Coined by a German economist in 1926, Fordism came to describe the dominant political-economic order of the mid-twentieth century. Could “Muskism” play a similar role in the twenty-first? How should we understand its distinctive regime of accumulation, and what kind of social contract does it propose?

The conviction of Anti-ICE protestors on terrorism charges represents a dangerous new front in the Trump administration’s war against the left. Yet it also highlights a longer history: over the past several decades, legislatures and courts have enacted a form of guilt by association that is antithetical to collective political action.

If we are to realize the dream of post-Trump reconstruction, policy reform will not be enough. We must articulate a constitutional politics capable of dismantling both juristocracy and the modern managerial presidency.

The whistle is sounding in Minneapolis. The question before the legal profession is whether we will hear it, amplify it, and act accordingly, or instead insist that the ground eroding beneath our feet is temporary and manageable.

As Republicans tightened work requirements and eligibility rules for Medicaid and SNAP last year, Equifax’s CEO openly celebrated the profits to be made from administering this deprivation. Means-testing and administrative complexity have turned America’s safety net into a lucrative revenue stream for monopolistic private contractors, underscoring the need for public data infrastructure and simpler eligibility rules.

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.