This piece examines how large U.S. law firms have responded to political pressure from the Trump administration, especially efforts to punish firms representing government critics. While some firms settled or retreated from controversial litigation, others have recently stepped up to defend civil rights, sanctuary cities, academic institutions, and government accountability. The author is skeptical that …
Levesque, C., DeWaard, J., Chan, L., McKenzie, M. G., Tsuchiya, K., Toles, O., … Boyle, E. H. (2023). Crimmigrating Narratives: Examining Third-Party Observations of US Detained Immigration Court. Law & Social Inquiry, 48(2), 407–436. doi:10.1017/lsi.2022.16 Crimmigrating Narratives: Examining Third-Party Observations of US Detained Immigration Court examines how U.S. immigration courts criminalize non-citizens through what the authors call …
In this Bloomberg Law commentary (Jan. 5, 2026), attorney Abbe David Lowell argues that authoritarian-leaning leaders often target lawyers first because lawyers are essential to protecting rights and checking executive power. He reframes Shakespeare’s “let’s kill all the lawyers” as a warning: eliminating lawyers makes it easier to undermine democracy. Lowell says President Donald Trump’s …
In early 2026, the legal fight over President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting major U.S. law firms is moving into a new phase. The orders sought to restrict lawyers’ security clearances and encouraged federal agencies to scrutinize government contracts connected to firms’ clients, citing firms’ political ties or high-profile adversarial hires. Four firms—Perkins Coie, …
Landau, D., & Dixon, R. (2019). Abusive judicial review: courts against democracy. UC Davis L. Rev., 53, 1313. Both in the United States and around the world, courts are generally conceptualized as the last line of defense for the liberal democratic constitutional order. But this Article shows that it is not uncommon for judges to issue decisions …
In a significant ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deploying National Guard troops to the Chicago area, delivering one of its first major setbacks to Trump’s expansive claims of executive power in months. The decision was heavily influenced by an unusual source: a friend-of-the-court brief submitted by Georgetown law professor …
In December 2025, a bipartisan group of Members of Congress sent a formal letter to Attorney General Pamela Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche raising serious concerns about potential conflicts of interest and ethical lapses within the U.S. Department of Justice. The letter documents a pattern of DOJ interventions, dismissals, and discretionary decisions in …
Dave Bridge, Curt Nichols, “Congressional Attacks on the Supreme Court: A Mechanism to Maintain, Build, and Consolidate.” Law & Social Inquiry, vol. 41, no. 1 (2016): 100–125. Summary: Reexamination and reinterpretation of the “mature” (1955–1984) New Deal era of congressional attacks on the Supreme Court reveals a new hypothesis: that Court‐curbing efforts played a previously unrecognized …
B.J. Kyle, A.G. Reiter, Military Courts, Civil-Military Relations, and the Legal Battle for Democracy: The Politics of Military Justice (1st ed.). London: Routledge, 2021. Summary: The interaction between military and civilian courts, the political power that legal prerogatives can provide to the armed forces, and the difficult process civilian politicians face in reforming military justice remain …
David Landau and Rosalind Dixon, “Abusive Judicial Review: Courts Against Democracy.” UC Davis Law Review, vol. 53, no. 3 (2020): 1313-1387. Summary: Both in the United States and around the world, courts are generally conceptualized as the last line of defense for the liberal democratic constitutional order. But this Article shows that it is not …