Supreme Court Asks: Does 'Regular Forces' Mean the Military?

The Supreme Court’s landmark decision granting presidential immunity for official acts has reverberated in unprecedented ways since its issuance. One consequence, as Mary and Andrew note in their recent New York Times essay, is that rather than “preventing the weaponization of prosecutions, the court has unleashed it.” The co-hosts begin here, offering insights into the ongoing prosecutions of James Comey, Letitia James and the suspension of two assistant U.S. attorneys in DC. Next, they move to some updates on the National Guard domestic deployments, as several cases wind their way through the courts. And rounding out this episode, Mary and Andrew turn to the litigation around SNAP benefits and preview Wednesday’s tariff argument before the Supreme Court.

Further Reading:

• Here is Mary and Andrews’ New York Times Essay: How the Supreme Court Paved the Way for Revenge Prosecutions
• And as Mary and Andrew discussed, note the difference between the government's first Sentencing Memorandum in the Taylor Franklin Taranto case compared with the second Sentencing Memo.

Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows.

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.