Amarica's Constitution

A violent incident in Minneapolis raises crucial constitutional questions about federalism and state powers. The podcast draws parallels to the historical Boston Massacre, exploring how past grievances shape modern legal frameworks. It discusses the implications of local authority in prosecutions, the limits of military force in civilian contexts, and the importance of impartial local juries. Insights into significant Supreme Court cases highlight the evolving nature of civil rights and remedies for constitutional violations. The conversation underscores the enduring relevance of these issues today.

The podcast delves into the military capture of Venezuelan leader Maduro, exploring its constitutional implications. Professors discuss Fourth Amendment issues related to his trial and the implications of warrantless arrests. They analyze landmark cases like Frisbie v. Collins that challenge the exclusionary rule, raising questions about the legality of evidence obtained through unconventional means. The conversation emphasizes the tension between constitutional protections and national strategy, revealing deep-rooted legal debates that remain unresolved.

Listeners pose intriguing questions about presidential oaths, the mechanics of jury selection, and the complexities of pardons. The discussion touches on the variances of First Amendment rules in different domains, and how political affiliations influence judicial nominations. Highlights include insights on whether a reelected president must retake the oath and the implications of impeachment checks. The hosts wrap up by emphasizing civic virtue and the importance of an informed electorate for a healthy constitutional democracy.

Presidential power is abridged, for a change, by the Supreme Court in its shadow docket ruling in Trump v. Illinois.  Rather than ruling in silence, however, this time the Court gives us 25 pages and 4 opinions to chew on.  We examine the history behind issues of deployment of the Army as well as the Guard/Militia on domestic soil, which leads us to discussions of Militia Acts, the Military Amendments, and basic constitutional principles.  Professor Amar discusses the implications for the coming big rulings on tariffs and birthright citizenship he sees in the alignment the Court assumes in this ruling. Just as this is not the Court’s last word in this case, we will have more to say in subsequent episodes, but this discussion will leave you armed, if you will, with the tools to see the issues clearly.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

One of the most promising new faces in the US Congress, Representative Maggie Goodlander, joins us for a wide-ranging discussion, including the recent video assuring our troops that they may not obey illegal orders, and the aftermath of that simple offer of support.  You may not know that this first-term congresswoman has served in our military for 11 years; has clerked for a Supreme Court Justice; has served in the White House; has been senior advisor to both Republican and Democratic Senators; has studied under Professor Amar - and much more.  Hear from her, and see that there are still talented American patriots that seek to defend the Constitution.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

The discussion dives into the Supreme Court's potential overruling of Humphrey’s Executor, as Chief Justice Roberts labels it a 'dried husk.' The hosts explore how the evolving role of agencies has changed since the founding era and the implications for modern governance. Justice Thomas' push for originalism raises questions about accountability versus independence in administrative bodies. A thrilling debate unfolds over single-head czars versus multi-member commissions and their constitutional ramifications, highlighting the tension between historical practices and contemporary politics.

Secretary of Defense Hegseth is making use of his sights.  He is focusing at times on Senator Mark Kelly, seeking to wreak havoc upon him for his utterances which have angered Hegseth’s master.  Meanwhile, purported drug smugglers have found Davy Jones’ locker at the order of Hegseth, it has been reported, including those left helpless after initial lethal strikes.  Yale Professor and Bancroft Prize winner John Fabian Witt joins us to help us make sense of the international law and laws of war issues here. Meanwhile, your poor co-host, Andy, is subjected to a Socratic barrage at the hands of a Kingsfield-like Professor Amar, as the relentless logic - or is it illogic - of Hegseth’s actions run into a Constitutional wall.  This is an entirely new, and entirely irresistible analysis; it’s Professor Amar at his best. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Events in the news once again intersect with Professor Amar’s past work, as a little-known aspect of a clause in the Constitution has surprising relevance to the President’s fire-breathing response to a video from Senators and Representatives reminding our military and other officers of their lawful obligations. We trace other constitutionally newsworthy developments, on the filibuster and on the unitary executive.  And the Born Equal tour continues, with some interesting reflections on the genesis and rationale for some interesting aspects of the book.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Delve into a captivating discussion on a longstanding tariff case as justices grapple with constitutional interpretations. Key justice exchanges illuminate the complexities of 'regulate importation' and the boundaries of executive power. The fallout from recent elections offers insights into federalism's role, while a proposed Illinois Bivens Act sparks conversation on state-level protections against federal officials. Historical nuances of taxation language and the implications of emergency tariffs add depth to this compelling exploration of law and governance.

The economy, trillions of dollars, and consequences unknown are on the line in the tarrifs case, Learning Resources v. Trump.  We present the justices and the advocates in their own voices from the oral argument, and Akhil reacts in real time as he hears the clips for the first time.  It’s a three hour argument, so this is the first of a two-parter.  The Court’s recent doctrines, including major questions and non-delegation are in play, perhaps, and therefore many are watching this case closely for consistency vs politics in the Court itself.  And of course there’s history and constitutional issues at stake, so we are right at home.  Join us! CLE is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.