Law firms are threatened with draconian penalties, with scarcely disguised vengeful and politically destructive motive. Universities are dragged on the carpet, with demands that they forfeit their academic freedom, choice in hiring, and internal mission priorities. What’s going on here? What is likely to happen in Court? Are the firms and universities defensible on constitutional grounds as well as because of procedural and statutory reasons? We bring on Vik Amar, former Dean at the Law School at University of Illinois, Urbana, and author of recent articles on both these crises. And while we are at it, we take a look at the forthcoming Supreme Court oral arguments in the birthright citizenship case, which superficially is about nationwide injunctions. Is that really what it’s about, and in any case, is there more than that there? Three of our current crises in one sweeping conversation. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Deportations, the administration’s preferred tactic du jour, appear to many as extreme, inadvisable, and often cruel. Are they unconstitutional? What framework can we use to determine the rights of citizens versus aliens, even if legal, even if permanent resident? What kind of process is “due” for the various groups? Where can we locate the origins in our history, and how do they interact with some of the great themes of the Constitution, including the guarantees of the Bill of Rights, and the rights of “persons” as expressed in the 14th Amendment? The case of Mahmoud Khalil offers a set of facts that shed light on these questions, as do other deportations; we start with this one.

Markets are crashing; freedom seems under siege; the international order is threatened. One man’s whim seems to be decisive. Where are the guardrails of our republic? We see some glimmers through the darkness, as some of the feedback mechanisms start to kick in. The constitutional order may be slow but it may not be completely in ruins. However, there is a threat, and we identify it in not one, but the sum of the actions the president has pursued. Many of these are unconstitutional; others may well be. The first step in protecting the republic from these threats is to identify them. We take that on and at least make a start; the task, in the end, however, will be up to the American people, as Project 2025 may fall to Project 2026.