Strategic use of litigation, selective prosecutions, and regulatory threats (‘lawfare’) functions as a tool of political control that systematically degrades an institution’s ability to recruit and retain independent experts. Over time this converts nominally neutral agencies (courts, central banks, regulators) into bodies staffed by loyalists, reducing state capacity and raising the risk of governance failure.
— If lawfare is treated as a structural governance problem, democracies must design procedural safeguards (appointment rules, tenure protection, transparency requirements) to preserve independent judgment and prevent institutional capture.
Alex Tabarrok
2026.01.12
100% relevant
Alex Tabarrok’s post cites the Fed and Chairman Powell as an example and argues lawfare produces toadying and loss of expertise—concrete elements that motivate this governance idea.
← Back to All Ideas