Kyle Barry
LightNews LightNews
banner
kylecbarry.bsky.social
Kyle Barry
@kylecbarry.bsky.social
2.3K followers 1.3K following 520 posts
Director, State Law Research Initiative (SLRI) http://state-law-research.org; Formerly @theappeal.bsky.social, NAACP LDF, @afjustice.bsky.social. I write about state courts & dismantling mass incarceration. https://open.substack.com/pub/slri
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Kyle Barry
mjsdc.bsky.social
During ratification of the 14th Amendment, senators discussed whether the Citizenship Clause would apply to the children of immigrants and resoundingly concluded that it did. The text and history all point in one direction and the counter-arguments are patently fraudulent. I am going to lose my mind
anthonymkreis.bsky.social Anthony Michael Kreis @anthonymkreis.bsky.social · 1d
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
December 7, 2025 at 7:19 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
johnpfaff.bsky.social
This is an outstanding development!

It’s also WILD to me that almost a quarter of a MILLENNIUM into our federal experiment American law schools are finally acknowledging there are 50 state constitutions.
yeargain.bsky.social Quinn Yeargain @yeargain.bsky.social · 7d
Hello! @adamsopko.bsky.social and I have been working on a proposal to charter an AALS Section on State Constitutional Law. We believe that such a section is long overdue and that it is urgent to foster scholarly community and support in a growing discipline. Links to support this effort below: ⬇️
December 3, 2025 at 8:51 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
chrisgeidner.bsky.social
Statehood for D.C. is an ethical obligation at this point, required to protect the rights of our residents to govern ourselves against such out-of-state troops being sent to patrol our city.
chrisgeidner.bsky.social Chris Geidner @chrisgeidner.bsky.social · 5d
NEW: Republican-led states, in a new filing at the D.C. Circuit, say D.C. residents are irrelevant, D.C. belongs to everyone else. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

The filing is led by the South Carolina and West Virginia attorneys general. Both states sent troops to DC.
No. 25-5418 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Plaintiffs-Appellee V. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States, et al., Defendants-Appellants BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE SOUTH CAROLINA, WEST VIRGINIA, AND 22 ADDITIONAL STATES IN SUPPORT OF STAY PENDING APPEAL Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia District Court Case No. 1:25-Cv-03005-JMC ALAN WILSON ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA Thomas T. Hydrick Solicitor General P.O. Box 11549 Columbia, South Carolina 29201 JOHN B. MCCUSKEY ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA Michael R. Williams Solicitor General OFFICE OF THE WEST VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 11 INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ............... 1 INTRODUCTION ............ 1 ARGUMENT ........... 3 The Equities Weigh Heavily in Favor of a Stay, as the Injunction Usurps Presidential Power and Endangers D.C. Citizens and the Government ............................... ..... 3 A. Securing the District Is the President's Constitutional Responsibility and Vital to a Functioning Republic .... .....3 B. Crime Has Exploded in Our Capital, Hurting Residents and Hindering the Federal Government 5 C. In the Few Months Since the Executive Orders, President Trump and National Guard Troops Have Made the Capital Safer ......... 10 CONCLUSION .............. 13 ADDITIONAL COUNSEL........................ 15 INTRODUCTION The District of Columbia is the Seat of America's National Government and the house of all three of its branches. U.S. CONsT. art. I, § 8, cl. 17. Safety, security, and domestic tranquility in D.C. are critical, not only to the good people of the District, but to the functioning of the United States. The American People rely on the effective operation of their Government, which in turn depends on the safety of elected representatives and officials who carry out the popular will. The American People travel from all over the country to Washington, every day, to visit its historic sites and exercise their First Amendment right to petition the Government. See U.S. CONST. amend. I. The District belongs to "the People" as a whole, and its safety is critical to our constitutional republic.
December 2, 2025 at 8:51 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
atrupar.com
Jacob Frey: "If we are now at the point where the federal govt is deploying agents on legal American citizens with a goal of uprooting people who have formed lives here, have families here, started businesses here, definitively made Minneapolis a better place, everybody should be speaking out."
December 3, 2025 at 4:32 PM
kylecbarry.bsky.social
#KavanaughStop bsky.app/profile/prem...
premthakker.bsky.social Prem Thakker ツ @premthakker.bsky.social · 5d
Agents in Key Largo, Florida ripped this woman wearing medical scrubs out of her car as she screamed she is a US citizen. Agents cuffed her and put her in one of their cars.

She was eventually let go, per David Goodhue of the Miami Herald, who also took this footage:
December 3, 2025 at 7:41 PM
kylecbarry.bsky.social
It’s weird that this is even mildly controversial. Reaching out for comment doesn’t mean ceding all editorial control so subjects can drop whatever nonsense they want into a story. bsky.app/profile/rado...
radosh.bsky.social Daniel Radosh @radosh.bsky.social · 5d
My hot media take is that it's important to contact the subject of a story for a response but if they say something that's not relevant or true, and especially if they just denounce the story without offering an actual explanation of what they object to, you don't have to include their statement
December 3, 2025 at 6:14 AM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
jamellebouie.net
i'm actually struck by how pete hegseth isn't just a cowardly man but a capital-c Coward. a guy who gets off on abusing and hurting people he thinks are weaker than him and then tries to run and hide when there might be consequences
December 2, 2025 at 1:45 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
billycorriher.bsky.social
ICYMI: A Wisconsin Supreme Court justice used a fake quote and citation in a high-profile dissent. She completely turned SCOTUS' 2023 gerrymandering ruling (out of North Carolina) on its head. #AI
mjsdc.bsky.social Mark Joseph Stern @mjsdc.bsky.social · 11d
Nestled within this bizarre story is the important news that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has taken the first steps toward striking down its state’s GOP congressional gerrymander, a move that could net Democrats 2-3 more seats in the House of Representatives. slate.com/news-and-pol...
Conservative Justice Uses Fake Quote to Justify Wisconsin Republican Gerrymander
It is not clear how Ziegler’s misquotation wound up in the published opinion of a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice.
slate.com
December 2, 2025 at 2:07 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
mjsdc.bsky.social
Sorry to be a broken record but it's nuts to me that the New York Times would write an entire article summarizing a court ruling and refuse to provide a link to said ruling. This is a disservice to readers. www.nytimes.com/2025/12/01/n...

Here's the ruling: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Appeals Court Says Alina Habba Is Unlawful U.S. Attorney
www.nytimes.com
December 1, 2025 at 2:57 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
rtodkelly.bsky.social
A reminder for those who are not aware: "remigration" is the process of deporting all non-white people from a country. It includes citizens and is, by definition, ethnic cleansing.

And to be clear: this is not fake. I just screenshot it myself.
November 28, 2025 at 6:12 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
nycsouthpaw.bsky.social
This is murder. www.washingtonpost.com/national-sec...
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation. "The order was to kill everybody," one of them said. A missile screamed off the Trinidad coast, striking the vessel and igniting a blaze from bow to stern. For minutes, commanders watched the boat burning on a live drone feed. As the smoke cleared, they got a jolt: Two survivors were clinging to the smoldering wreck. The Special Operations commander overseeing the Sept. 2 attack - the opening salvo in the Trump administration's war on suspected drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere — ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth's instructions, two people familiar with the matter said. The two men were blown apart in the water.
November 28, 2025 at 6:16 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
williamadler78.bsky.social
This is almost word for word what xenophobes in the 1930s and 1940s said about Miller's Jewish ancestors and relatives. He's so hateful he couldn't possibly recognize that of course.
publius24.bsky.social John Q. Public @publius24.bsky.social · 10d
Stephen Miller is now arguing that assimilation is fundamentally impossible and that certain cultures are not compatible with Western civilization
November 28, 2025 at 1:01 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
donmoyn.bsky.social
This is so deeply at odds with the vision and history of America. Take pretty much any ethnic or racial group that are part of the American mosaic America today - they have all faced the same accusation. The moment these accusations are turned into policy are some of the most shameful in US history
publius24.bsky.social John Q. Public @publius24.bsky.social · 10d
Stephen Miller is now arguing that assimilation is fundamentally impossible and that certain cultures are not compatible with Western civilization
November 28, 2025 at 1:58 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
marcelias.bsky.social
This is a really big story that should not be missed. www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/...
DOJ Says Noem Made Final Decision on El Salvador Removals in Breach of Court Order
Read more here.
www.democracydocket.com
November 27, 2025 at 12:38 AM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
jamellebouie.net
the requirement is, of course, “be white” amp.miamiherald.com/news/nation-...
Trump says Haiti no longer meets requirements for TPS. Haitians have to leave
The Department of Homeland Security said TPS for Haiti ends Feb. 3, 2026, affecting over half a million people who may face return to gang-controlled Port-au-Prince.
amp.miamiherald.com
November 26, 2025 at 10:43 PM
kylecbarry.bsky.social
I mean, "backstabbing drama between warring ideological factions" has been SOP in the Wisconsin Supreme Court for YEARS. In 2011, a conservative justice (allegedly) attacked and choked a liberal justice in chambers. It's a merciless blood feud. www.npr.org/sections/its... bsky.app/profile/mjsd...
Several days have passed since news emerged from Wisconsin that one state supreme court justice accused another of trying to choke her during a conference of the justices and there are some new developments. There are now two probes of the alleged incident in which Justice Ann Walsh Bradley claims that fellow Justice David Prosser choked her during a disagreement related to the state's partisan battle over the collective bargaining rights of public employees. An excerpt from an WPR.org report by Gilman Halsted: Three knowledgeable sources told Wisconsin Public Radio and the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism that the justices had a physical altercation just prior to the release of a ruling on the state's new law restricting collective bargaining. The sources spoke on condition of not being named, citing a need to preserve professional relationships. They say the argument took place in Justice Bradley's office with several other justices present. Sources say Bradley asked Prosser to leave her office, at which point Prosser allegedly grabbed Bradley around the neck with both hands. The Journal Sentinel says another source has told the paper a different story. That source is quoted as saying there was an altercation between the justices, but it was Bradley who rushed at Prosser with her fists raised, and his hands came into contact with her neck when he raised them in self-defense.
November 26, 2025 at 7:04 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
mjsdc.bsky.social
When liberals secured a majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2023, they changed internal procedures—over the objection of the conservative chief justice, who claimed they were taking away her power. Today the justices released MESSY details about the affair...
www.wicourts.gov/sc/rulhear/D...
BRIAN HAGEDORN, J. (concurring). The Wisconsin Supreme Court is composed of seven justices who are supposed to be members of the same team. Unlike trial courts, when we act, we do so collectively. To accomplish this, over the last 175 years, this court has established various practices and traditions, both formal and informal. These practices ensure all voices are heard, create clear lines of decision-making authority, and establish consistent and neutral processes to govern our case-deciding and administrative work. Some of these are reflected in formally adopted Supreme Court Rules, and some in our Internal Operating Procedures. But the true currency of a court like ours is trust. When trust is broken like it has been here, every aspect of our work suffers. ¶2 This all began in the summer of 2023 when four justices wished to make significant changes to how this court functions. Fair enough. These modifications could have been pursued through a process built on collegiality and mutual respect. Instead, my colleagues pursued a more destructive path. ¶3 The morning our then-newest justice was sworn into office——August 1, 2023——my four colleagues at that time set off to reshape our court and the operation of the court system. They had apparently engaged in significant discussions in the months prior and decided to force through these changes during our summer recess, and to do so via email with or without the input of their other colleagues. They issued a press release triumphantly announcing that these changes were all about transparency, accountability, and inclusivity. This was true in the same way Pearl Harbor was a strike for peace in the Pacific. I will not rehash every detail (Justice Ziegler's excellent writing recounts much of the history), but the reader deserves a taste. ¶4 The first shot sounded when my four colleagues fired the Director of State Courts, who functions as the CEO of administrative matters for the entire judicial branch. Without following any established process, one of my colleagues sent an email proposing that we fire our Director and install a new, preselected interim Director in his place. This happened through email, over the course of two business days, while the Director was out of town on state business, during our summer recess. He never received a performance review indicating concerns; he was simply told his employment was over. This came just months after some of these same colleagues emphasized the importance of having all justices participate in hiring key staff. ¶5 Later that same week, my colleagues proposed dramatic changes via email affecting both our case-deciding and administrative responsibilities. The email invited justices to attend a new, unscheduled meeting of the court later that week to discuss the proposals. One justice said she could not be there; another objected to the meeting as outside our court calendar. The meeting would go forward no matter what, we were told. I implored my colleagues to reconsider, to treat their fellow colleagues with the respect they would want if circumstances were reversed. They refused. The meeting went on as expected, and with only four members present, they voted to fundamentally remake our court. ¶7 Among their changes, my colleagues radically altered the role of the chief justice. They created a new, three-person administrative committee (on which the chief justice would ostensibly sit) to take over nearly all of the chief justice's most important administrative duties. And they did so in the face of serious objections that these changes violated the Wisconsin Constitution, which says the chief justice "shall be the administrative head of the judicial system." Wis. Const. art. VII, § 4. One justice who in the past championed the constitutional role of the chief justice suddenly changed course. Again, these actions stripping the chief justice of powers she had exercised for as long as anyone could remember were proposed via email, and were voted on a few days later during an unscheduled meeting of just four justices during our summer recess. Not exactly transparent, accountable, and inclusive. ¶8 Another significant series of amendments to our internal rules involved modifying the way we consider certain kinds of cases, essentially making it much easier for this court to expedite cases coming to us outside the normal appeals process. Why the change? As everyone understood, my colleagues had the not-sosecret goal of swiftly hearing particular politically charged cases. This was all by design. ¶9 And how did this experiment go? Not well. Administratively, it was not clear who was in charge. We experienced significant breakdowns in communication amidst a lack of clarity about who was doing what. Our staff was often caught in the middle of a court that did not have established lines of communication and authority. And when the Director of State Courts was unceremoniously fired for what many perceived as political reasons, it sent a shockwave through the system. Furthermore, my colleagues' changes were not one and done. Throughout the past two years, they continued to modify the court's procedures in a similar ad-hoc fashion, often after realizing problems with their earlier ill-considered changes. This only added to the confusion. ¶10 Finally, at one of the court's internal conferences this past June, my colleagues shifted course. One of the four announced she was "withdrawing" her prior votes from the past two years (which, by the way, is not a thing) with the idea that every disputed change was now, all of a sudden, reversed. What changed? Again, it was no mystery. My colleagues wanted to take power away from then-Chief Justice Annette Ziegler. Such a move ensured that my colleagues would run the court through the administrative committee. Following the April 2025 election, they concluded they would have the votes to elect a chief justice of their choosing and have a block of votes to support her, so they no longer needed to seize those powers. This is not a cynical take. It is exactly what happened. ¶11 What's past is past, however. I have no desire to hold this against my colleagues, and I am grateful they have changed course. In fact, I was happy to work collaboratively on many operational changes reflected in this order, most of which I
November 25, 2025 at 8:32 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
sanders.senate.gov
Congratulations to the UVM Catamounts men’s soccer team on an excellent season.

I know you’re disappointed that you didn’t repeat as NCAA Division 1 Champs, but a 14-1 season ain’t bad. You made the entire state proud.
November 25, 2025 at 9:18 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
johnpfaff.bsky.social
I have a new piece up at @msnownews.bsky.social, on the recent NJ supreme court case banning shaking baby syndrome evidence, using it to discuss both the generally shoddy nature of all forensic evidence but also the legal profession's on-going refusal to confront our current data-driven world.
Opinion | New Jersey's ban on 'shaken baby syndrome' claims in court points up a larger problem in the legal system
John Pfaff: The state Supreme Court ruling underscores how thin empirical support is for much of the forensic evidence used in criminal cases.
www.ms.now
November 25, 2025 at 2:38 PM
kylecbarry.bsky.social
Exactly right. If you think some of Duffy’s “wear shoes” comments sound reasonable, remember that they’re fueled by the same racist nostalgia from which all their culture war obsessions are born. bsky.app/profile/smot...
smotus.bsky.social 🦃 Seth Masket 🦃 @smotus.bsky.social · 13d
A roundtrip LAX-JFK flight in the late 60s was around $3K in today’s dollars. The people who wore suits on those flights were the people who regularly wore suits. Complaining about informally-dressed fliers is complaining that the wrong sorts of people are flying today.
November 25, 2025 at 5:07 PM
kylecbarry.bsky.social
Great reporting. And while the courts may intervene in this especially egregious case, this story underscores the absurdity and fecklessness of a constitutional jurisprudence that generally defers to--and thus allows rights to be defined by--the whims of prison officials.
bsky.app/profile/tani...
taniel.bsky.social Taniel @taniel.bsky.social · 14d
NEW: President Biden commuted the death sentences of most people on the federal death row before exiting office.

President Trump is now effectively looking to retaliate, and to detain those people in the most brutal conditions in the federal system. Bolts reports:
boltsmag.org/death-row-cl...
Death Row Prisoners Granted Clemency by Biden Brace for "Living Hell" Under Trump - Bolts
This story was produced by Bolts and published in partnership with The Nation. Inside the federal supermax tucked away in Colorado’s high desert, prisoners spend 22 to 24 hours a day... Read More
boltsmag.org
November 24, 2025 at 5:18 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
kylecbarry.bsky.social
Reminder: Republicans love "court packing" when it suits them:

Last week Utah Gov. Spencer Cox appointed anti-abortion culture war zealot John Nielsen to the state supreme court, & may now expand the court to create a majority more favorable to Republican legislators: www.sltrib.com/news/politic...
The governor, who is a lawyer, has so far vocally opposed most attempts by the Legislature to influence the courts’ operations. But earlier this month, Cox signed a law revoking the Supreme Court justices’ authority to choose their own chief, instead designating the governor to pick the head of the high court every eight years, subject to Senate confirmation. The governor vetoed a previous version of the bill that would have required him to pick a new chief every four years. Cox said Tuesday he may now support a dead proposal from earlier this year to expand the number of justices on the Utah Supreme Court. The Utah Constitution says the court must have “at least five” justices.
November 23, 2025 at 6:56 PM
Reposted by Kyle Barry
kylecbarry.bsky.social
Here's more on Neilsen, whom the state leg confirmed last week, and his "originalist" argument that abortion is "something meriting the utmost condemnation available in our law and society: criminal charge and punishment." www.sltrib.com/news/politic...
In the case of State v. Planned Parenthood, Lee and Nielsen filed an amicus brief — often referred to as a friend-of-the-court — on behalf of Pro-Life Utah, challenging a decision by a lower court to block a state law that would have outlawed almost all abortions in the state. The brief laid out an “originalist” argument, which Nielsen said Thursday is key to his judicial philosophy, drawing on newspaper articles written between the 1850s and 1940s to make the case that, during the period the Utah Constitution was ratified, Utahns did not envision it including a right to abortion. “At the time of ratification, the general public did not view abortion as a protected constitutional right,” the brief argues. “Quite the opposite. It viewed it as something meriting the utmost condemnation available in our law and society: criminal charge and punishment.”
November 23, 2025 at 7:01 PM
kylecbarry.bsky.social
Though all GOP-appointed, the Utah Supreme Court has been an independent check on the lawless extremes of Republican lawmakers, including by protecting abortion rights.

So Gov. Spencer Cox is putting an end to that. bsky.app/profile/kyle...
kylecbarry.bsky.social Kyle Barry @kylecbarry.bsky.social · 15d
Reminder: Republicans love "court packing" when it suits them:

Last week Utah Gov. Spencer Cox appointed anti-abortion culture war zealot John Nielsen to the state supreme court, & may now expand the court to create a majority more favorable to Republican legislators: www.sltrib.com/news/politic...
The governor, who is a lawyer, has so far vocally opposed most attempts by the Legislature to influence the courts’ operations. But earlier this month, Cox signed a law revoking the Supreme Court justices’ authority to choose their own chief, instead designating the governor to pick the head of the high court every eight years, subject to Senate confirmation. The governor vetoed a previous version of the bill that would have required him to pick a new chief every four years. Cox said Tuesday he may now support a dead proposal from earlier this year to expand the number of justices on the Utah Supreme Court. The Utah Constitution says the court must have “at least five” justices.
November 23, 2025 at 7:12 PM
kylecbarry.bsky.social
Reminder: Republicans love "court packing" when it suits them:

Last week Utah Gov. Spencer Cox appointed anti-abortion culture war zealot John Nielsen to the state supreme court, & may now expand the court to create a majority more favorable to Republican legislators: www.sltrib.com/news/politic...
The governor, who is a lawyer, has so far vocally opposed most attempts by the Legislature to influence the courts’ operations. But earlier this month, Cox signed a law revoking the Supreme Court justices’ authority to choose their own chief, instead designating the governor to pick the head of the high court every eight years, subject to Senate confirmation. The governor vetoed a previous version of the bill that would have required him to pick a new chief every four years. Cox said Tuesday he may now support a dead proposal from earlier this year to expand the number of justices on the Utah Supreme Court. The Utah Constitution says the court must have “at least five” justices.
November 23, 2025 at 6:56 PM