In this new podcast, Professor Amar offers weekly in-depth discussions on the most urgent and fascinating constitutional issues of our day. He is joined by host Andy Lipka and frequent guests: other top experts, including Bob Woodward, Neal Katyal, Nina Totenberg, Lawrence Lessig, Michael Gerhardt, and many more.

Season 4, Episode 20 (Show 177): Trials, Pardons, and Elephants

May 15, 2024

We bring you a report  from an on-site observer of  the Trump trial in NYC, discuss some of its constitutional issues, and answer user questions that turn out to be connected as well.

CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.

Donald Trump’s New York trial – where a conviction would be federal pardon-proof – has proceeded apace. we are pleased to bring a report to you from the trial itself, introducing you to one of Professor Amar’s star students in the process. Are there constitutional issues stemming from the trial?  You bet, and we address some of them. Meanwhile, a number of listeners have asked similar questions recently, so we take that family of questions on, and sure enough, there’s a lot to discuss there as well.

(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)

Show Notes:

Submit a Question for Professor Amar
Subscribe to “Amarica’s Constitution” by clicking “Subscribe” or “Follow” after selecting your preferred podcast app below.

Season 4, Episode 19 (Show 176): Immunity versus The Rule of Law

May 8, 2024

We conclude our analysis of the oral argument in Trump v. US, the immunity case, with more clips from the Justices and commentary by Prof. Amar.

CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.

This week we continue with clips from the oral argument in the immunity case (Trump v. United States).  Most of this week’s clips come from attorney Dreeben (representing the Special Counsel, and therefore the people of the United States), and some of the Justices have at him, sometimes in way Professor Amar finds wrong-headed or worse.  Our own argument is brought to bear upon these controversies, and a consistent way of addressing these questions emerges.  Clarity on the argument emerges.  

(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)

Show Notes:

Season 4, Episode 18 (Show 175): Sense and Nonsense on Immunity

May 1, 2024

The oral argument in Trump v. United States, the ex-president’s quest for immunity from criminal prosecution, was held.  Here, part 1 of our analysis.

CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.

The nine Justices heard arguments on ex-president Trump’s attempt to claim a sweeping immunity from criminal liability and prosecution.  We present clips from the argument and our commentary, including some historical analysis of claims that Benjamin Franklin spoke in favor of such a thing (spoiler:  NO), and many other claims which we had predicted in recent weeks.  There is clear acceptance of some of the arguments we have made by many of the Justices, but questions remain to be sure, and we begin to address them in this first part of a planned two-episode arc of clip and comment.  

(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)

Show Notes:

Season 4, Episode 17 (Show 174): Don’t Touch but Do Convict

April 24, 2024

The Court is primed for oral argument in the Trump immunity case.  We therefore complete our framework which enables examination of such questions.

CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.

As we close in on oral argument in the Trump v. United States case wherein Trump asserts some sort of permanent presidential immunity, we close out our preparatory analysis.  Impeachment’s relationship to criminal prosecution is explored.  Some founding-era conversations involving, for example, John Adams, inform our discussion.  Does the concept of double jeopardy play a role? Our hope is that these episodes prepare you for the oral argument with a comprehensive theory of how no one is held above the law even as a powerful executive sits high in We the People’s government.

(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)

Show Notes:

Season 4, Episode 16 (Show 173): Crime Means Punishment

April 17, 2024

More on presidential immunity, official acts, criminal vs. civil offenses, and fundamental principles that should guide the Court when oral argument begins soon in Trump’s attempt at a permanent get out of jail free card.

CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.

As oral argument in the Trump immunity case draws closer, we continue our discussion of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. Do so-called “official acts” during a president’s tenure in office raise special considerations? Constitutional text seems to offer an easy way out of the case – but does it, really –  and historical precedents enter the conversation.  Ultimately, some basic principles of immunity emerge, which leaves us with a much richer understanding of the many issues than a bland look the text alone would  Meanwhile, a listener’s question takes us abroad for a change, and developments in Arizona remind us of several of our podcast’s recurring themes.

(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)

Show Notes:

Season 4, Episode 15 (Show 172): Immunity Therapy

April 10, 2024

Is the president immune from crimes he commits as president? Trump says yes.  We take a close look, both originalist and precedential.

CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.

Former President Trump is making an extraordinary claim to the Supreme Court: that he is immune from criminal prosecution for crimes he may have committed while president. The Court has agreed to hear arguments on this proposition on April 25.  We begin the preparation by posing the questions and taking them on. Professor Amar is an expert on Presidential immunities.  Our analysis goes through originalism as well as precedent.  This and subsequent episodes form an oral amicus brief of sorts – another “master class,” if you will.  We also take a listener’s question seriously as we address the Comstock Act and related issues.

(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)

Show Notes: