100 Days of the Trump Administration

Overview

The Stanford Neukom Center for the Rule of Law is co-hosting with the Stanford Law Review and Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession, a special symposium examining the constitutional tensions revealed by recent executive actions, specifically focusing on the boundaries of presidential authority, the independence of the legal profession and the Department of Justice, and judicial capacity to check executive overreach. Rather than focusing narrowly on particular political disputes, this symposium will explore enduring constitutional questions about the separation of powers brought into sharp relief by recent events.

The special symposium builds on the Center’s successful panel discussions on executive orders and rule of law challenges. It will bring together leading scholars, former prosecutors, and practitioners. These experts will produce concise, accessible analyses addressing both doctrinal questions of immediate relevance to pending litigation and broader constitutional principles at stake.

The mini symposium will translate the insights and analyses from panel presentations into concise written submissions to the Stanford Law Review Online. Each contributor will refine their panel presentation into a focused piece that captures their key arguments and analysis, ensuring that the published symposium directly reflects the scholarly exchange that occurs during the live event.

Scholarly Focus

The mini symposium will explore three interconnected constitutional themes:

1. The scope and limits of executive power over agencies – examining questions of removal power, impoundment authority, and agency independence in light of recent executive orders and litigation.
2. Judicial power to check executive overreach – exploring recent Supreme Court decisions, emerging doctrines, and the institutional capacity of courts to restrain executive action that exceeds constitutional boundaries.
3. DOJ independence and the Legal Profession – analyzing the principles governing prosecutorial independence and the complex questions surrounding the administration’s attacks on law firms.