Oral arguments are approaching in the Trump v. Anderson case, and the nation is talking about little else. At the Harvard Law School, Professor Amar is invited to debate a former US Attorney General and Federal Judge, Michael Mukasey, who also submitted an amicus brief in the case together with Bill Barr and Ed Meese, among others. We analyze the debate - and the brief. And in that brief, Akhil identifies what he considers to be an egregious error, which is telling not only in its fatal weakening of the particular argument, but in the way it calls into question the entirety of their brief, and how it points the way to needed reforms in the legal ecosystem as a whole. This is an indispensable episode. CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.
Section Three Goes to Washington
Section Three Punditry: The Good, The Bad, and The Silly
The World Turns to Section Three
Juries, Jarkesy, and a Joke
2 Experts, 3 Courts, Section 3, Part 3 - Special Guests William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen
Sandra the First
Sense and Nonsensibility on Section 3 - Special Guests Mark Graber and Gerard Magliocca
Guns, Clips, and Rahimi
Moore on the Brief - Special Guest Vikram David Amar
Moore, in Brief
Aisles, not Walls
Speakerless
A Tale of Two Jordans
Allen and Affirmative Action, Again
Eleven Presidents - Special Guest Bob Woodward
Have Kavanaugh, Will Travel
Justice Jackson’s Santa Clause
An Officer and a President
The Two Experts, Part Two - Special Guests William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen
The Two Experts on Section Three - Special Guests William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen
Create your
podcast in
minutes
It is Free