2025-2026 - ongoing
Retaliatory use of state power against enemies
Using government power to punish perceived enemies is a central democratic-backsliding risk.
Claim
Retaliatory governance turns neutral state power into factional power.
What Happened
Official orders targeted named law firms including Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey.
Why It Matters
A government that targets enemies by faction weakens law, rights, and public trust.
Publication Note
This card now uses official law-firm orders as primary examples. Add separate records for universities, media, civil-service removals, and individual-opponent actions before describing the whole retribution system as fully mapped.
Model Read
Scores are structured judgments. The range widens when confidence falls.
Weighted toward human damage, realized harm, and durability.
Long-term damage discounted for source and causal uncertainty.
High confidence. Better evidence should narrow this band.
Strongest Counterargument
Some targets may have engaged in misconduct; investigating wrongdoing is legitimate if rules are applied neutrally.
Incentive Check
Who benefits from exaggerating this?
Those who call every policy reversal retribution may dilute cases where retaliation is evidence-backed.
Who benefits from minimizing this?
Those who define retaliation as accountability only when their side does it may excuse factional coercion.
Evidence
- Addressing Risks From Perkins Coie LLPprimary proofFederal Register API - Official executive-order record targeting a named law firm.API record is used because the Federal Register HTML page can rate-limit automated checks.
- Addressing Risks from Jenner & Blockprimary proofWhite House - Official order targeting a named law firm.
- Addressing Risks from WilmerHaleprimary proofWhite House - Official order targeting a named law firm.
- Addressing Risks from Susman Godfreyprimary proofWhite House - Official order targeting a named law firm.
Methodology Caveats
Court mapping needed
This card has a legal or constitutional mechanism but no mapped docket record. Add case records before treating legal posture as settled.
Status caution
This card is not settled. Scores should move when a better source changes the event record, legal posture, denominator, or counterargument.
Sources
- Addressing Risks From Perkins Coie LLP
Federal Register API - primary
primary proofOfficial executive-order record targeting a named law firm.
API record is used because the Federal Register HTML page can rate-limit automated checks.
- Addressing Risks from Jenner & Block
White House - primary
primary proofOfficial order targeting a named law firm.
- Addressing Risks from WilmerHale
White House - primary
primary proofOfficial order targeting a named law firm.
- Addressing Risks from Susman Godfrey
White House - primary
primary proofOfficial order targeting a named law firm.
Related Cards
Civil War habeas stress and military tribunals
Civil War emergency government strained habeas corpus, military jurisdiction, and civil-liberty boundaries while the Union fought secession.
Domestic military / National Guard use in political-city conflicts
Domestic military or Guard deployments over state/local objections risk normalizing federal force in political disputes.
Birthright-citizenship executive order
Attempting to change birthright citizenship by executive order is a major constitutional boundary test.
Keep It Independent
Fund The Work Without Buying The Verdict
Support the public ledger, correction work, source retrieval, and model maintenance.
From $500Paid BriefA source-backed brief on one policy, institution, city, candidate, agency, or claim.
From $250/moData LicenseStructured CSV/JSON exports, score history, source metadata, and update logs.
From $750/wkSponsorshipClearly labeled sponsor placements with no score influence and no editorial veto.