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.
Doubting Thomas, and doubting the doubters
Discretion and Indictment
Much to Bragg About?
It’s Coming
The Lord Mayor Adams
Sing a Song (of) Mike Pence
Torture, Time Travel, and Transformation
Secrets, Boards, and Moots - Oh My!
Treason, Reason, History, and OurStory - Special Guest Kermit Roosevelt III
Trillion Dollar Tricks - Special Guest Jack Balkin
Declaration, or Gettysburg? - Special Guest Kermit Roosevelt III
Wait - Don’t Tell Me!
The Idaho Murder Case in Constitutional Perspective
Speaker-ish
January 6th, Santos, and The Speaker
Strictly Scrutinizing Moore - Special Guest Kate Shaw
More on Moore - The Oral Argument, Continued
Mr. Amar Goes to Washington - the Moore v. Harper Oral Argument
Out-Ranked: Live Podcast with Yale Law School’s FedSoc Chapter
Ban the Box?
Create your
podcast in
minutes
It is Free