Concerns at Harvard Law School Over Political Retribution Against Legal Representation
Updated March 29, 2025, at 10:30 p.m.
Faculty Condemn Government Actions
In a recent open letter to the students of Harvard Law School (HLS), approximately 70 percent of the institution’s professors voiced their alarm regarding actions taken by the federal government against lawyers and law firms representing clients at odds with the agenda of former President Donald Trump. This statement, signed by 82 active professors out of 118, characterizes these governmental measures as a threat to the rule of law.
Signatory Highlights and Faculty Concerns
While interim Dean John C.P. Goldberg did not add his name to the list of signatories, the letter received backing from key leadership figures at HLS, including all three deputy deans, I. Glenn Cohen, Maureen E. “Molly” Brady ’08, and John Coates, as well as former Dean Martha L. Minow. The faculty expressed acute concern over what they see as severe challenges to legal norms, insisting that intimidation tactics against individuals based on political beliefs and public activism undermine fundamental legal principles.
Impact on Legal Firms Highlighted
The Trump administration’s recent directives targeted prominent law firms, revoking security clearances for their lawyers and barring them from government premises. In response, firms like WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, and Perkins Coie have initiated lawsuits against such government orders, while others, including Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, have opted for negotiation, agreeing to contribute significant resources to causes aligning with the Trump administration.
Concerns Among International Scholars
Notably, international students at Harvard have conveyed trepidation over their ability to engage in public discourse on controversial subjects, particularly in the wake of incidents involving immigration enforcement targeting students advocating for political causes. An example cited involves Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University graduate student recently detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement following his participation in a pro-Palestine protest.
The Constitutional Basis for Political Disagreement
The faculty’s letter emphasizes that the U.S. Constitution was crafted to safeguard political dissent without retribution. The assertion that “neither a law school nor a society can properly function amidst such fear” underscores the critical role of civil liberties in educational and democratic settings.
Reactions from HLS Faculty
Professor Andrew M. Crespo, an HLS faculty member, remarked that the unanimity reflected in this statement is unprecedented in his decade-long tenure. Fellow professor Benjamin M. Eidelson noted the significance of expressing alarm over perceived assaults on civil liberties, emphasizing that many faculty members who signed are not typically involved in such public declarations but felt compelled to address the issue directly with students.
