What does Juneteenth have in common with today’s immigration raids?

Law is the one thing restraining an American president who regularly exceeds his authority. More than 300 lawsuits against the second Trump administration have led to at least partial relief in a number of domains, including unlawful deportations and purges of federal workers. Those victories are fragile, however, in part because they are subject to review by an often unsympathetic Supreme Court, but also for a deeper reason: They involve too few of us.

The court rulings are the work of a small number of lawyers and judges and are largely opaque to most Americans. In this moment, we must do away with the common assumption that law is best left to lawyers. If we want to sustain the rule of law, we need to participate in it.

The difference between law and legal empowerment is akin to the difference between the Emancipation Proclamation and Juneteenth. Although President Lincoln’s proclamation theoretically went into effect on Jan. 1, 1863, it was not until 2½ years later, when Union troops arrived in Texas, that 250,000 people who were enslaved there could assert their freedom. We remember the proclamation as the first federal legal instrument to reject slavery. We remember Juneteenth for something even more important: the moment when the people whose freedom was at stake were aware of their rights and able to act on them.

To protect democracy in the U.S. today, we need mass legal empowerment. In some places, it’s already begun. Federal workers are learning the details of administrative law so they can respond to arbitrary and unlawful orders. Volunteers working with Organized Communities Against Deportations are helping immigrants to understand their rights and defend one another. In 27 neighborhoods across Chicago, volunteers show up within 10 minutes of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid. When people invoke their rights — for instance, insisting that agents present a valid judicial warrant before entering a private space — ICE agents have sometimes backed away.

You don’t need to read statutes, regulations or court decisions, which are often written in impenetrable legalese. Credible civil society organizations and some government agencies have simplified important laws. To understand the scope of the 1st Amendment, you can turn to plain language explanations from a group called Freedom Forum. A foreign student writing for a university newspaper has the same free-press rights as any other student journalist, for example, and the government cannot use federal funding to regulate the speech of nongovernmental organizations.

To take climate action in spite of the government’s political stance, you can begin by accessing clean energy tax credits in state and federal law. The climate laws we have will become more effective and more durable if more people understand and use them.

The key is not to do it alone. The law protects our rights as individuals, but learning and using law on your own can be intimidating, especially under a government that is hostile toward basic rights. Legal empowerment works when we come together.

With time, legal empowerment can address the root causes of authoritarianism. Political scientists including Cas Mudde and Pippa Norris describe a vicious cycle: Distrust in institutions leads to sympathy for authoritarian politicians, authoritarian politicians undermine institutions, and distrust deepens.

When we use law to tackle problems we face, we reduce the distance between our institutions and ourselves. My colleagues and I recently analyzed interviews with 95 “justice seekers” across Kenya, India and Myanmar — people who used law to address violations of their rights. Of those interviewed, 90% had developed greater confidence in engaging government institutions; 92% said they were either willing to help or had already helped others facing similar problems.

In all three countries, people who faced similar challenges came together to demand improvements in rules and systems. In Kenya, Muslims who had navigated a decades-old discriminatory ID system fought for equal treatment for all. In February 2025, after years of community meetings, marches and parliamentary hearings, President William Ruto abolished discriminatory vetting.

When we do achieve positive changes in law or policy, we shouldn’t assume those changes will implement themselves. Today, Muslims in Kenya are applying for IDs and tracking their experience to make sure the government follows through on the president’s decree. This is the legal empowerment cycle: the journey from knowing and using law to shaping it and back again. By taking part in the legal empowerment cycle, we can build institutions that deserve our trust.

I don’t want to understate the problems with our current legal system or the current administration. Law is overly complicated, unaffordable and, in this moment, often disregarded by those who should be upholding it. But all of that can change. As Juneteenth reminds us, law belongs to the people. If we know it, we can use it. If we use it, we can fix it.

Vivek Maru is founder and chief executive of Namati, a nonprofit organization that convenes the Grassroots Justice Network, which is open to people everywhere.