Season 4, Episode 46 (Show 203): The Gaetz of Hell
November 20, 2024
The president-elect has been rolling out his intended nominees, and they are sufficiently outlandish to raise a variety of constitutional questions, which we begin to address.
CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.
President-elect Trump has begun to announce his plans for his cabinet and other top appointments for January. Unconventional is a kind word for some of them. And suddenly, in a House where Republicans have a razor-thin majority, there is a resignation – months before it would be required. Why? There are conspiracy theorists for health care positions; admirers of Putin for intelligence posts; newscasters who have never managed anything for one of the largest organizations in the world. The Constitution has something to say about some of these, and we dive in. Suffice to say, the water is murky.
(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)
Show Notes:
Subscribe to “Amarica’s Constitution” by clicking “Subscribe” or “Follow” after selecting your preferred podcast app below.
Season 4, Episode 45 (Show 202): Preview of Peril – Special Live Podcast
November 13, 2024
Amarica’s Constitution goes live at the Yale Club of NYC for a look at the seemingly daily constitutional questions – and potential crises – in the news, and in store.
CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.
The election is behind us, and foreboding fills the air. We are live at the Yale Club of New York City for a live recording, addressing some of the many constitutional matters that are or soon may be front of mind as the seemingly inevitable challenges to norms, rules, and laws await. Matters as wide-ranging as the implications of undivided government; the significance of state constitutional amendments on abortion; Justice Sotomayor’s future; recess appointments – and much more are on our plate this week.
(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)
Show Notes:
Season 4, Episode 44 (Show 201): All This Fuss About the Presidential Election – Special Guests Gordon Wood, Steven Smith, Paul Grimstad
November 5, 2024
It’s Election Day, and we have an early podcast this week, with a panel of experts on elections past and present.
CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.
We are here early this week – for Election Day! And we bring you a panel that looks at elections, and Presidents, from American history, putting this year’s choice in perspective. Gordon Wood, the greatest historian of the early Republic; Steven Smith, an expert on political institutions, on The Federalist, on Lincoln; Paul Grimstad, authority on great American thinkers and writers like Emerson and Thoreau; and of course, Professor Amar, weigh in on all sorts of questions and aspects of this year’s crucial choice. And we have an audience for this live-to-tape podcast – an EverScholar audience – who asks questions on the mind of many. Here are perspectives you won’t gain anywhere else.
(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)
Show Notes:
Season 4, Episode 43 (Show 200): The Sound of Silence – Special Guest Ruth Marcus
October 30, 2024
The Washington Post shocked the nation by declining to endorse a candidate for President. An outpouring of opprobrium ensued; first in line was 40 year Post columnist and editor, Ruth Marcus – and she is our guest to discuss it.
CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.
It’s 200 episodes for Amarica’s Constitution, and we mark the occasion by bringing you a key expert for an in-depth exploration of a breaking development. Ruth Marcus, long-time Washington Post columnist, editor, Pulitzer Prize nominee, and insider, joins us to explore the inexplicable: the last-minute decision by the Post and its owner, billionaire Jeff Bezos, to withhold what would have been an endorsement for Vice President Harris for election to the Presidency. What goes on in an editorial board? What is the role of the owner? What are the alternatives for editors, columnists, and reporters? Was Bezos intimidated by Trump? What does all this mean for the nation? We have the perfect means to explore this shocker: a frank and unhurried inquiry with our friend, Ruth Marcus. What a way to mark our bicentennial.
(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)
Show Notes:
Season 4, Episode 42 (Show 199): Constitution Things
October 23, 2024
Amarica’s Constitution approaches some landmarks, takes stock, and preview and exciting future.
CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.
We are approaching our 200th episode and completing our 4th year of “Amarica’s Constitution,” and it seems appropriate to take stock. By coincidence, the Yale Law School is celebrating its own anniversary, and these things come together as Akhil is part of a big event and presents a “big idea” that sounds like a strange saying: “the Constitution is a thing.” We explain, elaborate, and celebrate a little bit. We look back, and we look ahead to some real excitement over the next few months (besides the election, that is).
(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)
Show Notes:
Season 4, Episode 41 (Show 198): How to Fix – and How Not to Fix – the Immunity Opinion
October 16, 2024
We analyze a recent NY Times article purporting to force the Supreme Court away from its current immunity stance, and offer a different approach.
CLE Credit Available for this episode from podcast.njsba.com.
In Trump v. United States, we have said that the Court went far astray from the Constitution and from its duty, endangering the nation in the short and long terms. Many have shared this opinion and these fears, and reaction has been profound. In the New York Times, two law professors take up the pen and offer a number of suggestions that purport to restrain and direct the Court towards Congress’ will, assuming that Congress agrees with the authors, that is. Senator Schumer in a recent bill took a similar though not as extreme direction. We identify the flaws with these approaches, and offer an alternative that would be constitutional, and has an actual chance of being effective, based upon history and constitutional structure. We also take up some fascinating readers’ questions, including one which might matter for some overseas voters.
(LAWYERS AND JUDGES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION CREDIT by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.)