Opening Arguments - The Fani Willis Hearings – Your Comprehensive Guide 2

Episode 1007   It's Part 2! Fani testifies! It is high drama. Not only that, we hear from an incredible Cohen Brothers movie character for some reason. We also hear from Fani Willis's dad, someone who has led a fascinating life. Then finally, they put Wade's ex-partner Bradley on the stand and... try to make him talk for like 4 hours. It also takes a very dark turn.  

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

For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.

Opening Arguments - The Fani Willis Hearings – Your Comprehensive Guide

Episode 1006   Part 1! We watched 17 hours of Fulton Country Superior Court so you don't have to! Cohabitating lawyers Matt and Casey are here to break down many of the legal issues, from the mundane to the outright bizarre. These hearings were truly extraordinary. Some of the craziest courtroom drama to ever happen in the real world.

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

For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.

Strict Scrutiny - The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly From State Courts

Kate, Melissa, and Leah preview the cases the Supreme Court will hear this week, explain the latest news in the Trump criminal cases, and survey the significant decisions happening in lower courts.

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

Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - Fani Willis and a Tale of Two Ethics Violations

The future of the Fulton County, Georgia election subversion case against Donald J. Trump and many many accused co-conspirators was cast into doubt this week as the court saw evidentiary hearings in the defence’s motion to disqualify Fulton County AG Fani Willis. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate’s chief Law of Trump correspondent Jeremy Stahl to discuss why, even with a very high bar for removing Willis from the case, the court was dragged through some tawdry details that are bound to come back to hurt the prosecution, one way or another.


Later in the show, executive director and co-founder of Court Accountability, Alex Aronson, talks with Dahlia about what could possibly be done to make Supreme Court justices follow reasonable recusal guidelines (we’re looking at you, Justice Thomas), and whether the American electorate might at last be finding an appetite for court reform. 


In the Slate Plus segment, Jeremy returns to the podcast martini lounge to discuss what might be the first Trump case to reach a criminal trial. They also discuss the latest on Trump’s claim of blanket immunity. 


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.


To catch up on the ever-breaking Trump trial news, check out https://slate.com/news-and-politics/jurisprudence

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

Opening Arguments - What In God’s Name Is Happening In Georgia

Episode 1005. So uh, yeah. About that. The news was so crazy that we recorded two different episodes and I had to stitch them together like a Frankenstein's Podster. Because WOW Georgia. In addition to that, Matt has for us a tour of the Trump legal circuit! It makes stops in DC, Florida, Georgia, and New York, with a brief layover in 1998 to reminisce about where we were the first time we heard an elected official talking about their sex life under oath. We share some initial impressions of the first day of Fulton County DA Fani Willis's disqualification hearing, debate whether Nathan Wade actually billed the county for 24 hours of work in one day, and consider what might happen next (and what probably should have earlier) in this unfortunate and entirely evitable sideshow to the single most important state criminal case prosecuted in our lifetimes. Also discussed: What's next for the stupidest impeachment in the history of impeachments? What's up with the House rule which makes tying a vote *much* worse than losing one? Is Robert Hur a doctor or does he just like playing one in special counsel reports? And we finally learn the one thing that truly makes Matt angry: FONTS.     1. Nixon v. U.S. (1993) 2. Trump's stay request to SCOTUS re: immunity claims 3. GA Defendant David Shafer's filing re: motion to disqualify 4. GA Code § 15-18-15 (2018) 5. Judge Merchan's denial of Trump's motion to dismiss

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

For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.

Amarica's Constitution - What the Oral Argument Should Have Said – Part 2

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.

Opening Arguments - Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Returns! T3BE Week 1

At laaaaaaaast it is the return of #T3BE! And we've got, not 1, not 2, but 3 questions! First, a question + answer to get warmed up, since we don't have any answers from previous weeks. THEN, the question everyone can play along with. AND THEN, it's the question only Patrons are elligible to win. But also, for patreons only, I've included the first question Matt and I ever did. We did some T3BE to practice, and this first one is maybe my favorite.

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

For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.

I used Dall-e for fun to create a T3BE graphic and it gave me "Thas BAR EXAM!" 10/10

Opening Arguments - SCOTUS OKs Execution By Nitrogen Gas Because Evil

This episode is brought to you by Trade Coffee! Visit drinktrade.com/oa

Episode 1004. "What's going wrong?" Neil Young once asked Alabama, and it's still a good question 52 years later in the wake of the unprecedented execution of Eugene Michael Smith on January 25, 2024 by nitrogen gas. Casey returns to share why learning about the death penalty made her want to be a lawyer before we review the recent history of capital punishment in the U.S. and the dangers of an originalist interpretation of a "cruel and unusual" execution. We then take a closer look at how a completely untested method of taking a human life came to be used in Alabama and find some hope for an end to state-sanctioned murder.   1. VIDEO: Spiritual advisor Jeff Hood describes the execution of Eugene Michael Smith 2. VIDEO: Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall describes Smith's execution as "textbook" 3. Bucklew v. Precythe :: 587 U.S. ___ (2019) 4. Sotomayor's dissent in Smith v. Hamm 5. Thomas and Alito's dissent in Hamm v. Smith 6. The Death Penalty in 2023: Year End Report | Death Penalty Information Center  

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

For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.

Graphic generated by Dall-e and seemed fitting.

Strict Scrutiny - SCOTUS Has Their Own Theories About Trump’s Eligibility

The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case about whether Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment disqualifies Donald Trump from appearing on the presidential ballot or holding the office of the presidency because of his role in January 6th. Melissa, Kate, and Leah break down the arguments and what it will mean if the Supreme Court reverses the Colorado Supreme Court's decision.

 

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