The Justice Department's inspector general on Thursday will release the results of its investigation into claims that the FBI failed to follow department protocols when investigating Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, which could give Trump more ammo in his nonstop public fight against former FBI Director James Comey.
From the second term of the Clinton administration to the end of the Obama administration, the U.S. government pursued an “internet freedom” agenda abroad. The phrase “internet freedom” signaled something grand and important, but its meaning has always been hard to pin down. For purposes of this paper, I will use the phrase to mean two related principles initially articulated by the Clinton administration during its stewardship of the global internet in the late 1990s.
The administrative state has increasingly grown powerful in day-to-day governance as the Congress, and the judicial branch has voluntarily ceded power over time. As a result, we have seen new regulations with minimum oversight and transparency. While the administrative state is an unavoidable consequence of our complex world, the administrative state must realign its interests with the public and the rule of law.
“The Internet,” Ira Magaziner opined in a 1998 speech, is “a force for the promotion of democracy” as well as “individual freedom and individual empowerment.” At the time he gave this speech, Magaziner was the Clinton administration’s internet guru.
Last week in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the Supreme Court threaded the needle. Whether the thread will hold is uncertain. Justice Anthony Kennedy’s narrowly crafted majority opinion protected religious liberty without impairing gay rights.
In his prime tweeting time, bright and early last Monday, President Trump proclaimed: "As been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to pardon myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong?"