BATTLE FOR THE RULE OF LAW: My Path to Public Interest and the Role of the Rising Lawyers

Over the past few months, I have reflected deeply on my next career move after graduation. Initially, I considered returning to Big Law to quickly pay off my student loans. However, I have come to realize that my skills are needed elsewhere. Recent attacks on the rule of law by President Trump, including Elon Musk’s attempt to illegally access Department of Treasury documents and efforts to pressure the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) into dropping corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, highlight the urgent need for legal professionals committed to upholding democracy. It has become clear to me that state attorneys general and public interest litigation groups are the last line of defense against the erosion of the rule of law. Consequently, I have shifted my job search away from big law firms and toward public interest work, focusing on opportunities with state attorneys general, judiciary counsel positions with Democratic members of Congress, and fellowships with organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). I believe my legal training should be dedicated to litigation efforts that counteract this administration’s threats to democracy.

On February 10, 2025—just 21 days after taking office—President Trump sent a memo to Acting U.S. Attorney for SDNY, Danielle Sassoon, requesting the dismissal of all pending charges against Mayor Adams. These charges include conspiracy to defraud the United States, wire fraud, soliciting campaign contributions from foreign nationals, and bribery. Notably, the Department of Justice (DOJ) did not assess the strength of the evidence before making its request. Instead, it justified its position on two grounds: (1) concerns that the timing of the charges, coupled with public actions by the prior U.S. Attorney Damien Williams, could undermine the case’s integrity, and (2) the belief that the indictment the indictment of Mayor Adams has “unduly restricted [his] ability to devote full attention and resources” to President Trump’s immigration agenda. The charges were to be dismissed “without prejudice,” meaning they could be refiled at any time. In effect, this move allows Trump to monitor and possibly control Adams' compliance with his administration’s policies—an act that constitutes textbook quid pro quo corruption.

In protest of this blatant abuse of prosecutorial discretion, Sassoon submitted her resignation, stating that dismissing the charges was improper. She emphasized that the indictment was returned by a constitutionally sound grand jury and that SDNY possessed strong evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Her resignation deeply resonated with me for two reasons. First, Sassoon, a Federalist Society member and former law clerk to Justice Scalia, was handpicked by the Trump administration to lead SDNY. In today’s hyper-partisan political climate, the fact that even a conservative legal figure found the administration’s interference unacceptable underscores the severity of the threat to the rule of law. Second, as a law student and former SDNY intern, I take immense pride in the office’s work and understand the duty of prosecutors to enforce the law in good faith. Political interference in prosecutorial decisions not only undermines the integrity of the legal system but also erodes public trust in law enforcement—trust that is essential to a functioning democracy. Given these circumstances, I feel compelled to contribute in any way I can.

One major critique of relying on public interest litigation to counter Trump’s threats to the rule of law is the possibility that he may simply ignore unfavorable court orders. Over the past month, Trump has signed numerous executive orders that have faced immediate legal challenges in federal courts. Critics argue that he might choose to act beyond his constitutional authority and disregard judicial rulings that do not align with his agenda. In such cases, courts can impose fines, sanctions, or even jail time. However, to my knowledge, no sitting president has ever faced such penalties. While this concern is valid, litigation remains one of the most powerful tools available to uphold the rule of law. The ACLU currently has over 434 active legal actions against Trump, and state attorneys general across the country are filing lawsuits to mitigate the damage caused by his administration. Although these legal battles will be difficult, history has shown that the pursuit of justice, equality, and democracy has never been easy—but perseverance has always led to progress.

With great power comes great responsibility. As law students and future legal professionals, we have been given the tools to fight for justice, and we must take a stand. That stand will look different for everyone. Some may join litigation-focused nonprofits or state attorneys general who are challenging the administration. Others may work with community organizers, legislators, or members of Congress committed to defending democratic institutions. And above all, we must exercise our right to vote in the upcoming midterm elections. Doing so will ensure that democrats retake the U.S. House of Representatives, which will act as a check against any legislation Trump seeks to push though Congress. The rule of law is not self-sustaining; it requires vigilance, dedication, and courage. My decision to pursue a career in public interest law is driven by the recognition that democracy does not defend itself—we, as future lawyer, must be the ones to do so.