Laurent Pech πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦'s Avatar

Laurent Pech πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦

@profpech

Professor of Law, Dean of @ucdschooloflaw.bsky.social, Senior Research Fellow at the CEU Democracy Institute in Budapest, and co-director of @goodlobbyprofs.bsky.social. Usual disclaimers.

6,240
Followers
1,361
Following
1,433
Posts
06.10.2023
Joined
Posts Following

Latest posts by Laurent Pech πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦ @profpech

Yesterday was an exchange of rhetoric from both sides

But now Orban seems to have escalated into outright hostage taking in order to pressure Ukraine to restore the damaged Russian oil pipeline

This is madness and the EU needs to come down on Orban like a ton of bricks

06.03.2026 06:03 πŸ‘ 41 πŸ” 22 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
Opinion | Trump Has Elite Law Firms on a Punishing Merry-Go-Round

β€œGiving in to bullies has its own costs, not least because bullies are never satisfied with just a single capitulation. Especially when, as with the law firms, the bully β€” that is, the Trump administration β€” was obviously playing a weak legal hand from the start.”

www.nytimes.com/2026/03/05/o...

05.03.2026 14:15 πŸ‘ 380 πŸ” 106 πŸ’¬ 17 πŸ“Œ 7

Yeah, this clip will certainly be shown as evidence at the trials.

05.03.2026 15:13 πŸ‘ 4114 πŸ” 929 πŸ’¬ 62 πŸ“Œ 19

excellent deep dive into all of the ways that the Trump administration has used the federal budget to keep punishing critics and trying to bend them to his will. FWIW, this is precisely how Viktor Orban crushed the opposition in Hungary 15 years ago. The national budget is a powerful weapon.

05.03.2026 14:19 πŸ‘ 287 πŸ” 133 πŸ’¬ 5 πŸ“Œ 4
Preview
The majority of UK academic institutions now no longer post on X - LSE Impact For the first time, more UK universities and associated organisations are inactive on X than active.

πŸ’₯New post | The majority of UK academic institutions now no longer post on X

✍️ @andytattersall.bsky.social

#AcademicSky #X #AcademicSocialMedia

03.03.2026 12:00 πŸ‘ 121 πŸ” 49 πŸ’¬ 2 πŸ“Œ 5

Sorry. Just seeing this. Let’s ask @jakubjaraczewski.bsky.social as currently too busy myself drinking β˜•οΈ in the 🌞😎

04.03.2026 07:33 πŸ‘ 1 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
When it comes to ending elite impunity, the US could learn from the UK | Jan-Werner MΓΌller British institutions can keep politicians somewhat in check. But in the US, shamelessness has become contagious

What and who enables elite impunity in the United States? and what explains the shamelessness?

03.03.2026 21:41 πŸ‘ 14 πŸ” 5 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 1

Once again, I think 13 Justices is the wrong way to do it. It appears like "packing" the court. If you go with *100* Justices, who handle cases on panels of 9, you fix the underlying problem of a small number of justices. www.techdirt.com/2026/01/16/t...

04.03.2026 07:01 πŸ‘ 361 πŸ” 91 πŸ’¬ 31 πŸ“Œ 3
04.03.2026 07:05 πŸ‘ 7 πŸ” 4 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

All you need is the willingness to follow orders; being actually smart or good at the law is irrelevant.

03.03.2026 14:01 πŸ‘ 390 πŸ” 133 πŸ’¬ 22 πŸ“Œ 9

Hannah Arendt spent years arguing that authoritarians put personal loyalty above merit, and in fact prefer appointing mediocrities, since their incompetence helps guarantee their loyalty and serves authoritarian goals by further hollowing out institutions, and Liberty U. Law made it career advice.

03.03.2026 15:11 πŸ‘ 337 πŸ” 127 πŸ’¬ 6 πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
DOJ Drops Defense Of Biglaw Executive Orders, Leaving Capitulating Firms Holding $940 Million Bag - Above the Law Turns out the Executive Orders Biglaw feared aren’t worth defending after all.

If any of the quisling firms have any balls (in a gender-neutral colloquial sense) at all, they'll run right into court and sue to set aside they deals they made as coercive and unconscionable

abovethelaw.com/2026/03/doj-...

03.03.2026 15:30 πŸ‘ 16 πŸ” 6 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
DOJ is dropping its appeals of losses in the law firm order cases. What does it mean? And: The Supreme Court heard arguments Monday over a federal law banning firearm possession by users of illegal drugs.

On Monday at Law Dork, I covered DOJ’s decision to drop the law firm executive order case appeals and the SCOTUS oral arguments over the federal law barring gun possession by users of illegal drugs.

03.03.2026 15:45 πŸ‘ 118 πŸ” 27 πŸ’¬ 5 πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
How the Destroyers of Academic Freedom Masquerade Themselves as Its Victims

Or to be associated with Orban's autocratic regime in any situation

verfassungsblog.de/how-the-dest...

03.03.2026 08:07 πŸ‘ 1 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

Spot-on analysis.

03.03.2026 08:05 πŸ‘ 1 πŸ” 0 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

As long as one gives the EU plausible deniability, authorities pursuing an autocratisation agenda or in this instance, further consolidating autocratic structures, the EU will look other way/take no action re de facto authoritarian judicial "reforms". The VC has also largely failed at this task too

03.03.2026 08:04 πŸ‘ 5 πŸ” 3 πŸ’¬ 0 πŸ“Œ 0

For the record I don’t think Orban will cancel the election. But I hope that my esteemed colleagues rushing to give talks at Mathias Corvinus Collegium ask themselves whether it is the right time to be associated with a Fidesz academic front.

03.03.2026 07:21 πŸ‘ 13 πŸ” 6 πŸ’¬ 1 πŸ“Œ 0

β€œWe cannot say that the United States’ actions are against international law, but we condemn Iran’s retaliatory actions as against international law,” is neither a coherent nor a compelling position.

01.03.2026 21:15 πŸ‘ 2118 πŸ” 629 πŸ’¬ 28 πŸ“Œ 0

Asserting international law only when it is in your own/allies interest means not being committed to international law at all. Being dragged into a war by more powerful allies against direct interest and better judgement means having no strategic autonomy. The UK Govt is in a mess.

01.03.2026 22:56 πŸ‘ 206 πŸ” 72 πŸ’¬ 4 πŸ“Œ 2
Preview
International law died yesterday. And Europe helped kill it. Macron, Starmer and Meloni gave their stamp of approval to Trump's illegal invasion of Venezuela to run the country and take its oil. Who can take them seriously now on Russia's invasion of Ukraine?

European leaders have acquiesced to the end of international law. They can no longer credibly speak of upholding it. This has implications for πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦.

We need to be realistic about this, and decide where we go from here.

There is no more international law.

01.03.2026 19:35 πŸ‘ 41 πŸ” 15 πŸ’¬ 2 πŸ“Œ 1

Rhetorically at least, Merz’s statements are a green light to Putin in Ukraine and to Trump himself in Greenland. They also consign the resounding success of the JCPOA, including Germany’s laudable participation in it, to the dustbin of history.

02.03.2026 05:48 πŸ‘ 270 πŸ” 85 πŸ’¬ 11 πŸ“Œ 6

the United States is now the most destabilizing global force, with Russia, and transatlantic leaders know it. yet they stand by, either approving or expressing milquetoast concern. Absolutely pathetic, self-defeating & dangerous.

02.03.2026 08:19 πŸ‘ 68 πŸ” 21 πŸ’¬ 2 πŸ“Œ 1
New: Pentagon briefers acknowledged to congressional staff in a briefing Sunday that Iran was not planning to strike US forces or bases in the Middle East unless Israel attacked Iran first, multiple sources to 
@NatashaBertrand
, 
@jmhansler
 & me. 

Why this matters: It undercuts Trump admin’s argument on Saturday that Iran was planning to potentially strike the US preemptively & posed an imminent threat:

New: Pentagon briefers acknowledged to congressional staff in a briefing Sunday that Iran was not planning to strike US forces or bases in the Middle East unless Israel attacked Iran first, multiple sources to @NatashaBertrand , @jmhansler & me. Why this matters: It undercuts Trump admin’s argument on Saturday that Iran was planning to potentially strike the US preemptively & posed an imminent threat:

No legal basis under either U.S. or international law to attack Iran.

No attack upon the U.S., nor imminent threat of one, nor any congressional authorization.

And the USG ought to be able to restrain the principal recipient of U.S. military assistance from provocations.

All utterly lawless.

02.03.2026 01:46 πŸ‘ 266 πŸ” 122 πŸ’¬ 9 πŸ“Œ 5

It’s worth emphasizing that the Supreme Court has propped up this presidential lawlessness.

When Congress enacted limits on presidential power in 1973, it included an enforcement provision. If the president said there’s an β€œemergency from attack” and Congress disagreed, it could order troops home.

28.02.2026 12:39 πŸ‘ 2525 πŸ” 538 πŸ’¬ 22 πŸ“Œ 8

Why are we attacking Iran?
*they are amassing nuclear weapons which Trump said he destroyed last year, after abandoned a successful Obama-era agreement to stop production
*they interfered in our elections - like China and Russia?
*Trump supports the oppressed Iranian people - like the Venezuelans?

28.02.2026 13:40 πŸ‘ 254 πŸ” 47 πŸ’¬ 7 πŸ“Œ 0

β€œTo initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

Judgment of the international Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Germany.

28.02.2026 13:04 πŸ‘ 609 πŸ” 296 πŸ’¬ 2 πŸ“Œ 17

this is so weak, passive, & unconvincing.

28.02.2026 10:33 πŸ‘ 119 πŸ” 17 πŸ’¬ 7 πŸ“Œ 1

Yet another war in violation of international law. Without the pretence of seeking UN approval.Unleashed while talks ongoing, making a laughing stock of diplomacy. Trump’s foreign policy is sickeningly predictable, with the only predictable effect being a decline of US power

28.02.2026 08:43 πŸ‘ 42 πŸ” 20 πŸ’¬ 3 πŸ“Œ 1

illegal use of force by every measure, domestic & international

28.02.2026 07:05 πŸ‘ 491 πŸ” 211 πŸ’¬ 4 πŸ“Œ 3

CNN reporting that the strikes on Iran tonight are joint US and Israeli strikes.

Which means Donald Trump should be impeached for a third time.

What he has done tonight is illegal under the US constitution and the UN charter.

28.02.2026 07:16 πŸ‘ 8162 πŸ” 2399 πŸ’¬ 258 πŸ“Œ 123