Thomas Ascik Subscribe

Since retiring as an assistant United States Attorney, Thomas R. Ascik has written about legal and constitutional issues at a variety of websites.

January 17, 2019|Affordable Care Act, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, John Roberts, Judge Reed O'Connor, NFIB v. Sebelius

On Obamacare, Is Common Sense Really Judicial Activism?

by Thomas Ascik|8 Comments

Affordable Care Act text (Ellen McKnight/Shutterstock.com).

Ironically, it was efforts to save the ACA that produced Judge O'Connor's conclusion that Obamacare could not stand.

November 30, 2018|asset forfeiture, Barron v. Baltimore, Federalist 45, Fourteenth Amendment, Gitlow v. New York, Incorporation, Timbs v. Indiana

Asset Forfeiture, Incorporation, and the Fourteenth Amendment

by Thomas Ascik|17 Comments

The U.S. Supreme Court at dusk (Greg Blakeley/Shutterstock.com).

Nothing surpasses the intellectual intoxication and will to power of a federal constitutional lawsuit—democracy be damned.

October 8, 2018|Fisher v. University of Texas, Gratz v. Bollinger, Grutter v. Bollinger, Harvard University, Racial Preferences, Regents v. Bakke

Harvard’s Student Body: Hitting the Targets, Spinning the Story

by Thomas Ascik|5 Comments

Commencement at Harvard University, 2014 (image: f11photo / shutterstock.com)

Harvard officials insist that the university does not engage in racial balancing, but their own admissions statistics prove otherwise.

August 28, 2018|DACA, DAPA, Dream Act, NAACP v. Trump, Prosecutorial Discretion

Enforcing Immigration Laws is “Arbitrary and Capricious”

by Thomas Ascik|7 Comments

Protest against end of DACA in Portland, OR, September 5th, 2017 (Diego G Diaz / Shutterstock.com).

Granting federal prosecutors the "discretion" to choose as a matter of policy what laws they favor and what laws they do not favor is just fine, right?

June 27, 2018|Abortion, crisis pregnancy centers, First Amendment, Governor Jerry Brown, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Stephen Breyer, NIFLA v. Becerra

Supreme Court: “Targeted” and “Content-Based” Speech Restrictions Are Unconstitutional

by Thomas Ascik|5 Comments

The Life Center in Sacramento, CA: a crisis pregnancy center (Chris Allan/Shutterstock.com).

In yesterday's 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court held compelling crisis pregnancy centers to promote abortion violates free speech.

April 24, 2018|Department of Justice, Donald Trump, Hawaii, Immigration and Nationalization Act, Supreme Court, Travel Ban, Trump v. Hawaii

Trump’s Travel Ban and the Constitution

by Thomas Ascik|2 Comments

Protesters rally against President Trump's travel ban on February 4, 2017 in Washington DC (Rena Schild / Shutterstock.com),

If the Supreme Court were to accept the plaintiffs' logic in Trump v. Hawaii, the judicial branch will gain new powers over defense policy.

March 28, 2018|Antonin Scalia, Benisek v. Lamone, Buckley v. Valeo, Gerrymandering, Gill v. Whitford, Partisanship, Vieth v. Jubelirer

A Supreme Court Takeover of Reapportionment?

by Thomas Ascik|7 Comments

Maryland Congressional District Map, 2013 (U.S. Department of the Interior)

We should view Congressional Reapportionment as a political, not a judicial process.

February 27, 2018|Donald Trump, Federal Conspiracy, Mueller Indictment

What Is the Mueller Indictment Really About? Part II

by Thomas Ascik|12 Comments

Mueller has presented an indictment alleging that foreign nationals attempted to “undermine public confidence in democracy” by means of social media.

February 26, 2018|Donald Trump, Hammerschmidt v. US, Klein Conspiracy, Robert Mueller, Russian conspiracy, US v. Coplan

A Criminal Conspiracy to Undermine Our Government and Our Country? Part I of II

by Thomas Ascik|2 Comments

What does it mean “to defraud” the entire United States government or “any” of its agencies?

November 29, 2017|Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, Employment Division v. Smith, Free Exercise Clause, Free Speech Clause, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, RFRA, Same Sex Marriage, Texas v. Johnson, West Virginia v. Barnette, Wooley v. Maynard

Its Momentousness Is Baked in the Cake

by Thomas Ascik|40 Comments

Such is the state of American law and of American society that the decision of a single Colorado baker not to make a cake for a customer because of his religious objection to what the cake was for will now go before the Supreme Court. Argument in the “cake case,” Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, will take place next Tuesday, December 5th.