Society for the Rule of Law

08/26/2026

Gridlock. Delays. Procedural hurdles.

The frustrating parts of American government are often there for a reason.

Yuval Levin explains how the Constitution’s constraints on power protect minority rights, prevent governing mistakes, and ultimately preserve our freedom.

Watch the clip, then the full conversation: https://chkbal.substack.com/p/congresss-core-role-is-negotiation

08/26/2026

The First Amendment protects Americans from being targeted by the government for their political beliefs, regardless of what those beliefs are.

SRL joined several other groups in an amicus brief urging the court in U.S. v. Sant to allow discovery into whether DOJ targeted the defendants because of their political views and protected speech.

When political ideology becomes grounds for government investigation or prosecution, every American's First Amendment rights are at risk.

Read more:

SRL joined an effort to prevent the weaponization of justice against lawful dissent.

08/25/2026

In the latest for our Substack, SRL Board Member Richard Bernstein argues that federal law draws a clear line around election administration: DOJ cannot seize ballots, voting machines, or other original election materials while votes are being counted and certified.

Here's why that safeguard matters for federalism, election integrity, and the Rule of Law:

Preventing DOJ intervention in elections before ballots have been counted and certified is critical to preserving our democracy.

08/24/2026

The Second Circuit has affirmed: John Sarcone III’s continued service as U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York is unlawful.

We filed an amicus brief arguing that his continued appointment violated federal law and the Constitution while risking emboldening politicized investigations and prosecutions.

We welcome the court’s decision upholding the rule of law.

Read more:

The Second Circuit Made a pro-Rule of Law decision in “In re Grand Jury Subpoenas to the Office of the New York State Attorney General v. United States of America.”

08/21/2026

The Society for the Rule of Law regrets today’s order from the Chief Justice allowing the unlawful construction of the president’s ballroom project to continue while litigation progresses.

As we argued in our brief, Congress has not authorized this project. The president’s attempts to escape that plain fact by invoking national security, while trying to outrun court review by rushing construction, should fail.

The Society will continue to argue for the separation of powers and system of checks and balances established by our Constitution.

You can read our full brief here:https://societyfortheruleoflaw.org/wp-content/uploads/26A203-Amicus-Brief-on-behalf-of-Society-for-the-Rule-of-Law-and-Officials.pdf

08/20/2026

Former U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales argues that the answer to an unpopular Supreme Court isn’t retaliation - it’s governing.

In his latest for our Substack, he makes the case for judicial independence, institutional restraint, and reform without retribution.

Read now:

When the Court makes an unpopular decision, it’s up to the Legislative Branch to change the law.

08/20/2026

Why does public interest litigation matter?

Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick explains how public interest lawyers help resolve some of our most consequential legal disputes in the courtroom and how thoughtful, intentional litigation can shape important Supreme Court decisions.

Watch the clip, then the full conversation: https://chkbal.substack.com/p/we-dont-just-have-one-constitution

08/19/2026

“Due process is expensive. It’s time-consuming. But it differentiates us from authoritarian regimes.”

Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick joined the Checks & Balances podcast to explain why judicial independence and the Rule of Law are worth preserving and why Americans can’t afford to take either for granted.

Watch the clip, then the full podcast: https://chkbal.substack.com/p/we-dont-just-have-one-constitution

08/19/2026

The Supreme Court is facing attacks from both the Left and the Right. But is its unpopularity actually evidence that it’s doing its job?

John Vecchione argues that the Roberts Court’s commitment to constitutional limits - not the political zeitgeist - is precisely what makes it so consequential.

Read our latest on Substack:

Both the Left and the Right have their fair share of criticism of the Roberts’ Court. But both are misplaced.

08/18/2026

The Society for the Rule of Law has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court opposing the Administration's effort to continue construction of the White House ballroom.

"The principles at stake here are timeless and fundamental. The Court should 'affirm the primacy of the Constitution's enduring principles over the politics of the moment' (NLRB v. Noel Canning, 573 U.S. 513, 614–15 (2014) (Scalia, J., concurring)—no matter how strongly the President wishes for a ballroom."

Read more:

“The principles at stake here are timeless and fundamental... no matter how strongly the President wishes for a ballroom.”