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

The election voting process, bidding, hands raised up with papers

Confidence in U.S. elections has fallen to 55% ahead of the 2026 midterms. The real risk isn't who wins — it's whether the loser accepts it.

Svetlana Shamshurina/Getty Images

The Real Test of the 2026 Midterms Comes After the Vote

Less than three months before Americans vote in the 2026 midterms, a federal judge on August 11 blocked the U.S. Postal Service from implementing part of President Donald Trump’s executive order tightening mail-in voting rules. The ruling came amid an intensifying fight over how November’s elections will be administered. That fight underscores a deeper problem: the real question in American politics is no longer simply who wins the next election, but whether large numbers of people will still accept the result when their side loses.

Elections in the United States were supposed to settle arguments. One side wins, the other accepts defeat, and the country moves on. That quiet agreement is under growing pressure as the midterms approach. Control of Congress still matters, but beneath that contest lies a more consequential question: if the outcome goes against one of the two major political camps, will that camp still trust the process that declared it the loser?

Keep ReadingShow less
Historical documents representing founding principles of United States on flag backdrop

As the US Constitution turns 250, one expert argues it was designed as an antidote to tyranny — and warns that antidote is now at risk.

photovs/Getty Images

Why the Constitution Remains Our Defense Against Tyranny

There are many analogies for constitutions, for example, a social contract, a blueprint, a roadmap. But as we mark the 250th birthday of the United States of America, I propose another: constitution as antidote.

Constitutions are always intentionally and carefully designed, more often than not as antidotes to heal and ward off ills that a country wishes - or existentially needs - to avoid. This is, and has historically been, true all around the world, although the study of how constitutions and constitutional change can address root causes of conflict and instability has evolved greatly, allowing us to harness their healing power more effectively.

Keep ReadingShow less
A rose stands on the 9/11 Memorial for the North Tower in front of 3 and 4 World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

A rose stands on the 9/11 Memorial for the North Tower in front of 3 and 4 World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

The 9/11 Town Hall That Helped Rebuild Ground Zero—and Democracy

As the nation and the world pause this week to honor and reflect on the 25th Anniversary of the terrorist attack that brought down the twin towers of the World Trade Center and killed more than 3,000 people, I am moved to share a very personal reflection.

After serving as Chief of Staff to Governor Celeste of Ohio and in the Clinton-Gore Administration, where I experienced firsthand how the major institutions in our country interact to favor the powerful over we the people, I became deeply concerned about the health of our democracy. It was clear to me that, beyond voting and national polling, the American people were not at the table to influence the decisions that most affect their lives.

Keep ReadingShow less
People casting their ballots.

Voters cast their ballots at the Buckhead Library for the primary runoff election on June 16, 2026 in Atlanta, Georgia.

Jessica McGowan/Getty Images

Bridgers in the House Face Disproportionate Headwinds in the Midterms

Congressional collaboration on Capitol Hill has become a lost art.

At Bridge Grades, we compile non-partisan 3rd party data to rank members of Congress on how collaboratively (or divisively) they govern. Our thesis is that a more collaborative and bipartisan Congress benefits Americans through a healthier Legislative Branch, stronger checks-and-balances, and more win-win legislation in our common interests.

Keep ReadingShow less