Jonathan Shaub

Jonathan Shaub is a law professor at the University of Kentucky. His research concerns executive privilege, presidential power, government accountability and congressional oversight. He has served in the White House Counsel's Office and the Office of Legal Counsel. He earned his law degree at Northwestern University and previously worked as an assistant solicitor general for Tennessee.

Also known as Jonathan David ShaubWebsite (opens in a new tab)

What we have documented

We have documented 2 statements by Jonathan Shaub, in 2 cases. Each statement below gives the quotation, its original source and a link to the full case.

Case updates

Want the next important update?

Follow "Trump directs Kennedy Center privilege claim; Beatty seeks disclosure" and get an email when an important development changes the record.

Important updates only. Free. Confirm your email to start. Unsubscribe anytime. How we handle your email.

Statements by Jonathan Shaub

Jonathan Shaub

Role at the time: University of Kentucky law professor

Challenged the characterization

Statement summary

Shaub says presidential communications privilege does not apply when Trump acts outside his presidential capacity and argues that chairing the Kennedy Center is a distinct role.

“If the president is not acting in his capacity as president, it doesn’t apply”
Open the original interview (opens in a new tab)Kennedy Center does not have to answer questions about Trump role, DOJ assertsShaub and Rozell interviews
Why we used this label

Shaub disputes treating Kennedy Center management communications as privileged presidential advice.

Jonathan Shaub

Role at the time: University of Kentucky law professor and former OLC attorney

Condemned

Statement summary

Jonathan Shaub calls OLC's opinion, which concluded that the entire Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional, absurd and embarrassing.

“Whatever one thinks about OLC or executive branch lawyering more generally, this opinion stands out for its absurdity.”
Open source (opens in a new tab)Jonathan Shaub on DOJ's challenge to the Presidential Records ActAuthored analysis
Why we used this label

Shaub explicitly rejects the opinion's reasoning and conclusion.

A participant is a subject of the case. A speaker has a statement documented in it. A commentator has an opinion or editorial documented in it.

Topics in this coverage