Last month the House speaker, Mike Johnson, raised the possibility of eliminating some federal courts. “We do have the authority over the federal courts, as you know,” Mr. Johnson told reporters. “We can eliminate an entire district court. We have power of funding over the courts and all these other things.”
The president of the United States, in brief, takes the position that he is not bound by federal statutes and does not have to obey federal-court orders. The constraint dimension of the rule of law, accordingly, is not met at present in the United States.
— Aziz Huq, professor, University of Chicago Law School
It’s too early to assume that the Supreme Court will roll over for him or that he will directly disobey a Supreme Court ruling.
— Daniel Farber, professor, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
The impression of a constitutional crisis is misleading. That impression was initially created by overreaching district judges selected by plaintiffs, who obtained temporary victories and leveraged those victories in the media. If there is a crisis, it does not arise from the actions of the administration but instead from a slew of highly aggressive judicial decisions that have transgressed traditional legal limits on the relationship between the judiciary and the executive branch — limits the courts respected during the Biden administration.
— Adrian Vermeule, professor, Harvard Law School
What do Mr. Trump’s lawless actions add up to? And where do they suggest the president is heading? We concluded by asking those questions to our legal scholars, too.
Having surrounded himself with sycophants, Trump feels unconstrained by the Constitution and federal statutes.
— Michael Dorf, professor, Cornell Law School
President Trump appears to be seeking simultaneously to engage in selective but ruthless enforcement of the law and to dismantle the general governing capacity of the state. … This would constitute nothing less than an authoritarian system under which civil society is significantly diminished for fear of targeted retribution and the government lacks basic indicia of trust, up to and including in the conduct of elections. We have much to fear.
— Jamal Greene, professor, Columbia Law School
Our constitutional system is on a knife’s edge.
— Jack Balkin, professor, Yale Law School
We are witnessing the broad expansion of presidential power and the system of checks and balances starting to break down. This has serious implications — we are heading to a constitutional crisis (although some say we are already there).
— Rose Cuison-Villazor, professor, Rutgers Law School, Newark
Trump’s assault on the role of lawyers and judges as defenders of free speech, the rule of law and the concept of government under law is an existential threat to American constitutional democracy.
— Burt Neuborne, professor, N.Y.U. School of Law
The use of the levers of government to exact retaliation for private vendettas — sending people to foreign prisons without due process, dismantling agencies and refusing to spend appropriated funds and pervasive retaliation for the exercise of First Amendment rights … are the actions of an authoritarian government, not a liberal democracy.
— Katie Eyer, professor, Rutgers Law School, Camden
The politicization of the Justice Department strikes me as the most disturbing. Trump is using his power to direct the conduct of individual criminal prosecutions. He is firing line attorneys he deems as insufficiently loyal. And he has installed loyalists as chief prosecutors.
— Daniel Epps, professor, Washington University School of Law, St. Louis
Even if Trump were stopped dead in his tracks tomorrow, it would take years, probably decades to undo the damage and regain public trust, rebuild our civic infrastructure and rehabilitate the rule of law. — Jon Michaels, professor, U.C.L.A. School of Law
I think it is fair to conclude that the U.S. constitutional system is on the verge of an authoritarian takeover. “Authoritarian constitutionalism” is not an oxymoron; unless the Trump takeover is repelled, our system will retain the familiar constitutional forms while becoming ever more illiberal, undemocratic and corrupt. The fight to avoid this fate is already being waged in the courts. That is a necessary first step. But to achieve more lasting victory against Trumpism, the country will need a massive amount of political opposition, as well as a major program of reforms that respond to the legitimate grievances Trump has been able to exploit.
— David Pozen, professor, Columbia Law School.
