Our experts discuss the verdict and what lies ahead. ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌   ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ 
Donate
Brennan Center for Justice
 
Seth Wenig/Getty
Despite the historic circumstances and intense scrutiny, former President Trump’s New York trial unfolded remarkably smoothly and efficiently — a sharp contrast to the snarls and delays plaguing the other prosecutions he’s facing. Most egregiously, the Supreme Court continues to drag its heels on the question of presidential immunity, making it unlikely that Trump will face a federal jury before the election. Regardless of how they decide the immunity case, the justices’ stalling is already one of the most outrageous political interventions in history.
The available crime data does not substantiate misguided claims by some pundits and politicians that immigrants, especially undocumented ones, drive increases in crime. Rather, numerous studies show that there is no link between crime and immigration and that immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated than native-born U.S. citizens. Though all incidents of violence should be taken seriously, policymakers must refrain from blaming migrants as a group for increased crime when research suggests otherwise. Perpetuating this myth stands in the way of effective policies that make communities safer for everyone.
More than 50 countries are holding elections this year, and governments must prepare for the ways that content generated by artificial intelligence will affect campaigns, both positively and negatively. While synthetic media like deepfakes pose clear dangers to democracy, they can also be used to further creative political communication. A new Brennan Center analysis outlines the competing interests that policymakers must keep in mind in determining how to counter the harms of deceptive AI without burdening legitimate forms of expression.
Recent reports that Justice Samuel Alito flew flags associated with the January 6 insurrection at his homes shine a light on just how ineffective the Supreme Court’s new code of ethics is. Though Alito’s conduct is barred by multiple canons of the Court’s self-imposed code, its rules are nonbinding and violations go unpunished. To safeguard public trust in the Court’s legitimacy and impartiality, Congress can and should pass legislation to ensure the justices can be held accountable for breaking the rules they’ve pledged to follow.
While the Supreme Court has made clear it won’t stop partisan gerrymandering, race-based gerrymandering is still unconstitutional. Yet in a recent ruling, the Court found a way to uphold skewed congressional district lines in South Carolina that kicked out some 30,000 Black voters from a district in order to preserve a Republican seat. The decision is as shocking as it is cynical, giving states a free pass to gerrymander communities of color out of power under the pretext of partisanship.

 
What’s Next in the Trump Legal Saga
 
Our latest live virtual event featured a discussion of Trump’s Manhattan conviction, sentencing options, the chances of appeal, and developments in the other Trump prosecutions. The conversation, moderated by Brennan Center Justice Program Senior Director Lauren-Brooke Eisen, features Georgetown law professor Paul Butler, University of Alabama law professor and former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance, and Brennan Center President Michael Waldman. Watch it on YouTube or listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or your favorite podcast platform.
 

 
BRENNAN CENTER ON INSTAGRAM
The president has broad emergency powers that are highly prone to abuse, and Congress needs to pass stricter safeguards for their use. Watch the Brennan Center’s Elizabeth Goitein testify before the Senate about it on Instagram >>
 

 
Events
 
VIRTUAL EVENT: What Originalism Means for Women
Wednesday, June 12, 3–4 p.m. ET
In a few short years, the Supreme Court has upended American law, pursuing a regressive agenda cloaked as a return to the Constitution’s supposed original meaning. The Court’s embrace of originalism poses special risks to women. The 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, exemplifies this threat. The majority failed to grapple with how legal and cultural gender norms have shifted since the founding era. A case in the current term, United States v. Rahimi, is built entirely around the fact that domestic violence was not a crime in the 18th century, taking originalism to its logical but absurd end at the expense of women.
 
Join us virtually for a panel discussion with Madiba K. Dennie, author of the new book The Originalism Trap; Khiara M. Bridges of UC Berkeley School of Law; Emily Martin of the National Women’s Law Center; and Alicia Bannon of the Brennan Center and State Court Report. They will explore the 2023–24 Supreme Court term through the lens of what it means for half the population. RSVP today
 
Produced in partnership with the Birnbaum Women’s Leadership Center

 
 
Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law
120 Broadway, Suite 1750 New York, NY 10271
646-292-8310
Want to change how you receive these emails or unsubscribe? Click here to update your preferences.
Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram LinkedIn YouTube Website