Stanford Law Review
@stanlrev.bsky.social
A legal publication run by @StanfordLaw.bsky.social students since 1948, providing expert legal scholarship, analysis, and commentary.
stanfordlawreview.org
stanfordlawreview.org
8/8 In our final Essay, Samuel Bray and James Pfander discuss universal injunctions. In this adversarial collaboration they explain where equitable tradition guides them to agree and where sharp differences remain. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/remed...
Remedies in the First Hundred Days of Trump II: A Gently Adversarial Collaboration | Stanford Law Review
In Trump’s second term, courts face mounting pressure to issue broad, sweeping remedies in response to clear executive overreach. While Samuel Bray
www.stanfordlawreview.org
July 23, 2025 at 3:19 PM
8/8 In our final Essay, Samuel Bray and James Pfander discuss universal injunctions. In this adversarial collaboration they explain where equitable tradition guides them to agree and where sharp differences remain. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/remed...
7/8 What limits are there to the President’s removal power? In this adversarial collaboration, Aditya Bamzai and Peter Shane trace this debate from the First Congress and offer dueling views on what that says about the executive’s powers today. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/the-r...
The Removal Question: A Timeline and Summary of the Legal Arguments | Stanford Law Review
Aditya Bamzai and Peter Shane trace the enduring debate of the President’s removal power. Together they provide a comprehensive yet succinct history
www.stanfordlawreview.org
July 23, 2025 at 3:19 PM
7/8 What limits are there to the President’s removal power? In this adversarial collaboration, Aditya Bamzai and Peter Shane trace this debate from the First Congress and offer dueling views on what that says about the executive’s powers today. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/the-r...
6/8 Sonia Mittal, a senior Jan. 6 prosecutor, details firings and demotions inside DOJ. She warns these actions reflect an effort to “capture the referees,” a playbook for authoritarian control through politicized law enforcement. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/execu...
Executive Branch Attacks on January 6 Prosecutors: A Notable Case of Democratic Backsliding | Stanford Law Review
Sonia Mittal–a senior January 6 prosecutor–details the firings, demotions, and investigations of DOJ prosecutors. Mittal argues these executive ac
www.stanfordlawreview.org
July 23, 2025 at 3:18 PM
6/8 Sonia Mittal, a senior Jan. 6 prosecutor, details firings and demotions inside DOJ. She warns these actions reflect an effort to “capture the referees,” a playbook for authoritarian control through politicized law enforcement. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/execu...
1/8 Diego Zambrano observes that while other democracies rally around “the rule of law,” Americans invoke “due process.” He argues the distinction is more than just words and may leave Americans unprepared to spot and resist democratic backsliding.
www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/due-p...
www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/due-p...
Due Process or the Rule of Law? Americans Speak a Different Legal Language | Stanford Law Review
Drawing on global political histories, Diego Zambrano explores why many democracies abroad rally around “the rule of law,” while Americans reach i
www.stanfordlawreview.org
July 23, 2025 at 3:18 PM
1/8 Diego Zambrano observes that while other democracies rally around “the rule of law,” Americans invoke “due process.” He argues the distinction is more than just words and may leave Americans unprepared to spot and resist democratic backsliding.
www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/due-p...
www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/due-p...
5/8 Targeted by Trump’s executive orders, law firms face a collective action dilemma: risk resisting alone or capitulate. @nora-engstrom.bsky.social, Jonah Gelbach & David Marcus detail how the profession can confront executive overreach as a class. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/how-a...
How a Rule 23(b)(2) Class Action Could Save Law Firms from Trump | Stanford Law Review
As Trump targets law firms with punitive executive orders, firms face a familiar dilemma: all would benefit from resistance, but acting alone may risk
www.stanfordlawreview.org
July 23, 2025 at 3:17 PM
5/8 Targeted by Trump’s executive orders, law firms face a collective action dilemma: risk resisting alone or capitulate. @nora-engstrom.bsky.social, Jonah Gelbach & David Marcus detail how the profession can confront executive overreach as a class. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/how-a...
4/8 Can courts review a president’s retaliatory revocation of a security clearance? Shreeya Singh (SLS ‘27) argues Supreme Court precedent supports review, but a recent ruling may shield such actions from scrutiny under the guise of national security. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/natio...
National Security or Nothing to See? Clearances as the Site of Executive Overreach | Stanford Law Review
Can courts review the President’s retaliatory decision to revoke security clearances? In this Essay, Stanford J.D. Candidate Shreeya Singh argues Su
www.stanfordlawreview.org
July 23, 2025 at 3:16 PM
4/8 Can courts review a president’s retaliatory revocation of a security clearance? Shreeya Singh (SLS ‘27) argues Supreme Court precedent supports review, but a recent ruling may shield such actions from scrutiny under the guise of national security. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/natio...
3/8 Reviving Nixon-era arguments, Trump claimed power to block funds Congress had already approved. In this Essay, Zachary Price dismantles the constitutional and practical cases for presidential impoundment. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/trump...
Trumpian Impoundments in Historical Perspective | Stanford Law Review
Reviving Nixon-era arguments, the Trump Administration claims the power to unilaterally withhold congressionally appropriated funds. In this Essay, Za
www.stanfordlawreview.org
July 23, 2025 at 3:16 PM
3/8 Reviving Nixon-era arguments, Trump claimed power to block funds Congress had already approved. In this Essay, Zachary Price dismantles the constitutional and practical cases for presidential impoundment. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/trump...
2/8 Bernadette Meyler argues courts should expand the “independent constitutional bar” test to federal funds granted to private entities. Otherwise, government suppression of free speech by proxy of private entities may escape accountability. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/lever...
Leveraging Institutions: Imposing Unconstitutional Constraints on Individual Speech through State and Private Organizations | Stanford Law Review
President Trump has leveraged federal funds to induce private entities, like universities, to suppress individuals’ free speech. Bernadette Meyler p
www.stanfordlawreview.org
July 23, 2025 at 3:16 PM
2/8 Bernadette Meyler argues courts should expand the “independent constitutional bar” test to federal funds granted to private entities. Otherwise, government suppression of free speech by proxy of private entities may escape accountability. www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/lever...
Manuscripts may be submitted from May 12 to May 23. Accepted essays will be published in Stanford Law Review Online.
April 11, 2025 at 2:20 AM
Manuscripts may be submitted from May 12 to May 23. Accepted essays will be published in Stanford Law Review Online.