Skip navigation links
Brian Kalt

Brian Kalt

Professor of Law & Harold Norris Faculty Scholar

Expert in constitutional law of the presidency, presidential pardons, impeachment, succession and the 25th Amendment.

Get in touch

Area of Expertise

Structural Constitutional Law Administrative Law Juries The Bill of Rights Tort Reform

Biography

Before coming to MSU College of Law in 2000, Brian Kalt was an associate at the Washington, D.C., office of Sidley Austin. He earned his juris doctor from Yale Law School, where he was an editor on the Yale Law Journal. After law school, he served as a law clerk for the Honorable Danny J. Boggs, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. Professor Kalt's research focuses on structural constitutional law and juries. At MSU Law, Kalt teaches Tort and Administrative law.

Read More

Education

Yale Law School: J.D., | 1997

University of Michigan: A.B., with Highest Distinction, | 1994

Selected Press

Explainer: Trump's acts as president are 'fair game' for criminal charges

Reuters | 2021-02-16

Here's an explanation of how Trump's leaving office affects his criminal and civil exposure. Can Trump be prosecuted for acts he engaged in as president? Yes. Now that Trump has left office, any misconduct he engaged in as president is “fair game” for criminal charges, said Brian Kalt, a constitutional law professor at Michigan State University. Trump enjoyed more protection from prosecution while he was president because the U.S. Justice Department has concluded it would be unconstitutional to indict a sitting president. But there is no federal prohibition on charging a former president for acts committed while in office. “The immunity argument is about the timing of the trial; it is generally accepted that ex-presidents can be prosecuted for crimes committed in office,” Kalt said.

Impeachment trial: Democrat says Trump lawyers misrepresented scholar's argument

The New York Times | 2021-02-09

Most legal scholars, including some leading conservatives, agree that a former president can be tried by the Senate even after leaving office — a point Democrats seized upon during their remarks. Representative Joe Neguse of Colorado noted that Brian Kalt, a legal scholar cited repeatedly by Mr. Trump's lawyers, publicly disputed their portrayal of his law journal article on the topic of trying former officials. “They misrepresent what I wrote quite badly,” tweeted Mr. Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University. “My article presented all of the evidence I found on both sides, so there were lots for them to use fairly. They didn't have to be disingenuous and misleading like this.” Mr. Trump's lawyers cited Mr. Kalt's article 15 times in their impeachment defense brief.

There’s no requirement to tell the public if the 25th Amendment is invoked

The Washington Post | 2021-01-07

This op-ed was written by Brian C. Kalt is professor of law at Michigan State University and the author of "Unable: The Law, Politics, and Limits of Section 4 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment."

Section 4 of the amendment allows the vice president and Cabinet to temporarily transfer the president’s powers to the vice president. Several sources reported that Cabinet members were actively discussing invoking Section 4, effectively replacing President Trump with Vice President Pence. Then a more startling suggestion began circulating on Twitter: that Section 4 had already been invoked. If Section 4 is invoked, would we necessarily know? The short answer is yes, probably. But the longer answer is not as simple. The 25th Amendment does not have any sort of formal requirement of transparency.

Does Trump have power to pardon himself? It’s complicated

Associated Press | 2020-12-07

No president has attempted to pardon himself while in office, so if Trump tries to do so in the next six weeks, he will be venturing into legally untested territory without clear guidance from the Constitution or from judges. Legal experts are divided on an inherently ambiguous question that was left vague by the Founding Fathers and has never had to be definitively resolved in court. “You could say, implicit in the definition of a pardon or implicit in the notion of granting a pardon — because the Constitution uses the word ‘grant’ — is that it’s two separate people,” said Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University. “You can’t grant something to yourself. You can’t pardon yourself.” It could also seem to run afoul of the fundamental principle that no one — in this case, a president issuing himself a pardon — may serve as a judge in his own case.