On February 21, 2025, WashU Law hosted the latest installment of its “Beyond the Headlines” discussion series, which assembles relevant faculty members for an insightful discussion of the country’s most pressing legal topics. This event centered on executive orders and presidential power and invited the following faculty members to speak on their area of expertise:
Travis Crum, Professor of Law, Constitutional Law and Birthright Citizenship
Andrea Katz, Associate Professor of Law, Constitutional Law and Presidential Power
Pauline Kim, Daniel Noyes Kirby Professor of Law, Anti-discrimination Law and the Future of DEI
Greg Magarian, Thomas and Karole Green Professor of Law, Constitutional Law and Freedom of Expression
Katie Herbert Meyer, Professor of Practice; Director, Immigration Law Clinic, Immigration, Refugee, and Asylum Law
With moderation by Karen Tokarz, Charles Nagel Professor of Public Interest Law & Policy
Panelists began by addressing the increasing reliance on executive orders by U.S. presidents, outlining both potential consequences and opportunities for constitutional reform. Executive orders have been used by both the Biden and Trump administrations to circumvent Congress, a concerning trend that threatens the federal government’s historic checks and balances.
“We are a democracy with a legislature at the heart of it, and so we need to really try to focus capacity back there and stop relying on this sort of quick fix,” said Professor Katz.
The Trump administration has heavily relied on executive orders to support its immigration agenda, which calls for an end to birthright citizenship and mass deportations. Professor Meyer expressed concern at the legality of some of these orders, calling them an overreach of executive authority and a challenge for a legal fight.
“Some of the immigration orders we’ve seen have been reinstatements of orders from the first Trump administration — but others have gone much further,” said Meyer. “They seem to go directly against the letter of the law and challenge Congress, states, and other organizations to sue them.”
A recurring theme throughout the discussion was the importance of grassroots engagement, with panelists acknowledging rising public frustration and urging attendees to take action at both the local and national levels. “Eventually, people are going to be taking to the streets,” Professor Magarian predicted. “If the investor class gets unhappy with what a Republican administration is doing, the administration is likely to find itself without much of a leg to stand on.”
The panel also examined the rise of the modern Republican Party and its shift toward more populist ideology. They challenged today’s lawyers to think more broadly about the causes of today’s political landscape and reflect on the growing divide in public opinion in the U.S. “We need more introspection,” said Professor Crum. “How do we go from January 6, to President Trump being the Republican nominee, to beating Kamala Harris and getting more votes from Black and Hispanic men than he had before. What is it about the Democratic Party platform that allowed this to happen?”
Finally, the panel addressed new challenges facing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in light of recent legal and political shifts, particularly following the 2023 Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. (SFFA) v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, which effectively ended affirmative action in higher education. Many student attendees expressed anxiety about the state of DEI and fear of their voices becoming diminished.
Panelist Pauline Kim, the Daniel Noyes Kirby Professor of Law and expert in antidiscrimination law and DEI, added that the executive orders surrounding DEI are meant to sow fear. “These executive orders are clearly intended to send a message to private entities that they should bow to the Trump administration’s understanding of all DEI programs as being unlawful,” Kim said. “Many universities, private organizations, researchers, and companies are already sort of backing off of these programs, not because they’re unlawful, [but] because they’re afraid of being investigated.”
This installment of “Beyond the Headlines” was a reminder of the ever-shifting legal and political landscape and the role legal professionals play in preserving democratic norms. As faculty emphasized throughout the panel, today’s students have an obligation to stay informed, speak out against injustice, and participate in the democratic process — especially in times of deep uncertainty.
