Changhao Wei and Ying Sun, "Why Did China Amend Its Law Governing Delegates to People’s Congresses?" and 習近平在慶祝全國人民代表大會成立六十周年大會上的講話 [Xi Jinping, Speech at the meeting celebrating the 60th anniversary of the founding of the National People's Congress]]

 

Pix credit Qiushi here (1st Session of the NPC 1964)

 

Changhao Wei and Ying Sun, recently published a quite useful article: "Why Did China Amend Its Law Governing Delegates to People’s Congresses?" (The Diplomat 10 April 2025).  The institution of peoples congresses, like other institutions in China, change with the times and reflect the Basic Line of the vanguard Communist Party as it formulates policies for implementing Marxist-Leninism in every stage of historical development of the nation.  Wei and Sun provide a powerful description of that evolution in this portion of the historical development of China in its present "new era." 

In recent years, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) under General Secretary Xi Jinping has directed – and the people’s congresses have experimented with – various reforms, both procedural and institutional, to improve “delegates-related work,” though the specifics vary across jurisdictions. The overall goal is to make sure that delegates can – and do, in fact – effectively discharge their representative duties within politically acceptable bounds. Last month’s Delegates Law amendments codified many of those reforms, thereby both placing them on a strong legal footing and upgrading them to statutory requirements that apply nationwide. We highlight a few in this article. (Wei and Sun, "Why Did China Amend Its Law Governing Delegates to People’s Congresses?").

Wei and Sun make several important points. The first touches on the cultures of responsiveness of NPC delegates within the parameters of the political system. The second is the role that NPC delegates play both in giving effect to the overall leadership of the Communist Party of China, and as a key element of the recently elaborated whole process people's democracy (for discussion on WPPD see, e.g. here). The alignment of the two gives efforts at elaborating a structure of Chinese socialist democracy its contemporary character. The third touches on the way in which delegates contributes to the four organs theory of the NPC system (which Wei and Sun nicely summarize)--as political organs [政治机关] responsive to CPC guidance and leadership, as that conscientiously adhere to the leadership of the CPC; as state organs [国家权力机关] that give effect to the administrative elaboration of political policy and direction; as mass line organs [工作机关] that give effect to the core policy of people being the masters of the state; and as representative [代表机关] that undertake the duties vested in them by the State Constitution in their function as organs of popular power. Wei and Sun also do an excellent job of describing the nature and fiction of the two contacts principle around which delegate duty may be elaborated--that state organs must maintain close contact with NPC delegates and that NPC delegates must maintain close contacts with the people. This principle is hardened into a set of rules. These rules, in turn, become part of a function of performance measures against which delegate 's work is measured. "The Delegates Law has long required directly elected delegates to keep the voters informed of their work and obligated the delegates’ supervisory bodies to organize regular briefing sessions with their constituents. The amendments not only extended the reporting obligation to cover all delegates (however selected), but also tasked their supervisory bodies with “keeping records on their performance of duties” and “disclosing delegates’ basic information and performance information to the public.”" (Wei and Sun, "Why Did China Amend Its Law Governing Delegates to People’s Congresses?").

For those seeking an excellent summary of NPC reforms the article is worth a read. It may be accessed in the original HERE, and follows below.

For those seeking to delve a little deeper into the theoretical basis of these reforms, it may be worth considering an official English translation (published 2020 from the Chinese version published in 2019 No. 18) of  Xi Jinping, Speech at the Ceremony Marking the 60th Anniversary of the National People's Congress (5 September 2014) and published in Qiushi and available online HERE. It is edited from the original Chinese version which also follows below. The General Secretary laid out the pathways to reform that have appeared with regularity over the last decade, and the conceptual structures under which such reform is undertaken.

A country's political system is determined by and reacts to its economic and social foundations. Among all of a country's various institutions, its political system plays the key role. Therefore, to boost confidence in the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics, we must first boost our confidence in the Chinese socialist political system, and enhance our confidence and determination in following the Chinese socialist path of political advancement. [一個國家的政治制度決定於這個國家的經濟社會基礎，同時又反作用於這個國家的經濟社會基礎，乃至於起到決定性作用。在一個國家的各種制度中，政治制度處於關鍵環節。所以，堅定中國特色社會主義制度自信，首先要堅定對中國特色社會主義政治制度的自信，增強走中國特色社會主義政治發展道路的信心和決心。]

*       *       *

Developing socialist democracy is an essential part of our efforts to modernize China's governance system and governance capacity. The overall goal of comprehensively furthering reform, which was set at the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee, is comprised of two parts: improving and developing the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and modernizing China's governance system and capacity. The first part designates the fundamental orientation, which is the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics and no other path. The second part makes clear the direction we will take to improve and develop the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics under the guidance of this fundamental orientation. Together the two parts constitute a whole. [發展社會主義民主政治，是推進國家治理體系和治理能力現代化的題中應有之義。黨的十八屆三中全會提出的全面深化改革總目標，是兩句話組成的一個整體，即完善和發展中國特色社會主義制度、推進國家治理體系和治理能力現代化。前一句規定了根本方向，我們的方向就是中國特色社會主義道路，而不是其他什麼道路。后一句規定了在根本方向指引下完善和發展中國特色社會主義制度的鮮明指向。兩句話都講，才是完整的。]

The key to developing socialist democracy is to increase and expand our strengths and unique qualities, rather than weaken and reduce them. We must uphold the core role of the Party in exercising overall leadership and coordinating overall initiatives, enhance its capacity to govern in a scientific, democratic, and law-based manner, and ensure that the Party leads the people in governing the country effectively, so as to prevent the Chinese people from becoming aimless like a ship with nobody at the helm or divided like a heap of loose sand. We must uphold the principle that all power in the country belongs to the people, guaranteeing not only law-based democratic elections but also law-based democratic decision-making, democratic management, and democratic supervision, so as to avoid the phenomenon of politicians making wild promises in the elections process that they are unable to deliver later on. We must uphold and improve the system of multi-party cooperation and political consultation under the leadership of the CPC, and strengthen cooperation and coordination of various social forces, so as to avoid factional strife between different political parties. We must uphold and improve the system of regional ethnic autonomy, consolidate socialist ethnic relations of equality, solidarity, mutual assistance, and harmony, and enable people of all ethnic groups to live together happily, work together for a common cause, and develop in harmony, so as to guard against estrangement and conflict between ethnic groups. We must uphold and improve the system of community-level self-governance, develop community-level democracy, and ensure that the people directly exercise their democratic rights in accordance with the law, so as to prevent the emergence of a situation in which the people have nominal but not real power. We must uphold and improve the system and principles of democratic centralism, urging various state organs to become more capable and efficient, enhance coordination and cooperation, and form strong synergy in national governance, so that they do not hold each other back or waste valuable energy on quibbling with each other. [發展社會主義民主政治，關鍵是要增加和擴大我們的優勢和特點，而不是要削弱和縮小我們的優勢和特點。我們要堅持發揮黨總攬全局、協調各方的領導核心作用，提高黨科學執政、民主執政、依法執政水平，保証黨領導人民有效治理國家，切實防止出現群龍無首、一盤散沙的現象。我們要堅持國家一切權力屬於人民，既保証人民依法實行民主選舉，也保証人民依法實行民主決策、民主管理、民主監督，切實防止出現選舉時漫天許諾、選舉后無人過問的現象。我們要堅持和完善中國共產黨領導的多黨合作和政治協商制度，加強社會各種力量的合作協調，切實防止出現黨爭紛沓、相互傾軋的現象。我們要堅持和完善民族區域自治制度，鞏固平等團結互助和諧的社會主義民族關系，促進各民族和睦相處、和衷共濟、和諧發展，切實防止出現民族隔閡、民族沖突的現象。我們要堅持和完善基層群眾自治制度，發展基層民主，保障人民依法直接行使民主權利，切實防止出現人民形式上有權、實際上無權的現象。我們要堅持和完善民主集中制的制度和原則，促使各類國家機關提高能力和效率、增進協調和配合，形成治國理政的強大合力，切實防止出現相互掣肘、內耗嚴重的現象。]

Wei and Sun provide an excellent analysis of the way on which these conceptual structures now manifest themselves in the latest set of reforms in the NPC system.

 

CfP (Convocatoria) for Dossier No. 38--Iuris Dictio Journal: Acceso a la Justicia y Equidad: Nuevas Perspectivas Jurídicas e Interdisciplinarias para la Inclusión de Personas en Situación de Vulnerabilidad [Access to Justice and Equality: New Legal and Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Inclusion of People in Vulnerable Situations]

 

I am delighted to pass along this CfP (Convocatoria) for Dossier No. 38--Iuris Dictio Journal: Acceso a la Justicia y Equidad: Nuevas Perspectivas Jurídicas e Interdisciplinarias para la Inclusión de Personas en Situación de Vulnerabilidad. In English here: Access to Justice and Equality: New Legal and Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Inclusion of People in Vulnerable Situations.

The Iuris Dictio Journal invites researchers and specialists in Law, Human Rights, Legal Sociology, Social Work, Psychology, Political Science and related areas to submit their articles for consideration as part of Dossier No. 38 of the review, which will be published in June 2026 and will address access to justice and equality from new legal and interdisciplinary perspectives focused on the inclusion of people in vulnerable situations. In the last few years, systems of justice in Latin America, particularly in Ecuador, have shown with growing clarity their structural weaknesses in assuring true, equal, indiscriminate access to all people, especially those who belong to historically excluded groups or who are in vulnerable conditions. While changes focused on strengthening human rights and the democratization of justice have been promoted, these advancements still coexist with socioeconomic, cultural and territorial barriers that further exclusion and inequality in the actual practice of law. For example, in rural areas of Ecuador, the limited presence of legal institutions and the scarcity of public defenders create obstacles to the effective practice of legal access. * * * In the face of this scenario, it is fundamental to promote a critical and interdisciplinary view that articulates a legal analysis with input from sociology, anthropology, psychology, social work, education and public health, among other fields. The idea is to explore paths that rethink the access to justice from an intersectional perspective that recognizes the diversity of experiences and contexts, and which advances towards a truly inclusive model of justice that is participatory and centered on human dignity.

La revista Iuris Dictio invita a investigadores y especialistas en Derecho, Derechos Humanos, Sociología Jurídica, Trabajo Social, Psicología, Ciencia Política y áreas afines a enviar sus artículos para ser considerados como parte del Dossier Nº 38 de la revista, que será publicado en junio de 2026 y que versará sobre el acceso a la justicia y la equidad desde nuevas perspectivas jurídicas e interdisciplinarias orientadas a la inclusión de personas en situación de vulnerabilidad. En los últimos años, los sistemas de justicia en América Latina, y de forma particular en Ecuador, han mostrado con creciente nitidez sus debilidades estructurales para asegurar un acceso real, equitativo y sin discriminación a todas las personas, especialmente a quienes pertenecen a grupos históricamente excluidos o en condiciones de vulnerabilidad. Si bien se han promovido cambios orientadas a fortalecer los derechos humanos y la democratización de la justicia, estos avances aún conviven con barreras socioeconómicas, culturales y territoriales que profundizan la exclusión y la desigualdad en el ejercicio real de los derechos. Por ejemplo, en zonas rurales del Ecuador, la limitada presencia de instituciones judiciales y la escasez de defensores públicos obstaculizan el ejercicio efectivo de acceder a la justicia. * * * Frente a este escenario, resulta fundamental promover una mirada crítica e interdisciplinaria que articule el análisis jurídico con aportes desde la sociología, la antropología, la psicología, el trabajo social, la educación y la salud pública, entre otros campos. Se trata de explorar caminos que permitan repensar el acceso a la justicia desde una perspectiva interseccional, que reconozca la diversidad de experiencias y contextos, y que permita avanzar hacia un modelo de justicia realmente inclusivo, participativo y centrado en la dignidad humana.

Articles may be written in English or Spanish and must be submitted by 15 December 2025. 

The full CfP (English and Spanish) follows below.

Just Released and Available for Download: OMFIF's Report, "Shaking Foundations: Reserves Management in a Volatile World" (2025)

Delighted to pass along notice of the distribution of OMFIF's Report, Shaking Foundations: Reserves Management in a Volatile World (2025). It makes for quite interesting reading. This from the Press Release:

OMFIF’s Global Public Investor has tracked central bank reserve managers’ investment strategies since its inception in 2014. In the first edition of the report, we wrote ‘diversification into different sectoral and geographical categories is increasing’ owing to ‘sub-optimal returns from traditional currencies and instruments’ in a low interest rate environment. Over a decade later, this year’s GPI report shows the appetite for diversification continues. But for very different reasons. The foundations of the global economic order, underpinned by globalisation and the US dollar, are shaking. Protectionism, geopolitical tensions and volatile policy-making are becoming norms. In this environment, close to 60% of surveyed central banks are seeking to diversify their portfolios within the next two years and 96% regard US tariffs as a major geopolitical concern.

Reserve managers expect to move away from dollars and towards other currencies, although this shift will be gradual. The dollar was the only currency that saw demand fall this year, while a net 16% of survey respondents intend to add to their euro holdings over the next two years. Gold is shining brightest as a diversifier and 32% of central banks expect to increase their holdings in the short term. Meanwhile, the shift towards corporate bonds and equities is likely to materialise over the next decade rather than in the next few years. This year’s report also incorporates insights from public pension and sovereign funds to understand how they are responding to new pressures. Their views paint a similar picture – more hesitance on US investments and less willingness to add risk to portfolios. In total, the GPI draws on insights from 90 official institutions with over $7tn in assets.This provides an important snapshot into how public investors at the heart of global finance are adapting to current conditions.

 

 

The key findings as reported: 

• 90 official institutions surveyed for the GPI 2025 report, comprising 75 central banks and 15 public pension and sovereign funds, with more than $7tn in assets combined.
• 31% of reserve managers up from just 4% last year now cite geopolitics as the top factor shaping investment decisions, with 96% of central banks flagging tariffs and trade protection as the main concern.
• While 70% of central banks are increasingly worried about the US political environment, over 80% still see the dollar as offering safety and liquidity, pointing to gradual diversification rather than rapid de-dollarisation.
• A net 16% of central banks plan to raise euro holdings – more than for any other currency while Germany ranks as the most attractive developed market among public funds.
• 32% of central banks expect to increase gold holdings in the next 12–24 months, with over 20% forecasting the price to surpass $3,500 per ounce.
• A net 28% of reserve managers aim to raise allocations to government bonds, while public funds are holding steady across asset classes amid ongoing market uncertainty.

The Table of Contents and Foreword follow below. 

Submission Drafts Posted: "The Current State and Future Trajectories of HRDD Laws: New Legal Norms on Human Rights Due Diligence" (Larry Catá Backer and Claire Methven O'Brien, eds; forthcoming)

 

Pix credit Larry Catá Backer Tabula se Saint Miquel (13th Century Catalonia)

 

I am delighted to announce that we are able to make available a number of submission drafts of the contributors to the book,  The Current State and Future Trajectories of HRDD Laws: New Legal Norms on Human Rights Due Diligence, that  Claire Methven O'Brien and I are editing ,for expected publication with Routledge at the end of 2025 or beginning of 2026 (assuming everything goes smoothly.

This volume brings together some of the most innovative and forward thinking academics, practitioners, and commentators, from universities, non-governmental organizations, business, and government. Their objective, collectively, was to contribute to a deeper understanding on the emerging law of due diligence. More specifically, contributors were asked to explore, from their own perspective on the ways in which due diligence as a legal concept touches on the human rights and sustainability elements of economic activities whether undertaken by public or private organizations. In each case, and from a variety of perspectives, each of the contributors explores the rich possibilities of due diligence within the business and human rights environment. Each explores the level and forms of attentiveness (diligence) as a function of the quantity and focus requires (the diligence that is due) in a variety of context that are defined both by the legal environment in which it is embedded and the normative principles that due diligence is meant to fulfill. The structuring is important—while one cannot ask due diligence to do more than it is capable—conceptually—one can certainly exercise a judgment about the way that one applies values and societal objectives within its somewhat capacious possibilities. With that fundamental understanding of structure, form, character, possibility, and limitation, no really useful understanding of, or effective application of due diligence is possible. (Backer & O'Brien, Chapter 1, Introduction).

Foe those interested we have posted material to the book website. All materials can be accessed through the Book Project Homepage which includes information about the overall project (Introduction to the Project) and its background (Project Genesis and Background). Information, including video links may be found about the introducory workshop held in 2023 here: Workshop-Conference: The current state and future trajectories of human rights due diligence laws: New Legal Norms on Human Rights Due Diligence(6 September 2023; virtual)

Information about the book may be accessed through the link: Book: The Current State and Future Trajectories of HRDD Laws: New Legal Norms on Human Rights Due Diligence. These include Contents and Chapter Abstracts; Selected Chapter Submission Drafts; and informaiton about our extraordinary group of Contributors.

Contributions include: 

 Chp 1: The Current State, and Future Trajectories, of Human Rights Due Diligence Laws —  Larry Catá Backer and Claire Methven O’Brien ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 2: Human Rights Due Diligence in the UNGPs – Larry Catá Backer ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 3: State Obligations and Corporate Responsibilities: The Notion of “Due Diligence” in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights – Maria Monnheimer  ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 4: Lessons for Human Rights Due Diligence from Due Diligence in International Environmental Law – Sara Seck ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Ch.5:  The Growing Relationship Between Tort Law and Human Rights Due Diligence – Carola Glinski ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 6: Can the French Law of Vigilance Apply to the Extraterritorial Violations of Indigenous and Human Rights? – Cannelle Lavite and Jérémie Gilbert ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 7: Supply Chain Due Diligence Law in Germany – Birgitte Spiesshofer ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 8: Mandatory HRDD in the E.U. – Claire Methven O’Brien

Chp 9: US Measures to Give Legal Effect to Human Rights Due Diligence – Rachel Chambers and Eric R. Biel

Chp 10: Horizontal Legislation: Cascading Due Diligence Through Model Contract Clauses– Susan Maslow, Patrick Miller, and David Snyder ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 11: What are the Lessons from Sectoral Approaches to Human Rights Due Diligence – Justine Nolan and Shelley Marshall ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 12: Human Rights Due Diligence and Disclosure Regimes – Rachel Chambers and Anil Yilmaz Vastardis ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp 13: Human Rights Due Diligence and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct – Jernej Letnar Černič ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

Chp.14: The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (EU) and Its Impact on Barriers to Remedy in Transnational Litigation – Lucas Roorda

Ch.15 Epilogue: Legalising Human Rights Due Diligence from the Present  into an Uncertain Future — Larry Catá Backer and Claire Methven O’Brien ACCESS SUBMISSION DRAFT HERE

The Book Table of Contents (with Abstracts) and links to selected submission drafts follow below as well. Draft Frontmatter may be accessed HERE.

Newsom v. Trump, No. 25-3727 D.C. No. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (9th Cir, slip op. 19 June 2025)--Part 4, Appellate Court Opinion

 

Pix credit here

 For those following the legal battle over the scope of Presidential authority to intervene in local civil disturbances, and the manner in which that may be attempted (Newsom v. Trump NO. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB  (N.D.Cal.)), the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals heard argument on 17 June 2025, on the President's challenge to the granting of a temporary restraining order against federal interference in the management of local civil disturbances in Los Angeles (Order Granting Plaintiffs' Application for Temporary Restraining Order). The federal appellate Court issued its opinion on 19 June 2025 (Newsom v. Trump, No. 25-3727 D.C. No. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (9th Cir, slip op. 19 June 2025)), granting the stay of the TRO, which was described in this way in press reporting: 

A federal appeals court on Thursday cleared the way for President Trump to keep using the National Guard to respond to immigration protests in Los Angeles, declaring that a judge in San Francisco erred last week when he ordered Mr. Trump to return control of the troops to Gov. Gavin Newsom of California. In a unanimous, 38-page ruling, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the conditions in Los Angeles were sufficient for Mr. Trump to decide that he needed to take federal control of California’s National Guard and deploy it to ensure that federal immigration laws would be enforced.  * * *  Mr. Trump praised the decision, saying in a Truth Social post late Thursday that it supported his argument for using the National Guard “all over the United States” if local law enforcement can’t “get the job done.” Mr. Newsom, in a response on Thursday, focused on how the appeals court had rejected the Trump administration’s argument that a president’s decision to federalize the National Guard could not be reviewed by a judge.(NYT here)

 As described in the reporting, there appeared to be a little positive for all actors in this litigation. The Opinion did a nice job of describing itself:

We now grant the stay. Defendants have made the required strong showing that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their appeal. We disagree with Defendants’ primary argument that the President’s decision to federalize members of the California National Guard under 10 U.S.C. § 12406 is completely insulated from judicial review. Nonetheless, we are persuaded that, under longstanding precedent interpreting the statutory predecessor to § 12406, our review of that decision must be highly deferential. Affording the President that deference, we conclude that it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority under § 12406(3), which authorizes federalization of the National Guard when “the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.” Additionally, the Secretary of Defense’s transmittal of the order to the Adjutant General of the California National Guard—who is authorized under California law to “issue all orders in the name of the Governor,” CAL. MIL. & VET. CODE § 163—likely satisfied the statute’s procedural requirement that federalization orders be issued “through” the Governor. And even if there were a procedural violation, that would not justify the scope of relief provided by the district court’s TRO. Our conclusion that it is likely that the President’s order federalizing members of the California National Guard was authorized under § 12406(3) also resolves the Tenth Amendment claim because the parties agree that the Tenth Amendment claim turns on the statutory claim. (Newson v. Trump, supra, slip op. at 2-3).

This does not resolve the case, of course.  It merely denies protection pending the resolution of the merits of the  case before the district court, subject to appeal.  But the resolution of the TRO, given its standard of review, does provide the district court whose order was stayed, and the parties, with a substantial amount of "instruction" about the way that the appellate panel views the case and the law.  It is likely that this will affect litigation strategy with respect to the development of evidence and of its presentation in narrative made compelling under a specific interpretive reading of both (1) the substance of the statutory authority invoked; and (2) the issue around intent (and the continually developing jurisprudence of (at least Presidential) abuse of discretionary authority. 

Pix credit here

That last point, perhaps is among the most lasting from this litigation.  And one other--the determination by the court that it has at least some authority to hear the case and review presidential action. That is critical with respect to the interpretation of both the scope of constitutional and statutory authority that serves as a basis for Presidential action (see, e.g., slip op. at 28-30).  More broadly the court also reserved to itself (as it must one would think) a role in the determination of whether the exercise of discretion in invoking an authority to act, and the way that this authority is actually deployed, "exceeded the scope" of authority--effectively built around notions of abuse of authority. "A simple definition of the abuse of power is the misuse of a position of power to take unjust advantage of individuals, organizations, or governments. . . The common element of these crimes is deceit." (here).

In this latter sense, one might perhaps be inclined to consider the extent to which the opinion appears to contribute to a principle now hardening, that is grounded on the presumption that all administrative discretionary action is reviewable by the courts, that this presumption may be set aside in very few areas (which future litigation will refine),  that review of discretionary decisions are subject to a highly deferential standard, but that evidence of bad intent can overcome that deferential standard, especially where the intent has no relation to the exercise of authority (e.g., to punish political enemies, to advance personal advantage, corruption, etc. again to be refined by the courts in case specific context) but possibly grouped together around an "exceeded the scope of their statutory authority" standard (see, eg slip op. at 36). Interesting as well is the effective embrace of a well worn juridical principle that not all defects in process compliance are fatal (slip op., pp. 30-35).

Pix credit here

 

The full text of the appellate court opinion may be accessed HERE. 

Access 

Part 1: Newsom v. Trump NO. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California) Filed 10 June 2025--Part I

Part 2:  Newsom v. Trump NO. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (N.D.Cal.)--Part 2; Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order; Order Granting Plaintiffs' Application for Temporary Restraining Order; Emergency Motion Under Circuit Rule 27-3 for Stay Pending Appeal; Order Granting Emergency Motion

Part 3: Newsom v. Trump NO. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (N.D.Cal.)--Part 3; Oral Argument Before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

Part 4:  Newsom v. Trump, No. 25-3727 D.C. No. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (9th Cir, slip op. 19 June 2025)

 

CfP (Convocatoria) for Dossier No. 37--Iuris Dictio Journal: Legal Education in Latin America: Challenges and Demands (La educación jurídica en América Latina: retos y desafíos)

 

 

I am delighted to pass along this CfP for Dossier No. 37--Iuris Dictio Journal: Legal Education in Latin America: Challenges and Demands. In Spanish here: La educación jurídica en América Latina: retos y desafíos.

Iuris Dictio Law Journal invites lawyers, professors, and researchers in Legal Education and Pedagogy, as well as in related fields, to submit academic research articles to be considered for its Dossier Nº 37, to be published in June 2026. The aim of this dossier is to contribute to debate and reflect on the contemporary challenges facing legal education in Latin America. Today, education represents one of the priority areas on government agendas because the human capacities acquired through it have implications in areas such mobility and performance in the labor market. According to UNESCO guidelines, as well as the Convention against Discrimination in Education and SDG 4 of the 2030 Agenda, there are three lines of action to achieve educational inclusion: coverage, diversity, and quality. However, the implementation of public policies varies according to the level of development of countries.

La revista Iuris Dictio invita a abogados/as, docentes e investigadores/as en Educación y Pedagogía jurídica, así como en áreas afines a enviar artículos de investigación académica para ser considerados como parte del Dossier Nº 37 de la revista, que será publicado en junio de 2026 cuya pretensión es coadyuvar al debate y la reflexión sobre los retos y desafíos contemporáneos a los que se enfrenta la educación jurídica en América Latina. Hoy en día, la educación representa una de las áreas prioritarias en las agendas gubernamentales, debido a que las capacidades humanas adquiridas a través de ella tienen implicaciones en la movilidad y el desempeño en el mercado laboral. De acuerdo con las directrices de UNESCO, así como la Convención relativa a la lucha contra las discriminaciones en la esfera de la enseñanza y el ODS número 4 de la agenda 2030 existen tres líneas de acción para lograr la inclusión educativa: cobertura, diversidad y calidad. Sin embargo, la implementación de políticas públicas varía de acuerdo al grado de desarrollo de los países.

Articles may be written in English or Spanish and must be submitted by 15 December 2025. 

The full CfP (English and Spanish) follows below.

Newsom v. Trump NO. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (N.D.Cal.)--Part 3; Oral Argument Before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

 

Pix credit here

 

I have been following the course of the political battle between the Givernor of California and the President of the United States over the rules and limits of Presidential authority, including rules relating to Presidential exercises of discretion and the bases for that exercise, around decisions to deploy military force within the United States. 

Having stayed the issuance of the district court's temporary restraining order issued against the President, the Court of Appeals heard argument on 17 June 2025. In excellent reporting for Politico, Appeals court seems poised to side with Trump on National Guard deployment in LA: A panel of two Trump appointees and one Biden appointee was openly skeptical of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s legal challenge, Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein nicely summarized the arguments. Their reporting may be accessed online HERE and is reproduced below.  More reporting here, here, and here.

The central issues--the scope of discretion and the reasonableness of the basis for its exercise appeared to be center stage. The further development of these concepts will have an effect well beyond the state of civil unrest in Los Angeles.  

 Access 

Part 1: Newsom v. Trump NO. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California) Filed 10 June 2025--Part I

Part 2:  Newsom v. Trump NO. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (N.D.Cal.)--Part 2; Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order; Order Granting Plaintiffs' Application for Temporary Restraining Order; Emergency Motion Under Circuit Rule 27-3 for Stay Pending Appeal; Order Granting Emergency Motion

Part 3: Newsom v. Trump NO. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (N.D.Cal.)--Part 3; Oral Argument Before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 

Part 4:  Newsom v. Trump, No. 25-3727 D.C. No. 3:25-cv-04870-CRB (9th Cir, slip op. 19 June 2025)

"G7 Leaders’ statement on recent developments between Israel and Iran": Agit-Prop Communications and the Banalities of its Performance in Theaters of the Absurd

 

Pix credit here

I have been speaking to the way the global political elite, and their supporting claques, have become-- perhaps because of the environment in which it finds incentives and rewards, perhaps because it appears to be the surest road to managerial stability of populations that need curation for optimal behavior--they have merged with, the forms and attitudes of agit-prop that, once an instrument of revolutionary challenge to an established order, has become the manifestation of both order and its challenge in a manged way. (See here, here, here, here, here, and here). Agit prop does not "belong" to or as a manifestation of any specific system--it is as at home in Marxist-Leninist systems as it is in liberal democratic, theocratic, post-colonial, or techno-bureaucratic systems. Cultural and operational manifestations of communication tend to be trans-cultural, feeding of of its manifestations across systems in a sort of dialectics of action that then serves as the pathways for communication, meaning and management of subject populations--at least in the thought-actions of those with a hand at the controls of the management of human aggregations--states, enterprises, NGOs, and other sorts of organized human collectives. 

The G7--both in its meeting and written memorialization of those inter-personal encounters (formal and informal)--suggests one of the forms of official agit-prop that now serves as the means through which transaction-based (e.g., here, here) encounters between formal and informal actors, each constituted as the expression of political. social, economic, and cultural power. There is nothing historically unique about this meeting of the G7 in terms of its performance and communication form, broadly understood. Sometimes the agit prop sounded in opera; sometimes in musical comedy; and sometimes in avant garde absurdist theater (Absurdist in its more ancient sense as something discordant and therefore incapable of being heard in a meaningful way). President Trump appears to add, in the view of some it appears, a measure of theatricality that moves the production from high society theater to vaudeville somewhere in the early 20th Century Bowery. district of New York. That adds to the fun. 

Pix credit here

The agit-prop was delightfully press worthy, and constructed for easy transposition to the social media organs  which serve as the virtual theatre space in which agit-prop is performed. And every theatre piece has a set if principal actors, in this case around the President of the United States.  President Trump was up to the task: arriving onstage to a Greek chorus style set piece, making press worthy declarations about the way that history ought to be written, and of the role of Russia within the Group. Russia's tragedy was a worthy sub-text to this overall cavalcade of cacophony adding a musical element to the proceedings--and aided by the rest of the theatre troupe for the entertainment of their audience and amplified by the media "stage hands" that bring these set pieces to life (eg here). 

Pix credit here

That last bit added a bit of hilarity to the early (first act) of the G7 meeting (in the sense of its Roman celebrations of Hilaria, "times of pomp and rejoicing; there were public ones in honor of Cybele at the spring equinoxes as well as private ones on the day of a marriage or a son's birth." (here):President Trump's lamentation about Russia being booted out of the then G8 which caused great sadness; less perhaps than the invasion and annexation of Crimea, and other portions of Ukraine and Georgia, etc. An excellent piece of agit-prop that served both to teach and provoke. There was more of course--the Real Housewives of New Jersey analysis of interpersonal relationships, capped by a bit of drama, the quick exit of President Trump to attend top weightier matters shortly after he arrived (here). There was more, of course--the fight over whether there was agreement about Ukraine (hardly likely given President Trump's lamentation of President Putin's melancholia for his post annexation removal from the G8, now G7 (here), bit see here in another moment of theater). 

The agit-prop of this meeting of the G7, though, was also manifested in text. That text, the G7 Leaders’ statement on recent developments between Israel and Iran(16 June 2025) managed to combine both a bricolage of multi-vector bromides that appear to sell to factional intelligentsia that appear to dominate  G7 national "brain trusts" and the expectations of a news oriented social media with its own expectations of how "leader speak" ought to be scripted. Here is the text: 

G7 Leaders’ statement on recent developments between Israel and Iran
June 16, 2025 Kananaskis, Alberta

We, the leaders of the G7, reiterate our commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East.
In this context, we affirm that Israel has a right to defend itself. We reiterate our support for the security of Israel.
We also affirm the importance of the protection of civilians.
Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror.
We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.
We urge that the resolution of the Iranian crisis leads to a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a ceasefire in Gaza.
We will remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability.

On its face there is nothing objectionable about any single statement in the text.  Indeed, each, singly, expresses some of the highest aspirations of humanity in this current stage of its historical development. The problem, of course, is that those statements can exist in all of their beauty only when they do not come directly in contact with each other.  But everyone who reads it implicitly believes, or is invited to believe in the solidarity of the text as a whole, made rational by their own engagement with text (here). At the same time, the text can be seen to serve as a curtain behind which those who embrace it can choose to order text in any way that serves their interests. Like the keys to a badly tuned piano they can be played in any order and combination in one note or in sequences that  reflect the inner demons of those at the keyboard.

Nonetheless, the G7 Statement invites us to hold fast to the text, even if each of their parts cannot yet come into proximity with any of the others. Perhaps some day they will; but it will be within an ordered reality that for us in the present remains substantially unimaginable--understood in its semiotic sense.  

Just Published: International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Vol 38 Issue 5

 

 Delighted to pass along the announcement fo the publication of Volume 38 Issue 5 of the International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique. Yhe issue includes 15 quite interesting articles that span the length and breadth of legal semiotics.

The table of contents with links to the articles follows below. 

 

President Donald Trump’s Full Remarks at the 250th Anniversary of the US Army Grand Military Parade June 14, 2025, the "No Kings" Response, and Political Communication as Agit-Prop

 

There was much political commotion around the address President Trump was to make at a Military Parade organized for that purpose to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army on a day that coincided with the presidential birthday.   The Video of the remarks: President Donald Trump’s Full Remarks at the 250th Anniversary of the US Army Grand Military Parade (June 14, 2025) were posted to the White House Website. The speech itself was what one might expect on so august an occasion; that is there were no surprises but a thoughtful expression of recognition in the now well known style of President Trump. A transcript follows below with thanks to the web site Roll Call from which it is sourced.

The President celebrated the parade in person and in text, memorials to both of which were inserted into the White House Website in "President Trump Celebrates U.S. Army’s 250th Birthday with Iconic Grand Parade" the text of which follows below. The pictures of the event were especially evocative.

As President Trump said in his remarks: “Tonight, we affirm with unwavering certainty that in the years ahead, and in every generation hence, whenever duty calls and whatever danger comes, the American Soldier will be there. No matter the risks, no matter the obstacles, our warriors will charge into battle, they will plunge into the crucible of fire, and they will seize the crown of victory because the United States of America will always have the grace of Almighty God and the iron will of the United States Army.” ("President Trump Celebrates U.S. Army’s 250th Birthday with Iconic Grand Parade" )

More interesting politically, as one might expect in these times, and certainly now traditional after 2016, also organized around both events were a series of popular manifestation framed under the theme--"No Kings." As reported by the Associated Press, with lots of photos, 

Pix credit AP

Demonstrators gathered in parks and plazas across the U.S. to protest against President Donald Trump. The “No Kings” rallies were organized in nearly 2,000 locations nationwide, including cities, towns, and community spaces. These protests followed recent unrest over federal immigration raids and Trump’s deployment of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles, where tensions escalated with protesters blocking a freeway and setting vehicles on fire.

Pix credit here

And, indeed, as NPR appeared to suggest, the principle value of "No Kings" (other than perhaps for their participants  whose objectives they are in the best position to articulate,  was to produce images. (The Picture Show; Photos: See No Kings protests around the country). Agit-prop (agitation-propaganda with its origins in the 1920s in Western Europe and with a Soviet aspect as well but then sometimes detached from a particular ideological positioning)) remains both a powerful visual tool and a preferred tool for leveraging culture and media technologies to advance political, social, cultural objectives within liberal democratic states. Imagery and performance rather than text and argument, now shape the narratives within which it is possible to believe, and from belief to understand, a world around one in a way that aligns belief with the performance of the act of believing in a thing. This is as much embedded in  the popular manifestations of people as it is in more organized parades. Both tell one more about the state of performing belief than they do about the things shaped by that belief--not text, theater.

One might well wonder whether, given the state of contemporary culture, the most effective forms of political communication are now only effective when projected in the forms and with the sensibilities of agit-prop. There are interesting potential consequences that might be worth considering. Among these are what that turn to agit-prop as discourse might potentially negatively impact the now almost century old inculcation of narratives of "brain trust" governance, experts and fact driven techno-bureaucratic managerialism that appears, just recently to be approaching a climatic (and transformative) moment. Another focuses on the performance of politics through mass manifestations; where decisive communication may turn on the strength, and vigor, of mass mobilizations on the street, the forms and nature of speech and speech acts, and their consequences may change dramatically, and intensely. And yet another, and broader element worth considering are the way that agit-prop may reshape the relationship between popular manifestations and the institutional apparatus of political authority. Lastly, agit-prop as an instrument of institutionalized authority also has a significant effect on that authority and on the institutions for the control and management of which it may be deployed.  This is not to suggest much of anything pointed to the resolution or preferences in this current state of the American national condition--that I leave to others.  It is, however, to note that agit-prop as an instrument does not have a political ideology, but if done well does have an interesting potential effect on the institutionalization of power in liberal democratic states. 

A video of the President's remarks may also be accessed HERE.