Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Law Day 2025: A Perfect Time for Attorneys To Reaffirm Their Oath

Opinion

Law Day 2025: A Perfect Time for Attorneys To Reaffirm Their Oath

A gavel in front of the U.S. flag.

Getty Images, SimpleImages

Each year on May 1st, the United States marks Law Day—a national observance that many Americans have never heard of, despite its six-decade history. Established in 1958 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Law Day is meant to honor the rule of law and reflect on its essential role in safeguarding liberty, promoting justice, and upholding the freedoms we often take for granted.

Each year, Law Day centers on a theme that highlights a fundamental aspect of the American legal and constitutional system. The theme for 2025, "The Constitution’s Promise: Out of Many, One," underscores the ideals of unity, shared responsibility, and the binding promise of our Constitution.


This year, a group of lawyers from across the country is taking that commitment a step further by encouraging fellow attorneys to participate in #ReaffirmTheOath—a nonpartisan grassroots campaign encouraging lawyers in communities large and small to publicly renew their commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law. It’s a powerful act of solidarity and civic leadership at a moment when the legal profession itself is under mounting pressure.

In recent years, we've witnessed an alarming erosion of trust in our democratic institutions—including efforts to discredit judges, intimidate election officials, and politicize the judiciary. Lawyers, law firms, and public servants have found themselves targeted simply for doing their jobs. #ReaffirmTheOath is a response to these attacks, offering a unifying platform for attorneys to stand up for the Constitution, the legal system, and the democratic principles they are sworn to uphold.

Led by volunteer lawyers, Checks and Balances Now is a legal and civic education initiative created by a group of lawyers. “The question I have heard for the past months from lawyer colleagues is ‘What can I do?’” said Cheryl Niro, former President of the Illinois State Bar Association and one of the organizers. “Reaffirming our Oath by making a public recommitment to our sacred duty to step up to defend and protect the Constitution and the Rule of Law is the best answer I could think of. Demonstrating that we are bound by the promise we made when we received our license to practice should help Americans understand it is our job, and we stand together to fulfill our obligation.” With the support of the American Bar Association's (ABA) Task Force for American Democracy and inspired by the Task Force's urgent call to action, Checks and Balances Now was launched to strengthen public understanding of the rule of law and democracy.

The ABA task force leaders include an impressive group of attorneys, encompassing all political perspectives. You can meet the task force at: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_interest/election_law/american-democracy/about/

The mission of the ABA Task Force for American Democracy is to:

  • Inspire and mobilize America’s duty-bound legal profession to actively support and defend American democracy, the Constitution, and the rule of law.
  • Ensure that lawyers are educated and held accountable to their professional obligations to support and defend our democracy, the Constitution, and the rule of law.
  • Leverage the legal profession to educate the public on the reasons for, and the importance of, democracy and the rule of law.

Through #ReaffirmOurOath, the legal profession is being asked not just to recite words but to model the integrity and civic responsibility that democracy demands. You can find more information and see how to get involved with #ReaffirmTheOath here: https://www.checksandbalancesnow.org/events.

In turn, it is our hope that millions of Americans across our nation will understand the importance of the rule of law and the institutions that uphold life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in our great nation.

The Fulcrum supports this effort to make Law Day 2025 a powerful moment for the legal profession to lead with clarity, integrity, and purpose. In doing so, they help ensure that the rule of law remains not only a legal ideal but a living promise to every American.

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Kristina Becvar is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and executive director of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.


Read More

​Protesters hold up signs before the start of a rally in support of a former Cornell University student known as Jane Doe

Protesters hold up signs before the start of a rally in support of a former Cornell University student known as Jane Doe at the Ithaca Commons on October 13, 2026 in Ithaca, New York. The rally was organized by several survivor and activist groups to demand accountability regarding Jane Doe's alleged gang rape she suffered at the Chi Phi fraternity house in 2024. Officials at Cornell University announced they would ban fraternity parties for the remainder of the academic year as the university continues to face scrutiny over their handling of the 2024 rape allegations.

(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Sexual Violence Requires More Than Legal Accountability

In the wake of public attention to the Cornell fraternity alleged gang-rape, headlines resound with statements of concern and calls for greater accountability. These calls are not new. They have followed countless incidents of sexual violence, whether on a college campus, in connection with work, or within an intimate relationship. Despite decades of law and policy reform, sexual violence continues to run rampant. While law and policy reform are sorely needed, we will not see long-lasting change unless we address what accountability truly means. Our collective response should aim for a world where no one would ever think it was ok to commit, condone, or be a passive witness to sexual violence, never mind that it would be ok to send the kind of text messages that were allegedly exchanged at the Cornell fraternity where the rape allegedly took place.

As policymakers consider reform, a comprehensive approach to accountability should consider the known limitations of criminal and civil justice systems. Problems with the criminal legal system are legion, both within and beyond sexual violence cases. These include racially discriminatory application of laws criminalizing sexual violence, that, for example, have led to harsher punishment when the accused is a person of color and lesser punishment when the survivor is a person of color. Survivors continue to be doubted and subjected to biases and stereotypes, including that survivors lie about their experience, that they somehow invited the violence, or act with self-interest or ulterior motive when coming forward.

Keep ReadingShow less
A gavel.

From the Gilded Age to Citizens United, discover how recent Supreme Court rulings empower mega-donors, reshape party spending, and impact American democracy.

Getty Images, David Talukdar

Supreme Court’s Campaign Finance Rulings Help the GOP

American elections have always been dominated by moneyed interests. For instance, during America’s last Gilded Age, in the presidential election of 1896, William McKinley, the Republican candidate, outspent his Democratic challenger by $3.5 million (roughly $140 million in today's dollars) to $400,000 (approximately $16 million today). McKinley went on to win the election with the help of robber baron J.P. Morgan and monopoly Standard Oil. As the example shows, powerful special interests have often translated their vast economic power into political influence. But recent court decisions threaten to permanently entrench the financial imbalance between the Republican and Democratic parties.

In this light, the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) decision to transfer more than $50 million to beleaguered congressional campaigns across the country must be judged. The impact of this massive infusion of cash into the otherwise struggling Senate campaigns cannot be overemphasized. On the other side, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) cannot match the GOP’s deep pockets filled by the likes of Elon Musk. The Republicans, even before this deluge of special interest money, enjoyed financial advantages. The money is coming at a particularly pivotal moment in the campaign as Republicans find themselves electorally underwater due to Trump’s unpopularity.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close up of a judge hammering a gavel

Investigations, indictments, dismissals, convictions: what each means and the questions to ask before judging claims of political weaponization of the law.

Chris Collins/Getty Images

Just the Facts: Trump, DOJ and the Legal Process

The Fulcrum approaches news stories with an open mind and skepticism, presenting our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.


The legal battles involving the Trump administration have become a constant feature of American politics and governance. Supporters often argue that many lawsuits and investigations are politically motivated attempts to block the administration's agenda. Critics contend that certain actions by the administration and the Department of Justice are themselves politically motivated or represent an improper use of government power.

Keep ReadingShow less
gavel on top of a US flag
a judge's gavel on top of a flag
Photo by Bermix Studio on Unsplash

60 Former DOJ Attorneys Oppose California Election Lawsuit

Sixty former Department of Justice attorneys from both Democratic and Republican administrations are urging a federal appeals court to reject the Justice Department's last-minute intervention in California's election. They argue that the intervention violates longstanding department policies designed to prevent election interference. The former officials cite guidelines such as Justice Manual Section 9-85.500, which advises against overt investigative or prosecutorial steps near an election, and the department's non-interference policy, which seeks to avoid actions that could affect election outcomes or integrity.

In an amicus brief filed by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law and Complex Appellate Litigation Group LLP, the former officials argue that DOJ is taking the unusual step of seeking election-related relief just days before the midterm election, contrary to department policies that discourage such actions near Election Day. They say these policies aim to prevent election interference, discourage voter participation, or disrupt election administration. The brief cites United States v. Cohen, 152 F.3d 321 (4th Cir. 1998), where courts recognized the importance of avoiding last-minute changes to election procedures. The amici also cite Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1 (2006), in which the Supreme Court cautioned against altering election rules close to an election, as such changes can cause confusion and undermine public confidence in the electoral process.

Keep ReadingShow less