Amarica's Constitution

The podcast discusses a rushed Supreme Court ruling on Trump v. Anderson with unanimous errors. Critiques on lack of quality, notorious cases cited, and a flawed opinion dissected. Examining the 14th Amendment's enforcement and state/federal power dynamics. Debates on state autonomy, statutes in Colorado, and challenges of removing officeholders. Analysis of constitutional problems, lack of engagement with key points, and disqualification post-14th Amendment. Courthouse discussions on unity despite discord among justices.

We’re back, and still waiting for the opinion in Trump v. Anderson, which gives us a chance to highlight important new evidence that has come to light - thanks in large part to Professor Amar’s great law student team.  It fatally undermines what seemed likely to be the reasoning the opinion was going to take.  Will it matter?  This is related to the role amici play in the Court ecosystem, and we look at how another case we had a brief in, Moore v. US, seemed to be possibly influenced by our brief by beginning our long-promised clip-based analysis of that oral argument. So a whole lot in a compact episode.  CLE is available from podcast.njsba.com.

As promised, we return in very short order with the completion of our analysis and response to the oral argument in Trump v. Anderson - before the Court has ruled. Again, key clips from the argument are played and dissected. The previous Part I episode concentrated on arguments concerning self-execution of Section Three; this episode reviews many of the other issues addressed by the Court, from questions of the nature of the Presidential Election and the closely related Electoral College, to the persistent irritant of "officer" and "office" questions.  As in the prior episode, Professor Amar “slows everything down” to allow you and hopefully the Court avoid sweet-sounding but flawed paths.  This episode is posted 8 days early for this reason. Continuing legal education credit is available; visit podcast.njsba.com after listening.

The podcast discusses the oral argument in the Trump v. Anderson case, highlighting mistaken representations and key lines of argument. It analyzes various topics including state offices, term limits, voting against longevity in office, and complexities of enforcing rules for sitting officers. The potential consequences of Jonathan Mitchell's statements and the role of the Supreme Court in presidential elections are also explored.

Special guest Ted Widmer, a distinguished historian and professor, joins the podcast to discuss the conspiracy to prevent Lincoln's election and cripple the Union, exploring the implications for the Trump v. Anderson case. They compare historical events to the Capitol insurrection, analyze Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, and emphasize the importance of a peaceful transfer of power.

Debate on Trump's disqualification, importance of 14th Amendment enforcement, provisions as swords and shields, criticism of trial judge's findings, misinterpretation of Cohen's case, expectations for enforcing restrictions on insurrectionists, inconsistency in 14th Amendment Section 3 interpretation, irrelevance of McKee, challenges of accelerated briefing schedules, correcting mistakes in legal practice, challenges of applying originalism, importance of disseminating legal knowledge in society.

Explore the upcoming Supreme Court oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson and the compelling history in the amicus brief. Learn about the parallels between ex-President Trump's actions and the concerns of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment. Delve into the motivations and figures behind the drafting of the amendment, with a focus on John B. Floyd. Discover the enduring lessons of the 14th Amendment and its application to Jefferson Davis and Trump. Analyze conflicting rulings and disqualification based on Section Three of the Constitution. Also, learn about opportunities for legal education and the importance of proper citation.

Discover the dramatic story of the 'First Insurrection' and its relevance to the Fourteenth Amendment. Explore the parallels between the 1860s insurrection and the recent Trump-fueled insurrection. Delve into the concept of the 50 state solution and the role of Congress. Uncover the controversy surrounding justices and access to deliberations. Explore the actions of Floyd and the heroism of Ulysses S. Grant in relation to the 14th Amendment.

The months of discussion of Section Three on Amarica's Constitution now make their way to Washington, as cert has been granted in Trump v. Anderson.  Amicus briefs will pour in - including the brothers Amar's brief.  We present some of the approach the brief will take, and we look at the nine Justices, taking account of their jurisprudential history and styles, and discuss how an intellectually honest brief-writer can make their best arguments even better by considering how their readers will read them, and what might be most useful to provide to those readers.  It's not quite "handicapping" but it is insightful, as all America is wondering if this case might actually result in the removal of Donald Trump from Colorado's primary ballot, and eventually possibly more states' ballots as well.  It has come to this.

Analyzing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, potential Supreme Court review of Trump's eligibility, 50 state solution, ballot access requirements, comparing Colorado case to earlier cases, consequences of excluding Trump from the ballot, critiquing an interpretation of the 14th Amendment, discussion on Professor Moyn's article and Ruth Marcus's argument, interpretation of the Constitution and state power, involvement of Supreme Court, analyzing arguments on the 14th Amendment, presidential commissions and constitutional language, analyzing the ongoing issue of officer business.