A Reckless Judicial Nomination Puts the Senate to the Test; The New York Times, June 29, 2025

DAVID FRENCH , The New York Times; A Reckless Judicial Nomination Puts the Senate to the Test

"Emil Bove, however, would be a problem for a very long time. At 44 years old, he’s been nominated for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench. That means he’d long outlast Trump in the halls of American power, and if past performance is any measure of future results, we should prepare for a judge who would do what he deems necessary to accomplish his political objectives — law and morality be damned...

Our nation does not need vengeful political operatives on the federal bench. Bove is a far worse nominee than Miers. Critics questioned her experience and her qualifications. They did not question her integrity. But with Emil Bove, integrity is precisely what is in doubt."

Justices need to own the consequences of their injunction ruling; The Washington Post, June 29, 2025

Editorial Board , The Washington Post; Justices need to own the consequences of their injunction ruling

"The bigger picture, though, is that the justices have now reserved to themselves alone the ability to issue nationwide injunctions. This will make it easier for the president and his executive branch officials to violate even black-letter constitutional rights as the country waits for the high court to tell them to stop."

A fourth judge has blocked a Trump executive order targeting elite law firms; NPR, June 27, 2025

Ryan Lucas, NPR; A fourth judge has blocked a Trump executive order targeting elite law firms

"A federal judge has struck down President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey, delivering the latest in a series of legal wins for firms that have challenged the president's punitive campaign against Big Law.

The ruling Friday from U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan marks the fourth time out of four that a federal judge has permanently blocked one of Trump's executive orders seeking to punish an elite law firm.

Judge AliKhan said in her ruling that the executive order against Susman Godfrey "is unconstitutional from beginning to end."

"Every court to have considered a challenge to one of these orders has found grave constitutional violations and permanently enjoined enforcement of the order in full," she wrote. "Today, this court follows suit, concluding that the order targeting Susman violates the U.S. Constitution and must be permanently enjoined.

"The Court's ruling is a resounding victory for the rule of law and the right of every American to be represented by legal counsel without fear of retaliation," Susman Godfrey said in a statement. "We applaud the Court for declaring the administration's order unconstitutional. Our firm is committed to the rule of law and to protecting the rights of our clients without regard to their political or other beliefs."

The latest order delivers a resounding rebuke to Trump's unprecedented series of executive orders targeting prominent law firms since February. The orders have sought to punish them for representing causes or clients that he opposes, or for once employing attorneys he dislikes, such as former special counsel Robert Mueller."

Emil Bove’s ‘I’m Not A Henchman’ T-Shirt Has People Asking Questions At Judicial Confirmation Hearing; Above The Law, June 26, 2025

 Liz Dye  , Above The Law; Emil Bove’s ‘I’m Not A Henchman’ T-Shirt Has People Asking Questions At Judicial Confirmation Hearing

"Emil Bove, III began his career at the Southern District of New York, where he was by all accounts a competent prosecutor. His management style left something to be desired, however, and he was denied promotion for “abusive” behavior

(Opens in a new window) toward his subordinates...

Third Circuit, here he comes!

On Wednesday, June 25, Bove appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is considering his nomination to the Third Circuit.

He opened by insisting, “I am not anybody’s henchman, I am not an enforcer. I’m a lawyer from a small town, who never expected to be in an arena like this.”

That is horseshit, of course. No one gets to “an arena like this” without a healthy dose of ambition. Note that Bove’s aw shucks modesty didn’t extend to telling the White House that he’d be a more appropriate nominee the US District Court.

And although his tone during the hearing was measured, his willingness to twist the truth was on full display

Asked about the Adams case, Bove pointed to the order dismissing the charges(Opens in a new window) as proof that he’d behaved appropriately. In reality, the Justice Department’s refusal to prosecute left the court little choice. And Judge Dale Ho denied the DOJ’s request to dismiss without prejudice, because allowing the Trump administration to reap the benefits of a corrupt bargain would be “difficult to square with the words engraved above the front entrance of the United States Supreme Court: ‘Equal Justice Under Law.’”

Bove denied telling subordinates to defy a court order, but said he just plum couldn’t remember if he’d told them to give the bird to a federal judge.

Over and over he simply refused to answer questions based on spurious claims about the deliberative process privilege. But, he assured the senators, all was on the up and up, even if he couldn’t commit(Opens in a new window) to recusing from cases involving his former client Donald Trump.

And if any Republican senator might be tempted to vote no, he brought out the big guns. Alan Dershowitz, late of Harvard Law (and his marbles), sent a letter(Opens in a new window) to the Judiciary Committee gushing that “Mr. Bove’s superior character, demeanor and diligence are evident throughout his time as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, as well as in private practice.”"

(Opens in a new windowtoward his subordinates.

The alarming rise of US officers hiding behind masks: ‘A police state’; The Guardian, June 25, 2025

Sam Levin, The Guardian ; The alarming rise of US officers hiding behind masks: ‘A police state’

Mike German, an ex-FBI agent, said immigration agents hiding their identities ‘highlights the illegitimacy of actions’

"Some wear balaclavas. Some wear neck gators, sunglasses and hats. Some wear masks and casual clothes.

Across the country, armed federal immigration officers have increasingly hidden their identities while carrying out immigration raids, arresting protesters and roughing up prominent Democratic critics.

It’s a trend that has sparked alarm among civil rights and law enforcement experts alike.

Mike German, a former FBI agent, said officers’ widespread use of masks was unprecedented in US law enforcement and a sign of a rapidly eroding democracy. “Masking symbolizes the drift of law enforcement away from democratic controls,” he said.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has insisted masks are necessary to protect officers’ privacy, arguing, without providing evidence, that there has been an uptick in violence against agents...

Were you surprised by the frequent reports of federal officers covering their faces and refusing to identify themselves, especially during the recent immigration raids and protests in Los Angeles?

It is absolutely shocking and frightening to see masked agents, who are also poorly identified in the way they are dressed, using force in public without clearly identifying themselves. Our country is known for having democratic control over law enforcement. When it’s hard to tell who a masked individual is working for, it’s hard to accept that that is a legitimate use of authority. It’s particularly important for officers to identify themselves when they are making arrests. It’s important for the person being arrested, and for community members who might be watching, that they understand this is a law enforcement activity."

Whistleblower: Trump judge nominee told DOJ lawyers to ignore court orders; Axios, June 24, 2025

 

• Jason Lalljee, Axios; Whistleblower: Trump judge nominee told DOJ lawyers to ignore court orders

"Why it matters: The official in question, Emil Bove, is Trump's former personal attorney and a current Trump nominee for a federal appeals court judge.

Driving the news: DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni and the whistleblower, identified as a fired DOJ lawyer, told the DOJ's internal watchdog and members of Congress in a letter that Bove told attorneys to consider telling judges "f––k you" in order "to implement the administration's removal priorities."

Those removal priorities include the Trump admin's efforts to deport immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act, which the Supreme Court blocked in March.

Bove, during a March 14 meeting with the whistleblower, Reuveni and others in the department, "stressed to all in attendance that the planes [carrying the immigrants] needed to take off no matter what," per the letter.

"Mr. Reuveni, almost immediately after receiving notice of his promotion to serve as Acting Deputy Director of OIL, became aware of the plans of DOJ leadership to resist court orders that would impede potentially illegal efforts to deport noncitizens, and further became aware of the details to execute those plans," the letter states.

The letter comes as multiple federal judges have said that the DOJ has failed to comply with court orders and as the DOJ antagonizes judges who run afoul of the Trump administration."

American Bar Association files suit to halt government intimidation of lawyers and law firms; American Bar Association (ABA), June 16, 2025

American Bar Association (ABA); American Bar Association files suit to halt government intimidation of lawyers and law firms

"The American Bar Association today filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government, more than two dozen federal departments and agencies, and the heads of those departments and agencies, asking a federal court to declare unconstitutional the Trump administration’s ongoing unlawful policy of intimidation against lawyers and law firms and to enjoin the government from enforcing the policy. 

Since taking office earlier this year, President Donald Trump and his administration have used the vast powers of the executive branch to coerce lawyers and law firms to abandon clients, causes and policy positions the president does not like, the lawsuit asserts. The Trump administration has carried out this policy through a series of executive orders, letters, memos and public statements designed to damage certain law firms and intimidate others. These relentless attacks have produced a chilling effect across the legal profession — including on many members of the American Bar Association — causing harm to the justice system at large and limiting access to representation for individuals and organizations whose positions the administration disfavors. 

The ABA stands for the rule of law and access to justice for all. Today, the American legal profession and the members of the American Bar Association face an unprecedented challenge. As the nation’s largest voluntary association of lawyers, the ABA is compelled to take action and seek meaningful relief through the courts on behalf of its members and in support of the American bar. 

Attacks on the legal profession are uniquely destructive because of the critical role that lawyers fulfill in the constitutional system of our country, the lawsuit notes. Without skilled lawyers to bring and argue cases, the judiciary cannot function as a meaningful check on the executive branch.  

The ABA’s lawsuit details how President Trump and his administration have adopted and implemented this Law Firm Intimidation Policy on an ongoing basis. The administration has targeted firms who have engaged in disfavored conduct. It has issued sanctions designed to cripple their businesses and limit their ability to freely represent clients. Tactics include terminating security clearances, severing government contracts of law firms and their clients, limiting access to federal buildings and refraining from hiring employees of certain firms for jobs in the federal government. 

As detailed in the filing, some firms have contested the orders in court while many others have entered into deals with the administration to avoid becoming the target of future executive orders. The result of the Law Firm Intimidation Policy has been a pervasive fear within the legal community and the justice system at large. Many attorneys are no longer willing to take on representations that would require suing the federal government because doing so poses a serious risk of becoming the next target of the administration’s devastating sanctions. This blizzard-like chill on the profession has continued even after firms challenging their own executive orders have won repeated court victories. Those victories only protect those firms. The ABA has filed this action to protect all its members, representing a far broader section of the legal profession.

The administration has demonstrated that it intends to continue the Law Firm Intimidation Policy in order to intimidate lawyers and law firms from taking on cases adverse to the president’s interests. These attacks are clear violations of First Amendment rights, including prohibitions on government coercion to suppress free speech, discrimination based on viewpoints held by lawyers and law firms, and the right of citizens to assemble freely and to petition the government. 

“This is the time to stand up, speak out and seek relief from our courts” said William R. Bay, president of the American Bar Association. “There has never been a more urgent time for the ABA to defend its members, our profession and the rule of law itself.” 

The case, American Bar Association v. Executive Office of the President, et al.,  has been filed in the United States District Court in the District of Columbia. 

Read the filing here.

The ABA is one of the largest voluntary associations of lawyers in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law. View our privacy statement online. Follow the latest ABA news at www.americanbar.org/news and on X (formerly Twitter) @ABANews."

Trump attacks Watergate laws in massive shift of ethics system; The Washington Post, June 21, 2025

Naftali Bendavid, The Washington Post; Trump attacks Watergate laws in massive shift of ethics system

"Then-Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman was 32 when, as a member of the House Judiciary Committee, she voted in 1974 for three articles of impeachment against President Richard M. Nixon. She spent the next few years as part of a Congress that passed wave after wave of laws to rein in future presidents.

A half-century later, Holtzman, a New York Democrat, is watching as President Donald Trump takes aim at post-Watergate reforms on transparency, spending, conflicts of interest and more. By challenging and disregarding, in letter or in spirit, this slew of 1970s laws, Trump is essentially closing the 50-year post-Watergate chapter of American history — and ushering in a new era of shaky guardrails and blurred separation of powers.

“We didn’t envision this,” Holtzman said. “We saw Nixon doing it, but he hadn’t done it on this vast a scale. Trump is saying, ‘Congress cannot tell me what to do about anything.’”...

This broad rejection of the post-Watergate laws underlines the country’s shift from an era focused on clean government and strict ethics to the rise of a president whose appeal stems in part from his willingness to violate such rules and constraints.

“There has been a collapse, at least temporarily, of the kind of outrage and ethical standards that were prevalent during the days of Watergate,” said Richard Ben-Veniste, who headed the special counsel’s Watergate Task Force."

Could the Third Time Be the Charm on Impeachment and Removal?; The New York Times, June 17, 2025

 Thomas B. Edsall, The New York Times; Could the Third Time Be the Charm on Impeachment and Removal?

"It was clear from the first day of President Trump’s second term that Round 2 would be very different from Round 1.

Trump’s revocation of law firms’ security clearances and access to federal facilities, his cutoff of research grants to Harvard, his multimillion-dollar cryptocurrency deals, his decision to send 700 Marines to contain protests in a five-block section of Los Angeles, his usurpation of congressional power over federal spending — all of these acts have left millions of Americans aggravated and apprehensive, even as a substantial number of U.S. citizens remain untouched and largely unmoved.

We now have a president imposing an agenda far more dangerous than anything Richard Nixon dreamed of.

Here is one measure of Trump’s reign of corruption.

In the five months Trump has held office in his second term, the number of impeachable offenses legal scholars estimate that he has already committed ranges from three to eight or more...

I asked Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina who has often appeared as an expert witness at congressional hearings on impeachment, about Trump. Gerhardt replied by email: “It is nearly impossible to overstate the degree of Trump’s corruption. It is manifest every day, as if he is daring the American people and Congress to try to stop him.”

Overall, Gerhardt continued: “Trump has shown time and again his disdain for the rule of law, including for the Constitution of the United States. He has routinely violated his oath of office and even proclaimed himself as entitled to break the law to save the country.”

No other American president, Gerhardt went on, “has come anywhere close to Trump’s corruption, and the level of his corruption — on a daily basis — is unmatched in our history.”"

Seven partners depart law firm Willkie Farr to join Cooley after Trump deal; Reuters, June 13, 2025

 Sara Merken, Reuters; Seven partners depart law firm Willkie Farr to join Cooley after Trump deal

"A group of seven partners is leaving Willkie Farr & Gallagher, which struck a deal with U.S. President Donald Trump in April to avert an executive order targeting its business, to join Cooley, which is representing one of the law firms fighting Trump's orders.

Cooley on Friday said Simona Agnolucci, Benedict Hur, Joshua Anderson, Tiffany Lin, Jonathan Patchen, Michael Rome and Eduardo Santacana are joining the firm as litigation partners in San Francisco."

No Kings Day: June 14 protests set to be biggest yet, will counter Trump military parade in locations nationwide. Here’s what to know; Fast Company, June 10, 2025

JENNIFER MATTSON , Fast Company; No Kings Day: June 14 protests set to be biggest yet, will counter Trump military parade in locations nationwide. Here’s what to know

"June 14 is shaping up to be a big day, with millions of Americans expected to take to the streets in an event dubbed “No Kings Day,” which organizers have said will likely be the largest single-day turnout of the anti-Trump, pro-democracy protest movement since President Donald Trump took office for a second term in January.

Organizers expect 1,800 rallies will take place on Saturday for “a nationwide day of defiance” in every state and major city across the country—except Washington, D.C., as to avoid clashes with the Army’s 250th anniversary celebrations, which will be held that day in the nation’s capital (more on that below).

In a statement to Fast Company, the No Kings organizers described their event as “peaceful, organized, and united.” They added: “Make it clear: We don’t do kings in this country.”"

A Comprehensive Accounting of Trump’s Culture of Corruption; The New York Times, June 7, 2025

 The Editorial Board, The New York Times; A Comprehensive Accounting of Trump’s Culture of Corruption

"The message seemed obvious enough: People who make Mr. Trump richer regularly receive favorable treatment from the government he runs.

The cryptocurrency industry is perhaps the starkest example of the culture of corruption in his second term. He and his relatives directly benefit from the sale of their cryptocurrency by receiving a cut of the investment. Even if the price of the coins later falls and investors lose money, the Trumps can continue to benefit by receiving a commission on future sales. Forbes magazine estimates that he made about $1 billion in cryptocurrency in the past nine months, about one-sixth of his net worth...

The self-enrichment of the second Trump administration is different from old-fashioned corruption. There is no evidence that Mr. Trump has received direct bribes, nor is it clear that he has agreed to specific policy changes in exchange for cash. Nonetheless, he is presiding over a culture of corruption. He and his family have created several ways for people to enrich them — and government policy then changes in ways that benefit those who have helped the Trumps profit. Often Mr. Trump does not even try to hide the situation. As the historian Matthew Dallek recently put it, “Trump is the most brazenly corrupt national politician in modern times, and his openness about it is sui generis.” He is proud of his avarice, wearing it as a sign of success and savvy.

This culture is part of Mr. Trump’s larger efforts to weaken American democracy and turn the federal government into an extension of himself. He has pushed the interests of the American people to the side, in favor of his personal interests. His actions reduce an already shaky public faith in government. By using the power of the people for personal gain, he degrades that power for any other purpose. He stains the reputation of the United States, which has long stood out as a place where confidence in the rule of law fosters confidence in the economy and financial markets. This country was not previously known as an executive kleptocracy."

Trump Loses Another Battle in His War Against Elite Law Firms; The New York Times, May 27, 2025

 Zach Montague, The New York Times; Trump Loses Another Battle in His War Against Elite Law Firms

"“The cornerstone of the American system of justice is an independent judiciary and an independent bar willing to tackle unpopular cases, however daunting. The founding fathers knew this!” Judge Leon wrote in a 73-page opinion laced with more than two dozen exclamation points.

“Accordingly, they took pains to enshrine in the Constitution certain rights that would serve as the foundation for that independence,” he wrote. “Little wonder that in the nearly 250 years since the Constitution was adopted no executive order has been issued challenging these fundamental rights.”

So far, federal judges have steadfastly rejected what they have described as an effort by the White House to subjugate the nation’s top law firms."

Presiding bishop defends decision not to resettle Afrikaners, calls church a ‘bulwark against injustice’; Episcopal News Service (ENS), May 21, 2025

David Paulsen, Episcopal News Service (ENS); Presiding bishop defends decision not to resettle Afrikaners, calls church a ‘bulwark against injustice’

"“The problem with any kind of Faustian bargain like that is that the devil always wins,” Rowe said. “We knew that if we did this, we were going to be asked to do something else we couldn’t do. This was the line that we had to draw. And we’ll continue to do that. We’ll continue to tell the truth and be on the side of moral decision-making, and that’s what this is about. Just because the Trump administration and others have lost their way doesn’t mean the church has.

Malavé’s organization is a plaintiff with The Episcopal Church and 25 other groups seeking to restore “sensitive locations” protections that the Department of Homeland Security previously had granted to houses of worship, before Trump took office in January 2025. The plaintiffs have argued that ending those protections from enforcement actions have hindered congregations’ efforts to welcome and minister to immigrant communities.

“We must, as followers of Jesus, be faithful to our call,” Malavé said. Christianity offers “a world view in which every human being is loved, accepted and cared for.”

Rowe agreed, adding that The Episcopal Church and other plaintiffs are “making pretty conservative arguments” based in constitutional principles of religious freedom, freedom of speech and the rule of law.

At the same time, The Episcopal Church has not joined a separate lawsuit contesting the Trump administration’s suspension of the refugee resettlement program. Rowe explained that the church needs to be strategic and “can’t be part of every lawsuit” but will continue to take faith-based stands as a “bulwark against injustice.”

“This is not about party politics. This is about moral decision-making,” Rowe said. “This is not about being a Republican or Democrat. This is not anti-Trump. … This is about our baptismal covenant and respecting the dignity of every human being.”"

We Study Fascism, and We’re Leaving the U.S.; The New York Times, May 14, 2025

Marci ShoreTimothy Snyder and Jason Stanley

Video by Francesca Trianni and James Robinson

, The New York Times; We Study Fascism, and We’re Leaving the U.S.

"Legal residents of the United States sent to foreign prisons without due process. Students detained after voicing their opinions. Federal judges threatened with impeachment for ruling against the administration’s priorities.

In the Opinion video above, Marci Shore, Timothy Snyder and Jason Stanley, all professors at Yale and experts in authoritarianism, explain why America is especially vulnerable to a democratic backsliding — and why they are leaving the United States to take up positions at the University of Toronto."

Trump presidential orders target law firms. Here's how some lawyers say that threatens the rule of law.; CBS News, May 4, 2025

Scott Pelley, CBS News; Trump presidential orders target law firms. Here's how some lawyers say that threatens the rule of law.

[Kip Currier: The Trump Executive Orders against select law firms violate the spirit and substance of foundational democratic beliefs and rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. 

The right to legal counsel is a fundamental precept of America's justice system and democracy.  Trump's Executive Orders imperil the right to legal counsel.

It is a conservative principle that finds its roots in the rebellion of the Thirteen Original Colonies against the human rights-starved tyranny of colonial England under King George III (1760-1820).

It is a tenet that has set the U.S. apart from authoritarian regimes.

The right to legal counsel is in jeopardy under the current administration.

The courageous, democratically-principled lawyers, law firms, judges, and legal organizations that are standing up and speaking out against these baseless unconstitutional actions deserve our admiration, support, and gratitude.]

[Excerpt]

"It was nearly impossible to get anyone on camera for this story because of the fear now running through our system of justice. In recent weeks, President Trump has signed orders against several law firms — orders with the power to destroy them. That matters because lawsuits have been a check on the president's power. Many firms and attorneys have been targeted, among them Marc Elias, a long time opponent of Trump who is the only lawyer the president has named who was willing to appear on 60 Minutes. Elias, and others, are warning that Trump's assault on the legal profession threatens the rule of law itself. Elias says that for him, it began with the president's personal grudge...

In a shock to the legal community, nine major firms went to the White House to make a deal. Some say they were pressured, not by a written order, but by a message from the White House threatening an order...

Marc Elias: It is trying to intimidate them the way in which a mob boss intimidates people in the neighborhood that he is seeking to either exact protection money from or engage in other nefarious conduct. I mean, the fact is that these law firms are being told, "If you don't play ball with us, maybe somethin' really bad will happen to you." 

The nine firms did not admit wrongdoing but, altogether, they agreed to give nearly $1 billion in legal services to causes that the firms and Trump support. 

Donald Ayer: Our whole system of government is at stake.

Attorney Donald Ayer should know. He argued before the Supreme Court for the Reagan administration. He was deputy attorney general for George H. W. Bush. Today, he teaches at Georgetown Law...

Four firms are standing up and fighting in court. Judges protected them with temporary restraining orders. Law professor Donald Ayer says, in his view, Trump's orders violate the constitutional rights to free speech, due process and the right to counsel."

Top Washington lawyer creates firm to defend officials targeted by Trump; Reuters via The Guardian, May 2, 2025

Reuters via The Guardian; Top Washington lawyer creates firm to defend officials targeted by Trump

"A prominent lawyer in Washington who defended Hunter Biden against criminal charges has launched a new law firm to represent former government officials and others targeted by the Trump administration.

Abbe Lowell left his large law firm, Winston & Strawn, to launch Lowell & Associates, which will defend clients including individuals, institutions and others that are “facing politicized investigations, civil and administrative actions”, the firm said in a Friday statement.

The new firm also includes two former lawyers at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom who quit over its response to Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting the legal profession.

Skadden is one of nine firms that cut deals with the administration to avoid the Republican president’s crackdown on the legal industry. Four other firms have sued to block Trump’s orders, which restricted their business over the president’s claims that they had “weaponized” the legal system against him or his allies.

One of the ex-Skadden lawyers, Rachel Cohen, said there is a need for attorneys “willing to stand up to the government when it oversteps”.

Two other lawyers are also joining the new firm from Winston & Strawn."