The controversy over a possible appointment of a special master in the. Mar-a-Lago search matter is a timely trigger for our discussion, especially in light of our recent 4th amendment episodes. Meanwhile we continue a rethinking of the fifth, and of course Professor Amar has a theory that unites everything. There’s also the Queen”s death, which is also fascinatingly relevant, and somehow Lincoln finds his way in, as he usually does. 

Our last episode explored how the self-incrimination protection came about, and how much of safeguards now lie outside the fifth amendment.  Given that, what is left?  Surprise - Professor Amar has a theory, and once again, it can change everything.  Well, almost everything - Donald Trump is still up to his old tricks.  Why does he say his name, and nothing else?  Also, what’s going on back in Florida, and what does it mean for Trump’s hapless attorneys? There will be a lot to explain to your friends after you finish this one.  

The Trump investigations are everywhere.  This week we move from Mar-A-Lago to New York, where the Attorney General had some questions for the ex-president.  He took the Fifth, repeatedly if unsurprisingly.  We look at it, but to do so we look at the Fifth Amendment itself, its roots going back millennia, and its evolution as American law.  So you think you know the Fifth?  We beg to differ.  Prepare for an entirely new way to think about this venerable protection, as Professor Amar offers a framework that will provoke, surprise, and hopefully, delight.

Following Akhil’s MSNBC appearance on “Velshi,” we elaborate on how a Republic is a Democracy.  Does it matter - oh yes, and we explain why. Then we go back to the future - to the biggest Supreme Court case of the 18th century, with rock star Alexander Hamilton arguing, and the echoes resonate today.  So why haven’t you heard of this case?  Well, now you will, and follow a step-by-step explanation you won’t find anywhere else.

***CLE available*** Ex-President Trump’s residence - or is it his club? - at Mar-A-Lago was searched, and US government papers seized, pursuant to a search warrant which has since been made public.  Warrants, papers, searches, seizures - all words found in the Fourth Amendment.  We take the opportunity to upend what every American thinks they understand: that searches require warrants, that probable cause is a must, that failure to heed these dictates means the fruits of the search will be suppressed.  Professor Amar presents an entirely different way of thinking about the 4th Amendment, and when he is done, you will wonder how you ever thought about it any other way.  Armed with this understanding, we then turn to Palm Beach and assess the Justice Department’s actions in this light. Continuing Education Credit is available after listening to this episode by visiting podcast.njsba.com.

The recent Supreme Court term gave rise to a virtual anointment of originalism, as the Court in case after case declared originalism the approach and method that determined the result.  Professor Amar has spent a career on the study, exposition, and refinement of originalism, and that expertise is employed here to respond to these developments.  We begin a look at the great cases and controversies of American history, and through them, we define an originalism that has a clear method, recognizes its own limits, responds to critiques, and is consistent with a recognizable America - not an America with a Constitution and a jurisprudence for liberals or for conservatives alone.

Events continue to unfold, causing us to look back, forward, inward, and outward.  A new bill is introduced which takes us back 20 years and ahead 18 years.  Professor Amar conducts an unprecedented interview - maybe we shouldn’t use that term - and you are there.  A moot court from 23 years ago reappears in the present.  And lessons from nearly 250 years ago will unfold in the next year - and affect us forever.  Professor Amar unwraps this scroll.

Our tour through the late-term Supreme Court cases now runs through the football field where Coach Kennedy sits praying on the 50 yard line.  Professor Amar calls the play - a run through the string of cases that took the Court to this point by way of Abington and progeny.  We wind up in this fact-specific case with turns and twists, and detours through the pledge of allegiance and an old Missouri case along the way.  It’s a master law school class in case analysis, and we aren’t so sure that the majority passed.

***CLE Available*** Our review of the major cases decided at or near the end of the recent Supreme Court term continues with Carson v. Makin,  The case immediately brings to mind the often-invoked metaphor of the “wall of separation” between church and state.  Professor Amar takes us back to the Founding and the origin of this meme, and in so doing, gives us an originalist analysis of the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses of the First Amendment.  By now our listeners should know the next step, as the Reconstruction must be brought in.  When we have finished looking at the text, the history, and the structure of the Constitution and its amendments, the case itself falls neatly into place.

We continue our look at the big cases that rocked the end of the Supreme Court term.  Turning to the Bruen gun case, we see a long opinion and two short concurrences.  An ambitious, contentious opinion by Justice Thomas riled many, especially in the wake of the continuing plague of shootings around America.  We draw particular attention, however, to concurrences that may be the real news here.  And if this case indeed has great impact, is it in its short-term policy implications, or its long-term constitutional lessons - or somewhere else?  The case turns out, in Professor Amar’s “Princess Bride” view, to perhaps not mean what you think it means.