Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · 3d

senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/repor...

senate.universityofcalifornia.edu

1 1

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · 4d

Strong statement today from UC's Academic Senate:

18 370 1.1K

Reposted by Brian Soucek

The University of Chicago Press @uchicagopress.bsky.social · 4d

An important piece from Brian Soucek (@brsoucek.bsky.social), author of THE OPINIONATED UNIVERSITY, coming in January 2026.

www.salon.com/2025/10/02/w...

When military recruiters visit, colleges must support trans students

The trans ban violates the missions of universities — and their silence is dishonorable

www.salon.com

4 5

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · 28d

Unless I'm missing something, three people were fired @tamu.bsky.social because a class syllabus expanded on this effusive description in the @tamu.bsky.social course catalog: "Literature for Children. Representative writers, genres, texts and movements." (See www.coursicle.com/tamu/courses...).

ENGL 360 - Literature for Children at Texas A&M University | Coursicle TAMU

ENGL 360 at Texas A&M University (TAMU) in College Station, Texas. Literature for Children. Credit 0 or 3. Representative writers, genres, texts and movements. Prerequisite: Junior or senior classification.

www.coursicle.com

1 1 3

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Sep 5

Proud to see @ucdavislaw.bsky.social making its values clear, even as the federal Solomon Amendment pressures us to allow military recruiters to violate our nondiscrimination policies. These kinds of statements were common (in fact, required by AALS) during Don't Ask Don't Tell. What's changed?

MILITARY RECRUITMENT AT UC DAVIS SCHOOL OF LAW
In accord with the University of California’s anti-discrimination policy and regulations
of the Associate of American Law Schools (AALS), the University of California, Davis
School of Law has a Non-Discrimination Policy & Statement of Equal Opportunity
providing that:
The UC Davis School of Law Career Services Office expects employers recruiting at
King Hall to share our belief that the diversity of our students' backgrounds,
experience and interests will enrich the legal profession.
UC Davis School of Law does not make its career services facilities or services
available to employers who discriminate in the selection of employees on the basis
of ... sex, gender, gender expression, [or] gender identity.
On January 27, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order directing the
Departments of Defense and of Homeland Security to revise their accession and
retention standards to presumptively ban service by people who are transgender,
finding that transgender status is “not consistent with the humility and selflessness
required of a service member” and with “a soldier’s commitment to an honorable,
truthful, and disciplined lifestyle.” A federal law, the Solomon Amendment, 10 U.S.C.
§ 983, denies most federal funding to a university that provides less access to military
recruiters than to other employers. For that reason, longstanding practice at King Hall,
as at other law schools, has been to grant access to miliary recruiters even when they fail
to comply with our policies.
As the U.S. Supreme Court wrote when it upheld the constitutionality of the Solomon
Amendment, “Nothing about recruiting suggests that law schools agree with any speech
by recruiters, and nothing in the Solomon Amendment restricts what the law schools
may say about the military’s policies.” Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and
Institutional Rights, Inc., 547 U.S. 47, 65 (2006). To make our position clear, we will
prominently post our non-discrimination…

5

Reposted by Brian Soucek

Jameel Jaffer @jameeljaffer.bsky.social · Aug 20

Listen guys, if you're going to highlight this provision, you might also want to acknowledge the other provisions that require Columbia to restrict teaching, scholarship, and campus protest, and that limit the university's autonomy re admissions and hiring. www.nytimes.com/2025/08/19/u...

2 31 94

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Jun 27

This:

jamelle @jamellebouie.net · Jun 27

the president does not actually have the power to fire a university president or a museum director, but if elites simply roll over under pressure, then effectively he does

jamelle @jamellebouie.net · Jun 27

... www.nytimes.com/2025/06/27/u...

2

Reposted by Brian Soucek

Katie Phang @katiephang.bsky.social · Jun 27

BREAKING:

CASA (plaintiff in Maryland birthright citizenship case) has now filed an amended complaint seeking class certification for similarly situated individuals impacted by Trump’s EO.

www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/wp-cont...

www.law.georgetown.edu

37 390 1.7K

Reposted by Brian Soucek

James Grimmelmann @jtlg.bsky.social · Jun 24

Orders with no accompanying explanation have no precedential force beyond the specific facts they apply to. The district court should grant this motion, and the lower courts should keep on granting relief until the Supreme Court articulates a rule of decision to the contrary.

Joshua J. Friedman @joshuajfriedman.com · Jun 24

NEW: Lawyers for the 8 men being deported to South Sudan ask the district court to enforce its order granting these men additional due process, arguing that the Supreme Court's unreasoned order doesn't foreclose a remedy for a previous violation. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

D.
The Supreme Court's Stay of the Preliminary Injunction
On May 27, 2025, Defendants sought a stay of the preliminary injunction from the U.S.
Supreme Court, and, on June 23, 2025, the Court granted the stay. DHS v. D.V.D., No. 24A1153
(S. Ct. Jun. 23, 2025). However, the Supreme Court did not rule on or in any way address the government's jurisdictional arguments or the merits of Plaintiffs' claims, including whether the eight Plaintiffs who now file this motion were entitled to notice and an opportunity to seek
protection before removal to a third country. Id.
III.
ARGUMENT
The Court Should Enforce the Previously Ordered Remedy
This Court retains the authority to enforce compliance with its previously ordered
remedy. DHS was required to immediately comply with this Court's order when it was in effect, for it is a "basic proposition that all orders and judgments of courts must be complied with
promptly." Maness v. Meyers, 419 U.S. 449, 458 (1975); see also, e.g., Pasadena City Bd. of Ed.

10 32

Reposted by Brian Soucek

Kyle Cheney @kyledcheney.bsky.social · Jun 24

BREAKING: A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to restore millions of dollars in canceled grants to University of California researchers, calling the terminations flagrantly illegal and unconstitutional. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

71 1.4K 5.4K

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Jun 19

Absolutely this. Nicholas Confessore clearly wasn't going to let the actual decision get in the way of his thesis. To be clear: the Skrmetti Court is 3-3-3 on the question of "extending new constitutional protections to trans people."

Chris Geidner @chrisgeidner.bsky.social · Jun 19

If an 11,000-word story has a major, factual error in the fifth graf, it probably should be seen for the biased, hit-piece it is.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court delivered a new, crushing blow, upholding Tennessee's ban in a 6-to-3 decision. In allowing Tennessee to outlaw blockers and hormones, the court not only shielded similar laws on the books in some two dozen states. It effectively closed the door on extending new constitutional protections to trans people. Some advocates fear that Skrmetti could open the door to banning medical transition for adults and perhaps other health care that some conservatives oppose, like birth control or in vitro fertilization - even vaccines. The fate of a once-obscure medical treatment could have profound consequences for American law.

1 3

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Jun 12

You can find the whole fascinating story here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.... or here: publications.lawschool.cornell.edu/lawreview/20...

Tax Law as Muse

Admission charges at Chicago’s small music venues are generally exempt from tax. But a few years ago, officials came after clubs that hosted rock, hip‑hop

papers.ssrn.com

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Jun 12

Think the government shouldn't be defining what's art? Think the arts deserve government funding? Uh oh...you can't think both. My article with the amazing @jenniferlena.bsky.social is finally out, and it tells a 100-year history of tax law shaping what we see as art versus other forms of amusement.

Tax Law as Muse
Brian Soucek & Jennifer C. Lena
Admission charges at Chicago’s small music venues are gen-
erally exempt from tax. But a few years ago, officials came after
clubs that hosted rock, hip-hop, country, and DJ performances,
claiming that those kinds of music weren’t “commonly regarded
as part of the fine arts.” Controversy exploded, critics derided
the idea of turning tax collectors into “culture police,” and the law
was quickly changed to avoid accusations of unconstitutionality.
Plaintiffs across the country have similarly alleged that
selective tax exemptions for certain arts but not others amount
to unconstitutional content discrimination. They claim that the
government has no business judging what is art or deciding
what types of art to favor. But if this is so, then all levels of
government in the United States have been acting unconstitu-
tionally for an awfully long time.
This Article recovers a largely forgotten history of federal tax-
ation of the arts, dating back to World War I. Federal admissions
and cabaret taxes grew large enough by the Second World War to
change the course of music, hastening the decline of big band jazz,
the death of tap, and the growth of bebop. Fights for exemptions
embroiled Congress in debates over the value of various arts and
their distinction from “mere” amusements like burlesque, band
concerts, and the circus. And as the legislative history reveals,
the lines that got drawn reflect the race, gender, and class dispar-
ities of the voices Congress heard during the nearly five decades
the federal admissions tax remained in effect.

Unearthing the historical context behind discriminatory
tax exemptions like those in Chicago helps shed significant
light on a notoriously difficult First Amendment problem: how
to distinguish selective support of the arts from censorship.
Perhaps surprisingly, the history bolsters the constitutionality
of tax schemes like Chicago’s. But at the same time, the his-
tory shows that government meddling in the arts—not least
through the tax code—runs far deeper than even its critics
realize. Over the last century, tax law in the United States has
not just discriminated among the arts; it has helped determine
what gets counted among the arts in the first place. And as
Chicago’s example proves, tax law continues to do this today,
helping shape the perceived status and nature of performances
by everyone from DJs to drag queens, and symphonies to strippers.
Desirable as government subsidies for the arts might be, to see their effects is to realize the need for broader popular involvement in deciding who and what should receive them.

1 1 4

Reposted by Brian Soucek

UC Davis School of Law @ucdavislaw.bsky.social · Jun 11

Professor @brsoucek.bsky.social‬ recently participated in the 2025 Second Circuit Judicial Conference at the historic Sagamore Resort in Bolton Landing, N.Y. He spoke as part of the plenary session “Art & Legal Efforts to Silence, Tame and Cage It.” Read more at the link: bit.ly/4mKGczc

#UCDavisLaw

1 4

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · May 6

Hey institutional neutrality folks: now that Trump’s military trans ban is back in effect, are you going to say anything about the fact that you’re violating your own nondiscrimination policies when you host military recruiters? Is that an attack on your mission?

2 2

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · May 1

Thanks Jean! It was a pleasure to be on the show with you. Such impressive work you’ve done to make Law Day so powerful this year!

1 2

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Apr 26

He retired in 2022

Reposted by Brian Soucek

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · Apr 17

I was waiting for someone to post this. Federal courts ordered the Biden administration to engage in negotiations with another country. This is complex territory for sure.

But how much negotiation is really required to say "you know that guy we're paying you to hold? Put him on our plane tomorrow"?

Mark Joseph Stern @mjsdc.bsky.social · Apr 17

As DOJ argues that federal courts have no authority to order "any particular acts of diplomacy," I want to remind everyone that SCOTUS let Matthew Kacsmaryk seize control of Biden's border policy for 10 months and micromanage diplomatic negotiations with Mexican officials. slate.com/news-and-pol...

The court’s inaction empowered Kacsmaryk to assert complete control over resumption of Remain in Mexico. He ordered U.S. diplomats to negotiate over the program with Mexico “in good faith,” demanding monthly status reports detailing exactly how they were implementing his commands and how much progress they were making. He forced the administration to spend millions of dollars rebuilding temporary structures that the government could use to adjudicate immigrants’ claims. He made the Justice Department tell him the precise number of migrants encountered at the border each month and exactly what the government did with each of them.

On top of these status reports, Kacsmaryk ordered ongoing updates on the administration’s “compliance” with his injunction—that is, detailed explanations of negotiations with the Mexican government to restart Remain in Mexico. These updates were accompanied by declarations from U.S. officials explaining how they were implementing the injunction. When Texas complained that they were not implementing it quickly enough, Kacsmaryk allowed the state’s lawyers to depose the federal officials, compelling them to turn over even more information about high-level diplomatic negotiations with the Mexican government. The lawyers and diplomats undertaking this task at Kacsmaryk’s insistence were subject to the constant threat of contempt and sanctions if they failed to meet his demands. Then–Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar later revealed that the judge had forced the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security to hold weekly calls with “their counterparts in the Government of Mexico” to execute his extensive directives.

5 47 180

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Apr 16

Perfect timing for the new edition of the @aaup.bsky.social #Redbook!

4

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Apr 15

That’s amazing, Allison! I can’t wait to follow along

1 1

Reposted by Brian Soucek

Charlotte Garden @charlottegarden.bsky.social · Apr 14

Interestingly, this letter is signed by Robert Hur; Hur was the MD USA during Trump I, and then the person assigned to investigate Biden's post-VP handling of documents. He wrote that Biden would present himself to a jury “as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

Niko Bowie @nikobowie.bsky.social · Apr 14

BREAKING: On Friday, the federal government issued new demands of Harvard University. The university's lawyers just responded: back off.

April 14, 2025
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Josh Gruenbaum
Commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service
General Services Administration
Sean R. Keveney
Acting General Counsel
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
Thomas E. Wheeler
Acting General Counsel
U.S. Department of Education
Dear Messrs. Gruenbaum, Keveney, and Wheeler:
We represent Harvard University. We are writing in response to your letter dated April 11,
2025, addressed to Dr. Alan Garber, Harvard’s President, and Penny Pritzker, Senior Fellow of the
Harvard Corporation.
Harvard is committed to fighting antisemitism and other forms of bigotry in its community.
Antisemitism and discrimination of any kind not only are abhorrent and antithetical to Harvard’s
values but also threaten its academic mission.
To that end, Harvard has made, and will continue to make, lasting and robust structural,
policy, and programmatic changes to ensure that the university is a welcoming and supportive
learning environment for all students and continues to abide in all respects with federal law across
its academic programs and operations, while fostering open inquiry in a pluralistic community free
from intimidation and open to challenging orthodoxies, whatever their source.
Over the past 15 months, Harvard has undertaken substantial policy and programmatic
measures. It has made changes to its campus use policies; adopted new accountability procedures;
imposed meaningful discipline for those who violate university policies; enhanced programs
designed to address bias and promote ideological diversity and civil discourse; hired staff to
support these programs and support students; changed partnerships; dedicated resources to combat
hate and bias; and enhanced safety and security measures. As a result, Harvard is in a very different
place today from where it was a year ago. These efforts, and additional measures the university
will be taking against antisemitism, not only are the right thing to do but also are critical to
strength…

recognized by the Supreme Court. The government’s terms also circumvent Harvard’s statutory
rights by requiring unsupported and disruptive remedies for alleged harms that the government has
not proven through mandatory processes established by Congress and required by law. No less
objectionable is the condition, first made explicit in the letter of March 31, 2025, that Harvard
accede to these terms or risk the loss of billions of dollars in federal funding critical to vital research
and innovation that has saved and improved lives and allowed Harvard to play a central role in
making our country’s scientific, medical, and other research communities the standard-bearers for
the world. These demands extend not only to Harvard but to separately incorporated and
independently operated medical and research hospitals engaging in life-saving work on behalf of
their patients. The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional
rights. Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the
federal government. Accordingly, Harvard will not accept the government’s terms as an agreement
in principle.
Harvard remains open to dialogue about what the university has done, and is planning to
do, to improve the experience of every member of its community. But Harvard is not prepared to
agree to demands that go beyond the lawful authority of this or any administration.
William A. Burck Robert K. Hur
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP 1300 I Street NW Suite 900 Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005 King & Spalding LLP
1700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20006

1 2 16

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Apr 9

www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-t...

New Report: Most Students Say Colleges Promote Free Speech

While freedom of speech remains a hot-button issue in higher ed, most undergraduates feel like they’re free to speak their minds on campus, according to a new report by the Lumina Foundation and Gallu...

www.insidehighered.com

1 1

Reposted by Brian Soucek

Rachael Myrow @rachaelmyrow.bsky.social · Apr 5

So excited to be a part of this year's #nightofideas at @sfpubliclibrary.bsky.social, 🗣️ about #universities + #freespeech . w/ @brsoucek.bsky.social + @dzambrano.bsky.social at 9 pm in the Hormel LGBTQIA Ctr, 3rd Flr. Capacity: 75 (est.) with standing room, so come early! ❤️‍🔥 www.kqed.org/event/5064

Night of Ideas 2025: (un)Common Ground | KQED

The Bay Area's biggest celebration of creativity and critical thought is back at the San Francisco Public Library and Asian Art Museum!

www.kqed.org

2 2

Reposted by Brian Soucek

UC Davis School of Law @ucdavislaw.bsky.social · Apr 5

Happening tonight at the @sfpubliclibrary.bsky.social!

Brian Soucek @brsoucek.bsky.social · Apr 4

Bay Area folks: come join me tomorrow night @kqednews.kqed.org ’s Night of Ideas at the SF Public Library, where I’ll be debating institutional neutrality with @stanfordlaw.bsky.social’s Diego Zambrano. 9pm, and it’s free!
@ucdavislaw.bsky.social @ucdavis.bsky.social

1 3

Reposted by Brian Soucek

Jenn Lena @jenniferlena.bsky.social · Apr 3

🧨

Janel Comeau 🍁 @verybadllama.bsky.social · Apr 3

I have tariffed
the penguins
that are on
Heard Island

and which
you were probably
assuming
did not export goods

forgive me
they were taking advantage of us
so cunning
and so cold

1 4