Erik Larson, a Bloomberg legal reporter, discusses Donald Trump's Supreme Court appeal regarding his hush money case, exploring implications for presidential immunity. Christopher Yoo, a law professor, delves into the recent ruling that dismantled net neutrality, raising concerns about the FCC's authority. Alex Ebert highlights a crucial New Jersey court decision that defends diversity, equity, and inclusion programs against backlash, showcasing the ongoing national debate about DEI initiatives. The conversation weaves together legal intricacies and their impact on society.
Trump's legal team contends that his presidential immunity should extend to his sentencing in the hush money case, potentially impacting his presidential duties.
The recent appeals court ruling favoring inclusion rights indicates ongoing legal battles affecting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives within organizations.
Deep dives
Trump's Legal Battles and Presidential Immunity
Donald Trump is facing sentencing for his conviction in a hush money case that marked him as the first U.S. president to be convicted of a crime. Following his conviction on 34 felony counts, Trump is arguing for presidential immunity, suggesting that the same protections afforded to sitting presidents should apply to him as a president-elect. His legal team filed a petition with the Supreme Court to intervene and delay the sentencing, arguing that a conviction could harm his ability to perform his presidential duties. The trial judge, however, specified that Trump would receive an unconditional discharge rather than any form of punishment, meaning the conviction would stand without penalties.
The Supreme Court's Role in Trump's Appeals
Trump's legal strategy appears to hinge on claims of presidential immunity that he previously employed in a different criminal case. His arguments are focused on the interpretation of the concept of immunity as expanded by the Supreme Court, asserting that a verdict against him undermines his authority on the global stage. While the lower courts have so far rejected these claims, Trump's team is moving quickly, indicating urgency due to his impending inauguration. The prospect of a Supreme Court ruling on this matter is uncertain, especially since the court's composition appears to lean favorably towards his arguments in past cases.
The Net Neutrality Ruling and Its Implications
A significant ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has dismantled the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules, maintaining that the agency lacked the authority to enforce them. The decision follows a Supreme Court ruling that shifted how courts assess agency interpretations of statutes, leading to skepticism about the FCC's prior inconsistent regulatory approaches. This outcome illustrates the challenges agencies like the FCC will face in creatively justifying their actions under the new framework set by the Supreme Court. The ruling is likely to have broad implications for future federal regulations and the operational dynamics between courts and administrative agencies.
The Evolution of the Right to Association
A recent New Jersey appeals court ruling has affirmatively stated that organizations possess the right not only to exclude certain individuals but also to include specific individuals based on targeted characteristics. This ruling represents a potential counterbalance to movements aiming to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion programs within private organizations. Bar associations are particularly impacted, as there has been a rise in litigation questioning DEI initiatives, often spearheaded by conservative groups. This trend may lead to a broader reevaluation of how the First Amendment’s right to free association applies within various contexts, revealing the complexities surrounding inclusion and exclusion policies.
Bloomberg legal reporter Erik Larson discusses President-elect Donald Trump asking the Supreme Court to intervene to stop his sentencing in the hush money case. Christopher Yoo, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School who has written extensively on administrative and telecommunications law, discusses the appeals court decision striking down net neutrality laws. Alex Ebert, Bloomberg Law senior correspondent, discusses a case that turns the tables on the movement to kill diversity, equity and inclusion programs. June Grasso hosts.