The Nutmeg State was wrong to join this Compact, designed to ensure that the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote also wins in the Electoral College.
November 21, 2017 - Professor Kate Shaw was referenced in an article in The Washington Times. The article focused on the idea of President Trump's words and Twitter use being a political liability and potentially having an impact on his executive intent and policy making. Recently, a judge in San Francisco used his words about California's sanctuary city policies to support a ruling stopping part of the president's travel ban policy.
Professor Shaw's research has found cases dating back a century showing that judges have examined presidential speeches. She didn't find agreement amongst judges on how much weight judges should give these words. The Washington Times article says, "Ms. Shaw suggested that one answer would be to look to a president's words when judges are trying to determine the purpose of an executive action but not to rely on them for policy guidance when they clearly are contradicted by the plain language of an executive order or Justice Department arguments."
Read the article here.