“We need to think about how we rebuild trust as a society”: protecting the rule of law

Most of us have heard of the ‘rule of law’ and instinctively recognise it as a good thing, even if we can’t always say exactly what it means.

For some, the phrase carries a reassuring sense of order and evokes ideas of fairness, justice and equal treatment for us all. 

For me, it means the exercise of power should be regulated by law and be capable of being challenged in courts on the basis that relevant legal norms have not been respected.

In Britain, there’s a strong sense of it being part of national history, going all the way back to Magna Carta. 

But often people aren't entirely sure what respect for the rule of law entails. And as a consequence, when concerns are expressed about the erosion of the rule of law, it can become a problem that isn’t quite grasped. But it’s happening in concrete terms, both in the UK and abroad.

Let’s take a look at what’s happening and what we can do about it.

Our new reality

There’s been a big shift in recent years, even in the well-established democracies, that has resulted in an increasing number of lawyers and judges being attacked. For doing their jobs. For providing a vital public service. For ensuring the rule of law is upheld.

Law firms across the country have had to revise their security procedures – changes that would have been unimaginable just five or ten years ago. Today, entering a law firm or barristers’ chambers can feel very different from before, thanks to the need to protect staff from attack or abuse. 

There's now a greater burden working in areas like immigration and asylum, family law, human rights and criminal law – vital areas where it's key that we have highly skilled and committed solicitors. 

Lawyers and judges in England and Wales must face the possibility of, ‘What happens if I become the focus of a hate campaign on social media?’

If you're a solicitor who represents clients facing deportation proceedings in the UK, you must now worry about sustained online social media abuse, potential death threats and physical violence. 

Threats without borders

If you cast your net more widely, you’ll see a similar problem surfacing in many different countries. Online abuse of lawyers and judges has become common across Europe. Judicial independence has come under pressure, with judges in Poland for example being subject to disciplinary procedures for deciding cases in particular ways.

Until recently, the United States was seen as a nation firmly grounded in the rule of law. But in 2025, judges who rule against the federal government are being subject to serious online and in-person harassment, including targeted and very specific death threats.

Lawyers have also been threatened with criminal prosecution for doing their jobs. Elected politicians are targeting judges through harsh criticism on social media, which encourages others to do the same. Law firms have been targeted and forced to effectively make deals with the administration. Such developments are extraordinary, and until now were unheard of in the US context. 

All of this adds up to an increasingly hostile environment globally for lawyers and judges who are doing their jobs in accordance with the rule of law, representing clients.

This will inevitably influence those aspiring to enter the profession. Yet it is vital that people do take on the challenge because we need good lawyers at the coal face. You have to be brave. This is our new reality. The public need lawyers to be able to do their jobs without fear.

Understanding the present to protect the future 

Few anticipated this shift. The change in dynamics caught many people by surprise.

Several factors are driving the current environment. One is the particular influence of social media: how we communicate and interact with each other online and the social patterns that emerge from it.

Economic stagnation has also played a role. We are witnessing an erosion of social trust, and of trust in institutions – partially driven by social media dynamics and contributing to them.

There’s also greater willingness among politicians to speak with less restraint and focus when commenting publicly on legal issues than would once have been the case.

This too has contributed to a wider unravelling of norms. In particular, it has reinforced hostility towards judges and lawyers amongst certain sections of public opinion, often channelled through social media.

The breakdown of traditional gatekeeper rules in the mainstream media – for better or worse – has also contributed. I wouldn't suggest that things were perfect in the old days, but the decline of those controls has been accompanied by a growing scepticism towards the mainstream press itself.

Rebuilding norms together

Protecting the rule of law, and the lawyers and judges serving it, means we have to try and rebuild norms and make new ones for the social media context. 

We need to think about the language used in major public debates, such as those relating to immigration and asylum, human rights and criminal law.

Some commentary has encouraged a demonisation of particular groups, and the lawyers who represent them.

Since 1945 and reinforced by the civil-rights settlement of the 1960s, there was a broad consensus against group stereotyping. In recent years, that consensus has been eroded.

We need to do our best to shore up norms in terms of the language used about courts and judges, about lawyers representing clients, and about people involved in litigation.

We need to think carefully about how we all – in the legal community and beyond – rebuild trust as a society.