Autocratic Legalism Kim Lane Scheppele Upd [verified] Here

Title: The Architecture of Authorship: Kim Lane Scheppele’s Autocratic Legalism and the Façade of the Rule of Law

What is autocratic legalism? — Core definition and central claims

Kim Lane Scheppele 's foundational text on Autocratic Legalism was published in the University of Chicago Law Review The University of Chicago Law Review Core Thesis of the Text Scheppele defines autocratic legalism autocratic legalism kim lane scheppele upd

Kim Lane Scheppele autocratic legalism as the process where democratically elected leaders use their electoral mandates to systematically dismantle the constitutional system through legal and constitutional means. Unlike 20th-century autocrats who relied on military coups, modern "legalistic autocrats" weaponize the law to consolidate power, hollowing out liberal democratic values while maintaining a "veneer of legality". Paper Outline: Autocratic Legalism I. Introduction Definition

First, the definitional slippage objection. Some scholars argue that Scheppele’s framework risks labeling any aggressive, partisan use of legal power as “autocratic.” If a democratic majority packs a court (as FDR threatened), is that autocratic legalism? Scheppele answers with a distinction of entrenchment versus policy. FDR wanted to change policy; Orbán wanted to change the ability of future majorities to ever change policy again. The latter is autocratic legalism; the former is constitutional hardball within a still-competitive system. Paper Outline: Autocratic Legalism I

The rise of autocratic legalism poses significant threats to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Some of the dangers include:

Scheppele’s 2026 response: “Autocratic legalism is not the only weapon. But it is the most deceptive. It convinces international donors, domestic investors, and the mildly content middle class that nothing is wrong because everything is legal.” Scheppele answers with a distinction of entrenchment versus

Unlike the 20th-century model of the coup d'état—where tanks roll into the capital and the constitution is suspended—modern autocrats (like Viktor Orbán in Hungary or Vladimir Putin in Russia) use the existing legal system to dismantle democracy.