executive branch

CASA’s reasoning left open multiple avenues for litigants seeking to obtain broad relief against unlawful executive actions

Coverage of key developments, including in concise “What Just Happened” expert explainers, legal and policy analysis, and more. Check back frequently for updates.

Trump’s strike on Iran violated constitutional limits on the president's unilateral power to take the nation to war—an authority the Framers reserved for Congress.

After Trump v. CASA, the APA offers a path to nationwide relief against unconstitutional executive actions—without relying on universal injunctions.

Tracking the use of State power requires systematically identifying linkages between individual developments and broader trends. This graphic offers one method.

Even amid domestic retrenchment of business regulation and oversight, corporations must adhere to internationally recognized human rights responsibilities.

The Trump administration's efforts to circumvent the APA's notice-and-comment requirements risk setting a damaging precedent.

Consolidating cases allows a clear, expedited path to Supreme Court review, helping quickly address matters involving executive orders.

It is essential to understand the line between war and peace, scrutinize the application of wartime powers, and interrogate the president’s assertions when he triggers them.

Business leaders face now face a pivotal choice: unite to defend democracy or stay passive. They should look to civil society for inspiration on how to take meaningful action.

The Trump administration has operated outside the appropriations process and congressional oversight through its law firm settlements.

Federal courts possess a number of tools to ensure the U.S. government is held responsible for failing to enforce or execute court orders.