Rick Pildes
@rickpildes.bsky.social
Legal expert at NYU on issues concerning democracy and the structure of American government.
Reposted by Rick Pildes
I look forward to defending free speech from its progressive critics — and conservative assailants == as the Tanner Letures Nov. 12 and 13 @princeton.edu
A timely topic, sadly
lectures.princeton.edu/lectures/202...
A timely topic, sadly
lectures.princeton.edu/lectures/202...
Tanner Lecture on Human Values: David D. Cole
Progressives have increasingly lost faith in the First Amendment—at least as it has been interpreted and applied by the Supreme Court. They argue that free speech has been “weaponized” by big busines...
lectures.princeton.edu
November 9, 2025 at 4:12 PM
I look forward to defending free speech from its progressive critics — and conservative assailants == as the Tanner Letures Nov. 12 and 13 @princeton.edu
A timely topic, sadly
lectures.princeton.edu/lectures/202...
A timely topic, sadly
lectures.princeton.edu/lectures/202...
Just saw this, glad you enjoyed it.
Great discussion, especially appreciated @rickpildes.bsky.social thoughts on 'free-floating atoms' within organized parties - the power of connecting with constituents through social media. Well done, both of you.
November 10, 2025 at 10:43 PM
Just saw this, glad you enjoyed it.
Reposted by Rick Pildes
On Lawfare Daily, @klonick.bsky.social spoke to @rickpildes.bsky.social about his article, “Political Fragmentation in Democracies in the West,” the link between social media and threats to democracy, and the unique way this technology is now impacting the United States political system.
November 4, 2025 at 2:39 PM
On Lawfare Daily, @klonick.bsky.social spoke to @rickpildes.bsky.social about his article, “Political Fragmentation in Democracies in the West,” the link between social media and threats to democracy, and the unique way this technology is now impacting the United States political system.
Hat tip to @martylederman.bsky.social
Supreme Court seems unsure how to proceed in case about whether Trump can deploy National Guard in Illinois. Asks for additional briefing:
October 29, 2025 at 7:34 PM
Hat tip to @martylederman.bsky.social
Steve Skowronek has an essay today on "Authoritarianism Then and Now" at the NYU Democracy Project:
democracyproject.org/posts/author...
democracyproject.org/posts/author...
Authoritarianism Then and Now
A broad range of views on democracy to help break the stalemate caused by partisan conflict.
democracyproject.org
October 22, 2025 at 2:21 PM
Steve Skowronek has an essay today on "Authoritarianism Then and Now" at the NYU Democracy Project:
democracyproject.org/posts/author...
democracyproject.org/posts/author...
On fusion voting and the NJ Supreme Court:
A new political party called the Moderate Party is challenging on state constitutional grounds NJ's ban on fusion voting. The court is considering whether to hear this challenge.
I published an essay urging the court to take the case. More below..
A new political party called the Moderate Party is challenging on state constitutional grounds NJ's ban on fusion voting. The court is considering whether to hear this challenge.
I published an essay urging the court to take the case. More below..
October 14, 2025 at 2:22 PM
On fusion voting and the NJ Supreme Court:
A new political party called the Moderate Party is challenging on state constitutional grounds NJ's ban on fusion voting. The court is considering whether to hear this challenge.
I published an essay urging the court to take the case. More below..
A new political party called the Moderate Party is challenging on state constitutional grounds NJ's ban on fusion voting. The court is considering whether to hear this challenge.
I published an essay urging the court to take the case. More below..
Here's an analogy. If the government imposes financial costs on you, you have standing. But if the government is beneficent and engages in spending you believe is illegal, it can be difficult to find anyone with standing to challenge.
Marty does not understand what's at stake in this case. Political parties and voters have always had standing to challenge voting rules they allege violate their rights, by BURDENING their right to vote. That's the Crawford case...
Materially less speculative--and thus more of a "substantial risk"--that the statute could affect the outcome of at least one election in the state, and therefore it saves the Dems some costs of getting those voters to the polls. Or so said the Court in Crawford (affirming Posner), anyway.
October 9, 2025 at 3:30 PM
Here's an analogy. If the government imposes financial costs on you, you have standing. But if the government is beneficent and engages in spending you believe is illegal, it can be difficult to find anyone with standing to challenge.
Marty does not understand what's at stake in this case. Political parties and voters have always had standing to challenge voting rules they allege violate their rights, by BURDENING their right to vote. That's the Crawford case...
Materially less speculative--and thus more of a "substantial risk"--that the statute could affect the outcome of at least one election in the state, and therefore it saves the Dems some costs of getting those voters to the polls. Or so said the Court in Crawford (affirming Posner), anyway.
October 9, 2025 at 3:19 PM
Marty does not understand what's at stake in this case. Political parties and voters have always had standing to challenge voting rules they allege violate their rights, by BURDENING their right to vote. That's the Crawford case...
When legal populists of the right mean legal populists of the left. Today's essay in the NYU Democracy Project from Jonathan Mitchell:
"Judicial Supremacy and American Democracy"
democracyproject.org/posts/judici...
"Judicial Supremacy and American Democracy"
democracyproject.org/posts/judici...
Judicial Supremacy and American Democracy
A broad range of views on democracy to help break the stalemate caused by partisan conflict.
democracyproject.org
October 8, 2025 at 7:45 PM
When legal populists of the right mean legal populists of the left. Today's essay in the NYU Democracy Project from Jonathan Mitchell:
"Judicial Supremacy and American Democracy"
democracyproject.org/posts/judici...
"Judicial Supremacy and American Democracy"
democracyproject.org/posts/judici...
The Court heard oral argument today in an important election law standing case. I published in advance an essay on the case in Law 360, which is paywalled.
The question is when candidates for federal office can challenge election laws prospectively. For my view, see next post
The question is when candidates for federal office can challenge election laws prospectively. For my view, see next post
October 8, 2025 at 6:39 PM
The Court heard oral argument today in an important election law standing case. I published in advance an essay on the case in Law 360, which is paywalled.
The question is when candidates for federal office can challenge election laws prospectively. For my view, see next post
The question is when candidates for federal office can challenge election laws prospectively. For my view, see next post
Thanks for this comment, much appreciated.
This essay provides an excellent summary of Rick's important recent work on political fragmentation—which is undermining coherent and effective government across developed democracies. In PR systems, fragmentation occurs inter-party. In PV systems (like ours) fragmentation occurs intra-party.
"Democracies in the Age of Fragmentation," my essay in NYU's Democracy Project series, was published this week. Link here, brief excerpts to follow.
democracyproject.org/posts/democr...
democracyproject.org/posts/democr...
October 6, 2025 at 2:44 PM
Thanks for this comment, much appreciated.
"Democracies in the Age of Fragmentation," my essay in NYU's Democracy Project series, was published this week. Link here, brief excerpts to follow.
democracyproject.org/posts/democr...
democracyproject.org/posts/democr...
Democracies in the Age of Fragmentation
A broad range of views on democracy to help break the stalemate caused by partisan conflict.
democracyproject.org
October 4, 2025 at 2:34 PM
"Democracies in the Age of Fragmentation," my essay in NYU's Democracy Project series, was published this week. Link here, brief excerpts to follow.
democracyproject.org/posts/democr...
democracyproject.org/posts/democr...
At NYU's Democracy Project (more on that later), Prof. Caleb Nelson has a feature essay arguing that originalism does not support the unitary executive branch theory. Caleb is one of the country's leading originalist scholars, frequently cited by the Court.
democracyproject.org/posts/must-a...
democracyproject.org/posts/must-a...
Special Feature: Must Administrative Officers Serve at the President’s Pleasure?
A broad range of views on democracy to help break the stalemate caused by partisan conflict.
democracyproject.org
September 29, 2025 at 12:59 PM
At NYU's Democracy Project (more on that later), Prof. Caleb Nelson has a feature essay arguing that originalism does not support the unitary executive branch theory. Caleb is one of the country's leading originalist scholars, frequently cited by the Court.
democracyproject.org/posts/must-a...
democracyproject.org/posts/must-a...
Reposted by Rick Pildes
Delighted to share my latest, History and Fetishism in the New Separation of Powers Formalism, now live in the Penn Law Review!
The piece traces the emergence of the Supreme Court’s new approach to separation of powers law and argues that it is grounded in a set of basic mistakes. (1/3)
The piece traces the emergence of the Supreme Court’s new approach to separation of powers law and argues that it is grounded in a set of basic mistakes. (1/3)
August 9, 2025 at 9:33 PM
Delighted to share my latest, History and Fetishism in the New Separation of Powers Formalism, now live in the Penn Law Review!
The piece traces the emergence of the Supreme Court’s new approach to separation of powers law and argues that it is grounded in a set of basic mistakes. (1/3)
The piece traces the emergence of the Supreme Court’s new approach to separation of powers law and argues that it is grounded in a set of basic mistakes. (1/3)
Cass Sunstein wrote an essay I found intriguing called "The Morality of Legality." We decided to do a short video discussing the ideas in it.
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
@casssunstein.bsky.social
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqlH...
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
@casssunstein.bsky.social
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqlH...
The Morality of Legality: A Conversation between Cass Sunstein and Richard Pildes
YouTube video by NYU School of Law
www.youtube.com
July 23, 2025 at 2:26 PM
Cass Sunstein wrote an essay I found intriguing called "The Morality of Legality." We decided to do a short video discussing the ideas in it.
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
@casssunstein.bsky.social
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqlH...
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
@casssunstein.bsky.social
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqlH...
The Supreme Court's decision in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management is going to make it harder to claim that the President can only remove for good cause commissioners of the federal election agencies, the FEC and EAC.
I explain in this post: electionlawblog.org?p=150710
I explain in this post: electionlawblog.org?p=150710
How A Recent Supreme Court Decision Affects the President's Executive Orders Concerning the FEC and the ECA #ELB
Congress designed the Federal Election Commission and the Election Assistance Commission to be “independent agencies” in various respects. See, e.g., S. Rep. No. 93689, at 16 (1974) (emphasizing that ...
electionlawblog.org
June 30, 2025 at 9:14 PM
The Supreme Court's decision in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management is going to make it harder to claim that the President can only remove for good cause commissioners of the federal election agencies, the FEC and EAC.
I explain in this post: electionlawblog.org?p=150710
I explain in this post: electionlawblog.org?p=150710
Reposted by Rick Pildes
As @rickpildes.bsky.social and Bob Bauer discuss here, this issue challenges traditional campaign finance reform advocacy. There's a strong argument that leaving this in place while the rest of the law has been gutted weakens parties to the detriment of democracy. electionlawblog.org?p=150545
June 30, 2025 at 2:22 PM
As @rickpildes.bsky.social and Bob Bauer discuss here, this issue challenges traditional campaign finance reform advocacy. There's a strong argument that leaving this in place while the rest of the law has been gutted weakens parties to the detriment of democracy. electionlawblog.org?p=150545
Breaking news: the Supreme Court has granted cert on an important case raising issues about the role of political parties in the campaign finance system.
Last week, Bob Bauer and I blogged about the issues in this case and their significance: electionlawblog.org?p=150545
Last week, Bob Bauer and I blogged about the issues in this case and their significance: electionlawblog.org?p=150545
The Supreme Court, The Political Parties, and the SuperPacs #ELB
This post is co-written with Bob Bauer, NYU Professor of Practice who formerly represented in private practice national and state Democratic Party committees: Later this week, the Supreme Court will c...
electionlawblog.org
June 30, 2025 at 2:06 PM
Breaking news: the Supreme Court has granted cert on an important case raising issues about the role of political parties in the campaign finance system.
Last week, Bob Bauer and I blogged about the issues in this case and their significance: electionlawblog.org?p=150545
Last week, Bob Bauer and I blogged about the issues in this case and their significance: electionlawblog.org?p=150545
The Supreme Court is considering a case on whether current limits on the ability of political parties to coordinate with their candidates violate the First Amendment
In this essay, Bob Bauer and I urge the Court to re-consider the role of parties in an age of SuperPacs
electionlawblog.org?p=150545
In this essay, Bob Bauer and I urge the Court to re-consider the role of parties in an age of SuperPacs
electionlawblog.org?p=150545
The Supreme Court, The Political Parties, and the SuperPacs #ELB
This post is co-written with Bob Bauer, who among other roles, served as former General Counsel to the Democratic National Committee: Later this week, the Supreme Court will consider hearing a case ne...
electionlawblog.org
June 24, 2025 at 1:24 PM
The Supreme Court is considering a case on whether current limits on the ability of political parties to coordinate with their candidates violate the First Amendment
In this essay, Bob Bauer and I urge the Court to re-consider the role of parties in an age of SuperPacs
electionlawblog.org?p=150545
In this essay, Bob Bauer and I urge the Court to re-consider the role of parties in an age of SuperPacs
electionlawblog.org?p=150545
On the Supreme Court's pending decision in the Louisiana redistricting case, LA v. Callais, I have three posts at Election Law Blog, including a new one today:
electionlawblog.org?p=150341
electionlawblog.org?p=149861
electionlawblog.org?p=149170
electionlawblog.org?p=150341
electionlawblog.org?p=149861
electionlawblog.org?p=149170
More on The LA Redistricting Case Pending Before the Supreme Court #ELB
In a couple of earlier posts, here and here, I explained the mix of politics and Voting Rights Act issues involved in the Louisiana v. Callais case. The specific issue is whether LA engaged in unconst...
electionlawblog.org
June 12, 2025 at 8:32 PM
On the Supreme Court's pending decision in the Louisiana redistricting case, LA v. Callais, I have three posts at Election Law Blog, including a new one today:
electionlawblog.org?p=150341
electionlawblog.org?p=149861
electionlawblog.org?p=149170
electionlawblog.org?p=150341
electionlawblog.org?p=149861
electionlawblog.org?p=149170
Reposted by Rick Pildes
New 30-minute educational cut of Majority Rules, the documentary on ranked choice voting #RCV and how it changed voting and politics in Alaska. I hosted a screening of the longer version at @cato.org last year and it's good.
Majority Rules 101 (30 min cut)
YouTube video by Unite America
www.youtube.com
June 3, 2025 at 3:55 PM
For #electionlaw folks, I published this analysis of the election-law case the Court granted cert. on yesterday, on standing to bring federal challenges to election laws in advance of an election.
electionlawblog.org?p=150169
electionlawblog.org?p=150169
The Court Rightly Granted Cert. in the Illinois Election Case #ELB
Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections raises important questions about who, if anyone, has standing to bring federal challenges to certain types of election laws in advance of an election. These a...
electionlawblog.org
June 3, 2025 at 6:21 PM
For #electionlaw folks, I published this analysis of the election-law case the Court granted cert. on yesterday, on standing to bring federal challenges to election laws in advance of an election.
electionlawblog.org?p=150169
electionlawblog.org?p=150169
Over at X, I have a short thread on today's major Supreme Court decision on NEPA:
x.com/RickPildes/s...
x.com/RickPildes/s...
x.com
May 29, 2025 at 4:17 PM
Over at X, I have a short thread on today's major Supreme Court decision on NEPA:
x.com/RickPildes/s...
x.com/RickPildes/s...
On the Louisiana race and redistricting case pending before the Supreme Court, I've posted this at Election Law Blog:
electionlawblog.org?p=149861
electionlawblog.org?p=149861
Who Wins or Loses in Louisiana if the Supreme Court Strikes Down LA's Congressional District as a Racial Gerrymander? #ELB
As a practical matter, the issue in Louisiana v. Callais is not whether LA will have a second Voting Rights Act (VRA) district, in which black voters will have an equal opportunity to elect their cand...
electionlawblog.org
May 12, 2025 at 1:21 PM
On the Louisiana race and redistricting case pending before the Supreme Court, I've posted this at Election Law Blog:
electionlawblog.org?p=149861
electionlawblog.org?p=149861
This is one of the best tributes to Justice Souter I've read, in part because it quotes at length from Justice Souter's own account of the processes of judging.
After recapping lots of #SCOTUS news, today's "One FIrst" takes a deeper look at the legacy of Justice David Souter.
He didn't especially like Washington or notoriety, but he took the job of judging (if not himself) extremely seriously.
More Souters, please:
www.stevevladeck.com/p/149-david-...
He didn't especially like Washington or notoriety, but he took the job of judging (if not himself) extremely seriously.
More Souters, please:
www.stevevladeck.com/p/149-david-...
149. David Hackett Souter (1939–2025)
Some reflections on a justice who hated Washington; hated being the center of attention; had an outsized effect on future Supreme Court nominations; and took his job as a judge incredibly seriously.
www.stevevladeck.com
May 12, 2025 at 12:30 PM
This is one of the best tributes to Justice Souter I've read, in part because it quotes at length from Justice Souter's own account of the processes of judging.