Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Why Law Day 2025 Matters More Than Ever

Opinion

Hands raised in the air, holding each other.​

Hands raised in the air, holding each other.

Getty Images, PeopleImages

At a time when faith in our democratic institutions is under assault and polarization runs deep, Law Day 2025 arrives with a powerful message: Out of many, one.

Observed annually on May 1st, Law Day is a reminder that the rule of law—not political whims, not brute force—is what protects liberty, ensures justice, and binds us together as one people. Established by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1958, Law Day invites Americans to reflect on the vital role of law in safeguarding freedom and fostering unity. Across the country, bar associations, courts, schools, and civic groups host events designed to renew public understanding of legal principles and their enduring importance.


Each year, the American Bar Association (ABA) selects a Law Day theme that reflects the evolving legal landscape and the pressing issues of the time. Themes are chosen through careful review of current events, legal trends, historical milestones, and civic education needs, ensuring each year's message sparks meaningful dialogue across the country.

Many themes have proven timeless, especially those centered on democracy, justice, and the Constitution. "Liberty Under Law," highlighting the balance of governmental power, was used in both 2006 and 2007. "America’s Promise: Justice for All" appeared in 1995 and 1999. More recently, voting rights — a cornerstone of democracy — took center stage in 2014 and 2020.

This year's theme, "The Constitution’s Promise: Out of Many, One," could not be more timely. It reminds us that diversity is not a threat to democracy — it is its foundation. The Constitution's Preamble declares the intention to "form a more perfect Union," recognizing that unity amid diversity is essential to our national identity. From the ABA:

“The Preamble to the Constitution boldly asserts that the Framers established the Constitution as representatives of ‘We the People, in Order to Form a More Perfect Union.’ On this Law Day, we explore and renew our duties to one another under the Constitution and our democratic norms. The Constitution establishes a framework for government that unites us as one citizenry, through means such as our representative government, jury service, and a regular Census. And through this commitment to our Union, we each provide for the common good through government responses to national crises and natural disasters, and through community and advocacy programs for students and adults.”

Events nationwide will mark this Law Day with a spirit of action and reflection. The ABA kicked off the celebration on April 24 by hosting a joint program with the Law Library of Congress on Constitutions, Unity, and the Rule of Law as well as collaborating on a Civics 101 podcast on the rule of law. On May 1, they will host a virtual panel, featuring Justice Stephen Breyer, civic leaders, and legal scholars who will discuss the essential roles of judicial independence and democratic norms. Also on May 1, a National Law Day of Action demonstration at the Supreme Court will visually reaffirm the legal community’s commitment to defending due process, fundamental rights, and the independence of the judiciary.

The message of Law Day 2025 holds particular urgency. We are living through a period when efforts to limit diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are gaining momentum at the highest levels of government. Executive orders aimed at curbing DEI initiatives send a troubling signal: that difference is something to be feared rather than embraced. In this climate, the Law Day theme of unity through constitutional principles serves not only as a celebration but also as a defiant affirmation of our national ideals.

"E pluribus unum" — out of many, one — has been our country's motto since its founding. It symbolizes the audacious idea that a nation can draw strength from its differences, not despite them. Law Day 2025 challenges us to live up to that promise. It urges us to set aside political tribalism, to remember that the rule of law protects us all equally, and to recognize that our shared national identity transcends race, religion, ideology, and origin.

This Law Day, let us not simply honor the law with words but renew our commitment to its highest purpose. Let us reaffirm that "We the People" are stronger together — and that in defending the rule of law, we defend the soul of our democracy.


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

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
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection
The Rule of Law depends on action, not blind optimism. Explore how critical hope, civic engagement, and accountability can strengthen democracy.
Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Law Was Supposed to Be a Shield. I Found the Bars.

I used to believe that learning the law meant learning the architecture of protection.

I believed statutes existed because someone, somewhere, had anticipated injustice and decided certain lines should never be crossed. I believed due process meant power could not simply declare itself correct. I believed whistleblower protections, grievance procedures, public-records laws, administrative review and courts formed a structure designed to restrain institutional misconduct.

Keep ReadingShow less