Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

A Pay‑to‑Play Presidency Testing the Limits of Our Institutions

How transactional power, donor access, and institutional silence erode the rule of law

Opinion

A balance.

A retired New York judge criticizes President Trump’s actions on tariffs, judicial defiance, alleged corruption, and executive overreach, warning of threats to constitutional order and the rule of law in the United States.

Getty Images

Another day, another outrage, and another attack on the Constitution that this President has twice taken a vow to uphold. Instead of accepting the Supreme Court decision striking down his imposition of tariffs, the President is now imposing them by executive order and excoriating the Justices who ruled against him. His disrespect for the Constitution and the judiciary is boundless.

To this retired New York State judge, all hell seems to have broken loose in our federal government. Congress lies dormant when it is not enabling the chief executive’s misuse and personal acquisition of federal funds, and, notwithstanding its recent tariffs ruling, a majority of the Supreme Court generally rubber-stamps the administration’s actions through opaque “shadow docket” rulings. In doing so, SCOTUS abdicates its role as an independent check.


I bemoan the bygone days when Mr. Smith went to Washington to fight corruption. Oh wait, Mr. Jack Smith did go to Washington to fight corruption.

Outrage also bubbles up from recent reports that well-heeled donors are being given the lucrative opportunity of gaining access to the President for a minimum of $1 million in tax-deductible donations to Freedom250, a new limited liability company involved in planning the celebrations for the nation’s 250th birthday. Although Freedom250 is a nonprofit subsidiary of the National Park Foundation, it appears to be just another avenue for gaining favor with the President. Given the President’s track record, there are and will likely be many more such avenues.

And if that weren’t enough, in a remarkable manifestation of larcenous intent, President Trump has also filed a multi-billion-dollar lawsuit against the IRS and the Treasury Department for their alleged failure to protect his tax records, which, if memory serves, should have been disclosed to the American public after he was first elected to the presidency. As Senators Wyden and Warren wrote in a letter asking whether the Attorney General and Treasury Secretary would defend the interests of the American taxpayers, the lawsuit hit a new low as a “shameless and transparent act of corruption.”

As if the blatant conflicts of interest implicit in the President’s conduct are not alarming enough, his transactional approach to the granting of pardons boggles the mind. It was noted by a Senior Fellow of The American Enterprise Institute that this “pardon-lobbying industry” was “profitable for Trump insiders, or those who can pose as Trump insiders. Having abandoned the prior process for considering pardons, the President apparently doles them out to those who flatter and/or enrich him, which includes criminals and fraudsters who donate millions of dollars to pro-Trump committees. Is it a coincidence that pardons are also granted to those involved in the crypto industry in which the President’s family is invested? This approach to governing defines Trump’s administration and is antithetical to the rule of law.

To add to the outrage, President Trump is reported to have previously tried and failed to persuade New York Senator Charles Schumer to assist in the renaming of Pennsylvania Station and Dulles International Airport after him in exchange for releasing the funds of the Gateway Tunnel Project. If that was a joke, it is not amusing. While the President’s attempt to condition the funding on his own personal desires failed, at least for now, I believe that many of my former judicial colleagues would take extremely seriously what may reasonably be characterized as an instance of attempted extortion. If a litigant had been brought before me for such flagrant violations, sanctions would have surely been imposed to the full extent of the law.

Unfortunately, we have become inured to this administration’s reliance on the “unitary executive theory” to permit the President to do just about anything he wants without any pushback. While Trump fatigue is real, we must continue to challenge every outrageous emanation coming from the White House. I applaud the many federal district court judges who continue to apply the rule of law and resist unconstitutional and unconscionable governmental conduct.

The responsibility lies, however, with all branches of government and the public they serve. The judiciary alone cannot preserve the rule of law.

Hon. Barbara Jaffe is a retired Justice of the New York State Supreme Court and volunteer for Lawyers Defending Democracy.


Read More

Allies United Holds Cross‑Community Meetings to Protect Civil Rights Across Chicagoland

Fight For Today For A Better Tomorrow sign

Canva

Allies United Holds Cross‑Community Meetings to Protect Civil Rights Across Chicagoland

En español

Operation Midway Blitz outraged much of the Chicagoland community last September when U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raided neighborhoods, arrested thousands of individuals, and fatally shot Mexican immigrant Silverio Villegas González.

Witnessing these injustices across the country and in Chicago, two local coalitions came together last year to form Allies United, a Chicago-based coalition initially focused on responding to immigration raids, and now prioritizing protecting civil rights and building long-term cross‑community solidarity.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose
white red and blue textile

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose

As the United States approaches both a consequential election cycle and the 250th anniversary of its founding, Americans stand at a crossroads the framers anticipated but hoped we would never reach: a moment when citizens must decide whether to allow the Republic to erode or restore it through vigilance. This is not about left or right. It is about whether we still share a common vision of the country we want to be — and whether we still believe in the same Republic.

The Founders never imagined “the land of the free” as a place dependent on benevolent leaders. They built a system in which the people — not the government — were the safeguards against overreach. James Madison warned that “the accumulation of all powers…in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny,” a reminder that freedom depends on restraint, not trust in any single individual. George Washington pledged that the Constitution would remain “the guide which I will never abandon,” signaling that loyalty to the Republic must always outweigh loyalty to any leader. These were not ceremonial lines. They were instructions — a blueprint for preventing institutional strain, polarization, and distrust we see today.

Keep ReadingShow less
A document representing the Declaration of Independence.

As trust in institutions declines, America’s 250th anniversary offers a chance to rediscover the civic lessons, leadership principles, and democratic values that sustain a republic.

Getty Images

America at 250: Will We Learn from Our Past?

We call it the American Experiment. Yet too often we celebrate it without studying it, invoke it without interrogating it, and inherit it without improving it. A republic designed to learn from experience cannot afford to ignore its own lessons from history.

As the United States approaches the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the country faces a deeper question than how to celebrate its founding. Do we still know how to learn from it?

Keep ReadingShow less
Person holding a sign in front of the U.S. capitol that reads, "We The People."

The nation has reached a divide in the road—a moment when Americans must decide whether to accept a slow weakening of the Republic or insist on the principles that have held it together for more than two centuries

Getty Images

A Republic Under Strain—And a Choice Ahead

Americans feel something shifting beneath their feet — quieter than crisis but unmistakably a strain. Many live with a steady sense of uncertainty, conflict, and the emotional weight of issues that seem impossible to escape. They feel unheard, unsafe, or unsure whether the Republic they trust is fading. Friends, relatives, and former colleagues say they’ve tried to look away just to cope, hoping the turmoil will pass. And they ask the same thing: if the framers made the people the primary control on government, how will they help set the Republic back on a steadier path?

Understanding the strain Americans are experiencing is essential, but so is recognizing the choice we still have. Madison’s warning offers the answer the framers left us: when trust erodes and power concentrates, the Constitution turns back to the people—not as a slogan, but as a structural reality.

Keep ReadingShow less