The Law and Political Economy (LPE) Project brings together a network of scholars, practitioners, and students working to develop innovative intellectual, pedagogical, and political interventions to advance the study of political economy and law. Our work is rooted in the insight that politics and the economy cannot be separated and that both are constructed in essential respects by law. We believe that developments over the last several decades in legal scholarship and policy helped to facilitate rising inequality and precarity, political alienation, the entrenchment of racial hierarchies and intersectional exploitation, and ecological and social catastrophe. We aim to help reverse these trends by supporting scholarly work that maps where we have gone wrong, and that develops ideas and proposals to democratize our political economy and build a more just, equal, and sustainable future.
LPE project
Learn
A variety of resources designed to help faculty and students learn more about LPE, including syllabi from LPE and LPE-related courses, primers on topics such as neoliberalism and legal realism, as well as videos from a number of events we have held over the last year.
Go to LearnEngage
Information about the amazing work being done by LPE student groups, as well as guidance on starting a student group on your own campus! A bureau of affiliated professors and practitioners designed to help faculty and students to bring LPE scholars to their campuses!
Go to EngageEvents
A compendium of upcoming (and past) events put on by the LPE Project, LPE student groups, and other organizations in the LPE ecosystem.
Go to Events
Weekly Roundup: Jan 23
Nathan Yaffe on the immigration agencies openly defying federal courts, and Sabeel Rahman and Jocelyn Simonson on the Part IV problem in legal scholarship. Plus, Michael Macher traces the bipartisan origins of Trump's immigration crackdown; Eric Blanc, Claire Sandberg, and Wes McEnany advocate targeting ICE's corporate collaborators; David Austin Walsh discusses socialism in one city; Alondra Nelson examines the Trump administration's more intensive and less transparent approach to AI regulation, William Boyd analyzes the White House's push for emergency auctions in the largest wholesale electricity market in the country, and Vincent Mancini, Marshall Steinbaum, and Robert Stutchbury propose an antitrust exemption for independent contractors.
Beyond Feasibility in Legal Scholarship
Law review articles are expected to conclude with a short section, often “Part IV,” that translates analysis into actionable prescriptions. Though well-intentioned, this convention constrains ambition, sidelines critique, and conflates near-term feasibility with rigor. In a moment of institutional unraveling and authoritarian threat, legal scholars and law review editors should resist the Part IV reflex and make space for bolder analyses, longer horizons, and more collective ways of imagining change.
Immigration Agencies Are Openly Defying Federal Courts
Federal courts have overwhelmingly rejected the Trump Administration's radical expansion of mandatory detention. Despite this, ICE continues to arrest and detain tens of thousands of people each month, effectively nullifying judicial oversight through sheer scale.
2025 Yearly Roundup: Editors’ Picks
Edie, James, Eve, and Liz highlight some of their favorite posts from 2025.