Category: 3-LawSometimeCommentary

OA1040

We begin in Florida with yet more of Judge Aileen Cannon's efforts to delay Donald Trump's federal case, including a demand for Jack Smith to be nicer to Trump's lawyers and her decision to allow non-parties to join the fun and make arguments in an upcoming hearing about whether Smith was properly appointed to prosecute Trump at all.

Hunter Biden's federal trial began this week in Delaware on charges relating to his purchase and possession of a gun which he owned for 11 days in 2018. Matt breaks down the history of this investigation, the charges, and how this case ended up going to trial before a quick time jump in which we return to review what we know one week into these proceedings. How does this trial compare to the one which concluded a week earlier with the conviction of a former President Donald Trump--and would these charges ever have been brought against someone whose last name wasn’t Biden? 

• 11th Circuit order instructing the clerk's office to stop taking complaints about Judge Cannon

• Mar-A-Lago search warrant

• Jack Smith's Motion for Modification of Conditions of Release

• Quick Facts on 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) Firearms Offenses (US Sentencing Commission)

• Delaware indictment of Robert Hunter Biden (gun charges)

• “How to Think About the Hunter Biden “Laptop,” Marcy Wheeler (6/6/2024)

If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Over the past 15 years, the journalist and author Katherine Stewart has been charting the rise of Christian Nationalism in the United States. On this week’s Amicus, Stewart joins Dahlia Lithwick and Rachel Laser of Americans United for Separation of Church and State to discuss the worrying signs of the growing power of extremist christian ideologies at the highest court in the land. Together, they trace shifts in jurisprudence that have emboldened and empowered some of the most extreme fringes of the extreme Christian right, and explain how the changing legal landscape is enabling right wing religious fever dreams to become explicit policy in a document like Project 2025. They all agree on this one thing: This is an episode about much more than flags. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

OA1039

Trump’s prosecution for election interference in Georgia was just stayed by the Court of Appeals, leaving no chance that this trial will proceed before November. What happened, and how unexpected was this delay? We investigate.

We then turn to our main story: Biden administration’s executive actions to “shut down the border” and close the door to asylum for many people who would otherwise be eligible. Matt explains what’s actually going on here and how much of it was already in place before we consider the practical and political consequences of Joe Biden effectively carrying out the border bill which Trump bullied Republicans not to pass. 

We end by spending a few minutes discussing a recent opinion from Judge Frank Easterbrook of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, who has very strong--and extremely appropriate--opinions about fonts.

• Georgia appeals court order staying Trump’s criminal trial

• “A Proclamation on Securing the Border” (June 4, 2024)

• Interim Final Rule (“Securing the Border”)(June 4, 2024)

• Attorney Taylor Levy’s donation page

 

If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

The verdict is in: guilty x 34.  A jury of Trump’s peers had its say, but the ex-president couldn’t leave it at that, of course.  On the legitimate side, the appeals are expected to begin soon.  On the Trump bombastic side, he blasted every institution in the legal system for having the audacity to do their duty.  Particularly in the case of the ordinary citizens of the jury, this bears examination, and so we do.  We also preview some of the likely appellate issues, lay out the expected path through the courts, and take some interesting listener’s questions.  CLE is available after listening at podcast.njsba.com.

OA's Official Bar Tutor returns! We've got the answer to Question 26, but with Heather's signature style where we're going to learn a whole lot along the way. Then, in Question 27, we've got some Constitutional Law!

Be sure to play along by submitting your answer! Use #T3BE, or play on reddit.com/r/openargs!

Melissa and Kate recap the Supreme Court's latest opinions and catch up on the latest drama from the Alitos' flag-flying fiasco.

We’re giving one lucky listener the chance to win a pair of tickets to our SOLD OUT show in DC on June 22nd.Here’s how to enter:

1. Subscribe to Strict Scrutiny’s Youtube channel
2. Leave a COMMENT on our most recent video episode with YOUR favorite Strict Scrutiny moment. [LINK MONDAY’S YT VIDEO HERE]

The giveaway starts TODAY and ends June 7th at 11:59pm PT. We’ll be picking a winner on/around June 10th so be sure to keep an eye on your comment. For the full rules, check out the link here: http://crooked.com/strictgiveawaydc

Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 

• 6/12 – NYC
• 10/4 – Chicago

Learn more: http://crooked.com/events

Order your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes

Follow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

OA1038

Today we're joined by Vox Senior Correspondent, Ian Millhiser! In his reporting, Ian focuses on the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the decline of liberal democracy in the United States. Ian gives us an excellent and comprehensive breakdown of Grants Pass v. Johnson, a case that could be decided any day now. As usual with this Court, the question is: How scared should we be?

Check out Ian's excellent article and other reporting here.

If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Unpredictably, we take a new approach and record immediately after the Court drops new opinions. We dig into Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (voting rights) and NRA v. Vullo (free speech). Before that, we engage with listener feedback and talk about the latest developments in the endless Alito flag saga. 

As a jury in Lower Manhattan responded with “guilty” to all 34 felony counts in former President and presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump’s hush money trial on Thursday, dozens and dozens more questions began to swirl. Will Trump appeal? On what grounds? Will Justice Juan Merchan sentence Trump to jail time? Will the US Supreme Court intervene? Is the gag order still active and in place? Luckily, we have the perfect guest on Amicus to answer all those questions to the extent that it is humanly and expert lawyerly possible. Ryan Goodman is the Anne and Joel Ehrenkranz Professor of Law at New York University School of Law. He served as special counsel to the general counsel of the Department of Defense (2015-16). He is also the founding co-editor-in-chief of the national security online forum, Just Security, a vital resource if you are trying to follow the many trials and appeals of Donald J Trump.

Want more Amicus? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes. Plus, you’ll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On March 19, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fikre. At issue was whether or not the government failed to meet its burden to demonstrate that respondent's removal from the government’s No Fly List mooted his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case.

Join us to hear Joseph Davis break down the decision and discuss its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
Mr. Joseph Davis, Legal Counsel, Becket Fund for Religious Liberty