Cato Daily Podcast
More Thoughts on Trump v. United States
Jul 13, 2024
Legal expert Walter Olson discusses the presidential immunity established by SCOTUS in Trump v. United States, highlighting the invented nature of these protections. The podcast explores the challenges in proving unofficial actions of the president, the difficulties faced by Congress in overseeing the executive branch, and the ongoing debate surrounding presidential immunity and executive power.
17:36
Episode guests
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
- SCOTUS introduced novel immunities for presidents, creating ambiguity in distinguishing official and unofficial actions.
- Courts struggle with evidence admissibility in prosecuting unofficial presidential misconduct, placing oversight burden on Congress.
Deep dives
Implications of the Supreme Court's Decision in Trump v. United States
The Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. United States introduced novel immunities for the chief executive, making it challenging to discern which actions by the president fall outside these protections. The court categorized presidential actions into unofficial, core official, and other official actions, creating ambiguity around the distinction between official and unofficial conduct. This lack of clarity leaves lower courts unsure of how to apply the decision, particularly regarding the admissibility of evidence related to official acts.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
