For the past 30 years, I have taught constitutional law, and I have come to realize that America’s best days are those when my phone doesn’t ring. In ordinary times, constitutional scholars are dull company—when we find ourselves in demand as speakers and party guests, the Republic is in trouble.
The last ten years have brought unprecedented challenges to the Supreme Court’s legitimacy, the effective functioning of American courts, and the idea of “the rule of law.” Being legal affairs editor of the Washington Monthly for the last four years has been like trying to drink the Great Lakes.
In addition to the legal slog (largely unsuccessful) to hold Donald Trump and his enablers accountable, we have seen the sudden prominence of parts of the Constitution that even scholars find obscure. Does Article II Section 2 Clause 3 mean the president appoints an entirely new Cabinet during a short “recess of the Senate”? Does the same article mean that the president can proclaim that the House and Senate are in “disagreement” and close them down until a time of his choosing while he fills the executive branch with cronies? Can a president issue an executive order setting aside the Birthright Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Please Donate to the Washington Monthly
For better or worse, lawyers and law professors are oft invited party guests, and we at the Monthly have been throwing one hell of a party. To hold power accountable, we have published legal scholars and attorneys like Peter M. Shane, one of the nation’s top experts on executive power, on questions ranging from presidential immunity to the end of the “administrative state”; Gerard Magliocca on the ongoing battles over the Fourteenth Amendment’s Disqualification Clause; Joshua A. Douglas, an authority on voting rights law, to assess the prospects that the next administration will meddle with Americans’ free elections; Jonathan Alter, who offered unparalled coverage of Trump’s Manhattan fraud trial, James D. Zirin’s observations (backed up by his experience as a federal prosecutor) on topics ranging from federal criminal prosecutions to Joe Biden’s age (backed up by his own experience as an octogenarian) to Samuel Alito’s alarming spiral; Caroline Frederickson on the Supreme Court’s radical abortion-rights decision; Ciara Torres-Spelliscy on federal campaign-finance and corruption law; Ruben Garcia on plutocrats’ war against the labor movement and the National Labor Relations Board; and Jacob Charles on the Supreme Court’s wacky gun-rights jurisprudence.
Please Donate to the Washington Monthly
These authors speak from specialized knowledge and yet explain these subjects in accessible language. All maintain a refreshing distance from the warring sides of the increasingly polarized legal world.
They offer insight you won’t find anywhere else but the Washington Monthly.
It’s been my honor to recruit and edit fabulous legal writers for the Monthly—even though I cannot offer them the money they deserve; at the same time, I’ve had the opportunity myself to write some longer pieces that might not run elsewhere—a profile of accused “coup lawyer” John Eastman, a contrarian assessment of the Supreme Court’s disastrous 2023-24 term, a feature-length assessment of the legal vogue for “originalism,” among others.
I am writing this year-end summary in hopes that readers who value this legal coverage will help us continue to pay a pittance to these brilliant contributors.
We can’t keep going without your help.
There’s no indication that there will be fewer alarming legal and constitutional novelties when Donald Trump moves back into the White House. (We’ve already had to deploy Peter Shane to explain to our readers—and Elon Musk—that there is no “Department of Government Efficiency” and that cutting federal spending takes more than a few posts on X.)
As those challenges arise, we will continue to tackle them in our print magazine, our constantly changing website, and now, in our new podcast (starring contributing writer Anne D. Kim and me). Your help and support make it possible. Will you join our law-nerd party? All the signs are that it’s going to be rip-snorter.
Please contribute to the Washington Monthly now. It’s tax-deductible, and $50 or more brings you a complimentary gift subscription to our print edition.
All the best,
Garrett Epps
Legal Affairs Editor
