The build-up to the 2020 US presidential elections between Joe Biden and Donald Trump saw disinformation spreading rapidly. Trump-appointee Chris Krebs, the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), had spent years enhancing election security while developing an apolitical reputation. But now Trump was questioning the election’s validity, and his close allies were sharing a false story about a supercomputer flipping votes. How could Krebs respond in a way that preserved widespread trust in the elections?

In late 2002, General Counsel of the US Navy Alberto Mora learned that detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay detention centre were being subject to abuse. Morally outraged and concerned for the impact on US policy aims, Mora also believed that the abuses violated international law. He had a duty to act, but with the techniques approved at the highest levels, how could Mora ensure he made the strongest legal, ethical, and political case possible to end the mistreatment?

The National Rifle Association had historically dominated US political debates around firearm regulation, with their defence of the right to bear arms particularly influential among Republicans. After several mass shootings in the 2010s, new gun safety groups and mobilisation strategies emerged, enabling Democrat Senator Chris Murphy to enter bipartisan negotiations on gun safety in 2022. But the deal was in jeopardy when Republican senators threatened to walk over a policy championed by gun safety advocates. Should Murphy compromise?

While millions of Americans gained health insurance after the Affordable Care Act was implemented in 2010, insurance markets in many states remained tenuous. Halcyon, a fictional US state, saw insurers exiting the system, premiums rising, and the number of uninsured people growing. The head of the state’s health commission was considering a potential solution: would shifting to an ‘opt-out’ system for basic health insurance stabilise the market?

On 9 March 2017, Preet Bharara, US attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), saw he had missed a call from US President Donald Trump. While not illegal, such communication was usually routed through senior intermediaries in the US Department of Justice to avoid political influence in law enforcement. Bharara wanted to avoid any impropriety, but he also knew that President Trump preferred to deal directly with subordinates. Should he return the president’s call?

After Bank of America (BofA) acquired Merrill Lynch, an investment bank nearing collapse during the global financial crisis, it emerged that BofA failed to disclose that $5.8 billion had been earmarked for Merrill’s employee bonuses. BofA later agreed to a $33 million settlement. Now, US federal judge Jed Rakoff, responsible for approving the settlement, questioned if justice was being served when BofA shareholders, the victims of the misrepresentation, would have to pay the penalty. Should he approve the settlement?

At a time when public-sector morale was declining across institutions, the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), the federal prosecutorial authority in New York City, seemed to have bucked the trend. With a reputation for excellence and independence, the SDNY attracted top-tier talent despite relatively low pay, with employees achieving high success rates in trial. This background note explores some of the perceived benefits and critiques of its organisational model.