The Peter Gruber Rule of Law Clinic focuses on maintaining U.S. rule of law and human rights commitments in four areas: national security (e.g., torture, drones, Guantanamo); anti-discrimination (especially against religious and ethnic groups); climate change (maintaining U.S. commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement); and democracy promotion (voting rights, redistricting). Projects include litigation, policy advocacy, and strategic planning matters. Please see the Peter Gruber Rule of Law Clinic Documents Depository1.
The Clinic has been working in various ways to support Harvard and its international students in the case of President and Fellows of Harvard College vs. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Among other products, the Clinic helped to produce various social media projects, including this graphic depicting international leaders who have studied at Harvard University7, making clear the costs of the U.S. government’s actions.
In May, the clinic helped file an amicus brief9 supporting the plaintiffs-appellees in National Treasury Employees Union v. Russell Vought8. Cooperating Attorney Jed Glickstein ’13 and the clinic represented 16 former officials of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) who have worked at the agency across several administrations. The brief argues that the CFPB’s current leadership has undertaken a drastic reduction-in-force operation that de facto guts a congressionally created agency by preventing the agency from carrying out its statutory obligations. The brief argues that absent congressional action to amend or repeal the agency’s substantive statute, this abdication of the CFPB’s duty to discharge its statutory responsibilities is unlawful. Amici encourages the appeals court to affirm the district court’s order for preliminary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs. Oral arguments in this case were held before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on May 16.
In April, the Clinic filed an amicus brief11 supporting the plaintiffs in Perkins Coie LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice10. Along with the Susman Godfrey law firm, the clinic represented 27 former government officials who have worked at the most senior levels across both Democratic and Republican administrations. The brief argued that President Trump’s executive order sanctioning the Perkins Coie law firm is not based on any legitimate national security concern, and furthermore, violates the separation of powers and constitutes an unconstitutional bill of attainder. The clinic also filed its amicus brief challenging three other executive orders in adjacent cases: Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr v. Executive Office of the President12, Jenner and Block LLP v. Department of Justice13, and Susman Godfrey LLP v. Executive Office of the President14. On May 2, Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered summary judgment in favor of Perkins Coie, granting the plaintiff’s request for a permanent injunction against the government’s ability to enforce the executive order. In the court’s opinion15, Judge Howell cited the Clinic’s amicus brief. Subsequently, Professor Harold Hongju Koh — alongside clinic members Inbar Pe’er ’25 and Fred Halbhuber ’25 — published two related articles in Just Security — the first piece16 (also cited in Judge Howell’s opinion) expanding on the brief’s historical bill of attainder argument, and the second piece17 arguing why the broader collection of law firm “deals” with the Trump Administration are unenforceable.
In February, the clinic and law firm Arnold & Porter filed an amicus brief19 supporting the plaintiffs in Talbott v. Trump18. The clinic represented the former Secretary of the Army and former Secretary of the Air Force as amici. The brief argued that President Trump’s executive order restricting transgender service members from continuing to serve in the military deserved no deference by courts on national security grounds because it was rooted in defective process and discriminatory animus. On March 18, Judge Ana C. Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction, citing the clinic’s brief in her opinion20.
V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump
In April, Clinic Director and Supervising Attorney Harold Hongju Koh6 filed a brief as amicus curiae before the Court of International Trade in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, arguing that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to impose across-the-board tariffs in the name of national emergency. A panel of the Court of International Trade (CIT) held a hearing for May 13 on all pending motions, including the motion for preliminary injunction. Related amicus briefs were filed in May in (1) Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (District Court for the District of Columbia), with a hearing scheduled before Judge Rudolph Contreras on May 27 to consider the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction and the government’s motion to transfer the case to the CIT; (2) California v. Trump (Northern District of California), with a hearing scheduled on June 26 before Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley to hear the California Attorney General’s preliminary injunction motion; and (3) Emily Ley Paper Inc. v. Trump (Northern District of Florida), in which the government has a pending motion to transfer jurisdiction to the CIT). The story of the amicus brief is told in a New York Times article21 and podcast22.
Other Activities:
In May, Cooperating Attorney and incoming Peter Gruber Distinguished Senior Rule of Law Fellow Bruce C. Swartz23 ’79, spoke on a panel titled “Rule of Law: Help or Hinderance to National Security?24” at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
Cooperating Attorney and incoming Peter Gruber Rule of Law Fellow Sonia Mittal25 ’13 spoke on a panel for Stanford Law School’s Neukom Center for the Rule of Law on “The First Hundred Days of the Trump Administration26,” regarding “The Independence of the Legal Profession, DOJ and Law Firms.”
Clinic Director and Supervising Attorney Professor Harold Hongju Koh delivered a graduation speech27 on the rule of law crisis at the 2025 George Washington Law School Commencement (starting at 55:20).
Ways to Engage
Our Clinics
Yale Law School offers more than 30 clinics that provide students with hands-on, practical experience in the law on a diverse range of subject matters.
Yale Law School enhances the intellectual life of its academic community by sponsoring a variety of centers, programs, and workshops, inspired by the interests of its faculty and students.
