On Thursday, May 15, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in “the birthright citizenship case.” Instead of deciding on the constitutionality of President Trump’s executive order (EO) banning birthright citizenship for certain classes of individuals, the Court is asked to decide whether lower courts exceeded their authority in placing a nation-wide injunction on the government’s order. But this doesn't make the decision any less significant.
Donald Trump’s radicalized efforts to transform US constitutional democracy into personalized executive-centered rule have again generated a predictable avalanche of invocations of Carl Schmitt. Less predictably, recent political commentators have turned to one of Schmitt’s contemporary critics, the mid-century socialist jurist and political scientist, Ernst Fraenkel, claiming that his account of the Nazi “dual state,” in which rule-based normative and discretionary prerogative legal spheres uneasily coexisted, provides a useful template for making sense of Trump 2.0’s highly selective rendition of legal fidelity.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters