Additional History of Interference

Since publication of the examples of interference set out in the 2010 Kuehn and McCormack article, additional law clinics, public and private, have had to fend off efforts to interfere in their operations.

In 2024, the First Amendment Clinic at the University of Georgia was ordered by the law school’s dean to withdraw from a public records lawsuit it had filed against the Atlanta Police Foundation. The purported reason given for forcing the clinic off the case was because the university itself is subject to the public records law, thus allegedly creating a conflict of interest. The clinic, however, had handled other public records cases without objection from the university and news reports noted that the Police Foundation’s attorney was a former Georgia supreme court chief justice who graduated from the law school and was also teaching at the school.
Timothy Pratt, University of Georgia Pulls out of ‘Cop City’ Lawsuit Requesting Public Records, The Guardian (May 17, 2024)

In 2025, the Tulane Environmental Law Clinic again had to defend itself, this time from actions of the university. Reportedly out of concern that the Louisiana governor was going to withhold state funding for a Tulane redevelopment project unless Tulane’s president “did something” about the clinic, the law school dean issued a directive restricting the ability of the clinic to communicate about its work. All external communications of the clinic that were not related to the representation of an existing client were ordered to be pre-approved by the dean, a restriction on the work of the clinic’s faculty that does not apply to any other members of the faculty. In response, the clinic’s research scientist and director of community engagement, whose published research on racial disparities in petrochemical industry jobs was singled out by the governor and Tulane’s president as problematic, resigned and filed a complaint with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges alleging that her academic freedom had been violated by the university’s restrictions.
Jack Brook, Tulane Scientist Resigns Citing University Censorship of Pollution and Racial Disparity Research, Associated Press (June 11, 2025)

Also in 2025, a U.S. House of Representatives committee sent a letter to Northwestern University requesting budgets, donor information, policies, and personnel data on its Community Justice and Civil Rights Clinic. The committee accused the clinic and law school of engaging in antisemitic conduct and left-wing political activism in the clinic’s representation of the organizers of a pro-Palestine protest that were arrested for blocking traffic to the airport. The clinic director filed suit to enjoin the committee from obtaining the requested information, arguing that the committee’s action illegally singled out the clinic for its views and legal positions in violation of the First Amendment. On the eve of a preliminary hearing on the matter, the committee withdrew the request.
Karen Sloan, US House Probes Northwestern’s Law Clinic Over Representation of Pro-Palestinian Protestors, Reuters (Apr. 1, 2025); Karen Sloan, US House Drops Probe for Data from University Over Pro-Palestinian Protestor Cases, Reuters (Apr. 10, 2025)

At a later hearing held by the same House of Representatives committee, a representative told the chancellor of City University of New York (CUNY) that it should discipline or fire a law clinic director for the clinic’s representation of Mahmoud Khalil, a lawful permanent resident who was detained by the Trump administration and facing deportation for helping lead pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University.
Vimal Patel, et al., 3 University Leaders Reject GOP Lawmakers Accusations of Inaction on Antisemitism, N.Y. Times (July 15, 2025).

A 2025 executive order prohibited providing services to or for the benefit of the International Criminal Court (ICC), subjecting those who provide services to civil and criminal penalties. Although not explicitly directed at law clinics, the order’s scope applied to the work of CUNY’s Human Rights & Gender Justice Clinic since the clinic’s work had included submitting amicus briefs in support of positions taken by the ICC Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) and providing education, training, analysis, and other services to the OTP. The clinic director and another CUNY law professor filed suit seeking a permanent injunction against enforcement of the order. The court granted the injunction, finding that the executive order unconstitutionally regulated protected speech based on its content. Opinion & Order, Rona v. Trump, No. 25-CV-03114 (S.D.N.Y. July 30, 2025).

Publicized Examples of Law Clinic Interference
from Kuehn & McCormack,
24 Geo. J. Legal Ethics at 92-95