Kim Lane Scheppele
LightNews LightNews
banner
kimlanelaw.bsky.social
Kim Lane Scheppele
@kimlanelaw.bsky.social
37K followers 1.5K following 700 posts

Tracking autocratic legalism around the world from Princeton University.

Videos

Kim Lane Scheppele is the Laurance S. Rockefeller Professor of Sociology and International Affairs in the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs and in the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University. Scheppele works on topics related to comparative constitutional ethnography within the sociology of law. .. more

Political science 58%
Law 31%
Posts Replies Media Videos

Reposted by Bonnie Honig

kimlanelaw.bsky.social
Kim Lane Scheppele @kimlanelaw.bsky.social · 4h
Don’t let the holidays hide this story Here’s part of the plot to steal the midterms. stateline.org/2025/12/18/t...
Trump’s DOJ offers states confidential deal to remove voters flagged by feds • Stateline
The U.S. Department of Justice has sent confidential draft agreements on voter data sharing to more than a dozen states, part of the Trump administration’s effort to obtain unredacted voter rolls, wit...
stateline.org

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

urocklive1.bsky.social
Khashoggi's Ghost @urocklive1.bsky.social · 4h
A federal judge this week canceled the trial of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran man who was mistakenly deported, and scheduled a hearing on whether the prosecution is being vindictive in pursuing a human smuggling case against him.

apnews.com/article/kilm...
Federal judge to hold hearing on whether Kilmar Abrego Garcia is being vindictively prosecuted
A federal judge has canceled the trial of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man mistakenly deported, and scheduled a hearing on whether the prosecution is being vindictive in its human smuggling case...
apnews.com

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

markzaidesq.bsky.social
Mark Zaid, Esq @markzaidesq.bsky.social · 5h
A discussion of my recent court victory by Harry Littman, a former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General.
youtu.be/aflAC8nuOLY?...
Whistleblower STUNS Trump with UNEXPECTED Courtroom Victory
YouTube video by Talking Feds with Harry Litman
youtu.be

Reposted by Anna O. Law, Kim L. Scheppele, Mark A. Lemley , and 14 more

mrsbettybowers.bsky.social
Mrs. Betty Bowers @mrsbettybowers.bsky.social · 11h
This is perfect. The DOJ's embarrassing snafu with disappearing redactions was the fault of Elon Musk. Musk cancelled government subscriptions to Adobe programs that would have made the redactions permanent. What a pack of fools.

Reposted by Stephen M. Walt, Anna O. Law, Kim L. Scheppele , and 4 more

paolosandro.bsky.social
Paolo Sandro @paolosandro.bsky.social · 14h
I had missed this latest delirium by Adrian Vermeule on birthright citizenship

'Common law?! NAH, it's the Roman law of adoption that should govern the interpretation of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution!'

thenewdigest.substack.com/p/immigratio...
What I suggest is different. Although broadly in the spirit of Aquinas’ two-or-three generations test insofar as it emphasizes the duties rather than the rights of immigrants who becomes citizens, it is derived not from theological principles but from a civil-law analogy — an analogy to the Roman law of adoption. After all, inclusion within “our posterity” may ordinarily arise not only through natural descent, but through legal adoption. In brief, I suggest that the legal immigrant should understand himself as an adopted son of a natural and concretely existing family, the American family, and this brings with it particular duties of filial piety and reverence for that particular family and for its thick heritage and traditions. Our laws as made, interpreted and applied should reflect that understanding as well. Because it is an analogy, not an identity, what I propose is not a set of legal rules to be directly mapped from Roman law into the American legal system. Rather it is a suggestion that the Roman law of adoption rested on a set of discernible principles of legal justice and political morality that represent the spirit of the laws bearing on immigration and citizenship in America — a time-honored mode of legal interpretation here, albeit not an originalist mode. Such principles should affect the interpretation of actually existing legal texts, rules, and doctrines; they should be understood as the soul of our law of citizenship. Needless to say, this does not answer or even purport to speak to all questions bearing on immigration. I do not speak here, for example, to the enforcement of the immigration laws against illegal immigrants, or to prospective questions of policy about exactly how much legal immigration, if any, there should be, and from where. All I address is the question what principles of legal justice and political duty apply, under existing law, to the immigrant who is already here legally. To that end I suggest a conceptual model for understanding the role and obligations of that immigrant — what justice classically understood requires of him.

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele, Eric Goldman, Alfie Kohn , and 1 more

martylederman.bsky.social
Marty Lederman @martylederman.bsky.social · 19h
I don't think there's any understanding of the First Amendment under which this ("our Savior") is constitutional. Yet they don't care, and they've eliminated all the attorneys who would've objected.

Kudos to the Goldwater and Cato Institutes for condemning it.

www.nytimes.com/2025/12/25/a...
Trump Administration Emphasizes Religion in Official Christmas Messages
www.nytimes.com

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele, Nandita Sharma, Brigitte Nerlich , and 1 more

profsanderlinden.bsky.social
Sander van der Linden @profsanderlinden.bsky.social · 1d
Legend Imran Ahmed (CEO of CCDH) just sued the U.S. Government for the wildly inappropriate visa sanctions. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York just granted a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against this inappropriate government action.

What a Christmas gift!

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele, Gerald Friedman, Kent Johnson , and 2 more

muellershewrote.com
Mueller, She Wrote @muellershewrote.com · 2d
The DOJ is lying when it says they *just now* received Epstein files from the Southern District of New York.

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele, Alan Richardson, W. Andy Knight , and 1 more

kylegriffin1.bsky.social
Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1.bsky.social · 2d
Jack Smith is calling for the House Judiciary Committee to release the recording of his full closed-door deposition before the panel.

"Doing so will ensure that the American people can hear the facts directly from Mr. Smith, rather than through second-hand accounts."

Reposted by Anne Applebaum, Kim L. Scheppele, Brendan Nyhan , and 3 more

philipmai.com
Philip Mai @philipmai.com · 2d
"Judges who ruled against Trump say harassment & threats have changed their lives. More than 100 pizzas were delivered to the homes of judges & their families this year, some with signs of foreign involvement. Judges say the message is clear: We know where you live." www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...
Judges who ruled against Trump say harassment and threats have changed their lives
More than 100 pizzas were delivered to the homes of judges and their families this year, some with signs of foreign involvement. Judges say the message is clear: We know where you live.
www.nbcnews.com

Reposted by Laurent Pech

kimlanelaw.bsky.social
Kim Lane Scheppele @kimlanelaw.bsky.social · 3d
The US govt wants to make the world safe for disinformation spread by US oligarchs. This is not about free speech.

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

legal.reuters.com
Reuters Legal @legal.reuters.com · 3d
US targets former EU commissioner, activists with visa bans over alleged censorship
US targets former EU commissioner, activists with visa bans over alleged censorship
The Trump administration on Tuesday imposed visa bans on a former European Union commissioner and anti-disinformation campaigners it says were involved in censoring U.S. social media platforms, in the latest move in a campaign aimed at European rules that U.S. officials say go beyond legitimate regulation.
reut.rs

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

martylederman.bsky.social
Marty Lederman @martylederman.bsky.social · 3d
Thanks much, Leah. I think it's noteworthy that *no* Justices thought that the SG's unconvincing alternative argument that Trump had properly invoked the *rebellion* provision of 12406 was even worthy of discussion or refutation; and ... [1]

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

drjohncotter.bsky.social
John Cotter @drjohncotter.bsky.social · 3d
I don’t see how EU and national leaders can go on publicly pretending that everything is normal for another 3.5 years and beyond.
eurobot.bsky.social Eurobot @eurobot.bsky.social · 3d
Former EU Commissioner Thierry Breton has been sanctioned by the United States for threatening Twitter with consequences for possible inaction on removal of illegal content and disinformation requirements. #Image(s) #EuropeanUnion

https://i.redd.it/eir5vtgu019g1.png
Former EU Commissioner Thierry Breton has been sanctioned by the United States for threatening Twitter with consequences for possible inaction on removal of illegal content and disinformation requirements. #Image(s) #EuropeanUnion

Reposted by Anna O. Law, Kim L. Scheppele, Steve Peers , and 12 more

mjsdc.bsky.social
Mark Joseph Stern @mjsdc.bsky.social · 3d
NEW: By a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court blocks Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to Chicago to assist immigration agents. A majority holds that he likely lacks authority to do so. Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissent. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
The Government asked this Court to stay the District Court's order. After the response and reply were filed, JUSTICE BARRETT referred the application to the Court. We directed the parties to file supplemental letter briefs on an issue that the District Court had addressed but the parties' initial briefs had not: the meaning of the term "regular forces" in §12406(3). In its supplemental brief, the Government argues that the term refers to civilian law enforcement officers, such as those employed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the Federal Protective Service. Respondents, echoing the District Court, maintain that the term refers to the regular forces of the United States mili-tary. We conclude that the term "regular forces" in §12406(3) likely refers to the regular forces of the United States mili-tary. This interpretation means that to call the Guard into active federal service under §12406(3), the President must be "unable" with the regular military "to execute the laws of the United States." Because the statute requires an assessment of the military's ability to execute the laws, it likely applies only where the military could legally execute the laws. Such circumstances are exceptional: Under the Posse Comitatus Act, the military is prohibited from "execut[ing] the laws" "except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress." 18 U. S. C. §1385. So before the President can federalize the Guard under §12406(3), he likely must have statutory or constitutional authority to execute the laws with the regular military and must be "unable" with those forces to perform that function.

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele, Rosemary A. Joyce, Melissa Johnson , and 1 more

normeisen.bsky.social
Norm Eisen @normeisen.bsky.social · 4d
BREAKING: We are suing Trump & his cronies to restore the Kennedy Center’s lawful name

We @democracydefendersaction.org are proud to represent Kennedy Center Trustee @repbeatty.bsky.social w/ our friends at Washington Litigation Group

Congress named the Kennedy Center & only they can change it
Press Release | Democracy Defenders Action
Congresswoman Joyce Beatty today sued President Trump and others to stop the unlawful renaming of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the Congressw...
www.democracydefendersaction.org

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

rparloff.bsky.social
Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 4d
Former CIA Director Brennan asks Chief Judge in SDFla to stop govt from steering grand jury probe to Judge Aileen Cannon, citing "irregular activity" & Cannon's "demonstrated pattern of favoring ... Trump's litigation positions." By @charliesavage.bsky.social . (gift)
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/22/u...
Ex-C.I.A. Chief Asks to Keep Justice Dept. From Steering Case to Favored Judge
www.nytimes.com

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

brennancenter.org
Brennan Center @brennancenter.org · 4d
Courts are using originalist arguments to expand executive power, weaken long-standing rights and protections, and entrench inequality. It’s crucial that lawyers push back. Our new guide shows you how. bit.ly/4iQ1v0B

Art Credit: Adrià Fruitos

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

kimlanelaw.bsky.social
Kim Lane Scheppele @kimlanelaw.bsky.social · 4d
When someone asks “what can I do?”, here’s the answer: open.substack.com/pub/cmarmita...
What the Mafia Can Teach Us About Destroying MAGA
We have what we need.
open.substack.com

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

dearlstephens.bsky.social
D. Earl Stephens @dearlstephens.bsky.social · 4d
probably

Reposted by Kate Jackson

kimlanelaw.bsky.social
Kim Lane Scheppele @kimlanelaw.bsky.social · 4d
Going where 60 Minutes fears to tread . . .
timcarvell.bsky.social Tim Carvell @timcarvell.bsky.social · 5d
Now seems like a swell time to point out that Frontline just released this excellent 11-minute mini-documentary about what happened inside CECOT.
Surviving CECOT (full documentary) | Deported to a Maximum-Security Prison | FRONTLINE + ProPublica
YouTube video by FRONTLINE PBS | Official
m.youtube.com

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele

leahlitman.bsky.social
Leah Litman @leahlitman.bsky.social · 4d
A phenomenal piece by Adam Serwer @adamserwer.bsky.social in The Atlantic @theatlantic.com that explains the racial and class hierarchies that are part of the Republican Party, including the Supreme Court's, vision for the Constitution.

www.theatlantic.com/politics/202...
What this means in practice is that if you are not white, you cannot go certain places without the risk of being kidnapped by federal agents. That is not “common sense”; it is the nullification of the Constitution’s guarantee of equal rights under the law. This decision is only one of the ways that the Court, under Chief Justice John Roberts, has been chipping away at the parts of the Constitution dedicated to ensuring equal citizenship to all through rulings on voting rights, immigration, and equal protection. It has done this even as it insists—while striking down affirmative action and school-integration programs—that the Constitution is “colorblind.” The Constitution of the Roberts Court is not color-blind. It is a Constitution that permits discrimination on the basis of race, but forbids alleviating discrimination on the basis of race. And over the next year, the Court will face more cases that could further erode both the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, pushing America back toward what some on the right believe is the true, Antebellum Constitution.

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele, Richard S.J. Tol, Dorothy Bishop , and 11 more

atrupar.com
Aaron Rupar @atrupar.com · 4d
Burgum: "Today we're sending notifications to the 5 large offshore wind projects that are under construction that their leases will be suspended due to national security concerns ... the Dept of War has come back conclusively that these large offshore wind programs create radar interference"

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele, John McLaren, Jacob T. Levy , and 4 more

evanbernick.bsky.social
Evan Bernick, a finite mode with a smol hooman and a lorg floof @evanbernick.bsky.social · 4d
Holy shit practically the entire Heritage legal center resigned www.nationalreview.com/news/exclusi...

Reposted by Kim L. Scheppele, Brendan Nyhan, Julie Novkov

evanbernick.bsky.social
Evan Bernick, a finite mode with a smol hooman and a lorg floof @evanbernick.bsky.social · 5d
I think this is an another data point concerning where things are going, nothing more. but, it’s worth a read. reason.com/volokh/2025/...
My Resignation From The Heritage Foundation I sent this letter this evening to Dr. Kevin Roberts, President of the Heritage Foundation. JOSH BLACKMAN

Reposted by Anne Applebaum, Timothy Snyder, Kim L. Scheppele , and 29 more

annabower.bsky.social
Anna Bower @annabower.bsky.social · 5d
Per NY Times’s Michael Grynbaum on X, this is Sharyn Alfonsi’s email to her “60 Minutes” colleagues in full:
News Team, Thank you for the notes and texts. I apologize for not reaching out earlier. I learned on Saturday that Bari Weiss spiked our story, INSIDE CECOT, which was supposed to air tonight. We (Ori and I) asked for a call to discuss her decision. She did not afford us that courtesy/opportunity. Our story was screened five times and cleared by both CBS attorneys and Standards and Practices. It is factually correct. In my view, pulling it now-after every rigorous internal check has been met is not an editorial decision, it is a political one. We requested responses to questions and/or interviews with DHS, the White House, and the State Department. Government silence is a statement, not a VETO. Their refusal to be interviewed is a tactical maneuver designed to kill the story. If the administration's refusal to participate becomes a valid reason to spike a story, we have effectively handed them a "kill switch" for any reporting they find inconvenient. If the standard for airing a story becomes "the government must agree to be interviewed," then the government effectively gains control over the 60 Minutes broadcast. We go from an investigative powerhouse to a stenographer for the state. These men risked their lives to speak with us. We have a moral and professional obligation to the sources who entrusted us with their stories. Abandoning them now is a betrayal of the most basic tenet of journalism: giving voice to the voiceless. CBS spiked the Jeffrey Wigand interview due to legal concerns, nearly destroying the credibility of this broadcast. It took years to recover from that "low point." By pulling this story to shield an administration, we are repeating that history, but for political optics rather than legal ones. We have been promoting this story on social media for days. Our viewers are expecting it. When it fails to air without a credible explanation, the public will correctly identify this as corporate censorship. We are trading 50 years of "Gold Standard" reputation for a single week of political quiet. I care too much about this broadcast to watch it be dismantled without a fight. Sharyn