Category: Lawyers Facilitating Democratic Decline

A crisis is shaking Brazil’s Supreme Court. Here’s what to know

The Associated Press sets out how the collapse of Banco Master, a mid-sized bank shut down last November after a fraud investigation, has reached the Brazilian Supreme Court three weeks before a presidential election. According to documents in the investigation, Justice Alexandre de Moraes provided legal advice to the bank’s former head Daniel Vorcaro, who has …

Attorney General Blanche’s appearances at political events blur Justice Department boundaries

Attorney General Todd Blanche spoke on September 16 at an event for Republican Senate nominee Michael Whatley in North Carolina, a week after addressing the Republican midterm convention in Dallas, and held a White House press briefing on September 15. At the Whatley event he called the President the greatest of his generation and ranged …

Raskin Targets Jeanine Pirro and Other Prosecutors in Misconduct Probe

On August 26, Rep. Jamie Raskin, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, sent letters to the top federal prosecutors in five districts — the District of Columbia, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and the Northern District of Illinois — opening an inquiry into what he characterized as a pattern of Justice Department attorneys misleading …

Justice Department Argues It’s OK if It’s Under Trump Control

In an August 18 filing in the Eastern District of North Carolina opposing James Comey’s vindictive-prosecution motion, federal prosecutors argued that presidential direction of subordinates exercising executive functions is “a feature, not a bug” of the constitutional system, and characterized the tradition of Justice Department independence from the White House as a historical “myth.” The …

Attorney General Todd Blanche won’t commit to a DOJ free from White House influence

In this NPR All Things Considered segment, host Sacha Pfeiffer interviews ProPublica reporter Aaron Davis about newly confirmed Attorney General Todd Blanche’s appearance on Meet the Press, where Blanche declined to pledge that the Justice Department would operate independently of the White House and said no attorney general should make such a promise. Davis, coauthor …

Did Paul, Weiss Partners Seriously Debate Running The Firm’s Business Past Stephen Miller?

A sweeping New York Times investigation published the weekend of August 2, and analyzed in the legal press, reconstructed how the elite law firm Paul, Weiss chose to strike a deal with the White House rather than litigate against an executive order targeting it — an order issued because the firm had employed attorneys involved …

How a Top Law Firm Went From Standing Up to Trump to Bending the Knee

A New York Times investigation by Michael S. Schmidt and Jessica Silver-Greenberg examines how Paul Weiss — a firm long identified with civil rights litigation and, during Trump’s first term, with organized legal opposition to the administration — came to settle rather than fight when it was hit with a punitive executive order in March …

Bangladesh: Fair Trial Concerns at Tribunal

Human Rights Watch warned that proceedings before Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal were failing to satisfy international fair-trial standards. The organization argued that inadequate procedural protections could permit the imprisonment of political opponents and undermine the credibility of accountability proceedings. Read it here.

Democrats Demand Information From Law Firm Over Its Deal With Trump

Three senior congressional Democrats — Representative Jamie Raskin, Senator Richard Blumenthal, and Senator Adam Schiff — have written to Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom seeking documents about the arrangement the firm struck with the White House to avoid an executive order that could have severely damaged its business. Skadden pledged $100 million in free …

At Trump’s Direction, Federal Agencies Are Abandoning Discrimination Cases

Federal agencies have pulled back sharply from civil rights enforcement after a Trump executive order directed them to deprioritize “disparate impact” cases — those targeting policies that appear neutral but disproportionately disadvantage protected groups. The legal standard dates to a 1971 Supreme Court test, was written into law by Congress in 1991, and was upheld …