Supreme Court this term–American Hospital Association v. Becerra and West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency–could shape regulatory policy in this country for years to come.
Show More
loading
Actions
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.Get in touch with Simon
Contact Simon, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack