Amarica's Constitution

The discussion tackles the constitutional complexities surrounding presidential pardons, especially in light of recent actions by Biden and potential moves by Trump. Key themes include the ethical dilemmas of self-pardoning and the notion of accountability in the justice system. The hosts also delve into historical examples, exploring how pardons have been used to foster unity or create controversy. Executive privilege and congressional oversight emerge as crucial elements in understanding the pardoning process and its implications in today's political landscape.

Could Republicans in the House conspire with a 2025 President Trump to manufacture a forced Senate recess in an effort to bypass the advise and consent appointments process?  The much-anticipated article in The Atlantic has been published, to widespread approval.  We proudly present all three co-authors of this article in a wide-ranging, nuanced, fascinating discussion, as Professors Josh Chafetz, Tom Schmidt, and of course Akhil Amar reunite to take us from Restoration England to the chambers of the Supreme Court where Professor Schmidt clerked for Justice Breyer, the author of the principal case on recess appointments, NLRB v. Noel Canning, in 2014.  We hear how that case has lessons, and yet is distinguished, from the scenario here, and what might happen if the contemplated maneuvers, deemed grossly unconstitutional by our experts, try it anyway.  CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.

The podcast dives into the tumultuous nature of presidential transitions, particularly focusing on Trump's controversial choices for key positions. It discusses the complex dynamics surrounding a senior judge's unexpected resignation and the implications that follow. Topics also include the ethical questions raised by presidential pardons, especially concerning a recent nomination for ambassador to France. Historical parallels with Adams' presidency highlight the strategic nature of political appointments and the ongoing battle between competence and loyalty in governance.

Delve into the legal implications of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment as the Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Trump's eligibility for presidency. Discover the historical context of presidential authority with a nod to George Washington's influence. The discussion raises critical questions about accountability in government roles and examines the evolving definition of insurrection. As the nation shifts focus, the ethical responsibilities of lawmakers in voter certification are highlighted, emphasizing the need for principled evaluations amid changing political landscapes.

President-elect Trump has begun to announce his plans for his cabinet and other top appointments for January.  Unconventional is a kind word for some of them.  And suddenly, in a House where Republicans have a razor-thin majority, there is a resignation - months before it would be required.  Why?  There are conspiracy theorists for health care positions; admirers of Putin for intelligence posts; newscasters who have never managed anything for one of the largest organizations in the world.  The Constitution has something to say about some of these, and we dive in.  Suffice to say, the water is murky.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

A live discussion at the Yale Club delves into pressing constitutional matters. The implications of an undivided government and the challenges of the two-party system take center stage. Attention turns to unenumerated rights, invoking landmark Supreme Court cases that shape abortion laws. The talk shifts to presidential recess appointments and the potential transition of Justice Sotomayor. Finally, the evolving dynamics of federalism and state resistance highlight the delicate balance of power in America, reflecting on the Founding Fathers' intentions.

Gordon Wood, a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian, Steven Smith, a Yale political science expert, and Paul Grimstad, a literature scholar, dive into the intertwining of history and politics. They explore pivotal elections from America’s past and how they echo in today's political climate. The discussion touches on the legacy of figures like Andrew Jackson and debates around contemporary issues such as abortion. The role of social media in shaping political discourse is also examined, highlighting its effects on trust and democracy.

It's 200 episodes for Amarica's Constitution, and we mark the occasion by bringing you a key expert for an in-depth exploration of a breaking development.  Ruth Marcus, long-time Washington Post columnist, editor, Pulitzer Prize nominee, and insider, joins us to explore the inexplicable:  the last-minute decision by the Post and its owner, billionaire Jeff Bezos, to withhold what would have been an endorsement for Vice President Harris for election to the Presidency.  What goes on in an editorial board?  What is the role of the owner?  What are the alternatives for editors, columnists, and reporters? Was Bezos intimidated by Trump?  What does all this mean for the nation?  We have the perfect means to explore this shocker: a frank and unhurried inquiry with our friend, Ruth Marcus.  What a way to mark our bicentennial.  CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.

We are approaching our 200th episode and completing our 4th year of “Amarica’s Constitution,” and it seems appropriate to take stock.  By coincidence, the Yale Law School is celebrating its own anniversary, and these things come together as Akhil is part of a big event and presents a “big idea” that sounds like a strange saying: “the Constitution is a thing.”  We explain, elaborate, and celebrate a little bit.  We look back, and we look ahead to some real excitement over the next few months (besides the election, that is).  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

This discussion dives into the constitutional crisis sparked by Trump v. United States, highlighting the potential dangers of recent court decisions. Law professors suggest ways to rein in judicial authority, but flaws in their proposals are identified. The complex dynamic between Congress and the Supreme Court is examined, shedding light on historical tensions and the impact of public sentiment on legal decisions. Additionally, the podcast tackles voting dynamics, military residency issues, and misconceptions about voter fraud, all while addressing essential questions from listeners.