The New York Times Opinion editors have gathered responses from nearly three dozen top legal scholars assessing what the paper calls President Donald Trump’s “first 100 days of lawlessness,” with many warning—one bluntly—that “no U.S. citizen is safe” if Trump can act “in violation of the law.”
These top legal minds—and the Times’ editors—use phrases about Trump and his administration’s actions such as “disregard for law,” “flagrantly lawless,” “anti-constitutional,” “quasi-authoritarian,” and “unconstrained by the Constitution.”
Columbia University Professor David Pozen warned: “More important than any specific example of unconstitutional conduct is the overall pattern. The depth and breadth of this administration’s disregard for civil liberties, political pluralism, the separation of powers and legal constraints of all kinds mark it as an authoritarian regime. That is the crucial thing to see.”
“The disregard for law is itself part of the agenda,” offered Harvard Law School Professor Jody Freeman. “They do not seem to care whether they violate the Constitution and statutes, make mistakes, do irreparable harm. That recklessness itself sends a message.”
READ MORE: Trump Calls to ‘Immediately’ Eject ‘Disruptors’ as GOP Congressman Faces Boos, Backlash
The Times editors noted that many of the scholars first flagged the Trump administration’s efforts to end birthright citizenship, calling the move, “a direct assault on the Constitution,” and “an extraordinary thing” done in “his first hours back as president.”
“From there,” the editors noted, “it’s a straight shot to deporting people without due process.”
“Due process dates back to Magna Carta,” wrote one expert, Professor Kim Wehle of the University of Baltimore School of Law, “it is the essence of liberty. Without it, America is not a democracy as freedom itself is at the arbitrary whims of a malevolent ruler.”
Stanford University Law School Professor Shirin Sinnar added, “If the administration can simply spirit people outside the United States in violation of the law and then disclaim any power to bring them back, then no U.S. citizen is safe from similar actions.”
Experts also sounded alarms over Trump and his administration attacking law firms, universities, and the Associated Press, and the firings at independent agencies. Also, the “defiance of our judiciary and constitutional system; the undermining of First Amendment freedoms,” and, “the impoundment of federal funds authorized by Congress; the erosion of immigrant rights; and the drive to consolidate power.”
The Times notes also that there are “concerns about whether court orders will be ignored by the Trump administration or the courts will be undercut by Congress, which controls their budgets and can, under the Constitution, largely dictate which cases federal courts can hear — and can’t.”
The Times, and the experts, suggested Trump’s use of tariffs is suspect.
READ MORE: ‘What Fascism Looks Like’: Bondi’s War on Judiciary Is ‘Red Line’ for Democrats
“Most important is the coming showdown over the president’s asserted power to impose, rescind, raise and delay tariffs on imports,” wrote Stanford Law School Professor Michael McConnell. “The administration can point to broad statutory language authorizing specific import restrictions under emergency circumstances, but the president has no inherent constitutional authority to tax imports. No statute expressly authorizes the president to impose tariffs for the nonemergency purposes of raising revenue, improving our long-term balance of trade or winning unrelated concessions on miscellaneous issues.”
And on the “Big Picture,” Rutgers Law School Professor Katie Eyer added: “The use of the levers of government to exact retaliation for private vendettas — sending people to foreign prisons without due process, dismantling agencies and refusing to spend appropriated funds, and pervasive retaliation for the exercise of First Amendment rights … are the actions of an authoritarian government, not a liberal democracy.”
Professor David Pozen concluded “that the U.S. constitutional system is on the verge of an authoritarian takeover. ‘Authoritarian constitutionalism’ is not an oxymoron; unless the Trump takeover is repelled, our system will retain the familiar constitutional forms while becoming ever more illiberal, undemocratic and corrupt.”