The Northwestern University Law Review Online has carefully curated a collection of opinions written by President Donald Trump’s proposed nominees to the Supreme Court. The collection organizes seminal opinions and other written work by each individual. This is not a political project. Rather, we aim to provide a resource for scholarship into the Presidential’s proposed nominees. Likewise, scholars working on the Trump administration’s policies will find a bespoke collection tailored to that end.
The subject matter of the opinions contained within range from First Amendment issues to state law tort claims. Whether in dissent or holding a majority, the opinions offer a window into the legal analysis and judicial decision-making favored by President Trump. Thus, this collection offers a starting point for scholarship into the President’s nominees to the country’s highest court.
This project made possible by the work of Christopher Grady, Thomas Rousse, Alexandria Neal, Anastasiya Kapustina, Derek Gumm, Lena Dunn, Liani Balasuriya, Michael Lowes, Caroline Hammer, Joseph Zelasko, Matt Monahan, Beau Tremitiere, Marco Minichiello, Nicholas Brown, Jessie Gong, Alanna Sandoval, Ian Flanagan, Arielle Tolman, Eric Schanowski, Theo Lesczynski, Matthew Skiba, Katie Funderburg, Adithi Grama, Jentry Lanza, John Wolf, Victoria Hartman, Edwin Choy, Hillary Chutter-Ames, Elan Spanjer, Emily Roznowski, Adam Alexander, Kelsey Chetosky, Emma Englund, Jonathan Byron, Shafaq Hasan, and Sami Fenton.