Season 3, Episode 36 (Show 140): The Two Experts on Section Three – Special Guests William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen
August 30, 2023
The authors of a blockbuster article appear for the first time since its release to discuss, explore, and defend their conclusion that Donald Trump is at this moment and in the future disqualified from holding office, including the Presidency.
Note: CLE available by going to podcast.njsba.com after listening to this episode.
In a special episode, the two distinguished authors of a recent major article, which dives deep into Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment and finds that Donal Trump is disqualified from the Presidency, join us for a thoughtful and rigorous examination of the tough questions about their conclusions. These are leading conservative scholars who have gone where their methodologies, and the law, has taken them. Reaction has been swift and impassioned around the country, and in this episode they respond for the first time to some of the critiques, explore the implications of their work, and in doing so, they bring an integrity to our civic conversation. This is an important discussion important issues, by real experts.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 35 (Show 139): Georgia On Our Minds – Special Guest Ruth Marcus
August 23, 2023
The Washington Post op-ed columnist and editor, Ruth Marcus, has written on the complexities of Federal and State prosecutions of Trump; she takes us deeper on this, and wider on a range of issues.
Everyone needs a translator, and for decades there have been few better than Washington Post columnist, reporter, and editor Ruth Marcus. She has made understandable the intricacies of many a Supreme Court matter, not to mention the vicissitudes of other Washington institutions. Now, with Federal and State cases against former president Trump pending, the complexities are impressive, but we take you through them with Ruth’s help. There are also stories galore, with angles political, constitutional, and gleeful.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 34 (Show 138): This Must Be The Place
August 16, 2023
There are lots of Democrats in Washington DC. Is that a reason for a judge to grant a motion from ex-president Trump to move the trial away? Professor Amar has written on this subject, and shares his insights. Hint: Trump won’t like it.
Ex-President Trump faces a number of trials, and he doesn’t like where some of them are. Too many Democrats, or he doesn’t like the judge. Does he have recourse? No surprise – Professor Amar has written on this subject. There is a fascinating history behind it, an originalism analysis, and, most importantly – an answer. Changes of venue, bench trials, peremptory challenges, unanimous verdicts – they all find their way into this episode.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 33 (Show 137): Third Time’s A Charm
August 9, 2023
A now-familiar defendant appears in federal court. Should he appear in another type of tribunal? Akhil raises the specter of a third impeachment, and all that it might imply. This takes us to a constitutional place you have never heard before.
He’s baaack. Former President Trump has been arraigned once again, this time on serious federal charges related to the very heart of democracy – the election itself. Special Counsel Jack Smith continues to discharge his appointed function by bringing charges he deems warranted. Beyond Smith, however, do the American people have other means of redress? And if Trump is guilty, will these prosecutions prevent him from seeking and possibly gaining the White House? Akhil has some surprising ideas – and one that even surprises himself!
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 32 (Show 136): The Legacy of the Harvard Case – Special Guest Jeffrey Brenzel
August 2, 2023
The shock waves from the affirmative action opinion continue to propagate, and former admissions Dean Jeffrey Brenzel joins us with a look at legacy and donor admissions and other policies implicated by these developments.
We return to the affirmative action case, and again former Yale Dean of Undergraduate Admissions, Jeffrey Brenzel, joins us with his peerless expertise. The fallout of the opinion is enormous ,and we address some of its ramifications, including legacy admissions, donor admissions, private vs. public institutional options, admissions departments’ responses, and much more. What about the new frontiers of litigation that seem to be emerging, from scholarships designed to address racial disparities to non-race-conscious policies that nevertheless have impact on racial makeup? Former Dean Brenzel also offers a fascinating critique of the likely responses, showing how what might seem like a powerful response might actually be a foolish way to avoid real impact.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 31 (Show 135): Amara Culpa, Amara Bene
July 26, 2023
Professor Amar looks at his own words, both on this podcast and elsewhere; his mistakes and his wisdom each teach us something.
What’s in a name? This week, our podcast title means (sort of) “Amar was wrong – Amar was right.” Two weeks ago we said “bigots” and many made much of that. So we take the feedback seriously and revisit it – you can judge the result. Meanwhile, news from Long Island brings the 4th amendment to the fore again, and in a somewhat different way. Different – how? Listen and find out how to create a better jurisprudence without amending the Constitution, and the real differences in the lives of the people this would make. Finally, Akhil has a new article in the popular press, and we introduce that for later elaboration.