Passing Judgment: Recent Episodes
Jessica Levinson
Is the constitution in crisis? This podcast is for people who are curious about politics and the law and how the biggest political and legal issues of the moment affect you. Pull up a chair and join host Jessica Levinson, a professor at LMU’s Loyola Law School, and a rotating cast of experts. Jessica will be joined by journalists, politicians, political scientists, lawyers, and many others.
Listen to Jessica and her guests for a wry, and sometimes irreverent take on the most pressing issues of our time. What are the laws of our democracy? How are they changing? And what does that mean for your daily life?
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson unpacks a significant federal court decision blocking the Trump administration from withholding or conditioning federal funds to UCLA in exchange for major campus policy changes. The discussion covers the court's reasoning under the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and 10th Amendments, and why the judge deemed the administration’s actions coercive. Join us for a breakdown of this breaking legal news and its broader implications for university autonomy.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
Federal Funding Leverage Challenged: A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction preventing the Trump administration from freezing, terminating, or conditioning UC research funds—pointing out that the administration’s approach may violate legal requirements, including the Administrative Procedures Act, the First Amendment, and the Tenth Amendment.
Academic Freedom & Speech Protected: The court found that forcing changes to speech policies, DEI efforts, gender healthcare, protest rules, and admissions could unlawfully coerce universities and chill free speech, especially among public university faculty and students.
States’ Rights and Spending Clause Limits: The judge ruled that federal conditions on funding can’t be so extreme they essentially take away states’ ability to decide their own policies—a “gun to the head” tactic that threatens economic stability and state sovereignty.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine the escalating ICE raids and federal enforcement actions in Chicago, joined by Reuters reporter Renee Hickman. Together with Jessica Levinson, the episode explores fatal encounters involving federal agents, disputes over official narratives, and the controversies surrounding body camera requirements. We also discuss daily judicial oversight of law enforcement, its unique legal status, and challenges to the president’s order to deploy the National Guard. Tune in for a closer look at the clash between community resistance, federal enforcement, and ongoing legal battles on Chicago’s streets.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
1. Fatal Shooting Involving ICE Agents: The episode opens with the recent ICE raids in Chicago, focusing on a fatal shooting involving an ICE agent and Silverio Villegas Gonzalez, a Mexican national. The circumstances are contested, with DHS claiming agents felt threatened, while surveillance and police records suggest otherwise. This incident marks the most violent encounter since the start of the Trump administration’s Operation Midway Blitz.
2. Disputed Narratives and Lack of Accountability: Renee highlights the conflicting narratives between federal agencies and victims’ families, particularly in the cases of fatal shootings or injuries during enforcement actions. There’s an ongoing lack of clarity and accountability due to delayed or restricted investigations, including an internal probe that may be impacted by a government shutdown.
3. Judicial Oversight of Federal Agents: A rare level of judicial supervision has been imposed, compelling federal agents to report daily to a judge about any use-of-force incidents. This oversight stems from lawsuits by protesters, journalists, clergy, and others who allege excessive force during raids and demonstrations. The order has since been stayed by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, so the future of this oversight is uncertain.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we tackle the Supreme Court battle over Louisiana’s redistricting and its far-reaching implications for voting rights. Host Jessica Levinson and NPR’s Hansi Lo Wang unpack the legal fight over Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, explaining how redistricting shapes the power of racial minorities and the future of partisan gerrymandering. Join us as we break down what’s at stake for Congress, the states, and the promise of equal representation.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
Redistricting = Real Voting Power: How district lines are drawn can dramatically dilute or amplify your vote. Redistricting is a complex, often opaque process with huge, tangible consequences for representation.
Supreme Court Decisions Have National Impact: The outcome of Louisiana’s case (and similar cases) could directly affect minority representation in Congress and potentially lock in partisan advantages for years to come.
Tension Between Race & Partisan Politics: The debate isn’t just about protecting minority voters. The Court is grappling with whether racial considerations in redistricting are required or unconstitutional, especially since partisan gerrymandering is now out of reach for federal courts.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson welcomes Jan Wolfe of Reuters to break down a major Supreme Court case that could reshape voting rights nationwide. They discuss how a challenge to Louisiana’s congressional map escalated into a broader attack on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act—one of the remaining federal protections against racial discrimination in voting. Jan and Jessica unravel the complexities of the case, the Supreme Court’s skepticism, and the potential consequences: from narrowing how race can be considered in redistricting, to making it much harder to bring successful claims under Section 2. The episode also takes a look at other high-profile cases on the Supreme Court’s docket, including questions of executive power and social issues, highlighting the legal and political stakes at play this term.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is at a crossroads:
Following the Supreme Court’s 2013 Shelby County decision (which gutted Section 5 preclearance provisions), Section 2 remains the primary tool to challenge racially discriminatory voting practices. This case could either hobble or maintain its effectiveness, depending on how the justices rule.
The current dispute reflects broader battles over race and "colorblindness":
The case sits at the intersection of redistricting and the recent trend in the Court toward a “colorblind” constitutional interpretation—reminiscent of last year’s affirmative action ruling. The outcome could make it significantly harder to prove voting power is being diluted due to race, with huge consequences for minority representation.
The Court's decision may have national ripple effects—or remain narrow:
While the justices have options ranging from a sweeping redefinition of Section 2 to a narrow ruling specific to Louisiana, the oral arguments showed splintering among conservatives and uncertainty about the ultimate path forward. Watch for possible “off ramps” that limit the case’s impact nationally.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we cover the arraignment of former FBI Director James Comey. Host Jessica Levinson explains the charges against Comey and outlines his defense strategies, including claims of vindictive prosecution and challenges to the validity of the prosecutor’s appointment. Tune in as Jessica breaks down the legal complexities and what this high-profile case means for the broader landscape of justice.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
- Challenge to Validity of Appointment: Comey’s defense intends to argue that the U.S. attorney who brought the indictment, Lindsey Halligan, may not have been validly appointed. If successful, the charges can't simply be refiled due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.
- Selective and Vindictive Prosecution Motions: The defense plans to file motions asserting that the prosecution was brought with political animus and lacked objective justification—raising important questions about equal protection and due process under the law.
- High Bar for Prosecution: To secure a conviction, prosecutors must prove that Comey knowingly made false statements and intentionally obstructed Congress—standards that can be difficult to meet, especially with the complex context and timing of the indictment.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson is joined by Politico’s Nicholas Wu to break down the causes and consequences of the ongoing government shutdown. They discuss how partisan divides, failed budget talks, and the Senate filibuster have led to a halt in government services and potential spikes in healthcare costs. Nicholas shares what this means for everyday Americans, the political strategies on both sides, and why the shutdown could last for weeks. Tune in for a clear explanation of how we got here, what’s happening now, and what may come next on Capitol Hill.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
- How the Government Shutdown Happened: Nicholas Wu lays out the basic process of government funding through appropriations bills in Congress. He explains that both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees are supposed to agree on funding for each agency by September 30th. This year, they failed to come to an agreement, and attempts at a stopgap measure (a continuing resolution) fell through, triggering the shutdown.2. Partisan Gridlock & Narrow Legislative Majorities: A recurring theme is the impact of narrow majorities in Congress and the difficulties that creates for reaching agreements. Wu highlights that with such close margins, especially in the Senate due to the filibuster rule, bipartisan cooperation is necessary but often lacking. The lack of communication between parties and between Congress and the White House is also emphasized as fueling the stalemate.3. Impact of the Shutdown on Everyday Americans: The conversation shifts to what the shutdown actually means for federal services and the public. Wu notes that the effect varies depending on where people interact with the federal government. Essential services (like air traffic control) keep running, but might do so without pay, while some non-essential services are halted, affecting federal workers and potentially local economies.Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica breaks down the Trump administration’s move to federalize the National Guard in Oregon amid Portland protests. She explains Oregon’s lawsuit against the federal government, outlining key arguments such as the improper use of federal authority, possible violations of the Posse Comitatus Act, and state sovereignty issues. Jessica evaluates each argument’s strength, noting that courts usually defer to presidential discretion in these cases. The episode offers a clear overview of the unfolding legal battle and what’s at stake for both state and federal powers.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1. Federalization of the National Guard in Oregon
- The episode opens by discussing the Trump administration’s decision to federalize the National Guard in Oregon—specifically Portland. This move was made over local objections and parallels previous situations, such as federal intervention during protests in Los Angeles.
2. Oregon’s Legal Arguments Against Federalization
- The majority of the episode breaks down the legal case Oregon is making in its suit against the federal government.
3. Legal Analysis of Oregon’s Chances
- Each argument is weighed in terms of likely success. The host points out that courts have historically given substantial deference to presidential discretion in these national security and public order matters, making Oregon’s position a difficult one.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica is joined by David Goodman of the New York Times to break down the unexpected surge of mid-cycle redistricting in Texas. They discuss how political maneuvering by Republicans—aimed at flipping congressional seats—has triggered national reverberations, with states like California now considering similar actions to counter Texas. The episode dives into the partisan motivations, the legal and political pushback, and the threat to independent redistricting commissions. Together, Jessica and David make sense of the fast-evolving redistricting landscape and its far-reaching impact on representation and the future balance of power in Congress.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Mid-Cycle Redistricting—Why Now? The episode opens with an exploration of why an unusual mid-cycle redistricting is being discussed in 2025, even though redistricting typically happens every ten years after the census. The trigger for this push is political: Republicans, facing a narrow margin in the U.S. House, sought ways to gain additional seats, focusing first on Texas where state Republican control made this feasible.
The Politics and Justification of Gerrymandering Both Jessica and David highlight that Texas Republicans were fully open about the political motives behind redrawing district lines—to flip as many as five Democratic seats to Republican. They justified this by pointing out gerrymandering in Democratic-led states and emphasizing partisan advantage as allowed by the Supreme Court, which has found political gerrymandering to be outside federal judicial review.
The Domino Effect—Other States Respond Texas’s actions triggered similar conversations in other states. However, David points out that most opportunities for follow-on aggressive redistricting are found in Republican-led states because many Democratic-led states (like California and New York) have independent redistricting commissions, which limit the legislature’s ability to redraw maps for partisan gain. States specifically considered for similar moves include Indiana, Missouri, and Florida, while California emerged as the prime Democratic candidate, though with significant procedural hurdles.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson unpacks the legal issues behind Jimmy Kimmel’s temporary show suspension. She explains the distinction between private action by ABC and possible government coercion from the FCC or the President, outlining why the First Amendment generally protects speech from government—not private—actions. Jessica also discusses the limited circumstances under which the FCC could revoke broadcast licenses and what this case means for free speech and media organizations moving forward.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1. The Suspension and Return of Jimmy Kimmel’s Show
Jessica Levinson opens the episode by explaining the sequence of events around Jimmy Kimmel’s temporary suspension from ABC after a controversial comment in his monologue. She emphasizes that although he has now been returned to air, the legal issues discussed still remain relevant.
2. The Role and Limits of the First Amendment
A central theme is clarifying what the First Amendment protects. Jessica explains that the First Amendment limits government action against speech, not actions taken by private entities like ABC. If ABC alone had suspended Kimmel with no government involvement, it would not be a First Amendment issue.
3. Government Involvement and the FCC’s Role
The episode explores concerns about potential government overreach, specifically whether statements made by the FCC chair or the President could constitute government coercion. Jessica details how, if the government pressures a private company to take action against someone’s speech, First Amendment concerns are triggered.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the high-stakes legal battle over the attempted removal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. Jessica explains the Trump administration's push to fire Cook, the court's decision to reinstate her, and the looming emergency appeal. Tune in as we explore the legal protections for Fed governors, the fight over presidential power, and why this showdown could impact both the central bank’s independence and the broader economy.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Legal Battle Over Federal Reserve Independence: Jessica discusses the attempt by the Trump administration to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. She explains this centers on whether a president can remove a sitting Fed governor and under what circumstances, which is a pivotal question about the independence of the central bank.
The Law and Statutory Interpretation: The conversation delves into the Federal Reserve Act, which only allows removal of board members “for cause.” There’s debate on what “for cause” means—whether it should be restricted to on-the-job misconduct or include actions before taking office. The district court judge sided with the narrower reading, that it should only pertain to conduct while in office.
Due Process and Rights of the Removed Official: A significant part of the discussion is about whether Lisa Cook was given due process. The judge found she likely wasn’t given adequate notice or opportunity to respond to the allegations, which could be a violation of her rights.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson unpacks two recent Supreme Court emergency decisions. First, she discusses the Court’s move to allow ICE raids in Los Angeles to proceed, highlighting the legal debate over what constitutes reasonable suspicion for immigration enforcement. Next, she examines a ruling permitting President Trump to fire an FTC commissioner, raising questions about presidential authority over executive agencies.
Jessica then dives into a major Federal Circuit Court decision striking down President Trump’s expansive tariffs, explaining why the court found he lacked statutory authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). With the Trump administration seeking Supreme Court review, Jessica explores what these rulings mean for executive power, immigration, and international trade.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1. 1. Supreme Court Emergency Docket Decisions: Jessica opens the episode with a breakdown of two new decisions from the Supreme Court’s “emergency docket.” These aren’t full decisions on the merits, but rather interim rulings that signal how the Court may eventually decide, and have real practical effects in the meantime.
2. The Federal Circuit Court’s Landmark Ruling on Tariffs: Jessica explains a recent and highly significant Federal Circuit Court decision regarding President Trump’s use of reciprocal tariffs. The court held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the president to impose sweeping tariffs as he did.
3. The Core Legal Issue: Presidential Authority Under the IEEPA: A central theme is whether the IEEPA grants the president power to impose tariffs. The court found it does not, highlighting that the statute’s language does not include terms like "tariff," "duty," or "tax," distinguishing it from other statutes where Congress has explicitly delegated tariff authority.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson welcomes Reuters reporter Joseph Axe to discuss the intensifying battle over redistricting across the country. They examine Texas’ unprecedented mid-decade redistricting push, California’s proposed response, and the broader trend of overt partisan gerrymandering. The episode delves into what these changes mean for voters, political polarization, and the balance of power in Congress, highlighting how the fight over district lines could have lasting impacts on American democracy.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
What is Redistricting and Why It’s Unusually Timely Now: The discussion highlights why redistricting is happening now, outside the normal decade cycle, mainly due to political pressure—specifically, former President Trump urging Texas to redraw its maps to increase Republican representation.
The Texas Redistricting Battle: There’s a deep dive into recent, unprecedented actions in Texas, where Republicans are seeking to replace a map they themselves passed just four years ago with one even more favorable to their party.
Partisan vs. Racial Gerrymandering: Political gerrymandering is drawing lines to benefit a party (now effectively permitted by the Supreme Court), while racial gerrymandering—diluting the voting power of racial minorities—remains illegal, though often overlaps with partisan efforts.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of The Passing Judgment Podcast, host Jessica Levinson recaps the latest legal developments with the Menendez brothers. After being resentenced in May 2025 to 50 years to life, Lyle and Eric Menendez became eligible for parole and recently had hearings—but both were denied, mainly due to the brutal nature of their crime and rule violations in prison. Jessica explains that their legal team is still pursuing release through a habeas corpus petition (based on new abuse allegations) and a clemency request to Governor Newsom, although both are unlikely to succeed.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Resentencing & Parole Eligibility: A recent resentencing in May 2025 made the brothers eligible for parole under California’s youthful offender framework, even though they were originally sentenced to life without parole.
Recent Parole Board Denials: Despite the new eligibility, both Eric and Lyle were denied parole this August, with rule violations and the brutal nature of their crimes weighing heavily against them.
Multiple Ongoing Legal Paths: In addition to parole, the Menendez team is pursuing a habeas corpus petition (introducing new evidence) and a clemency request to the governor, though both face significant legal hurdles.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica breaks down three major legal developments: the Supreme Court allowing Mississippi’s age verification law for social media to take effect while litigation continues, a renewed but unlikely push to overturn the Court’s marriage equality decision in Obergefell, and a federal court ruling enabling potential mass firings at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Jessica explains what these cases mean for our rights and daily lives, highlighting the ongoing balance between state power, individual liberties, and consumer protection.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Supreme Court and Mississippi’s Social Media Age Verification Law: The episode opens with a discussion of the Supreme Court’s decision to allow Mississippi’s new law requiring age verification for children on social media to take effect while legal battles continue. The law mandates social media companies verify users’ ages and get parental consent for kids under 18. Supporters claim it protects children from online harms, while critics argue it’s vague, intrusive, and may violate the First Amendment.
Renewed Push to Overturn Marriage Equality (Obergefell v. Hodges): There’s renewed legal activity aimed at overturning the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. The case gained attention due to Kim Davis, a former Kentucky clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, now asking the Supreme Court to revisit the ruling.
Trump Administration and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB): The final major story discusses a recent court decision paving the way for the Trump administration to pursue mass firings at the CFPB—a federal agency created after the 2008 financial crisis to protect consumers.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of The Passing Judgment Podcast, host Jessica Levinson unpacks President Trump’s decision to deploy federal troops—including the National Guard and Marines—to Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. Jessica explains the current California v. Trump trial, which centers on whether the administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act—a law barring the military from acting as domestic law enforcement unless certain exceptions apply. She discusses the difference between supporting federal agencies and directly enforcing laws, and outlines legal exceptions like the Insurrection Act. Jessica also details the president’s authority over the D.C. National Guard and the special rules for taking over the District’s police under the Home Rule Act.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
The Posse Comitatus Act at Center Stage: The ongoing bench trial (California v. Trump) challenges whether deploying the National Guard in Los Angeles crossed the legal line into direct law enforcement, potentially violating the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act.
Presidential Authority—A Legal Balancing Act: While the president (any president!) can federalize the National Guard, there are boundaries—like the Insurrection Act—that determine what those troops can actually do once deployed. This nuance will shape legal precedents nationwide.
D.C. vs. State Jurisdictions: The president has much more direct control over deploying and directing the National Guard in D.C., versus states like California. Taking control of local police, however, requires navigating additional legal steps under the Home Rule Act.
Mentioned In The Episode:
- National Guard in Los Angeles: Decoding the Law Behind the Standoff
- The Legal Battle Over Federalizing California's National Guard: What You Need to Know
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode, Jessica Levinson unpacks the major legal clash between Harvard University and the Trump administration over a $2.6 billion freeze on federal research funding that impacts vital medical studies. Harvard argues the cuts violate its First Amendment rights and the Administrative Procedures Act, claiming they're being punished for not complying with federal demands related to antisemitism policies. The Trump administration insists it’s merely a contract dispute, asserting their right to cut funding if Harvard doesn’t align with federal priorities. Jessica highlights that the judge in the case seems skeptical of the Trump administration's stance and notes that the outcome could have sweeping effects on academic freedom and federal funding for universities across the country.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
The Legal Battle Over Federal Funding and Academic Freedom: The episode centers on the case of Harvard University vs. the Trump administration over a $2.6 billion freeze in federal research funding to Harvard. Jessica Levinson explains that this legal clash is significant because it questions the extent of federal power over universities and touches on core issues of academic independence and freedom.
Harvard's Arguments: First Amendment and Administrative Procedures Act: Harvard argues that the funding freeze violates its First Amendment rights—claiming it’s being punished for not complying with federal demands that affect speech and institutional governance. Additionally, Harvard contends the Trump administration failed to follow the correct legal processes outlined in the Administrative Procedures Act, making the funding cuts arbitrary and lacking proper justification.
The Trump Administration’s Position and Judicial Skepticism: The Trump administration frames the dispute as a simple breach-of-contract issue, saying grant contracts allow for cancellation when an institution’s actions don’t align with federal priorities. In court, however, the judge sounded skeptical of the administration’s position, questioning whether the funding cut was improperly suppressing speech and whether there was enough evidence to justify such a drastic move.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson interviews Chris Stein, senior politics reporter for The Guardian US, about the "big, beautiful bill" driven by President Trump and congressional Republicans. Stein explains that the bill makes the 2017 tax cuts permanent, primarily benefiting high earners, while also introducing new deductions and extending some relief for select groups. He highlights significant cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, noting these changes are delayed until after the midterms, while increased funding for immigration enforcement and the border wall takes effect more quickly. The episode also addresses the bill’s large projected impact on the federal deficit and the political strategy behind delaying the most controversial cuts. Levinson and Stein wrap up with insights into House Democrats’ push for Trump-related Epstein files, illustrating the limited tools available to the minority party.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Tax Changes: Immediate Relief, Long-Term Effects: The bill makes the Trump-era tax cuts permanent, creating significant (and expensive) relief that primarily benefits top earners, while also introducing temporary new cuts for working-class voters. However, not everyone qualifies, and the flipside could mean fewer resources for government programs.
Social Safety Nets: Delayed Pain, Lasting Impact: Major changes to Medicaid and SNAP (food stamps) are built in—including work requirements and shifting costs to states. Crucially, these cuts are delayed until after the next midterms, affecting rural and Trump-leaning areas the most, but the full consequences won’t be felt until later election cycles.
Immigration and Deficit: Shifting Priorities, Bigger Budget: The bill pours billions into border enforcement—including ICE, deportations, and the border wall—while still adding an estimated $3.4 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade, eclipsing even the emergency pandemic-era spending.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica breaks down the Supreme Court’s two most significant cases of the term. First, she examines the Court’s ruling that sharply limits federal judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions, especially in the context of challenges to executive orders like those affecting birthright citizenship. The episode then moves to the Supreme Court’s decision upholding Tennessee’s ban on certain gender-affirming care for minors. Jessica explains how the Court sided with state power, applying a deferential standard of review, and contrasts this with the dissent’s focus on equal protection for transgender youth.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Limits on Judicial Power: The Supreme Court, in a 6–3 decision authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, ruled that federal judges generally cannot issue nationwide injunctions unless Congress clearly authorizes it. This shifts significant power dynamic back to individual cases and underscores the role of Congress in expanding judicial remedies.
Nuanced Exceptions Remain: Despite the new limits, broad relief is still possible through class actions, certain state-led cases, and challenges under the Administrative Procedures Act. These pathways ensure there are still tools to address sweeping executive actions, though access is more restricted.
Transgender Rights Under Scrutiny: In the Skrmetti case, the Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors, framing the law as a neutral regulation based on age and medical use—not sex or transgender status. Dissenting justices warn this approach threatens protections for vulnerable groups and diminishes the judiciary’s role as a check on legislative overreach.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson unpacks two pressing legal issues. First, she explores whether the President can legally bomb Iran, looking at the balance of war powers between Congress and the President, the War Powers Resolution, and recent historical precedents. Then, Jessica provides an update on the legal showdown between California Governor Newsom and the Trump administration over federalizing the National Guard, analyzing a recent Ninth Circuit decision and the role of the Posse Comitatus Act. Tune in as Jessica breaks down these timely constitutional questions and their real-world implications.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Presidential War Powers Are Limited—But Vague: Under Article 2 of the Constitution, the President can order military action in response to imminent threats or sudden attacks, but only Congress can declare war. The limits of what constitutes “imminent threat” or “war in the constitutional sense” are not clearly defined, leading to ongoing legal gray areas.
Congressional Oversight Remains Weak: While laws like the War Powers Resolution were intended to check the President’s power, in practice Congress often cedes authority, rarely using funding powers to halt military action even in constitutionally questionable situations.
Judicial Review Is Highly Deferential: Courts are reluctant to second-guess military decisions, frequently relying on the political questions doctrine and issues of legal standing. This means even if constitutional boundaries are tested, legal recourse is rare.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson unpacks the legal battle between California and the Trump administration over the federalization of the National Guard in Los Angeles. She explains the statutes at play, including the limits of the Posse Comitatus Act and the potential use of the Insurrection Act. Jessica details Judge Breyer’s ruling in favor of California, outlines the key legal questions for the upcoming Ninth Circuit hearing, and gives insight into the judges involved in this high-profile case.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Presidential Power to Federalize the National Guard: Jessica Levinson opens by explaining the legal mechanisms the president attempted to use to federalize the National Guard and send them, along with Marines, into Los Angeles. She breaks down the relevant federal statute (Title 10, Section 12406), which gives the president limited power to federalize the National Guard under specific conditions, such as responding to rebellion or when federal law can’t be enforced with regular forces.
The Scope and Limits of Military Involvement – The Posse Comitatus Act:
Jessica addresses the significance of the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement. Even if the National Guard is federalized, their direct involvement in law enforcement (like making arrests) is limited unless a separate statute (the Insurrection Act) is invoked.
The Insurrection Act as an Exception: She describes how the Insurrection Act is an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, allowing the military to more directly handle law enforcement under certain conditions (such as widespread unlawful conduct or when state authorities can’t protect federal rights). She provides historical examples, such as federal intervention during desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s, and the Rodney King riots in 1992.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine the legal showdown in Los Angeles as President Trump sends the National Guard against California’s wishes. Host Jessica Levinson analyzes the president’s broad—though not unlimited—authority under Title 10 and California’s legal case challenging the move on grounds of state sovereignty and the Tenth Amendment. Jessica explains how federal law and the Posse Comitatus Act restrict the National Guard’s role, and why courts are usually hesitant to overrule presidential decisions on national security.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Presidential Authority to Federalize the National Guard Jessica Levinson breaks down the Trump administration's decision to send the National Guard into Los Angeles, despite objections from California officials. She explains that under federal law (Title 10), presidents have broad—though not unlimited—powers to federalize state National Guard troops. This authority can be exercised when there is a “rebellion or danger of rebellion” against federal authority, even if the state’s governor disagrees.
State Sovereignty vs. Federal Power California, led by Governor Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, challenges Trump’s move, arguing it infringes on state sovereignty. Levinson examines the legal conflict between state autonomy (protected by the Tenth Amendment) and federal authority as outlined in Title 10. However, she concludes that the statute grants the president clear authority in these situations, making California's legal challenge an uphill battle.
The Limitations of National Guard Powers (Posse Comitatus Act) Another key theme is what the National Guard can—and cannot—do once federalized. The Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits the military from acting as domestic law enforcement. Levinson clarifies that under Title 10, the National Guard cannot directly enforce domestic law (like making arrests or searches), unless additional powers are invoked (e.g., via the Insurrection Act).
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson previews the Supreme Court’s most anticipated pending cases as the term nears its end. She highlights upcoming decisions on nationwide injunctions, Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors, evolving standards in discrimination lawsuits, and major cases involving religious exemptions and parental rights in education. Jessica offers her predictions and insight on how these rulings could shape the law and impact daily life, setting the stage for a dramatic finale to the Supreme Court term.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Nationwide Injunctions – Trump v. Washington/New Jersey/California: This case tackles whether federal district courts can issue nationwide injunctions blocking federal policies, as opposed to limiting decisions to just the plaintiffs in the case. The backdrop is Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship, which attempts to limit who qualifies as a citizen by birth.
Transgender Rights and Equal Protection – Skrmetti: The Court is considering whether Tennessee’s ban on certain gender-affirming treatments for minors violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. The predicted outcome is that the Court may allow such state restrictions, but notes there could be future challenges regarding parental rights under a different part of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Religious Objections in Public Schools – Parental Opt-Outs for LGBTQ-Inclusive Curriculum: A Maryland case considers if public schools must offer opt-outs for parents whose religious beliefs conflict with LGBTQ-inclusive materials and lessons. The prediction: the Court may require such opt-outs under the Free Exercise Clause, but will need to write the opinion carefully to avoid overly broad exemptions.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson talks with Wall Street Journal tax reporter Richard Rubin to break down the GOP’s "big beautiful" tax bill. Richard explains what’s in the bill—from tax cuts and increases to spending shifts—and who will be most affected if it passes. They discuss how the bill squeaked through the House, the major sticking points, and what’s likely to change as it moves to the Senate. Join us for a clear, accessible look at what’s inside the bill and how it could impact Americans’ wallets and the federal deficit.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
What’s Inside the GOP Tax Bill: The bill primarily extends the 2017 tax cuts, including a higher standard deduction, lower rates, and business relief, while adding temporary cuts like a boosted child tax credit and tip or overtime exemptions. To offset costs, it includes tax hikes, mainly on clean energy and high earners, major cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, and increased spending on border security and defense.
How “Typical” is This GOP Bill?: Richard describes it as a “mishmash”—there are conventional GOP elements (like tax cuts for the affluent), but also some Trump-specific provisions, like the “Trump account” (a new children’s savings account), faster write-offs for American factories, and anti-immigration measures.
The Path Forward in the Senate: Richard explains that the Senate will likely alter the House version, focusing on issues like Medicaid changes and clean energy tax credits.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@RichardRubinDC
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine the legal controversy over James Comey’s deleted “8647” social media post and the ensuing federal investigation. Host Jessica Levinson analyzes whether Comey’s message amounted to an unlawful threat against former president Trump or was simply protected political speech. She guides listeners through the legal standards for incitement, fighting words, and true threats, concluding that the greater threat may be government efforts to silence political opponents.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
James Comey’s Social Media Post: Jessica Levinson introduces the controversy surrounding former FBI director James Comey, who is under federal investigation for a now-deleted social media post featuring shells arranged as "8647" on the beach. The crux of the issue is whether this was a coded call to "get rid of" (86) President Trump, who is both the 45th and 47th president, or simply a form of political commentary.
The Legal Question: Free Speech vs. True Threats: Levinson dives into the central legal dilemma: Was Comey advocating violence, or exercising his First Amendment right to political speech? She explains the importance of distinguishing between punishable incitement or threats and protected political advocacy.
Historical and Contextual Perspective: The episode puts this controversy in a broader context, mentioning similar uses of "86" by other politicians, notably Matt Gaetz, without triggering federal investigations. Levinson argues that context matters—whether the intent is referencing a metaphorical political ouster or a literal threat.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine sweeping changes in the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division under the Trump administration. Reporter Sam Levine joins host Jessica Levinson to discuss how the division, long tasked with enforcing voting rights and other protections, has seen over 70% of its attorneys depart amid a shift in priorities toward the president’s agenda. The episode explores what this means for civil rights enforcement, voter protections, and whether former DOJ lawyers can fill the gap by taking their expertise into private practice.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
The Role and Function of the DOJ Civil Rights Division and Voting Section: The conversation starts with an explanation of what the Civil Rights Division within the Department of Justice (DOJ) does. It is tasked with enforcing America’s civil rights laws—including the Voting Rights Act—and consists of 11 sections dealing with various aspects of civil rights (voting, housing, education, anti-discrimination).
Impact of Administrative Changes on DOJ Priorities: A significant theme is how changes in presidential administrations can redirect the focus and priorities of the DOJ and its sections—especially the Voting Section. While career attorneys (not political appointees) do most of the day-to-day work, political appointees set overarching priorities. Normally, shifts happen between administrations, but under the Trump administration, changes were described as “radical departures,” shifting focus to investigate noncitizen voting and prioritizing policies aligned with the president rather than traditional civil rights enforcement.
Dismissal of Civil Servants and Dismantling of the Voting Section: The episode highlights the mass removal of senior civil servants in the Voting Section under Trump’s administration, replacing experienced managers and ordering the dismissal of all active cases. This unprecedented action is portrayed as a clear signal of political influence overriding apolitical legal work—and is said to undermine the department’s ability to fulfill its civil rights mandate.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@srl
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson speaks with NPR’s Elissa Nadworny to unpack the Trump administration’s efforts to withhold federal funding from colleges and universities over issues like antisemitism and DEI practices. They discuss how these unprecedented moves are impacting not campus life, but vital medical and scientific research nationwide. Elissa explains the legal challenges schools like Harvard are mounting in response, the stakes involved for the entire higher education sector, and the broader implications for public policy.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Federal Funding as a Lever in Higher Education Policy: The episode opens by surveying recent actions from the Trump administration regarding federal funding for colleges and universities. The administration is using financial levers—pausing, freezing, or cutting funds—to influence policies on campus, particularly tied to issues like DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) and antisemitism.
Mechanisms and Legality of Federal Control: The speakers discuss how and why the administration has the power to control this funding. The complexities of federal funding—who controls the purse strings, when Congress vs. the executive branch has authority, and what legal mechanisms are at play—come up. The episode highlights that while presidents can make funding conditional, the legality often hinges on whether proper procedures are followed (Administrative Procedures Act), not just on broad authority.
Who Really Loses When Funds Are Cut: The speakers emphasize that federal research dollars are not just about student amenities—they fund major scientific, medical, and technological research. The implications of large-scale cuts ripple well beyond campuses, potentially hurting national health, technological innovation, and local economies (since universities are major employers and research hubs).
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson goes solo to break down the latest in legal and political news. She starts by analyzing fresh polling data on President Trump’s approval ratings at the 100-day mark of his second term, noting significant public disapproval and discussing what drives this administration’s bold use of executive power. Jessica then turns to the Supreme Court’s current docket, spotlighting two major education-related cases: one about the legal standard for disability discrimination in schools, and another questioning whether a religious school can be established as a taxpayer-funded charter school.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Presidential Approval Down, But Base Remains Loyal: Despite approval ratings hovering around 39–43%, President Trump’s core supporters (about 33–35%) aren’t likely to abandon him, illustrating a growing divide between the general public and a steadfast political base.
Economic Policies & Tariffs Fuel Discontent: Many respondents reported feeling worse off economically since Trump’s reelection and a majority expressing disapproval of new tariffs and federal agency cuts.
Supreme Court Watch—Education and Religious Freedom on the Line: Two major cases could redefine legal standards for disability discrimination in schools and determine whether religious institutions can operate publicly funded charter schools.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica talks with USA Today reporter Erin Mansfield about the Trump administration’s efforts to overhaul and reduce the federal workforce. They discuss the administration’s push for greater executive power, the agencies hit hardest by job cuts, and the impact on public services like education and food safety. Erin also explains the legal battles unfolding over these changes, including the significance of the landmark Supreme Court case Humphrey’s Executor and the future independence of federal agencies.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
The Federal Workforce Under the Trump Administration: Trump’s administration is undertaking dramatic efforts to reshape--and notably reduce--the federal workforce, prompting widespread job insecurity, potential displacements, and structural overhauls throughout the government.
Who is Affected by Federal Workforce Reductions: Erin outlines which agencies are most impacted. Socially-oriented agencies—like the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, USDA, and the Environmental Protection Agency—face the brunt of the cutbacks, while national security, law enforcement, and immigration agencies are largely exempt. She clarifies that massive cuts are not equally distributed across all departments.
Real-Life Impacts of Workforce Reduction: Jessica and Erin discuss how these changes might touch everyday Americans. Reductions in the workforce could affect everything from food safety inspections and educational grant administration to public health services and climate research—potentially making certain public services less effective or slower.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@_erinmansfield
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson sits down with Emily Bazelon to unpack pressing legal issues. They examine two major deportation cases, focusing on a Supreme Court order for the Trump administration to rectify a wrongful deportation, while assessing the broader context of executive authority in immigration. They also delve into President Trump's use of the Impoundment Act, analyzing the balance of power over federal funding. This conversation sheds light on current challenges to constitutional law and American democracy.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Deportation Cases: The conversation begins with the case of Mister Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported and the legal battle concerning his return to the U.S. Emily Bazelon discusses how the Trump administration is disobeying a court order to bring him back and the broader implications of this defiance on American constitutional law and the rule of law.
Mahmoud Khalil Case: Another deportation case discussed relates to Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, with focus on the broad discretionary powers of the Secretary of State under the Immigration and Nationality Act and potential constitutional issues of free speech and due process.
Impoundment Act and Presidential Powers: The discussion shifts to President Trump's actions regarding federal funding and the constitutional debate over Congress's power of the purse. Emily Bazelon explains how this ties into the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, highlighting the tension between legislative intent and executive authority.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
Emily Bazelon
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine recent developments within the Department of Education under the Trump administration. Jonaki Mehta, an NPR education reporter, joins Jessica Levinson to clarify the Department's functions and discuss recent substantial funding cuts and layoffs, particularly affecting low-income and disabled students' support. They explore the Trump administration's push against diversity initiatives and the role of federal oversight in education. The discussion provides an overview of these changes and their potential impact on schools, highlighting the ongoing tension between federal and state control in the educational landscape.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Role of the Department of Education: The conversation starts with clarifying what the Department of Education does and doesn't do. It doesn't determine educational content; that role is for states and local districts. The department is mainly involved in funding and providing guidance through grants and investigating civil rights violations.
Recent Department Cuts: There have been significant workforce cuts at the Department of Education, affecting key offices such as the Office for Civil Rights and the Office of the General Counsel. This reduction has hampered the department’s ability to perform its duties effectively.
Impact of Funding Cuts: The cuts have direct implications on the ground, with activities like investigations into discrimination cases being halted. There’s concern about the future allocation of funds, especially for the 2026-2027 school year, which could affect low-income and Title I schools significantly.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
Jonaki Mehta LinkedIn
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Claudia Grisales, NPR's congressional correspondent, joins Jessica to explore the evolving relationship between Congress and the Trump administration. Claudia provides an insider's view on the unprecedented unity within the Republican party under Trump and its impact on congressional oversight. The conversation also covers the recent signal chat controversy involving potential classified information breaches by high-level officials. Additionally, they discuss the Democrats' legal strategy and ponder the implications of these political shifts for the future of American governance. Listen in for a comprehensive look at the current political dynamics and what's next for Congress.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Congress as a Check on the Executive: Claudia and Lisa explore the idea that Congress is not acting as an effective check on the executive branch as was intended by the founders. They discuss the unity within the Republican Party under President Trump and the resulting lack of checks and balances.
Signal Chat Controversy: The discussion addresses a situation involving a breach related to government officials using Signal chat to discuss potentially classified information. Claudia describes the internal dissent within the Republican Party about this issue and the investigation being demanded by Congress.
Democratic Strategy: The conversation shifts to reflect on the Democratic Party's struggle to find a unified strategy. Claudia talks about moments when Democrats have come together, such as in stances against government shutdowns, but overall highlights challenges in forming a cohesive legal and political strategy.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@cgrisales
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica examines a pivotal voting rights case before the Supreme Court concerning Louisiana's congressional district lines. The case touches on the conflict between the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Jessica reviews the legal arguments, reflects on past decisions like Shelby County, and explores the case's broader implications.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Voting Rights Act and Supreme Court Case: Jessica Levinson delves into a Supreme Court case concerning the Voting Rights Act, highlighting a challenge over Louisiana's congressional districting. The essential question is whether the state violated the Act by diluting voting power or violated the Fourteenth Amendment by using race excessively in district creation.
Louisiana District Lines Controversy: After the census, Louisiana's district lines came under scrutiny for having only one majority minority district, leading to lawsuits. The state later redrew the map to include two majority minority districts, sparking a new suit from non-African American voters claiming the excessive use of race in drawing these lines.
Fourteenth Amendment and Equal Protection Clause: The tension between complying with the Voting Rights Act and the constraints of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause is a major theme. The conversation touches on recent affirmative action cases, emphasizing the court's perspective that race should not be the predominant factor.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine the Trump administration's controversial attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century law, to deport Venezuelan nationals. With guest Greg Storer, Jessica Levinson explores the historical precedent of the statute, the current legal arguments, and the implications for executive power. They also discuss the Supreme Court's role in these matters and other pressing legal issues.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Alien Enemies Act: The discussion centers around the Trump administration's attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act, a law from 1798, to deport individuals from Venezuela. The act has rarely been used and traditionally only in times of declared war. The Trump administration's approach has raised questions about its applicability without an official war declaration.
Legal Proceedings and Executive Orders: There were significant legal maneuvers following Trump's proclamation about deporting Venezuelan nationals. The podcast delves into the temporary restraining order issued by a judge to halt these deportations, the legal arguments around jurisdiction, and differences in verbal and written orders.
Supreme Court Considerations: The conversation segues into what cases might reach the Supreme Court, with a focus on significant issues such as birthright citizenship, the president's authority related to immigration laws, and overarching constitutional questions.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@GregStohr
In this episode of Passing Judgment, guest Amber Phillips returns to analyze President Trump's recent address to Congress and the implications of his administration's actions. Jessica and Amber explore the partisan nature of the speech and the administration's reliance on executive orders, notably within the Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE). They discuss the effects on the federal workforce, address questions surrounding the budget process, and examine entitlements.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Trump's Speech and Approach: The episode begins with a discussion about Trump's address to Congress. Both Amber and Jessica noted how the speech resembled more of a campaign rally than a traditional State of the Union address. They observed Trump's lack of engagement with Congress and his focus on executive orders to achieve his goals.
Executive Orders vs. Congressional Legislation: Amber and Jessica explore why the Trump administration is relying heavily on executive orders despite having Republican control in Congress. They discuss the challenges of legislation and the perceived ease of presenting executive orders as actions to the public.
Budget and Economic Implications: The speakers delved into the budgetary impacts of the Trump administration's policies, especially concerning cuts in government spending and workforce. They raised concerns about the broader economic consequences, such as potential unemployment and doubts about genuine savings versus necessary spending.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@byamberphillips
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson is joined by Joey Garrison, USA Today's White House correspondent, to navigate the latest developments of the Trump administration. They discuss key topics such as executive orders, federal workforce cuts, tariffs, and the influence of Elon Musk's Doge efforts. Additionally, they explore the Democrats' strategic responses and the congressional dynamics surrounding President Trump's economic and foreign policies.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
White House Changes and Cuts: The discussion begins with Joey Garrison outlining the sweeping changes made by the Trump administration, particularly through executive orders aimed at fulfilling promises to the MAGA base. A significant emphasis was on the creation of Doge, led by Elon Musk, which has been actively involved in restructuring federal departments and proposing workforce reductions.
Impact of Tariffs on the Economy: The tariffs imposed on neighboring Mexico and Canada, as well as increased tariffs on Chinese imports, formed another major topic. The discussion touched on the political and economic ramifications of these tariffs, including rising consumer prices, diminished consumer confidence, and negative polling for President Trump on economic management.
Foreign Policy – Ukraine and Russia: A significant portion of the episode covers the meeting between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky, primarily concerning US-Ukraine relations and mineral agreements. The dispute and its implications for US support to Ukraine were discussed, with Trump administration's stance on withholding aid until diplomatic talks are pursued by Ukraine.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
@joeygarrison
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the Supreme Court’s decision to abstain from ruling on a Trump emergency appeal about firing Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel. Jessica Levinson and Katie Buehler, Law360's Supreme Court reporter, analyze the nuances of presidential power and the debate over the constitutionality of restricting executive authority.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Supreme Court Decision on Trump Emergency Appeal: The episode discusses the Supreme Court's recent decision not to review an emergency appeal concerning the firing of Hampton Dellinger from his position as the head of the Office of Special Counsel. The court allowed the temporary restraining order, which pauses the firing, to run its course and expire.
Legal Arguments and Statute Constitutionality: The legal argument centers on whether President Trump had to provide a reason for Dellinger's firing, as required by federal law. Trump’s administration argues that the statute requiring a reason is unconstitutional and that the president should have the power to fire at will. This theme explores the larger question of presidential authority and statutory constraints.
Significant Supreme Court Cases: Katie Buehler highlights other significant Supreme Court cases beyond the Trump-related decision, including a case involving the Federal Communications Commission's authority and executive power, as well as cases on religious rights such as opting-out of LGBTQ-related education and funding for religious charter schools.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
@bykatiebuehler
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the Trump administration's controversial federal buyout plan aimed at reducing the workforce. Jessica is joined by expert guest Tami Luhby to unpack the deferred resignation offer's complexities, union opposition, and the vagueness surrounding its terms. We explore how these workforce reductions could impact government services and the ongoing legal battles related to this initiative.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Federal Buyout Plan: The Trump administration aimed to downsize the federal workforce, incorporating a controversial program called the deferred resignation offer. Approximately 2 million federal employees were offered this program, where 77,000 accepted the resignation offer. However, there was confusion and reported ineligibility among recipients.
Legal Proceedings: A Boston judge twice paused the program, considering the unions' claims, but ultimately decided they lacked standing, supporting the administration’s effort to proceed with the buyout program.
Impact on Services: The reduction in workforce potentially affects various essential services such as Social Security and Veterans Affairs, leading to concerns about extended wait times and disrupted services for the public.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
@Luhby
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the uncharted territory of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk. Host Jessica Levinson, along with guest Lisa Mascaro, delve into the department's mission to overhaul federal operations and its legal uncertainties. We examine DOGE's drastic measures, including federal employee buyouts and the reduction of USAID, all under the influence of Musk.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Overview of the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge): The episode delves into the establishment of a new entity known as the Department of Government Efficiency, headed by Elon Musk. They explore what this department is meant to accomplish, how it is categorized (as a department or agency), and its power and influence.
Legal and Political Dynamics Surrounding Doge: Lisa Mascaro highlights the legal challenges and political scrutiny faced by Doge. Questions are raised about the authority and legality of actions taken by this department. There is mention of the involvement of Vivek Ramaswamy in the initial establishment, and how this aligns with broader conservative goals of cutting back federal government size and spending.
Congressional and Public Scrutiny: The initiative has sparked debates and raised questions in Congress and among the public. There are historical parallels with past governance styles, but nothing quite matches DOGE's scale and influence fueled by Musk's vast reach and resources.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
@lisamascaro
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the political landscape of President Trump's new cabinet picks through the expert lens of Michelle Shen from CNN's politics team. Jessica and Michelle dissect the confirmation hearings of controversial figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Health and Human Services Secretary and Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence, along with Elise Stefanik's smoother path as UN Ambassador. The discussion sheds light on the intrigues and political maneuvers surrounding these nominations and their potential impact on Trump's administration over the next four years.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
RFK Jr.'s Nomination for Health and Human Services Secretary: The discussion focuses on RFK Jr.'s controversial stance on vaccines and his break from the Kennedy family, who have been stalwarts in the Democratic Party. His views, which have been scientifically disproven, present difficulties in his confirmation process, even among some Republicans.
Media and Reporting Challenges: Michelle Shen shares the challenges faced in reporting on the Trump administration, emphasizing the importance of careful fact-checking and contextualization in her journalism work.
Inauguration Reflections: Shen reflects on the inaugural weekend, highlighting the contrast between Trump supporters and the wealthier individuals who have close access to him. This theme underscores questions of who will have influence in Trump's administration.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
@Michelle_shen10
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we dive into the rapid-fire executive orders issued during the first week of President Trump’s second administration. Joined by political reporter Megan Lebowitz, Jessica explores key topics such as immigration, energy policies, transgender rights, and foreign policy changes. Megan also discusses her recent article on Trump's comments about Ukraine and his stance on international relations.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Unprecedented Volume of Executive Orders: President Trump has issued dozens of executive orders in his first few days, a stark contrast to his previous term. From birthright citizenship to energy production, the scope is extensive and impactful.
Immigration Policies Under Scrutiny: Key actions include the reinstatement of the remain-in-Mexico policy and the suspension of refugee resettlement. These orders are set to face significant legal pushback.
Shift in Foreign Policy and Public Health: Withdrawal from international organizations like the WHO and the Paris Climate Accord signifies a return to Trump’s "America First" policy. Public health funding and higher education grants are also restructured, particularly impacting DEI initiatives.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
@megan_lebowitz
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the Supreme Court's current term with Lindsay Whitehurst from the Associated Press. Jessica Levinson and Lindsay discuss three significant cases: a Tennessee law on transgender minors' access to gender-affirming care (Skirmiti), regulations on ghost guns, and flavored e-cigarettes. They explore the implications of these cases, potential judicial leanings, and the role of presidential administrations in legal arguments.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
Transgender Rights in Healthcare: A case involving the access of gender-affirming care for minors, which touches on parental rights and the role of the state in healthcare decisions.
Ghost Guns and Federal Regulations: A significant case about the regulation of untraceable homemade firearms and the broader implications for federal agency powers.
E-Cigarettes Rules Challenge: The court's review of regulations around flavored vapes, further tying into the authority of administrative bodies.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
@lwhitehurst
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we unravel the current status of the four pending criminal cases against former President Trump. Host Jessica Levinson explains that while Trump was convicted in the New York State hush money case, he received no real sentencing. The Georgia election interference case stalled due to conflict of interest allegations against the district attorney. Jessica provides a detailed overview of each case and what it means now that Trump is set to return to office.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
New York State Hush Money Case: Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts related to falsifying business records for hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. However, the sentence resulted in no jail time, fines, or probation due to constitutional concerns about punishing a sitting president.
Georgia Election Interference Case: This case, involving Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election results, stalled due to conflict of interest allegations against District Attorney Fani Willis. The delay and constitutional concerns have put the case on indefinite hold.
Federal Cases: Both the DC election interference and Mar-a-Lago classified documents cases stalled due to legal challenges and questions of immunity. Following Trump's recent election victory, Special Counsel Jack Smith resigned, and the cases were effectively closed.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we analyze the high-stakes TikTok ban case as it heads to the Supreme Court on an accelerated timeline. Host Jessica Levinson explains the key arguments: ByteDance claims the ban violates First Amendment rights, while the government cites national security concerns over TikTok's Chinese ownership. With oral arguments set for January 10th, Jessica discusses potential outcomes and actions President Trump might take once in office.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Overview of the Legislation: The law in question mandates that TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, divest its U.S. operations by January 19th, 2024, or face a nationwide ban. The ban would affect app stores and Internet providers, eventually causing TikTok to stop working as updates and downloads would be prohibited.
2️⃣ Lower Court Rulings: The DC Circuit upheld the law as constitutional. A three-judge panel determined that the national security concerns cited by Congress justify the legislation. Judges generally defer to the political branches on national security issues.
3️⃣ Arguments by ByteDance and TikTok: ByteDance argues that the law violates the First Amendment by eliminating a mode of communication without a compelling government interest. They contend that the national security concerns are baseless and accuse the U.S. government of targeting TikTok based on its content, which is potentially a content-based restriction—a key concern in First Amendment law.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we unpack two significant legal developments. First, Jessica covers the Supreme Court's expedited review of the TikTok ban, weighing national security concerns against First Amendment rights. Then, she dives into the controversy surrounding a federal judge who criticized Justice Alito over flags flown at his residences, examining the broader implications for judicial impartiality and trust.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ ByteDance's Argument: ByteDance argues that restricting its platform violates users' First Amendment rights and contends that national security concerns are either exaggerated or unfounded.
2️⃣ Potential Actions by President Trump Regarding TikTok case: President Trump could instruct the Attorney General not to enforce the law, attempt to persuade Congress to repeal it despite bipartisan support, argue that the law no longer applies if a qualified divestiture occurs, or advocate for the sale of TikTok to an American company.
3️⃣ Judiciary Impartiality and Trust Issues: Judicial impartiality is crucial for maintaining public trust, and any erosion of respect for the judiciary could potentially lead to a constitutional crisis, as emphasized by quotes from Justice Thurgood Marshall underscoring the importance of civic duty.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica sits down with Sam Levine from The Guardian to unpack the future of voting rights under the Trump administration. They explore the role of the Department of Justice, the impact of stalled federal legislation, and the current state of the Voting Rights Act. Sam also clarifies common misconceptions about election fraud and administration, highlighting what to watch for in the coming years.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Trump Administration and Voting Rights: Sam Levine outlines the anticipated approach of the Trump administration regarding voting rights, including the potential use of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to challenge election outcomes and influence election administration.
2️⃣ Role and Powers of the Department of Justice: The DOJ's role in enforcing federal laws, particularly civil rights and voting rights laws, is explained. Shifts in administration can significantly alter DOJ priorities.
3️⃣ Election Security and Misconceptions: The podcast addresses common misconceptions about voter fraud and the robustness of election systems. Sam Levine stresses the rarity of voter fraud and the extensive safeguards in place.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@srl
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore a pivotal Supreme Court case that could redefine federal agency power. Jessica is joined by journalist David Ovalle to unpack the FDA's authority over e-cigarette regulation and the legal battle surrounding its rejection of flavored vape products. Plus, Jessica delves into a critical Supreme Court hearing on transgender healthcare for minors, shedding light on the stakes and potential implications.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ FDA Regulation of Vaping Products: There's a high volume of applications for vaping product approvals, but only a few have been approved. The debate surrounds the popular and attractive fruity-flavored vapes, which are targeted for regulation due to concerns about their appeal to young people.
2️⃣ Legal Challenges and Circuit Split: The 5th Circuit Court ruled that the FDA acted arbitrarily and capriciously, a decision that challenges the FDA’s authority and methods. This created a split among appellate courts.
3️⃣ Parent's Rights in Transgender Care Case: A new argument based on the due process clause regarding parents' rights to direct their children's medical care might offer a different legal challenge in the future.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@DavidOvalle305
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the legal complexities of President-Elect Trump's proposed tariffs. Jessica Levinson explores how power over foreign commerce has shifted from Congress to the President, highlighting key laws like the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 and the Trade Act of 1974. The episode also covers President Biden's controversial pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, examining the constitutional power of presidential pardons, historical precedents, and political implications.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Congressional Abdication of Trade Powers: Jessica Levinson points out that Congress has gradually ceded its constitutional authority to regulate foreign commerce to the executive branch over the past century.
2️⃣ Legal Hurdles for Trump's Proposed Tariffs: Despite President-elect Trump's promises to impose sweeping tariffs on countries like Mexico, Canada, and China, there are significant legal and procedural hurdles to clear. These include mandatory investigations by the Department of Commerce, and potential court challenges under doctrines like the major questions doctrine and nondelegation doctrine.
3️⃣ Presidential Pardons and Political Implications: The episode delves into President Biden's pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, explaining the broad and exclusive presidential power to grant pardons for federal crimes.
Resources Mentioned:
Jessica's MSNBC article
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica provides updates on two prominent legal stories. She delves into the Menendez brothers' ongoing legal challenges, including their bids for resentencing, a habeas petition, and clemency, explaining the possible outcomes. Jessica also analyzes a proposed bill by Congresswoman Nancy Mace that seeks to ban transgender individuals from using bathrooms aligned with their gender identity in federal buildings. She breaks down the legal scrutiny surrounding such laws and relevant court precedents. Happy Thanksgiving!
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Menendez Brothers Resentencing Claim: They're pushing for resentencing based on their model behavior in prison and the argument that they were victims of severe sexual abuse by their father.
2️⃣ Proposed Transgender Bathroom Bill: Congresswoman Nancy Mace introduced a bill aiming to ban transgender individuals from using bathrooms aligning with their gender identity in federal buildings.
3️⃣ Classification of Law: The bill's focus on transgender individuals can be seen as a quasi-suspect classification, which is subject to intermediate scrutiny.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson is joined by Josh Gerstein from Politico, they explore accusations of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia, recent appeals, and the constitutional questions of prosecuting a sitting president. The episode highlights the Georgia Court of Appeals' decision to pause the case, logistical and legal complexities if Trump were to face jail time, and the broader implications for presidential power. They also discuss the potential impact of a second Trump administration on the DOJ and strategies from the Biden administration to solidify its policies.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Constitutional and Supreme Court Considerations: There is a discussion on whether a state can prosecute a sitting president, involving constitutional implications and the Supreme Court’s views on presidential power and immunity. Historical cases like Clinton v. Jones are referenced.
2️⃣ Trump's Legal Troubles and Sentencing Complexities: Trump's legal issues are detailed, including complications stemming from his behavior during trials, contempt issues, and potential sentencing challenges, especially given his status as a former president.
3️⃣ Transition Strategies of the Biden Administration: Potential strategic moves by the Biden administration to solidify policies before a Trump reentry, such as issuing pardons and "midnight regulations," are contemplated.
Follow Our Host and guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@Joshgerstein
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we dive into the immediate aftermath of the 2024 election results. Jessica discusses the implications of President Trump's return to the Oval Office, the Republican trifecta in controlling the White House, Senate, and likely the House of Representatives. Join us as Jessica unpacks the pending federal and state legal cases against Trump, explores possible legal challenges and strategies over the next four years, and examines significant legal issues such as federal power, immigration, the Department of Justice, environmental policies and more.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Legal Cases Against Trump: Federal cases against Trump, including the DC election interference and Mar-a-Lago documents cases, may be dismissed when Trump regains office and appoints new officials.
2️⃣ Federal Power and Separation of Powers: With Republicans potentially controlling both legislative branches, there might be more legislation rather than executive orders.
3️⃣ Organizational Framework for Legal Issues: The episode discussed potential changes to laws, executive orders, judicial appointments, and expansions of executive power, highlighting their hypothetical nature and the need for ongoing monitoring.
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we engage in a thought-provoking discussion with retired Justice Stephen Breyer. Host Jessica Levinson delves into Breyer's critique of textualism, focusing on whether "costs" in legal contexts should include educational experts. The episode also touches on public trust in the judiciary, the role of the First Amendment, and the complexities of precedent. Breyer's engaging stories and reflections provide a comprehensive perspective on modern judicial challenges.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
- Critique of Textualism and Originalism: Breyer critiques the methodologies of textualism and originalism, which focus strictly on the text and original meaning of the law. He highlights the limitations of these approaches, given the evolving societal and political contexts since the laws were written.
- Pragmatism in Constitutional Interpretation: Advocating for a pragmatic approach, Breyer emphasizes the importance of interpreting the Constitution by considering historical context, consequences, and inherent values such as democracy and human rights.
- Supreme Court's Political Perception: Addressing public concerns about the Supreme Court's political influence, especially with the conservative supermajority appointed by Republican presidents, Breyer contends that legal analysis should be distinct from political thought.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson tackles the controversial actions of Elon Musk, who has set up a lottery system pledging $1,000,000 a day to registered voters in swing states who sign a particular petition. Join us as we delve into the legal complexities and potential impacts of Musk's actions on the integrity of our democratic system.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
- Electoral Integrity and the Influence of Money: Jessica explores the risks and ethical concerns surrounding the influence of money on elections. She discusses the principle that elections should not be bought and the potential for wealthy individuals like Elon Musk to influence election outcomes through financial incentives.
- Historical Context of Federal Laws: The discussion includes the historical foundations of federal laws aimed at limiting the impact of money on elections. She references the 1925 federal law and subsequent legislation, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which both aim to prevent monetary inducements related to voting and voter registration.
- Legal Implications and Ethical Considerations: The episode delves into the legal nuances and potential federal law violations in Musk's actions. Jessica discusses how a judge might interpret these actions and the importance of maintaining the integrity of election systems by avoiding financial incentives that could influence voter behavior.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we welcome New York Times reporter Maggie Astor for her first podcast appearance, diving into her comprehensive comparison of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump’s policy positions. Jessica Levinson and Maggie explore key issues like abortion, climate change, democracy, crime policy, and the economy, highlighting the vast differences in each candidate’s approach.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Abortion Standpoints: Kamala Harris is pro-choice, a strong supporter of Roe v. Wade, and advocates for protective abortion rights legislation. Donald Trump supports overturning Roe v. Wade, state-level abortion restrictions, and has ambiguous positions on a federal abortion ban.
2️⃣ Democracy: Kamala Harris is committed to upholding the democratic process and respecting election outcomes, while Donald Trump's refusal to accept the 2020 results and unwillingness to acknowledge potential future losses has fueled skepticism about the legitimacy of the electoral process.
3️⃣ Climate Change Policy: Trump opposes major climate change initiatives, having withdrawn from the Paris Agreement and supporting expanded fossil fuel production, including coal and oil. Harris supports the Paris Agreement, advocates for renewable energy, and has backed legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act to combat climate change.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we dive into the key cases of the Supreme Court's 2024-2025 term. Jessica Levinson highlights an October 8th case on ghost guns and the ATF's regulatory powers, drawing parallels to a previous bump stock ruling. Additional cases discussed include the FDA's authority over flavored e-cigarettes, a Texas law's First Amendment challenges on adult age verification for online materials, and a lawsuit by the Mexican government against U.S. gun manufacturers. Jessica also previews potential cases related to post-election litigation and federal criminal charges against former President Trump.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Ghost Guns Case: The Supreme Court will hear a critical case regarding the regulation of ghost guns by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). The core issue is whether this regulation should be within the executive agency's power or if it requires new congressional legislation.
2️⃣ Transgender Rights for Minors: A major case this term focuses on Tennessee's 2023 law prohibiting most gender-affirming medical treatments for minors. This case could set a precedent on how transgender status is viewed under the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
3️⃣ FDA’s Authority on E-Cigarettes: The court will evaluate the power of the FDA in regulating flavored e-cigarette products. The decision hinges on whether the FDA's actions were "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedures Act.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the recent federal indictment against New York City's mayor, Eric Adams. Jessica Levinson is joined by Eric Levenson, a senior writer for CNN Digital, who provides a comprehensive overview of Mayor Adams' background, the specifics of the charges, and the potential legal and political fallout. From his unique public persona and controversial political stances to the detailed allegations of bribery and campaign fraud, we unpack the complexities of this high-profile case.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Background of Eric Adams: Eric Adams, a former NYPD captain, Brooklyn borough president, and now mayor of New York City, is discussed. He has a mixed persona, presenting himself as a "tough on crime" candidate while also seeking to revitalize New York's nightlife.
2️⃣ The Indictment: Adams faces a federal indictment on charges including bribery, wire fraud, and solicitations of illegal campaign contributions from foreign nationals.
3️⃣ Adams’ Re-election Prospects: The indictment complicates his re-election campaign. Some politicians, like AOC, have called for his resignation, but others, including Governor Kathy Hochul, have been more cautious.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@ejleven
In this episode of Passing Judgment, political science professor Michael Genovese joins host Jessica Levinson to explore the complexities of predicting presidential elections, highlighting the electoral college's impact and the importance of swing states. Voter priorities on economic issues and the limitations of presidential power are also examined, alongside the role of media influence and hyperpolarization. Jessica and Michael dissect these intricate dynamics, the strategic significance of key battleground states, and the potential influence of celebrity endorsements on voter turnout in this episode of Passing Judgment.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Presidential Election Complexity: Genovese highlights the unique nature of U.S. presidential elections, describing them as 50 individual races due to the electoral college. Winning requires state-specific strategies, especially targeting battleground states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan.
2️⃣ Economic Priorities and Presidential Power: Both Genovese and Levinson underscore that while the economy remains a top voter concern, the president's actual influence over economic conditions is limited.
3️⃣ Celebrity Influence on Young Voters: Additionally, the significant influence of social media on voter registration, particularly among younger demographics, is discussed.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson is joined by Gram Slattery from Reuters to delve into the recent presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. From Harris rattling Trump with strategic jabs to the contentious discussions on key issues like the economy and abortion, this episode unpacks the critical elements that could shape the upcoming election.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Kamala Harris's Strategic Advantage: Harris accomplished her primary goals by setting the tone right from the handshake and taking the initiative, which helped her keep Trump on the defensive through most of the debate.
2️⃣ Trump's Challenges on Economic and Cultural Issues: Despite Trump's perceived strength in economic issues, the discussions on the economy and immigration did not favor him. His diversion to unfounded claims about Haitian immigrants highlighted his inability to stick to impactful topics.
3️⃣ The Impact of Polarization: Despite the consensus that Harris won the debate, the polarized electorate and the scarcity of swing voters suggest that winning debates might not significantly shift the numbers.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@G_Slattery
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we engage with Maureen Groppe, who delves into the nuanced arena of Supreme Court reporting. Host Jessica Levinson probes into the personal dynamics among justices, leading Maureen to emphasize their professional decorum despite ideological differences. Jessica's students' questions introduce topics like maintaining objectivity and Supreme Court reform, with Maureen discussing the hurdles of simplifying complex legal issues for a general audience. This discussion offers a unique glimpse into the behind-the-scenes world of Supreme Court reporting and its impact on public perception.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Court's Collegiality: Groppe shares that justices stress their collegiality, although social interactions are often downplayed by some, like Justice Kagan, who emphasizes professional respect.
2️⃣ Impact of Oral Arguments: Groppe shares the challenge of determining the impact of oral arguments on court decisions, using an emergency abortion case as an example where Justice Barrett's reactions played a crucial role.
3️⃣ Reporting Impartiality: The episode includes a discussion on how reporters like Groppe maintain neutrality when covering Supreme Court cases with significant implications.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@mgroppe
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson is joined by political science and history professor Paul Savoie to break down the intricacies of the US electoral system. They explore the historical roots and ongoing impact of the electoral college, the challenges of polarized politics, and the reliability of modern polling. The conversation examines the potential advantages of reforming the electoral college and delves into the implications for American democracy.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Framers' Intent and the Electoral College: The framers of the Constitution were cautious about giving voters too much power and thus created a bicameral Congress and the Electoral College. The system was designed to balance public influence with a moderated selection process, initially allowing electors to make independent choices but later tying their votes to state popular votes.
2️⃣ Electoral College Impacts and Controversies: The electoral college has led to significant discussions about its impact on the political landscape, particularly regarding scenarios where candidates can win the popular vote but lose the election.
3️⃣ Student Concerns: Students discuss significant current issues like reproductive rights and the Israel-Hamas conflict, reflecting diverse concerns and single-issue voting tendencies.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of The Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson engages in an insightful conversation with USA Today White House Correspondent Joey Garrison, who provides an inside look at the Democratic National Convention. Recorded from his hotel room in Chicago just after the convention, Garrison offers a detailed recount of the key moments, speeches, and political dynamics of the event, including Joe Biden’s farewell address and Michelle Obama’s highly acclaimed speech. This episode provides listeners with a rich perspective on the DNC and what to watch for in the coming weeks of the campaign.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Excitement and Logistics of the Democratic National Convention: Joey Garrison discusses the overwhelming excitement and energy among Democrats during the DNC in Chicago. He highlights the logistical challenges of covering the event, such as security measures and the exhaustion that follows a packed schedule.
2️⃣ Speeches and Messaging: The conversation covers various speeches delivered at the DNC, including critiques and observations on Joe Biden's farewell and Michelle Obama's impactful address.
3️⃣ Kamala Harris’s Campaign Strategy and Challenges: Joey Garrison offers insights into Kamala Harris's speech, her strategic messaging, and the challenges she faces moving forward. He discusses her role in uniting the party and energizing voters, as well as the expectations surrounding her debate performance against Donald Trump.
Follow Our Guest and Host:
@Joeygarrison
@LevinsonJessica
In this micro episode of The Passing Judgment Podcast, host Jessica Levinson discusses two major legal issues. Firstly, former Republican congress member George Santos pled guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, among other charges, effectively avoiding a federal trial and ensuring some prison time. The second case involves Lisa Finley, who was arrested for attempting to fraudulently foreclose on Elvis Presley's Graceland by claiming that Presley’s late daughter had used it as collateral for a loan, backed by forged documents.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ George Santos Legal Issues: George Santos, a former Republican congress member from New York, has pleaded guilty to two counts of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, avoiding a public federal trial.
2️⃣ Graceland Foreclosure Attempt: Finley falsely claimed that Lisa Marie Presley had put up Graceland as collateral for a $3.8 million loan, creating a fictitious entity to carry out the scheme.
3️⃣ Common Thread of Aggravated Identity Theft: Both cases are marked by deceptive and fraudulent activities, whether in political campaigns or in attempts to claim ownership of a legendary estate.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson speaks with Perry Stein to gain a deeper understanding of the ongoing legal challenges in former President Trump's Mar-a-Lago case. Stein shares unique insights into the strategies and dynamics at play in the courtroom, highlighting the roles of key figures like Judge Aileen Cannon and special counsel Jack Smith. The discussion explores the intricacies of legal proceedings, the significance of intent in charges, and the impact of procedural delays on the trial's progression.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Courtroom Dynamics and Decision-Making: Perry Stein provides an analysis of Judge Eileen Cannon's distinctive courtroom style and decision-making approach, explaining how these factors influence the legal proceedings and the strategies employed by both the defense and prosecution.
2️⃣ The Role of Intent in Legal Charges: The conversation delves into the importance of intent in the charges being faced by the defendant, exploring how this legal concept plays a critical role in shaping the arguments and potential outcomes of the trial.
3️⃣ Impact of Procedural Delays: Perry Stein discusses the procedural delays that have arisen during the trial and their impact on the timeline and overall dynamics of the case, offering insights into the strategic maneuvers by both sides and the implications for the defendant's legal journey.
Follow Our Guest and Host:
@PerryStein
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica speaks with Dan Morain, celebrated author of Kamala's Way, to gain a deeper understanding of Kamala Harris' journey to becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee for president. Dan shares his unique insights into Harris' career trajectory, from her early days in California politics to her tenure as vice president. Dan also delves into specific moments that highlight Harris' political savvy and resilience, providing a comprehensive look at a candidate who could become the first female president of the United States.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Kamala Harris' Career Trajectory: Dan Morain traces Kamala Harris' career from being appointed to a state position in 1994 by then-Speaker Willie Brown, to becoming a surrogate for Barack Obama in 2008, and eventually serving as the Attorney General of California and a U.S. Senator.
2️⃣ Presidential Campaigns: Morain discusses Harris' 2019 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, describing it as poorly managed and fraught with stumbles, leading to her early withdrawal. Conversely, he notes her current campaign as more confident and focused on one primary opponent: Donald Trump.
3️⃣ Public and Media Perception: Harris' public and media perception is explored, with Morain noting how she can be both celebrated and criticized. Her ability to handle media scrutiny and maintain a positive public image is highlighted, demonstrating why she is effective in her role despite the challenges.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the robust start of Kamala Harris’s 2024 campaign. Joined by political reporter Carla Marinucci, we discuss Harris's impressive early achievements, including 170,000 volunteers and $200,000,000 in donations, mostly from first-time donors. Carla provides insights into Harris's newfound confidence, her strategic focus on reproductive rights and environmental justice, and her strong appeal to young voters. We also address concerns about office turnover and the challenges Harris faces as a female candidate of color. Discover how Harris is reshaping her image and what it means for her political future.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Challenges and Media Criticism: Concerns about high turnover rates in Harris’s office and campaigns and how her status as a tough boss and a woman of color might impact public perception.
2️⃣ Electoral and Policy Strategy: Harris's strategy of making critical connections within the Democratic Party helped her win races, including establishing relationships with key donors and mentors.
3️⃣ Future Challenges: Potential hurdles for her presidential campaign include negative ads, criticisms on policy issues like urban crime and immigration, and her ties to Joe Biden’s presidency.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@Cmarinucci
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica delves into the political and legal ripple effects following President Joe Biden's unexpected decision to withdraw from seeking the Democratic nomination. She examines the current political landscape, with Democrats rallying around Vice President Kamala Harris, and discusses the complex legal procedures of picking a new nominee at the convention. Tune in as Jessica navigates this unprecedented moment in American politics and answers the burning questions on everyone's minds.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Political Impact of Biden's Decision: President Joe Biden's announcement not to seek the Democratic nomination is unprecedented and has significant political repercussions.
2️⃣ Role of Delegates: Delegates previously pledged to Biden are now free agents but are likely to support Harris if she garners the necessary backing.
3️⃣ Potential Running Mates for Harris: Kamala Harris is expected to choose a running mate who can strategically enhance the ticket’s chances in crucial swing states.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into a shocking yet somewhat unsurprising ruling from judge Aileen Cannon on the Mar-a-Lago case against former president Trump. On July 15th, Judge Cannon dismissed all charges related to Trump's unlawful retention of sensitive government documents, citing unconstitutional appointment of special counsel Jack Smith. Host Jessica Levinson takes us through the intricacies of the appointment clause of the constitution, Judge Cannon's legal reasoning, and the likely path forward, including a potential appeal to the 11th Circuit.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Dismissal of the Mar-a-Lago Case Against Trump: Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the federal case against former president Trump involving his retention of sensitive government documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence.
2️⃣ Appointments Clause and Constitutionality: Judge Cannon's decision to dismiss the case was based on her interpretation of the Appointments Clause in the Constitution.
3️⃣ Potential Impact on Other Cases: The ruling could potentially affect the DC election interference case but does not impact state cases. Other federal judges, including Judge Chutkan in the DC case, have not made similar rulings regarding Jack Smith's appointment.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the intricacies of the 25th Amendment and the Democratic National Committee's rules concerning presidential succession. Host Jessica Levinson provides a thorough breakdown of what would happen if President Biden steps aside or is declared incapacitated. She explains the history and application of the 25th Amendment, highlighting its various sections and uses. Additionally, she discusses the procedural rules for selecting a new Democratic nominee should President Biden choose not to run.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Historical Context: Several historical instances (e.g., President Harrison's death in 1841, Garfield's incapacitation in 1881, Wilson's stroke in 1919, and Eisenhower's health issues in the 1950s) highlighted the need for clear constitutional guidelines.
2️⃣ The 25th Amendment Section 4: Provides the procedure if the president is deemed unable to discharge duties, which involves the vice president and a majority of the cabinet, and requires a two-thirds vote in both House and Senate for the president to be removed.
3️⃣ Democratic National Committee (DNC) Rules: Discusses the procedural implications if President Biden decides to step aside before or after the Democratic National Convention.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the blockbuster Supreme Court case regarding presidential immunity. Host Jessica Levinson takes you through the Court's 6-3 ruling on whether a president or former president enjoys some or absolute immunity from criminal prosecution. This pivotal decision arose from former President Trump's alleged actions related to the January 6 events and the so-called DC election interference case. Tune in as Jessica explains the intricacies of this landmark case, its implications for the future, and what it means for the ongoing legal battles surrounding former President Trump.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Supreme Court Decision on Presidential Immunity: The Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling on most issues, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the majority opinion.
2️⃣ Impact on Legal Proceedings: The case is unlikely to go to trial before the election, which could impact the case if Trump wins.
3️⃣ Practical Implications for Prosecutors: The majority opinion restricts the use of evidence of official conduct to prove private acts, making it harder for prosecutors to prove cases involving presidents or former presidents.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson and Reuters legal correspondent Jack Queen delve into two of the most politically charged trials of our era: those involving Hunter Biden and former President Donald Trump. They dissect the collapse of Hunter Biden's plea deal over the scope of immunity and dive into the trial's contentious debate on firearm purchase forms and drug use. Switching focus, they examine Trump's historic conviction related to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Hunter Biden Trial and Plea Deal Miscommunications: The plea deal for Hunter Biden unraveled when the judge questioned the broad scope of immunity it offered.
2️⃣ Donald Trump and the Hush Money Case: The defense requested a mistrial due to the nature of Daniels' testimony, which was denied. Michael Cohen’s cross-examination and David Pecker's damaging testimony were key moments.
3️⃣ Vagueness and Second Amendment Arguments in Biden Trial: Questions about the vagueness of the law and an appeal based on Second Amendment rights. The defense argued that the timing of Biden's drug use at the time of the gun purchase was not adequately proven.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@Jackqueen_
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the multifaceted challenges of election coverage and the pervasive issue of media polarization. Jessica Levinson hosts senior political reporter Aaron Blake from The Washington Post, as they navigate the treacherous waters of misinformation and its threat to democracy. Highlighting recent headlines, they discuss Hunter Biden's conviction and its potential ripple effects on the 2024 election. Together, they dissect the selective prosecution cases involving Trump and Biden, raising questions about voter perceptions and the prioritization of legal cases.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Hunter Biden's Conviction: The recent conviction of Hunter Biden for lying on a federal form and illegal gun possession is discussed, with Aaron Blake suggesting that this may have limited effect on the political landscape and President Joe Biden’s reputation among the majority of voters.
2️⃣ Potential Running Mates for Trump: Potential vice-presidential picks for former President Trump are discussed with Marco Rubio and Tim Scott highlighted as strong contenders.
3️⃣ Economic Concerns and Inflation: Blake highlights inflation as a primary economic concern that could impact President Biden’s reelection prospects. The challenges the Biden campaign faces in effectively communicating the economic situation to voters are discussed.
Subscribe to the "Campaign Movement" Newsletter and receive Aaron Blake's essential guide to the 2024 Election!
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@AaronBlake
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the controversy surrounding the Netflix series "Baby Reindeer" and the legal battle it has sparked. Host Jessica Levinson breaks down the lawsuit brought by Fiona Harvey, who claims to be the real-life inspiration for a character portrayed as a stalker and abuser in the series. Harvey's suit includes allegations of defamation, emotional distress, and violation of her right of publicity. Jessica examines the balance between First Amendment protections for artists and the privacy rights of individuals, discussing why she believes censorship poses a greater danger than the harms claimed by Harvey.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Right of Publicity vs. First Amendment: The episode explores the balance between an individual's right to privacy and freedom of expression.
2️⃣ Impact of Modern Media and Public Scrutiny: Harvey was quickly identified due to social media, escalating her distress and highlighting the modern challenges of privacy.
3️⃣ Artistic Freedom and Public Interest: The episode delves into the importance of protecting artistic freedom, indicating that censorship can be more harmful than the potential injuries to privacy.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the historic conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records. We also discuss the possible ramifications, including whether Trump can vote or run for president as a convicted felon, potential sentencing outcomes, and the likelihood of appeals.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Felony Elevation: Falsification of business records is typically a misdemeanor. It becomes a felony if done to commit or conceal another crime. In this case, the prosecution argued it was to unlawfully interfere with the election by committing federal campaign finance violations, tax fraud, or falsification of other business records.
2️⃣ Sentencing: Trump’s sentencing is set for July 11th. Jessica anticipates probation rather than prison time due to the non-violent nature of the crimes and Trump being a first-time offender.
3️⃣ Impact on Presidential Run: The conviction does not bar Trump from running for or serving as President. The Constitution only precludes those convicted of insurrection from holding office.
Join us as Jessica unpacks the legal intricacies of this unprecedented case and its implications for the future.
Follow Our Host:
@LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson sits down with guest Edward Foley to delve into the intricate world of disputed elections, legal challenges, and the evolving landscape of American democracy. Foley shares his insights on the confluence of historical election disputes with current events, the critical role of clear election rules, and the challenges faced in ensuring fair and accurate elections. From discussing his book on the history of disputed elections to shedding light on the nuances of judicial behavior and election administration, this episode offers a deep dive into the complexities and nuances of election law and constitutional principles.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Disputed Elections and Democratic Stability: Foley discusses the confluence of conspiracy theories with disputed elections, emphasizing the need for clear election rules, competent institutions, and a strong civic culture to support democratic governance.
2️⃣ Judicial Behavior and Supreme Court Dynamics: Foley shares insights on the evolution of judicial behavior, noting the increased visibility of judges through various public engagements like social media, book authoring, and public appearances. The discussion raises concerns about Supreme Court justices' extracurricular activities and potential biases, as well as historical parallels in such behaviors.
3️⃣ Election Procedures and "Blue Shift" Phenomenon: The podcast addresses challenges in election procedures, particularly regarding absentee ballots verification procedures. It delves into the concept of the "blue shift" in elections, where Democrats tend to gain ground on late-counted ballots leading to a shift in results favoring the Democratic candidates as more ballots are processed.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@Nedfoley
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson sits down with Shayna Jacobs, a federal courts and law enforcement reporter for The Washington Post, to delve into the ongoing Trump hush money trial. With the trial moving at an unexpectedly rapid pace, Jessica and Shayna discuss why this case is progressing faster than anticipated and explore the pivotal role of Michael Cohen's testimony. Tune in as Jessica and Shayna navigate the intricate legal landscape of this high-profile trial and speculate on its potential implications for Trump's political future.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Trial Progression and Timeline: The trial moved faster than expected, with significant progress including jury selection, opening arguments, and witness testimonies. Judge Marchand emphasized keeping the trial on track.
2️⃣ Novelty of the Case: This case is unique because it’s uncommon for falsification of business records to be the primary charge. Typically, it's a lesser charge combined with more significant crimes.
3️⃣ Relevance of Stormy Daniels’ Testimony: Although some details of her testimony might not directly relate to the falsification charges, they were used to establish context and motive for Trump's actions.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@Shaynajacobs
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the intricacies of the MAGA movement with Isaac Arnsdorf, a national political reporter for The Washington Post. Isaac shares insights from his new book, "Finish What We Started: The MAGA Movement's Ground War to End Democracy," examining the evolution of MAGA from its roots in earlier American political ideologies to its transformation post-January 6th. Join us as Isaac explains the movement's shift towards more extreme elements and its strategy to infiltrate the Republican Party from the ground up, as well as discussing potential scenarios for future elections and the ongoing impact on American democracy.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Historical Continuity and Evolution: The MAGA ideology connects back to older political traditions in America, such as the non-interventionist "America First" ethos of the 1930s and the conservative backlash against the New Deal. This historical perspective helps explain the resurgence and transformation of these ideologies in today's political landscape.
2️⃣ Transformation of the MAGA Movement Post-January 6th: Isaac elaborates on how the MAGA movement became more radicalized and inclusive of extreme right elements post-January 6th. This was driven by grassroots efforts rather than Trump himself, with significant influence from figures like Steve Bannon aiming to deeply integrate the movement within the Republican Party.
3️⃣ Impact and Strategies for Future Elections: Arnsdorf expresses concerns about potential disruptions in future elections, noting preparations for legal strategies that could make elections contentious and the worrying prospect of political violence or disruptive actions at crucial electoral stages.
Follow Our Host and Guest:
@LevinsonJessica
@Iarnsdorf
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson dives deep into the legal intricacies surrounding protests on college campuses, specifically addressing First Amendment protections and relevant federal laws. By discussing these themes, Jessica Levinson aims to provide a legal framework for understanding the complexities of First Amendment protections and other related legal aspects in the context of college protests, influenced by ongoing events like the war in Gaza but strictly from a legal perspective, avoiding political discussions. Join us as Jessica provides a thorough legal framework to help us understand these complex dynamics, setting the stage for informed discussions on rights, responsibilities, and the reach of the law in educational settings.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ First Amendment Protections in Protests: The episode delves into how the First Amendment ensures robust protection for speech and expressive conduct during protests.
2️⃣ Limitations on Speech: While the First Amendment offers broad protections, there are permissible limitations. Levinson explains that these restrictions must be content-neutral—applied uniformly regardless of the speaker's identity or viewpoint and should ideally serve a legitimate purpose like ensuring safety, without being a pretext for suppressing undesirable viewpoints.
3️⃣ Federal Laws Impacting Protests: Levinson addresses how the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (particularly Title 6) intersects with campus protests. Actions during protests that discriminate based on race, color, or national origin, or that disrupt educational opportunities for these groups, might constitute violations under Title 6.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve deep into the complex world of voting rights and election integrity with renowned UCLA professor Rick Hasen. The discussion navigates through the intricacies of Hasen's recent books, "A Real Right to Vote," where he advocates for a constitutional amendment to solidify voting protections, and "Cheap Speech," which examines the dangers of disinformation in our political landscape. Join Jessica Levinson as she and Hasen dissect the balance between maintaining ballot security and ensuring broad voting access, the role of the Supreme Court in shaping these rights, and the urgent challenge of combating political disinformation in the digital age.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Voting Restrictions and Integrity: Rick Hasen discusses the necessity of certain voter restrictions and identification verification to maintain the integrity of elections. He acknowledges the challenges and criticisms associated particularly with rules around absentee ballots and instances of election fraud, highlighting the complexity of balancing accessibility with security.
2️⃣ Disinformation in Politics: Jessica Levinson brings up the issue of disinformation, and Hasen elaborates on its detrimental impact on elections, as detailed in his book "Cheap Speech." They discuss the challenges posed by social media and the spread of false information, especially during the 2020 election cycle, and the balance between free speech and the necessity for accurate information.
3️⃣ Legal Uncertainties and Electoral Litigation: Hasen notes the unique, decentralized, and highly partisan nature of U.S. elections, contributing to frequent litigation over voter registration and eligibility. He expresses concern about the Supreme Court's approach to such issues, fearing that ongoing legal uncertainties could delay crucial resolutions, especially in a polarized political climate.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the intricacies of the New York hush money payment case involving a former president – a state criminal trial of immense historical significance as it's the first to proceed against an ex-commander-in-chief. Host Jessica Levinson, alongside court and justice reporter Ella Lee, unpacks the legal complexities facing the prosecution, particularly the challenge of proving intentional fraud linked to the 34 felony counts of false business records. Join Jessica and Ella as they navigate the tangled web of legal battles surrounding one of the nation's most polarizing political figures.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ New York Hush Money Payment Case: This segment introduces the trial concerning former President Trump's alleged hush money payments, which is notable for being the first criminal trial against a former president in U.S. history. There's a discussion on the legal challenges, particularly the difficulty of proving intentional fraud and the connection to another crime.
2️⃣ Legal Nuances and Jury Impact: Jessica and Ella discuss anticipated challenges for both the prosecution and the defense. For the prosecution, convincing the jury of the witnesses' credibility, especially Michael Cohen's, is anticipated to be difficult. The defense is expected to face challenges due to the case's high profile and the polarizing figure of Trump.
3️⃣ Trial Timing and Political Considerations: Speculation about when other cases might go to trial before the November elections is discussed, including the implications of Department of Justice policies regarding pursuing cases close to elections and considerations judges might have on trial scheduling.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this riveting episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson delves into the intricate legal battles surrounding former President Trump and the classified documents dispute. Our esteemed guest, Sarah Wire of the Los Angeles Times, unveils the complexities of Trump's assertion of ownership over crucial documents, a stance that's been thwarted by Judge Keenan's recent decision. Throughout the episode, we unravel the strategic delays in the courtroom, weigh the public's right to pre-election transparency, and examine how the pursuit of justice is not merely about the charges themselves, but about the far-reaching implications of cover-ups and electoral integrity. Join us as we pass judgment on these crucial issues that define not just legal boundaries, but also the very contours of our democracy.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Significance of January 6th Insurrection: The podcast also deeply examines the January 6 insurrection, with Sarah Wire sharing firsthand accounts and emphasizing its historical significance. The conversation covers the actions leading to the insurrection, its classification, and the personal impact on those who reported from within the Capitol during the event.
2️⃣ Presidential Records Act and Classified Documents: The Presidential Records Act is discussed, particularly in relation to former President Trump's claims over certain records. The rulings by Judges Keenan and Cannon are highlighted, exploring the legal boundaries of document ownership by a president.
3️⃣ Public Interest in Trial Information: The episode delves into the debate surrounding the timing of trial information release, particularly in the context of elections. The emphasis is on whether the public should have access to trial details before casting votes and how reporters view their role in this process.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, esteemed author and political analyst Jonathan Alter delves into the complexities of Jimmy Carter's presidency, exploring how external factors such as inflation and unemployment marred its perception. Alter highlights similarities between Carter's challenges and those facing current President Joe Biden, drawing attention to historical influences on today's politics. The episode also examines the New York Hush Money case against Donald Trump, emphasizing its significance for law enforcement and democratic norms. Tune in to this episode of Passing Judgment for an encompassing discussion that charts the precarious balance between law, politics, and the ever-changing tapestry of American leadership.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Comparisons Between Carter and Biden: Alter draws parallels between the presidencies of Jimmy Carter and Joe Biden, observing the influence of past presidents on current political scenarios, along with the challenges they face due to changing times and issues.
2️⃣ New York Hush Money Case and Trump: The podcast touches upon the legal troubles surrounding Donald Trump, specifically the New York Hush Money case, and its potential ramifications on the electorate. Alter underscores the gravity of such cases concerning the rule of law.
3️⃣ Condition of the Republican Party: There's an assessment of the Republican Party's evolution, particularly its departure from traditional conservative values, allowing the rise of Donald Trump and presenting new directions for the party.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson and guest Ankush Khardori delve into the tangled web of legal challenges surrounding former President Trump. We dissects a series of cases poised to reshape our understanding of presidential immunity and the limits of executive power. Tune in for an episode rich in legal insight, where the implications of these judicial battles are laid bare, revealing a complex mosaic of potential outcomes that could alter the political and legal landscape.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Trump's Immunity and Public Perception: A significant portion of the discussion revolved around Trump's claims of immunity, the consequences of his potential conviction, and public opinion on the matter, noting a poll revealing a potential conviction would negatively impact his support among independents and Republicans.
2️⃣ Michael Cohen's Credibility: Ankush Khardori discussed the use of Michael Cohen’s public statements to question his reliability in the trial, highlighting inconsistent statements and animosity towards Trump. The challenges of proving Trump's knowledge of wrongdoing and rehabilitating Cohen as a witness were also explored.
3️⃣ Mar-a-Lago Case & Jury Instructions: We delve into the Mar-a-Lago case, with a particular focus on proposed jury instructions and Judge Eileen Cannon's rulings. We voiced concerns about the legality and implications of the proposed instructions and the judge’s perceived favorable treatment of Trump's arguments.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
The latest episode of Passing Judgment dives into critical legal discussions surrounding charges against a former president, touching on both state and federal levels. Host Jessica Levinson, with guest Kyle Cheney from Politico, delve into the recent developments within the Georgia election interference case. Join us as we pass judgment on the rule of law, dissect the possible chaos this could sow in Congress, and interpret the maze of legal arguments presented in these monumental cases.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ DC Interference Case and Supreme Court Decisions: There is significant attention on the potential chaos that could arise from the Supreme Court's unanimous decision that states do not have the authority to determine eligibility under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The concern revolves around the question of whether any Congress should count the electoral votes of a candidate considered ineligible for the presidency, potentially leading to chaotic scenarios in Congress, particularly by January 2025.
2️⃣ The Georgia Case and Racketeering Charges: The Georgia case involving the former president's alleged election interference continues to face challenges. Although Judge Scott McAfee dismissed six charges related to soliciting Georgia officials to violate their oath of office, the core racketeering charges remain intact. The discussion indicated that the prosecutor's office is currently mired in its own controversies, making it uncertain if they will appeal the ruling or refile the charges.
3️⃣ Federal Case Developments in Georgia and Florida: The federal case in Florida about the unlawful retention of documents at Mar-a-Lago is being discussed in court with motions to dismiss based on the Espionage Act and the Presidential Records Act. Trump’s legal team argues for the motion to dismiss, claiming the statutes have not been used in this manner against a former president and raises the issue of whether Trump had fair notice of potential charges. However, the judge has not indicated any decision on the case schedule.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode, we dive into the complex intersection of TikTok and the First Amendment. Jessica Levinson breaks down the ongoing debate surrounding a proposed bill that could impact the popular social media app. Join us as we explore the constitutional implications, the distinction between speech and conduct, and the fascinating first amendment questions that arise from this contentious issue.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ National Security vs. Free Speech: The federal government argues that the ban is necessary due to national security concerns, believing that TikTok's Chinese ownership could compromise the privacy and national security of American users.
2️⃣ First Amendment Implications: While the government claims it's not a ban on speech, but rather a restriction on commercial conduct, there are strong arguments that this could infringe on the First Amendment rights of both the app and its users.
3️⃣ Legal Challenges: If the bill becomes law, it's likely to face First Amendment challenges in court, with the level of scrutiny on the legislation being a pivotal point of contention.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the latest legal bombshell dropped by the Supreme Court. With an unanimous ruling, the Court determined that states do not have the power to enforce section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which deals with the eligibility of federal candidates. Join us as Jessica dissects the details and disagreements within the Court's opinion and explores its potential impact on future elections and congressional power.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ The Supreme Court Ruling: The Colorado Supreme Court's decision was overturned unanimously by the Supreme Court, which held that the state exceeded its authority in determining a federal candidate's eligibility under a specific constitutional amendment.
2️⃣ Implementation and Implications of Section 3: The court's opinion was delivered per curiam, representing the entire bench, with the conservative and liberal justices offering differing perspectives on how Section 3 of the 14th Amendment can be enforced.
3️⃣ Disagreement Between Conservative and Liberal Justices: The ruling highlights the fracture lines within the court, with disagreement on the extent to which Congress can exclude an individual from holding office based on Section 3.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the recent oral arguments in two cases concerning social media, state laws, and the First Amendment. We walk through the complexities of the justices' struggle to establish a legal framework for addressing content moderation by social media platforms, highlighting the unprecedented nature of these issues in the context of constitutional law. Tune in for an informative discussion on the ever-changing landscape of law and the profound impact it has on our lives.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Big Supreme Court News: The Supreme Court's decision to hear the case regarding a former president's immunity from criminal prosecution has significant implications. This case raises critical questions about the constitutionality of immunity for a former president and the potential impact on future legal proceedings.
2️⃣ Cases Involving Internet, First Amendment, and Social Media: The recent oral arguments on state laws attempting to regulate social media platforms' content moderation choices brought to the forefront the absence of a clear constitutional framework and precedents for addressing such modern technological issues. The Justices' struggle to fit these cases within existing legal categories highlights the need for new frameworks to address emerging technology-related legal concerns.
3️⃣ Role of Congress: The lack of national standards from Congress further complicates the situation, leaving the Justices in a dilemma about who should be making decisions regarding the regulation of social media content moderation.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we dive into the high-profile defamation cases filed by journalist E. Jean Carroll against former President Donald Trump. Our guest for today is Erica Orden, a reporter for Politico, who was at the forefront of the courtroom proceedings. Join us as we explore the legal intricacies of the case, the jury's decision, the behavior of the involved parties, and the impact of Trump's presence during the trial.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Trump's Behavior: Trump's conduct in the courtroom likely influenced the jurors' decision in the second trial. It raises questions about his ability to comply with court etiquette and handle upcoming criminal trials where his presence is mandated.
2️⃣ Judge Kaplan's Firm Hand: Judge Kaplan's strict demeanor and rules within the courtroom shed light on the tension and emotion present during key testimonies, and provide insights into the judiciary's handling of complex legal battles.
3️⃣ Attorney Roberta Kaplan's Effort: Renowned for her pivotal legal battles, Roberta Kaplan's role in advocating for her client, E. Jean Carroll, demonstrates the significance of a well-prepared and experienced legal team in navigating high-stakes trials.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this week's gripping episode of "Passing Judgment," host Jessica Levinson and esteemed guest, Lawrence Hurley of NBC News, unpack the complexities of Trump's request for immunity and the potential consequences for our legal system. Join them as they dive into the mechanics of our judicial system, and the razor's edge upon which current events balance. ⚖️
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Supreme Court Decisions: How upcoming Supreme Court rulings could reshape the election landscape and set precedents on presidential immunity.
2️⃣ Separation of Powers: The implications of the DC Circuit's stance against absolute immunity and what it means for the checks and balances of our system.
3️⃣ Legal Uncertainty and Timeline: The potential paths the Trump-related cases might take and the associated uncertainties that could affect the trial and election timelines.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
Follow Our Guest:
On Threads: @LawrenceHurley
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we're delving into the Colorado Supreme Court's recent ruling on whether former president and potential 2024 candidate, Donald Trump, can appear on the state's primary election ballot. We'll break down the legal arguments, the potential implications, and why this decision may land in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. Join us as we analyze the constitutional issues at play and examine the political dynamics surrounding this case.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Section 3 of the 14th Amendment: The Colorado State Supreme Court relied on this little-known section to justify its ruling. This section, which was implemented after the Civil War, aims to prevent individuals who engaged in an insurrection or provided aid or comfort to insurrectionists from serving in federal office.
2️⃣ An Uncertain Future: The case presents a complex legal and political dilemma, raising questions about the role of the Supreme Court in determining the eligibility of presidential candidates.
3️⃣ The Supreme Court Conundrum: The episode delves into the possible paths the Supreme Court could take, the political pressure at play, and the potential ramifications of the Court's decision.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson dives into a thought-provoking discussion with guest, novelist and essayist, Stephen Marche. Together, they dissect the corrosive impact of money in American politics, the flaws in the electoral college system, and the urgent need for profound electoral reforms.
Here are 3 key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Money in Politics: The conversation delves into the damaging effects of unlimited corporate spending in elections, the influence of dark money mechanisms, and how fundraising can shape politicians' priorities and actions.
2️⃣ Flaws in the Electoral College System: We discuss the significant flaws in the electoral college system and express concern about its potential collapse, leading to an illegitimate government.
3️⃣ Necessity for Electoral Reforms: From the limitation of campaign spending and donations to open primaries, it's clear that significant changes are needed to address corruption, ensure the legitimacy of the political system, and empower a more representative democracy.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @StephenMarche
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we discuss the upcoming presidential election with Professor Michael Genovese, President of the Global Policy Institute at Loyola Marymount University. Join us as we delve into the complexities of presidential politics, and examine the impact of media sensationalism, the challenges of giving up power, and the qualities critical for a great president.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ The Impact of Political Spectacle: The political landscape has become dominated by spectacle, with the media and public more focused on personalities and entertainment rather than policy.
2️⃣ Leadership Qualities: Drawing from historical perspectives on leadership, such as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, the conversation underscores the significance of leaders prioritizing the welfare of the people and the country over personal ego.
3️⃣ Presidential Elections and Political Dynamics: The episode delves into the dynamics of presidential elections and the influence of political tribalism; touching on scenarios where leaders may resist relinquishing power and the role of the media and public in shaping political narratives.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this week's episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson delves into the aftermath of the recent Supreme Court decision in the Dobbs case, and the upcoming landmark abortion rights case in April. Join us as we discuss the current state of abortion rights, the legal landscape, and the upcoming significant Supreme Court cases that are poised to shape the future of reproductive healthcare in the United States.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ The fallout from the Dobbs decision: The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade and the upcoming case dealing with abortion rights demonstrates a fundamental question about pregnant women's entitlement to full protection under the law.
2️⃣ Legal battle over pregnant women's access to abortions: The Supreme Court will address the conflict between a federal law entitling all people to emergency medical care and state laws in Idaho and Texas that severely restrict abortions, leaving pregnant women with limited options for care.
3️⃣ Impact of judicial appointments on abortion laws: The new makeup of the federal judiciary, particularly lower court judges appointed by President Trump, has had significant effects on abortion rights, leading to near outright bans on abortions in some states.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this week's episode of the Passing Judgment podcast, host Jessica Levinson engages in a compelling discussion with guest Dean Baker, co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, on the state of the economy and associated governance challenges. Join us as we cover a range of crucial economic issues, shedding light on several key takeaways for you listeners.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Economic Perception vs. Reality: Despite public perception of a negative economy, the data tells a different story. With low unemployment rates, high workplace satisfaction, and real wage gains, the economy is showing positive signs.
2️⃣ The Influence of Pessimism on Economic Behavior: While people may feel negatively about the economy, high levels of consumer spending, particularly on non-essential items, suggest that behavior does not always align with perception.
3️⃣ The Tension Between Expertise and Politics: Issues like combatting global warming, altering prescription drug research financing, implementing a financial transactions tax, and addressing CEO pay are key priorities, but there are structural government challenges hindering progress.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @DeanBaker13
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the legal question of whether former President Trump is immune from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office. With two federal cases pending against Trump, one involving election interference, the stakes are high! Tune in as we navigate the legal landscape surrounding this case and explore the implications of presidential immunity on criminal prosecution.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Presidential immunity shields the president from civil suits for official actions. This doctrine aims to allow presidents to function without fear of frivolous suits and to protect sensitive discussions involving national security.
2️⃣ The Supreme Court has not definitively ruled on whether a president can be criminally prosecuted for acts taken while in office, but guidance from past cases gives us insight into this complex legal issue.
3️⃣ The recent ruling by district court judge Chutkan states that there is no presidential immunity in Trump's case, as his alleged attempts to interfere with the election were considered nonofficial acts. The case now awaits a decision from the DC Circuit Court.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
In our latest episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson breaks down the recent decision by the Colorado Supreme Court regarding the eligibility of former President Donald Trump to appear on the state's 2024 primary election ballot. She delves into the reasons behind her belief that the verdict might be overturned and discusses why she thinks the case will ultimately end up at the US Supreme Court.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ Colorado Supreme Court's Decision: The court relied on section 3 of the 14th Amendment to conclude that Donald Trump is constitutionally barred from appearing on the state's 2024 primary election ballot.
2️⃣ Implications for the US Supreme Court: This case is likely to head to the US Supreme Court for resolution, and the decision could have significant political implications.
3️⃣ Potential Outcome: While the host believes that the US Supreme Court will overturn the Colorado decision, the case presents complex legal and political considerations that will require careful navigation.
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
Join us in a thought provoking conversation about the Republican Party's transformation and the potential impacts of court decisions on elections and politics. We're joined by Dr. Norm Ornstein; senior fellow emeritus at the American Enterprise Institute, as he provides eye-opening insights offering a perspective on the potential emergence of a figure with Trump-like views in the party's future.
Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:
1️⃣ The Republican Party's journey from a traditional problem-solving entity to a more right-leaning stance, influenced by historical struggles with authoritarians and tribalism, presents significant implications for the country's political trajectory.
2️⃣ Thought-provoking discussions on the influence of money in politics, ethical concerns within the court system, and the impact of individual decisions on significant outcomes, such as Supreme Court decisions.
3️⃣ The potential scenarios for the next 4 years in the U.S., including the implications of potential executive appointments, structural problems in the Senate, and concerns about the electoral college's impact on the legitimacy of elections.
Follow Our Guest:
On Threads: @NormOrnstein
Follow Our Host:
On Threads: @LevinsonJessica
Want to know more about the intersection of AI and the law? Check out this week's episode of Passing Judgment podcast with Congressman Ted Lieu. He shares his expertise on the benefits and potential detriments of AI and discusses its implications for healthcare, national security, and the upcoming election season.
Here are 3 key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Protecting ourselves from deepfake technology: Congressman Lieu highlights the proliferation of deepfake videos and audios. He emphasized the importance of skepticism, industry-led initiatives for content authority, and legislation for disclosure of social media ads to mitigate the impact of deepfakes on public perception.
2️⃣ Ensuring equitable AI outcomes: We delved into the potential biases in AI algorithms and how the government and private sector can work together to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in AI programs. Congressman Lieu emphasized the importance of auditing, validation, testing, and leveraging existing legal frameworks for addressing discriminatory AI practices, particularly in hiring decisions.
3️⃣ Regulating AI: Congressman Lieu provided insights into the regulatory approach to AI, emphasizing the need for careful scrutiny of AI applications in critical sectors such as transportation and employment, along with the importance of mitigating discriminatory biases in AI programs.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @TedLieu
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
In our latest episode of Passing Judgment, we had the pleasure of hosting Juliette Kayyem, a prominent figure in the fields of homeland security and crisis management. With an extensive background, Juliette brought a wealth of insights about current world events with a focus on the situation in Israel and the implications for disaster management and preparedness.
Here are 3 key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Family Unification: In a crisis, prioritize locating your loved ones and ensuring their safety. Educate your children on what to do in an emergency to prepare them for unexpected situations.
2️⃣ Situational Awareness: Stay informed about real-time developments through various sources, such as apps and social media. Being aware of what's happening around you can help you make informed decisions during a crisis.
3️⃣ Personal Preparedness: Take steps to ensure you have the necessary provisions, such as water, food, and medications, to sustain yourself and your family for up to 72 hours. Being self-sufficient in the immediate aftermath of a disaster can bring peace of mind and reduce the strain on public safety resources.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @JulietteKayyem
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
This week's episode of the Passing Judgment podcast we have a riveting discussion with special guest Hugo Lowell, a prominent political investigations reporter for The Guardian. As he joins our host, Jessica Levinson, together they tackle the intriguing and complex case surrounding former President Donald Trump 🤔.
Here are 3 key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Judge Eileen Cannon's relationship with prosecutors and deference to the Trump team has raised eyebrows. Her insistence on classified discovery being produced in a skiff in the district where the case is brought and her concerns about potential collisions of criminal cases involving Trump have been questioned. Will the special counsel team challenge her actions?
2️⃣ Trump's legal team seems to be banking on delaying the trials past the 2024 election to avoid criminal liability. The introduction of classified information and the unconventional application of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CEPA) by Judge Cannon are contributing factors.
3️⃣ A separate federal case involving election interference on January 6th highlights a judge with little patience for delay tactics. The obstruction case using the 15/12 statute is strong, and prosecutors do not necessarily have to prove that Trump knew he had lost the election to make their case. Will this federal case have an impact on the overall legal battle?
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @HugoLowell
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
This week's episode of the Passing Judgment podcast, host Jessica Levinson, breaks down the significance of the Supreme Court's code of ethics. While it may come as a surprise to some, this is actually the first time in our nation's history that such a code has been implemented for Supreme Court justices. And while the introduction of the code is a step in the right direction, it is important to note that it lacks an enforcement mechanism🧑⚖️.
Here are 3 key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Code of Ethics: The Supreme Court has adopted a code of ethics for the first time in the nation's history. This code emphasizes the importance of fairness, impartiality, and the proper administration of justice.
2️⃣ Lack of Enforcement: While this code of conduct is a step in the right direction, it is notable that there is no enforcement mechanism in place. This limits its effectiveness in ensuring accountability for ethical violations.
3️⃣ Public Pressure Matters: The adoption of the code of ethics is believed to be a response to ongoing criticism and ethics scandals involving Supreme Court justices. It highlights the significance of public scrutiny and the impact it can have on our judiciary.
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
In the latest episode of the Passing Judgment podcast our host, Jessica Levinson delves into a significant Supreme Court case involving gun control. The case, US versus Rahimi, has sparked discussions about the court's position on gun control measures and their constitutionality. Tune in to gain insights into the legal intricacies of this case and the potential implications for future gun control regulations.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ The Supreme Court is reevaluating a 2022 landmark decision regarding the constitutionality of gun control measures, indicating potential shifts in the conservative stance.
2️⃣ The case in question, "US versus Rahimi," involves the constitutionality of a law prohibiting individuals under domestic violence restraining orders from possessing guns. This raises complex questions about historical tradition and the Second Amendment.
3️⃣ Justice Sonia Sotomayor's powerful statement highlights the critical role of gun control measures in protecting individuals, especially in cases of domestic violence.
Explore the MSNBC column authored by our host and Loyola Law School professor, Jessica Levinson, for a comprehensive overview of the Supreme Court and its ruling🗣!
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/supreme-court-gun-control-ruling-rahimi-rcna124289
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
In today's episode of the Passing Judgment podcast, we explore the intricacies of the legal realm and examine the most recent developments in the ongoing civil case against the former president. Our guest is Elie Honig, a CNN senior analyst and the bestselling author of 'Hatchet Man.' Together, we delve into the allegations of fraud, witness tampering, and their potential implications for our justice system. From analyzing the judge's ruling to questioning the validity of guilty pleas, this episode leaves no stone unturned. We also delve into the power dynamics, legal strategies, and potential solutions within this captivating case, which could have significant, far-reaching consequences.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ The judge's summary judgment ruling in favor of the attorney general has raised concerns about bias and prematurely determining the case's outcome without considering genuine disputes of material facts.
2️⃣ Gag orders can limit speech and expression, but they are important tools to ensure a fair trial. Maybe it's time to rebrand them to be less restrictive while maintaining their purpose.
3️⃣ Powerful individuals often pay for co-defendants' legal representation, making it harder for them to cooperate with authorities. These dynamics can complicate prosecutions, highlighting the need for DOJ policies that discourage such practices.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @ElieHonig
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
In today's episode of the Passing Judgment podcast, host Jessica Levinson discusses the recent lawsuits filed by over 3 dozen states against Meta for allegedly promoting addictive behavior and pushing harmful content to minors.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Congress's inaction has led to a dangerous vacuum when it comes to protecting children and teens on social media. The absence of federal legislation has prompted states to sue Meta, seeking to hold them accountable for their alleged violations of privacy and consumer protection laws.
2️⃣ Evidence shows a strong link between time spent on social media and increased depression, anxiety, and self-esteem issues among kids and teens. Cyberbullying and exposure to harmful content have even been linked to the death of minors. It's crucial that we address these issues and prioritize the mental health of our younger generations.
3️⃣ While Meta has made some reforms and safety improvements, more needs to be done. Content moderation, algorithm changes, and increased privacy protections are essential to mitigate the harm faced by minors. Without federal legislation, lawsuits filed by the states may serve as a means to push for change in the absence of proactive action.
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
Today, we have an exciting new episode of the Passing Judgment podcast where we're joined by Dahlia Lithwick, senior legal correspondent at Slate and author of the book "Lady Justice". In this episode, we explore a range of intriguing topics, from the court's centrist decisions and its challenges to regulatory agencies, to the crucial cases that will shape the future of the First Amendment and technology. And don't miss out on our exploration of Georgia legends Sally Yates and Stacey Abrams, their divergent paths in the legal system, and the disparities in access that still persist today.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ The episode highlights the impactful work of Stacey Abrams, who fought against voter suppression and created a successful model for other states. This is a reminder that grassroots efforts are integral in shaping our democracy.
2️⃣ We explore the incredible legacy of Pauli Murray, a constitutional hero who played a pivotal role in shaping the thinking about the 14th Amendment. Murray's contribution often goes unrecognized, underscoring the importance of acknowledging the work of unrecognized individuals who fight tirelessly for equality and justice. It's a reminder that progress is driven by nameless heroes.
3️⃣ We discussed the impact of prominent lawyers like Roberta Kaplan, whose high-profile lawsuits have brought about significant legal victories.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @DahliaLithwick.
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
In the latest episode of the Passing Judgment podcast, we delve into a variety of legal cases and hot topics currently on the Supreme Court's docket. We're rejoined by David Savage, one of the nation's experts as we unravel the intricacies of these captivating legal matters.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Diverse Perspectives on the Supreme Court: Contrary to popular belief, not all conservative justices on the Supreme Court think the same way. While they may have made conservative rulings on issues like abortion and affirmative action, there are notable differences among them, reflecting a range of conservative views.
2️⃣ The Impact of Regulatory Laws on Gun-Related Offenses: The case involving Hunter Biden's gun-related offense sheds light on the existence of various regulatory laws and their potential impact on other gun-related prosecutions. This case has the potential to initiate a significant Second Amendment discussion in the Supreme Court, prompting considerations of history, tradition, and the scope of constitutional rights.
3️⃣ Social Media Regulation: With different states having varying views on what content should be allowed on social media platforms, the issue of government regulation becomes complex. The episode explores recent cases where Trump-appointed judges in different circuits had differing opinions on states' authority to regulate social media. The Supreme Court's decision in this matter could have wide-ranging implications for free speech, censorship, and states' rights.
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode of the Passing Judgment podcast, we're joined by Laura Kusisto, national legal affairs reporter for The Wall Street Journal, to discuss the state of abortion rights in America one year after the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs. They explore the shifts in legislation and litigation surrounding abortion, emphasizing the political and legal hurdles faced by the anti-abortion movement. Overall, the episode delves into the complex landscape of abortion rights in post-Roe America.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Contrary to initial expectations, fewer states have outright banned abortions post-Roe v Wade than anticipated. About a dozen states have passed significant restrictions, but many face political and legal hurdles. Voter support for abortion rights remains strong, even in politically mixed or conservative states like Michigan and Kansas.
2️⃣ Republicans in states like Kansas, Kentucky, and Michigan have faced setbacks in their efforts to restrict abortion. Attempts to pass restrictive legislation have been met with opposition from voters, leading to upset victories for the abortion rights movement. The political landscape is proving that even traditionally conservative states have a significant population in support of abortion rights.
3️⃣ State Supreme Court decisions protecting abortion rights are more fragile than federal Supreme Court decisions based on the US Constitution. State constitutions may contain more explicit provisions protecting privacy and equality, allowing for the interpretation of abortion protections. However, state courts are subject to turnover and political pressures, leading to the potential reversal of decisions in short periods.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LauraKusisto
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
On the newest episode of the Passing Judgment podcast, we focus on the ethical dilemmas surrounding Supreme Court justices and their affiliations. Joined by Supreme Court correspondent for USA Today, John Fritze, we delve into Justice Thomas' alleged luxurious trips to Justice Alito's controversies, and examine a web of potential influences on court decisions. Fritze shares his expertise on how the lack of clear authority to enforce ethical rules raises questions about self-policing and potential separation of powers concerns. This episode emphasizes the need for ethics reform and transparency urging us to question the higher standard we hold for our esteemed justices.
Here are three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Their is a lack of enforcement mechanisms for ethical rules in the Supreme Court and the challenges of self-policing. Who should be responsible for ensuring that justices adhere to ethical standards, and how can we strike a balance between independence and accountability? This is where the need for ethical accountability is necessary.
2️⃣ Ethics concerns may also influence the court's decisions on which cases to take. With public perception playing a role, we explore the potential consequences of aligning case selection with public opinion.
3️⃣ The recent controversies surrounding Justice Thomas and Justice Alito's travel raise questions about transparency and the Supreme Court's declining poll numbers. The implications of these issues on public confidence in the court and the need for ethics reform is emphasized in light of these challenges.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @Jfritze
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
This week's episode of the Passing Judgment podcast, we are joined by the president of CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington), Noah Bookbinder. We delve into the recent lawsuit filed by CREW in Colorado. The suit claims that former President Trump is disqualified from holding public office due to his alleged violation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. This provision prohibits individuals who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding federal or state office. Tune in to better understand the intersection between the law, politics, and the preservation of democracy.
Here are the three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ In the state of Colorado there's a unique law that allows voters to sue to remove candidates who are not qualified to serve. This provided an avenue for the plaintiffs, 6 Republican and unaffiliated Colorado voters, to challenge Trump's eligibility for the ballot.
2️⃣ The lawsuit is considered ripe for review because Trump has already declared himself a candidate for president, actively fundraising, and giving campaign speeches. With the possibility of him filing paperwork and being put on the ballot, time is of the essence for this case.
3️⃣ Section 3 of the 14th Amendment: This provision was added to the Constitution after the Civil War to prevent those who engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding public office. Previous cases and decisions in state courts have interpreted and applied this section to disqualify individuals. CREW's success in a similar case in New Mexico highlights the potential impact of this provision.
Follow Our Guest:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @NoahBookbinder
Check out CREW here.
Follow Our Host:
On X formerly known as Twitter: @LevinsonJessica
In this episode, we dive into the highly publicized indictment of Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden. From the charges laid against him to the collapse of his previous plea agreement, we unravel the legal complexities surrounding his case. Join us as we analyze the potential defenses, including a surprising Second Amendment argument, and examine the political backdrop against which this indictment unfolds. Stay tuned as we shed light on what this indictment means for Hunter Biden's future and the implications it holds for American politics.
Here are the three key takeaways from the episode:
1️⃣ Hunter Biden is facing three felony charges related to gun possession and his gun purchase. He allegedly lied on a federal form when purchasing a gun, stating that he was not using controlled substances when he actually was. Additionally, he was in possession of a firearm when he shouldn't have been allowed to.
2️⃣ The plea agreement that was previously in place fell apart in open court. Part of the agreement included a pretrial diversion program, which would have allowed Hunter Biden to avoid prosecution on these gun-related charges. However, the judge expressed concern about the structure of the plea deal, and the Department of Justice couldn't reach an agreement with Hunter Biden's defense team.
3️⃣ Hunter Biden may present two key defenses. First, he may argue that the pretrial diversion agreement still remains in effect and should be honored. However, the Department of Justice maintains that it was never signed by a probation officer and is null and void. Second, Hunter Biden may claim protection under the Second Amendment, arguing that the law prohibiting certain drug users from possessing a gun violates his rights.
Follow Our Host:
On Twitter @LevinsonJessica
Let's dive into the intriguing world of legal cases involving former President Donald Trump. With a multitude of indictments, federal trials, and state investigations, it can be challenging to keep track of all the allegations and their implications.
Our host is joined by special guest Rebecca Beitsch as they unpack the latest developments in these cases, including the controversy surrounding RICO conspiracy charges and the federal case relating to the 2020 election.
They discuss the unique aspects of these cases, such as the involvement of a candidate for federal office and the legality of hush money payments. Jessica and Rebecca also examine the strategic decisions being made by defense attorneys, the upcoming trial dates, and potential implications for the former president. So, put on your legal thinking caps, because we're about to pass judgment on these complex and consequential legal battles.
Don't miss the premiere of season 5!
Meet Our Guest
Rebecca Beitsch is The Hill’s national security and legal affairs reporter where her beat spans immigration, the intelligence community, and high-stakes legal battles, including investigations concerning former President Trump. She previously covered criminal justice and civil rights issues at Stateline and worked as a statehouse reporter in North Dakota and Missouri. She is a graduate of the University of Missouri and also served as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Panama. Rebecca can be reached at rbeitsch@thehill.com.
Follow Rebecca on X formerly known as Twitter @rebeccabeitsch
Read more of Rebecca's articles here.
Follow Jessica A. Levison on X formerly known as Twitter @LevinsonJessica
In a nation of complicated legal machinations, the mifepristone situation is especially complicated. U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk last week suspended a number of laws regulating the popular and widely-used abortion drug mifepristone. Kacsmaryk’s ruling affected both the Food and Drug Administration's original 2000 approval of mifepristone as well as subsequent updates to laws regulating the drug from 2016 and 2019. Multiple appeals to Kacsmaryk’s ruling followed, and late this week the Supreme Court issued an administrative stay on the lower court’s ruling in the aftermath of a formal request from the Justice Department to block the new restrictions to the drug. Limiting access to mifepristone would have far-reaching implications of the ability of the FDA to approve other drugs, and to further complicate the situation, a ruling out of Washington was issued that could potentially limit Kacsmaryk’s decision. As the story develops in real time, Jessica updates you on the current state of the law surrounding mifepristone, as well as how we got here and where the law is going.
Depending on what you've heard, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's case against former President Trump is somewhere between frivolous or airtight. And it is likely that one's position depends on the beholder's opinion about Donald Trump himself. In today's episode, Jessica strips away the partisan perspectives and assesses the real world legal nuts and bolts of exactly what the charges are, as well as the obstacles that Bragg faces in proving his case.
The biggest defamation case we've seen in decades is about to go to trial. Dominion Voting Systems, a manufacturer of electronic voting machines and associated software, has sued Fox News and Fox Corporation for defamation, based on false claims that Dominion helped rig the 2020 presidential election for President Biden. Jessica talks through exactly what Dominion will have to prove to succeed in its case.
Former President Trump will be criminally indicted. This is a historic first. But what does it mean legally and politically? Jessica walks through what we're likely to see in the indictment, what an arraignment will look like, and what the next steps will be.
It looks likely that former President Donald Trump will soon be indicted by New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg for his role in the 2016 hush money payment to adult film performer Stormy Daniels stemming from an alleged affair with then-candidate Trump. Setting aside the time when president Ulysses Grant was arrested for speeding in a horse and buggy in Washington D.C. in 1876, a Trump arrest would make him the only sitting or former president to be arrested for suspected criminal activity. For many people who believe in accountability and the rule of law, this may sound like good news, but there may be legal and political landmines ahead - especially given the other cases in process against Trump and the fact that he as already announced his campaign for 2024. Jessica explains the legal basis for a potential indictment and talks about why she's nervous this case will go forward.
Will the Supreme Court conclude that President Biden overstepped his authority when he created a $400 billion student loan forgiveness program?
Adam Liptak, the Supreme Court reporter for The New York Times, joins Jessica to discuss how we got here and the likely fate of Biden’s program.
This week the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could change the Internet as we know it. Two cases, one case was brought against YouTube by the family of an individual was killed in an ISIS attack in Paris in 2015, and another was filed against Twitter by the family of an individual killed by an ISIS attack in Istanbul in 2017, will ask the high court to interpret the extent that technology companies could face legal liability for content posted on their sites. Jessica discusses both cases and how the eventual decisions by the Court may affect how both tech giants and everyday Americans use the Internet with Michael Macagnone, a legal affairs reporter for CQ Now and Roll Call. Jessica has also written on the cases for MSNBC here.
On January 28th of 2023, what appears to be a Chinese surveillance balloon entered U.S. airspace north of the Aleutian Islands in Alaska. President Biden ordered the balloon to be shot down. In subsequent weeks, three more unidentified flying objects were shot down by the U.S. military over Alaska, Canada, and Lake Huron.
Qhat is going on? How concerning is this string of aerial incidents? Are they related?
Mariana Alfaro, The Washington Post's co-anchor of Post Politics Now, The Washington Post's live breaking political news feed, joins Jessica to talk about what is going on and why the origins of these UFOs are more banal than an invasion of little green men from a planet far, far away.
Something rare happened in the Supreme Court last year: News that the decision in the Dobbs case would scuttle nearly half-century-old abortion protections of Roe v Wade leaked before the Court announced it, sending shockwaves through American society. Other branches of our government may leak, intentional or otherwise, but the Supreme Court traditionally ran a tighter ship. The Court just did not leak. And then it did. An investigation held by the Marshal of the Court to determine the source of the leak was inconclusive and it was revealed that the nine justices refused to sign affidavits about the leak that were mandatory for the rest of the clerks and staff. Steven Mazie, Professor of Political Studies at Bard High School Early College-Manhattan and Supreme Court Correspondent for The Economist, joins Jessica to chat about the leak and what it means for the legitimacy of the Court going forward.
Actor Alec Baldwin and armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed were recently charged with involuntary manslaughter stemming from a fatal on-set incident that took place on October 21st of 2021 while the movie Rust was filming in New Mexico. An extensive investigation by New Mexico officials established some facts regarding the tragedy: which are that Baldwin was rehearsing a scene inside a church set with a prop gun given to him by assistant director David Halls. During the rehearsal, the gun discharged and a real bullet struck cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. The bullet passed through her chest and also struck the film’s director, Joel Souza, wounding him in the shoulder with a non-fatal injury. Hutchins was pronounced dead later that day. In this episode, Jessica lays out the legal ramifications of the charges and where the trials may lead. And in order to learn a bit about on-set firearms protocols, we invited an expert in this field to talk about how firearms are handled on movie and television productions. Joey Dillon is an armorer, gun trainer, gunfight choreographer, and assistant prop master who has handled prop weapons on movies like the Coen Brothers’ The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and Hail Caesar!, as well as The Call of the Wild, The Harder They Fall and television programs like HBO’s Westworld.
Jessica and Joe discuss the death of a young man named Tyre Nichols, who died three days after a violent incident at the hands of Memphis police on January 7th, 2023. After a traffic stop, a pair of "confrontations" occurred with video evidence of the incident showing that Nichols was savagely beaten by five or more officers of Memphis' SCORPION street crime unit. Nichols wound up in critical condition and he died in a hospital three days later. Seven police officers were relieved of duty in the aftermath of the incident, five of whom were fired. Nichols was unarmed. What charges do these officers face in the death of Tyre Nichols? How can video evidence affect the judicial process in the Nichols case? Will the death of Nichols change police tactics? And how does this keep happening?
Philip Bump from The Washington Post joins Jessica to explain the politics behind the debt ceiling debacle, and the discovery of classified documents at Biden’s house, and how Jan 6 could have been avoided.
Author, columnist, and analyst Anand Giridharadas, stops by Passing Judgment to discuss his latest book -- The Persuaders: At the Front Lines of the Fight for Hearts, Minds, and Democracy.
What are the best ways to persuade people?Are Republicans better than Democrats at persuasion? What is the best way to combat disinformation? What is deep canvasing?
Anand and Jessica discuss all of these questions.
The short answer -- It's complicated. Jessica explains why members of the House Select Committee on January 6th and others have claimed that Trump is legally barred from holding federal office again, and why it is not so straightforward.
The House Select Committee on January 6, 2021 just met for the last time. As expected, they referred former President Trump to the DOJ for four criminal charges.
Jessica breaks down those four charges, what they mean, and why this matters.
Journalist Philip Bump's day job is as a journalist and correspondent for The Washington Post, where he writes the weekly newsletter, How to Read This Chart - in which he analyses trends in economics, pop culture, politics, and more using the data behind the news. His new book, The Aftermath: The Last Days of the Baby Boom and the Future of Power in America, examines the ways that America's largest generation has had an effect on manifold aspects of our culture. Who are the Boomers, beyond just a birth year? How do they continue to determine major aspects of our society, and what happens as they age and are eventually replaced by their generational competitor, the equally large generation of Millennials? Bump joins Jessica to talk about his new book on a deep dive into all things Boomer.
Democrats padded their midterm elections win tally this week with another victory in Georgia's runoff election to fill the state's second Senate seat. When neither incumbent Raphael Warnock nor challenger Herschel Walker garnered 50% of the vote in November, that set Georgia's voters on an accelerated runoff schedule. One of the strangest races in this year's senatorial elections got even stranger with former football star Walker making comments about werewolves and vampires and dodging additional accusations of allegedly encouraging former girlfriends to get abortions. Although Reverend Warnock won convincingly enough to have the race called mere hours after polls closed, Walker still managed to garner 48.6% of the votes cast. Jessica welcomes journalist Greg Bluestein from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution back to PJP to discuss the runoff, how Warnock won, why Walker lost, why Republicans still voted en masse for a candidate as flawed as Walker, and why Brian Kemp beat Stacy Abrams so convincingly in the Georgia governor's race.
The Supreme Court just heard oral arguments in the biggest free speech case of the term. The case involves a would-be website designer in Colorado and whether she can decline to design wedding websites for same sex couples. Jessica gives a quick recap of the complex legal issues and tells us what to expect from the Supreme Court.
It is another big week of legal news on two-fer Friday! First, Jessica explains why former President Trump is unlikely to keep the special master he asked for in the Mar-a-Lago investigation. Second, Jessica talks through a huge election law case involving the 'independent legislature doctrine' that will be argued before the Supreme Court next week and explains how it could affect your voting power.
The two-week trial against the founder of the Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes, and four others for seditious conspiracy in association with the January 6th insurrection just concluded. While we wait for the jury's verdict, Jessica breaks down what is at stake - both for Rhodes and the Justice Department.
Democrats outperformed expectations in the midterm elections. Jessica gives three reasons why historical trends didn't hold in this election, previews what will come next, and shares the best-known secret in American politics - Supreme Court decisions matter!
It's midterm election eve and all is not quiet. With the control of both houses of Congress hanging in the balance, rising inflation, a staunchly conservative Supreme Court majority and a President with low approval ratings, Americans are poised to go to the polls to determine the direction of the country.
In the midst of this, Jessica talks with David Corn, the Washington, D.C. bureau chief for Mother Jones and author of American Psychosis: A Historical Investigation of How the Republican Party Went Crazy, as well as other books.
What do Barry Goldwater, the Tea Party, and Senator Joe McCarthy have to do with Trumpism? Listen and find out!
Jessica gives a quick summary of the breaking legal news of the week, including new revelations in a book that call into question some of Justice Samuel Alito’s statements to the late Senator Ted Kennedy about his position on Roe v. Wade, the January 6th Committee’s decision to give Trump another week to produce subpoenaed documents, and the likelihood that Donald Trump will ever sit for a deposition. (Don’t hold your breath.)
The Supreme Court is hearing two huge cases dealing with the legality of affirmative action programs. Jessica explains the two cases before the court and what is likely to happen in each case.
Jessica speaks with Noah Bookbinder, the President and CEO of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). CREW's mission statement outlines the organization's activities to "...use aggressive legal actions, in-depth investigations, and innovative policy and reform work" because "Americans deserve a government that is ethical, accountable, and open."
Noah and Jessica discuss efforts to use the 14th Amendment to disqualify lawmakers involved in the insurrection on January 6th, efforts to reform judicial ethics, and more.
The former president had a no good, very bad legal week. The January 6th Committee served him with a subpoena. He was deposed in a defamation case brought by journalist E. Jean Carroll. And a federal judge found that it is more likely than not that Trump and one of his attorneys, John Eastman, engaged in a crime related to thwarting the peaceful transfer of power. Oh, and Steve Bannon was sentenced for contempt of Congress. Jessica breaks it all down in plain English.
After an earth-shattering term that ended federal protection for abortion in the last term, the 6-3 Supreme Court GOP majority is flexing its power in the new 2022-2023 term. Jessica welcomes the PJP producer and co-host Joe Armstrong back to discuss upcoming cases about redistricting and voting rights, a 1st Amendment case that deals with Andy Warhol (you read that right), a pair of cases that address affirmative action, yet another religious rights and discrimination case, and a doozy of a case with colossal implications that deals with what what is referred to as the independent legislature doctrine. And there is a new justice on the bench, with Ketanji Brown Jackson displaying a keen legal mind in the first oral arguments of the new session.
Jessica gives a quick update on what happened this week when Baltimore prosecutors decided to drop all charges against Adnan Syed, who has spent the last two decades in prison after being convicted in 2000 of the murder of his ex-girlfriend, Hae Min Lee. Syed's story was brought to national attention in the "Serial" podcast and he has consistently claimed to be innocent of the crimes of first-degree murder, robbery, kidnapping and false imprisonment that landed him in jail.
The Daily Beast's political investigations reporter Jose Pagliery joins Jessica to unravel the morass of legal maneuvers by Donald Trump's lawyers.
The new Supreme Court term is about to begin and the court is set to hear a number of cases that address legal protections from discrimination. Two of the cases involve voting rights, two more involve affirmative action programs, and another centers on the matchup between free speech rights and freedom from discrimination. How will these cases impact American society? Will the now-entrenched 6-3 conservative majority on the court continue to attempt to push the country to the right?
Donald Trump's legal team got its special master to review classified documents discovered at Mar-a-Lago in August, but is the situation playing out like they intended? Reporter Jan Wolfe is the business legal affairs correspondent for The Wall Street Journal and he spends a lot of time sorting out questions like that one. He joins Jessica to discuss the multiple ever-developing investigations that seem to be changing by the minute into the former president's business empire and handling of sensitive documents.
Just a few moments ago the Department of Justice submitted a 36-page filing responding to President Trump's claim that a special master should be appointed to review documents the FBI obtained and took from his residence at Mar-a-Lago.
What did the DOJ say and what did we learn?
Hugo Lowell, reporter for The Guardian and regular commentator on MSNBC, joins Jessica to discuss the breaking news of the partial release of the affidavit supporting the warrant to search Trump’s former residence at Mar-a-Lago. What did we learn? Why was the affidavit redacted? Does this mean Trump will face charges? What about this new development has Trump's legal team more concerned than ever before?
There has been a deluge of political and legal news over the past few weeks - especially for midsummer - a typically slow period in the calendar that news junkies sometimes refer to as "the summer doldrums." But not this year. An unprecedented FBI search of a former president's current residence is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to deepening legal trouble for Donald Trump.
It is time for a regroup and a recap.
On this week's episode, Jessica breaks down the states of the (multiple) big legal investigations into Trump and his associates and explains which laws are at issue in each case: the investigation regarding January 6th, the documents seized at Mar-a-Lago, possible election fraud in Georgia, and potential business or tax fraud in New York. Will any of these investigations imperil the teflon reputation the former president has when it comes to dodging real legal liability?
Two more big pieces of legal news this week.
First, if Trump is convicted for taking classified documents from the White House, does that mean he is barred from holding federal office again? (Spoiler alert - no).
Second, since Trump took the Fifth in a deposition in the ongoing investigation by the New York Attorney General into the Trump Org, does that mean we can't judge him for that? (Answer - it does not).
This is a breaking news episode of Passing Judgment.
The FBI has executed a search warrant at the private residence of former President Trump.
What does this tell us about the investigation into Trump and whether he will face criminal charges?
Representative Judy Chu stops by Passing Judgment to discuss reproductive rights, marriage equality, and gun control.
Rep. Chu is the lead sponsor of the Women's Health Protection Act, and a supporter of Right to Contraception Act, the Respect for Marriage Act, and tighter gun control measures. She talks with Jessica about those proposed laws and why, in her view, it is time to eliminate the filibuster.
Kyle Cheney, senior legal affairs reporter for Politico, joins Jessica to talk about the January 6th Committee, Steve Bannon’s trial for criminal contempt, and whether the DOJ will bring criminal charges against Trump.
Prof. Cary Franklin, a professor at UCLA's School of Law and the Director of the Center on Reproductive Health, Law, and Policy and the Williams Institute, joins Jessica to talk through the impact of the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson.
Cary and Jessica discuss the rationale behind the ruling and what it could mean for other rights, including LGBTQ rights and the ability to obtain contraception.
The congressional hearings investigating the events of the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th of 2021 were supposed to end in June, but progress is being made and additional hearings have been scheduled. Like so many investigations, when you tug on one thread you discover that that thread is connected to many, many others. Why has the committee scheduled more hearings? How has Team Trump changed its strategy as the committee gains traction? Why didn't Trump administration officials reveal the information discovered in the hearings in the immediate aftermath of the deadly event? In this episode, Jessica and Joe review and analyze the latest news from the January 6th committee - where they started, where they are, and where they are going.
This was an epic Supreme Court term.
It is not an overstatement to say this was the most consequential term in at least half a century.
Joe joins Jessica as they walk through the biggest opinions of the term and what they mean for you.
We talk abortion rights, religious rights, gun rights, and the power of the federal government.
Jessica speaks with novelist, essayist and cultural commentator Stephen Marche.
Stephen is the author of The Next Civil War (2022), The Unmade Bed: The Messy Truth About Men and Women in the Twenty-First Century (2016), and The Hunger of the Wolf (2015) among other books.
Jessica interviews Stephen about whether and why America stands at the brink of civil war and what we can do about it.
The Supreme Court issued a legal and political earthquake today: abortion is no longer a constitutionally protected right, and this means states have a clear pathway to completely ban abortion. Jessica and Joe break down the opinion, talking through exactly how the Court made this decision which overturns half a century of legal precedent, as well as what comes next both legally and politically.
Hearings of the House Select Committee on the January 6th, 2021 insurrection at the Capitol took place this week. Jessica gets us started with an overview the evidence presented, the former president’s brazen disregard of the Constitution, the intended audience(s) for the hearings, and just how close America came to becoming a failed democracy.
Congressman Brad Sherman has been serving California in congress since 1997, in three different congressional districts - long enough to have endured many changes in how our government governs. Sherman joins Jessica to discuss his position on how both our government and our divided society got to be so at odds, what we can do about it, and how he got into politics in grade school.
There are about half a dozen big cases left in the current Supreme Court term that began last October. The 6-3 conservative majority on the Court has an opportunity to make an enormous impact on our country over the next month as decisions will be issued regarding not just Roe v. Wade and the fate of federally protected abortion rights, but also gun rights, religious rights, and the limits of executive authority. And as per usual, the implications for these new decisions affecting other rights looms large. In today's episode Jessica gives a short preview of what to expect.
This week a Court of Appeals held that someone who engages in or supports an insurrection is barred from holding certain public offices. The case involved a challenge surrounding Rep. Madison Cawthorn's candidacy.
Cawthorn last week lost his primary election and will not appear on the ballot for reelection in November, but the precedent - based on a section of the 14th Amendment - has far-reaching implications for other lawmakers who may have participated in the "Stop the Steal" riot. In this episode of PJP, Jessica explains why this crucial clarification goes far beyond the soon-to-be former Congressman Cawthorn.
For more, read Jessica's piece here.
Sarah D. Wire covers the Justice Department and national security for the Los Angeles Times with a focus on the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection and domestic extremism.
She stops by Passing Judgment to update us on the Committee's work.
It was a bombshell week of legal news this week. A leaked draft opinion revealed that the Court is poised to eliminate abortion protections that have stood for nearly half a century. The opinion - if it is issued in its current form at the end of the term - has far-reaching implications for both abortion rights in America as well as collateral damage to other rights like access to birth control and same-sex marriage. And the unprecedented leak continues to erode the legitimacy of the court.
As expected, America will soon likely look very different, with a patchwork of legal protections for abortion determined on a state-by-state basis. In this episode Jessica talks about the leak, how and why she thinks it took place, and what the fallout may be.
Our guest is David Lazarus, the "Emmy-winning money guy for KTLA Channel 5" and the former business columnist for the Los Angeles Times.
David joins Jessica to talk about the impact of Elon Musk's impending acquisition of Twitter, why Europe might better protect social media users, and why it is important to have consumer affairs reporters.
It's a legal and political roundup! Jessica is joined by Joe.
Topics include -- abortion pills, and whether women in states that outlaw abortion will be able to obtain them; a terrible decision regarding the legality of federal mask mandates; Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and whether a Civil War era provision of the 14th Amendment will prevent her from being on the ballot; and Rep. Kevin McCarthy's hypocrisy caught on tape.
Should Americans be required to vote?
E.J. Dionne and Miles Rapoport argue that they should in their new book, 100% Democracy.
Jessica interviews E.J. and Miles and asks them about the pros and cons of their proposal.
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will be sworn in as our country's first African American female Supreme Court justice. How will Judge Jackson change the Supreme Court?
Which big cases will the court tackle next term when she is on the court?
What do the confirmation hearings and vote say about our political processes?
This week federal district court judges from opposite sides of the country came out with two big decisions this week. A California district court judge ruled that John Eastman, former advisor to the former president, must turn over some emails to the January 6th Committee. But the big news from the ruling is the judge's conclusion that it is more likely than not that Eastman and Trump engage in criminal conduct. Will Trump and Eastman face criminal charges?
Next, a Florida district judge struck down a portion of Florida's restrictive voting law. The judge found that Florida intentionally discriminated against Black voters. Will the decision stand?
Jessica and Joe break it all down for you.
For more, here are Jessica's pieces on MSNBC. Why this federal judge has had enough of Florida's racist election laws A federal judge's conclusion is more than a stinging rebuke of Trump
Will Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson make history and become the first female African American Supreme Court justice? What happened during the four days of confirmation hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee?
Could Justice Clarence Thomas be impeached? Given his wife, Ginni Thomas', political activities, should he recuse himself from all cases dealing with January 6th or the 2020 presidential election?
And what did the Supreme Court just say about the religious rights of death row inmates?
POLITICO Senior legal affairs reporter Kyle Cheney covers the legal and political action following the January 6th insurrection at the Capitol. A Congressional committee’s work investigating the insurrection - and former president Donald Trump’s possible culpability - has been intensifying. It is the perfect time to have Kyle join Jessica and get us up to speed on the latest on this topic with far-reaching implications. Will Steve Bannon face penalties for ignoring a congressional subpoena? Why did Michael Flynn change his tune? Will the committee recommend charges to DOJ? And perhaps most importantly of all, did Donald Trump’s involvement in Ukraine set the stage for Russia’s invasion and the rapidly developing human crisis in Europe?
Another week, another batch of breaking legal news! In this episode Jessica breaks down the latest news from the House Select Committee investigating the events of January 6, 2021 and talks about a key new court filing that may turn out to be a game-changer in the ongoing investigation. Jessica also discusses a new, baseless theory that may look good in the short term but bad further down the road - one that could further threaten our voting rights. And Jessica explains why Texas and Missouri recently delivered a one-two punch when it comes to rapidly eroding reproductive rights in America.
Time to analyze President Joe Biden's SOTU address with CBS political contributor Joel Payne.
How did Biden do? Did he pivot and signal a change in his governing style? Are any concrete policies likely to result from the laundry list of wishes included in the speech? Will the speech help Democrats in the midterms?
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will make history later this year when she is expected to become the first Black woman to sit on the Supreme Court United States.
Jessica provides you with a quick biographical sketch of Judge Brown Jackson, how her appointment could change the court, and the big cases she'll be deciding next term.
Jessica talks with Tom Nichols, Tom is an expert on international affairs. His work deals with issues involving Russia. He is a contributing writer for the Atlantic and proprietor of “Peacefield” a newsletter at the Atlantic.
He was a professor at the U.S. Naval War College and at the Harvard Extension School. He was previously a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, and the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. And he is the author of numerous books, including Our Own Worst Enemy: The Assault from Within on Modern Democracy.
Tom talks with Jessica about what precipitated Russia's invasion of the Ukraine, whether there was any way to prevent Russia's invasion, and what may happen next. Tom walks us through options that the U.S. and our international allies have to address Russia's acts of war.
In a follow-up to last week's coverage of Sarah Palin's defamation lawsuit against the New York Times, Jessica and Joe report that the judge tossed Palin's case - but that he also allowed the jury to render a verdict. Neither were particularly favorable to Palin, but the unique close to the trial may complicate the situation down the road after Palin issues a near-inevitable appeal. Will the First Amendment rights of the press remain as robust when Palin's defamation accusation is eventually resolved? Also, this week a 1st Judicial District judge ruled that three members of the Trump Organization, namely the former president Donald Trump and his two eldest children, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump, must sit for depositions under suspicion of fraudulent business practices. Will they show? And if they do, will they lean on their 5th Amendment protections and not answer questions? Also, in a unique wrap for this week's episode, Jessica gives the absolute latest development of a story on a podcast in a manner that typically happens on live radio - breaking news that former Minnesota police officer Kim Potter was today sentenced to two years for the fatal shooting of Daunte Wright.
It is our first legal roundup of 2022, and intrepid producer and co-host Joe Armstrong returns.
First, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin took the stand in her defamation suit against the New York Times this week. How did she do? [ANSWER: Not great.]
We also recently learned that although Donald Trump may or may not have been flushing official documents down a White House toilet, he most definitely improperly took some top secret documents with him when he left for Mar-a-Lago in Florida.
Lastly, the Supreme Court this week ruled in Alabama's favor when it came to a recent challenge to congressional redistricting despite a violation of the Voting Rights Act, and Jessica shares some theories about how this "shadow docket" decision may be related to SCOTUS' recent YOLO energy.
Lawrence Hurley has covered the Supreme Court for over two decades, earning a Pulitzer Prize in 2021 for work on a project that examined the doctrine of “qualified immunity.” Lawrence and Jessica discuss what it is like to cover the Court, whether the Court has become increasingly partisan in the modern age, who might be on the shortlist to replace retiring Justice Stephen Breyer, and the fate of Roe v. Wade.
United States Senator Alex Padilla has spent his lifetime in public service - first as a member of the Los Angeles City Council and eventually as a California State Senator. In 2015 he became California’s first Latino Secretary of State, and he was then appointed by Gavin Newsom to finish the term of Senator and now Vice President Kamala Harris. Padilla joins Jessica to discuss the fate of the filibuster, why voting rights are essential to a free democracy, and the Senate’s role in the upcoming replacement of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer.
CBS political contributor and veteran Capitol Hill reporter Molly Hooper joins Jessica to discuss the major political stories of the week - including Joe Biden's marathon two-hour press conference. The President took a wide range of questions on a variety of topics, but was more better? With the midterm elections looming larger every day and an ongoing pandemic hampering the healthcare system and the economy, did Biden help or hurt his party, his presidency, or the country?
Joel Payne is a Democratic strategist who worked on Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign as well as a member of the late Senator Harry Reid's staff. He joins Jessica to discuss the Biden administration's first term. President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was sworn in last January 20th in the midst of a maelstrom of foreign and domestic challenges - a raging Covid-19 pandemic, a monumental vaccine rollout, a strong conservative majority on the Supreme Court, and a country divided by years of misinformation and disinformation fomented by the chaotic prior administration - and he moved into the Oval Office two weeks to the day after an unprecedented and violent insurrection at the Capitol that left five Americans dead. But Biden also found himself with narrow majorities in both the Senate and the House and managed to pass a groundbreaking infrastructure bill within months. How did Biden navigate his first year in office? And how is he positioned to guide the United States through the ongoing pandemic, the upcoming midterm elections, and a likely run for reelection in 2024?
Welcome to 2022! This is a special, best-of episode of Passing Judgment, featuring excerpts from some of Jessica's best interviews with guests like Senator Barbara Boxer, America's Debate Coach Dr. Todd Graham, hard-nosed journalist Brian Karem, Nse Ufot, who played no small part in turning Georgia blue in 2020, New York Times legal counsel David McCraw, former white supremacist Arno Arno Michaelis and his ideas on how to heal a divided society, author and political scientist Brian Klaas on how power corrupts, SCOTUS expert Linda Greenhouse, and an emotional account of her experience during the January 6th insurrection from California Rep. Norma Torres.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Happy New Year Passing Judgment listeners.
Jessica and Joe talk through some, but not all, of the biggest legal stories of the year, including the January 6th insurrection, SCOTUS news (including abortion laws and vaccine mandates), and some big criminal trials including - Derek Chauvin, Travis & Gregory McMichael, Kyle Rittenhouse, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Jussie Smollett.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Jay Willis, editor-in-chief of Balls and Strikes, joins Jessica to talk about the problems plaguing the Supreme Court. They talk through the root causes of those problems and some potential solutions.
Linda Greenhouse joins us to discuss her fascinating new book - Justice on the Brink: The Death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Rise of Amy Coney Barrett, and Twelve Months that Transformed the Supreme Court
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It is a week legal and political roundup of the big stories of the week that was. Joe joins Jessica to help explain the Supreme Court's big ruling today regarding Texas' restrictive abortion law, the District of Columbia's Circuit Court's decision regarding the work of the House Select Committee investigating the insurrection on January 6th, the resolution of the Jussie Smollett case, and the legacy of Senator and former Republican candidate for president Bob Dole, who died this week at the age of 98.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Time for a legal roundup.
We cover oral arguments before the Supreme Court in the big abortion case, oral arguments before the DC Circuit regarding Trump's attempt to stop the January 6th Select Committee from getting Whitehouse documents, and the shooting in Michigan this week.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide while incarcerated in August of 2019, but that's not the end of the story. Epstein's confidant and alleged former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, is now facing federal charges for sex trafficking. Maxwell is a British citizen and former socialite who stands accused of assisting Epstein in multiple instances of exploiting and abusing underage girls over nearly a decade. On this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica gives a summary of the beginning of the trial, for which opening arguments are expected today to take place.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
On August 12th 2017, during two days of protests and counterprotests surrounding the white supremacist “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, a man named James Alex Fields Jr. drove his car into a group of counterprotesters, severely injuring several of them and killing a 32-year-old woman named Heather Heyer. Fields was eventually convicted and sentenced to life in prison, plus 419 years. In public statements about the violence, then-President Donald Trump kicked off a political firestorm when he failed to immediately denounce the white nationalists, saying there were “...very fine people on both sides.” In the conclusion of the civil trial that arose in the aftermath of that bloody weekend, a jury this week ruled that the white nationalist organizers of the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville must pay more than $26 million in damages. In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica and Joe discuss the civil trial and how the outcome may impact future activities by white supremacist organizations.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
In the verdict in the second high-profile court case with a strong racial aspect in just five days, a jury today found three white men, Gregory McMichael, Travis McMichael, and William "Roddie" Bryan, guilty in the murder of Ahmaud Arbery. Arbery was jogging in a residential neighborhood in Brunswick, Georgia in late February of 2020 when the three men chased the young black man in their vehicles. Suspecting Arbery was a burglar, Travis McMichael shot and killed Arbery with a shotgun during a scuffle. On this episode, Jessica and Joe break down the 27 charges against the men, how and why the case and the verdict were different from the outcome in last week's Rittenhouse trial, the selection of an almost all-white jury for the murder of a black man in a mostly-white county, and why 75 days elapsed between Arbery's murder and the arrest of the three men.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
During a summer of civil unrest in 2020, a white police officer shot a 29-year-old black man named Jacob Blake in the back in Kenosha, Wisconsin. This sparked days of protests and rioting in Kenosha. Kyle Rittenhouse, an Illinois resident, drove to Kenosha, saying that he wanted to protect businesses from looters. He brought his Smith and Wesson M&P15 Sport II, an AR-15-style rifle. After a series of chaotic events, Rittenhouse shot and killed two people - Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, and he wounded a third, Gaige Grosskreutz. After a widely-publicized trial, the jury today found Rittenhouse not guilty on all counts. Jessica and Joe break down the verdict, its context, and its larger consequences.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse has garnered national attention for a myriad of reasons, and it brings up important questions related to self-defense, vigilantism, and race. In today's episode, Jessica and Joe give a summary of facts of the case, discuss how the prosecution and the defense presented their arguments to the jury, and examine the judge's headline-generating role in this trial.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Biden indicted. Why? What is next?
Trump wins a (temporary) victory in his effort to prevent the National Archives from releasing documents to the House Select Committee on January 6th.
Biden has a (perhaps temporary) loss in his effort implement a vaccine mandate.
And the Supreme Court considers the religious rights of death row inmates.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
We've all heard the aphorism from Lord Acton, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." But does it? And if it does, how does power corrupt people who would otherwise act in the best interest of others? Does power make people more susceptible to abusing that power or are people more likely to abuse power drawn to leadership positions? Author and political scientist Dr. Brian Klaas set out to answer those questions in his new book, Corruptible: Who Gets Power and How It Changes Us. (Scribner, November 9, 2021). In his previous books, The Despot's Accomplice: How the West is Aiding and Abetting the Decline of Democracy and The Despot's Apprentice: Donald Trump's Attack on Democracy, Klaas turned his keen eye on the increasingly divisive state of the world and how the former U.S. president Donald Trump undermined democracy at home and abroad. This time, Klaas broadens the scope of his research by conducting over 500 interviews for Corruptible - sitting with presidents, rebel leaders, cult members and dictators to try and determine if that age old adage is true.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It’s hot button season here on Passing Judgment. We have been closely following the fate of abortion rights with Supreme Court cases out of Texas and Mississippi. Today's episode of Passing Judgment focuses on another lightning rod topic that has come before the court, and that’s gun rights. On Wednesday of this week, the court heard about two hours of oral arguments about the Constitutionality of a New York law that restricts concealed carry permits. With a new solid conservative majority on the Court, what has changed about how the nine justices address the interpretation of the Second Amendment? And will the current case out of New York wind up expanding gun rights in several states - areas where 25% of Americans live?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
This morning the Supreme Court heard almost three hours of oral arguments about who can sue and be sued to block the enforcement of SB8 - Texas’ restrictive abortion law. Jessica listened to the arguments, and in this episode she and Joe explain what exactly how each side presented their position, what the eventual outcome will mean for the protection of your individual rights, and how the law of unintended consequences may come into play.
On today's episode, Jessica and Joe discuss California Congressman Devin Nunes and his defamation lawsuit against journalist Ryan Lizza - and why it may have significant consequences for free speech and the free press in America.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
President Obama appointed 55 federal appellate judges in two terms - and Donald Trump appointed 54 in just one. Now President Biden is working to nominate judges who will diversify the judicial system to better reflect the changing demographics of America. Also, the civil trial begins this week in the deadly "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, West Virginia. And a new exclusive piece in Rolling Stone alleges that Trump administration members and other elected officials may have helped plan the January 6th insurrection at the Capitol. Jessica and Joe talk about all these topics and veer gently into "Big, if true" territory for the last one.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It is our semi-regular weekly legal roundup!
We're going to explain the breaking legal news out of the Supreme Court. It agreed to hear a challenge to Texas' abortion law, but it may not be exactly what you think.
We explain what is next for Steven Bannon, now that the House voted to hold him in contempt.
We also walk through former President Trump's suit against the national archives, talk about why voting rights reform has failed to gain traction in the Senate, and why Trump recently sat for a deposition.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
In today's episode, Jessica talks with Dr. Peter Hanson - the National Poll Director at Grinnell College. Hanson walks us through brand-new polling data about Biden, the politicization of the Supreme Court, the future of democracy, and how what liberty means to Democrats is not the same thing as what liberty means to Republicans. The results will surprise you.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Its our legal roundup!
Will Steve Bannon face criminal penalties for defying a congressional subpoena? (For more, here is Jessica's MSNBC column).
Will the Supreme Court be reformed?
Will former President Trump sit for a deposition in a civil suit?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
A House Select Committee is investigating the events of January 6th.
It is vital that the American public know what exactly happened leading up to, and during, the insurrection at the Capitol.
But now some people who were subpoenaed by that committee, namely former President Trump, and former White House counselor Steve Bannon, are contending they do not have to comply with those subpoenas.
We will break down the law and talk about the politics of what is really happening here.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Vaccine mandates, they're everywhere. Public and private institutions are requiring that workers, students, and customers be vaccinated. But are religious exemptions to these vaccine mandates legally required?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Not exactly. A federal judge just pushed pause in the implementation of Texas' restrictive abortion law. But that ruling is already being appealed.
We talk about what happened and why and what comes next.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Jessica previews and explains the big cases the Supreme Court will be hearing this term.
What's on the docket for the term that begins on October 4th? Abortion, gun control, religious rights, the freedom of speech, and much more.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
There was a big hearing in federal district court today in the case of U.S. v Texas. We break down all of the legal arguments made by the Department of Justice, the State of Texas, and what is likely to happen next.
Cyber Ninjas, along with three other contractors, completed the Arizona ballot audit this week, spending millions to prove once again that Joe Biden won the state in the 2020 presidential election. But Arizona isn't alone in doing so - a number of states are engaging in audits of ballot tallies from the 2020 election; Pennsylvania's is ongoing, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott this week announced that an audit will be performed in four Texas counties despite the fact that Donald Trump won Texas in the last election. With no demonstrable evidence of fraud, what is the GOP strategy here? Is this about the last election or the next election?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Kind of.
It's a new week and a new episode.
Jessica breaks down the arguments in favor of Texas and Mississippi's restrictive abortion laws, why the people supporting those laws are may soon try to undermine protections for LGBTQ Americans, and why Supreme Court justices keep telling us they're neutral.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
While we all think through our top legislative priorities, we talk with Congressman Ro Khanna (D) about this. Rep. Khanna shares his thoughts about climate change, infrastructure, the economy, and when kids will be able to get the COVID-19 vaccine.
Let's recall the failed recall election of California Governor Gavin Newsom.
Why and how did he resoundingly defeat an effort to end his term before it, well, ends?
What does this recall mean for California? Gavin Newsom? The future of recall elections?
We address all of this on the latest episode of Passing Judgment.
And here is Jessica's piece on MSNBC about the recall.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
On the 20th anniversary of 9/11, we are joined by Peter Bergen, author of the new book, "The Rise and Fall of Osama Bin Laden."
Peter is the vice president for global studies & fellows at New America, a CNN national security analyst, and a professor of practice at Arizona State University where he co-directs the Center on the Future of War.
He is the author or editor of nine books, three of which were New York Times bestsellers and four of which were named among the best non-fiction books of the year by The Washington Post.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Lots of legal news from the Lone Star State.
We will give you the latest legal news on Texas' abortion and voting laws and a challenge by an inmate on death row in Texas.
Here are Jessica's latest columns (mentioned in the episode) on MSNBC.
Texas abortion law should be fought at state court level
Texas abortion ban is devastating testament to Trump's Supreme Court
Also, did an Ohio judge really force a hospital to tread a COVID-19 patient with ivermectin?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
The Supreme Court just silently let its most controversial case in decades - Roe v Wade - slip away by taking no action on an emergency appeal on a restrictive new Texas abortion law. By letting that law - SB 8 - go into effect, abortion is presently illegal after six weeks in the state of Texas. Jessica and Joe discuss the implications of SB 8 at the state and federal levels, as well as how the conservative majority on the Court said a lot by saying nothing at all.
Dr. Aaron David Miller is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and he has advised Secretaries of State from multiple presidential administrations on both sides of the aisle. With an ongoing international pandemic and a bollixed pullout of U.S. forces from a twenty year war in Afghanistan, what would someone with decades of foreign policy experience tell the Biden Administration about how to best face multiple challenges at home and abroad?
Senior reporter for Buzzfeed News, Zoe Tillman, stops by Passing Judgment to update us on the cases against those involved in the insurrection at the Capitol.
We talked about who has been charged, what charges are being brought, and what to look for in upcoming cases.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
We ask Dr. Lauren Crosby, a nationally-recognized parenting expert and pediatrician, all of your questions about kids and COVID-19.
Can kids safely go back to school? What safety protocols should schools be putting in place? Are playdates safe? After school sports?
Should every eligible child get the vaccine? And when will kids under 12 be eligible for the vaccine?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
The news out of Afghanistan is gutting.
We call on Dr. Abdulkader Sinno, professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Studies at Indiana University, to walk us through how we got here, whether it was avoidable, who is to blame for what is currently happening in Afghanistan, and were we go from here.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Wondering what is in the big infrastructure bill? So were we. We called Politico reporter Tanya Synder for help. Tanya walks us through what is and isn't in the infrastructure bill and what that means for you.
We also talk about Tanya's area of expertise -- self-driving cars. Ready to let a machine take the wheel? We are.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo steps aside. What does it mean for impeachment hearings, criminal investigations, and civil cases?
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is temporarily kicked off Twitter (again). Spoiler alert - mandatory vaccinations are typically legal. We will tell you why. And for more, here is Jessica's piece on MSNBC.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
We round out the week with a look back at the legal and political problems facing Gov. Cuomo and the new round of employers requiring vaccine mandates.
Welcome back! We have a lot of politics and law packed into this episode.
First up, what is NY Gov Andrew Cuomo's political future? Will he face impeachment proceedings? Civil litigation? Criminal prosecution?
Next, what about the latest developments in Rep. Eric Swalwell's case against former President Donald Trump, Rep. Mo Brooks and others? Is Brooks immune from liability? What about Trump?
And finally ... will we ever see Trump's tax returns? It looks like Congress might see them. When will we?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Kate Starbird stops by Passing Judgment to discuss how to create an informed public and strengthen democratic discourse. She also talks about how to fight misinformation and disinformation.
Kate is the co-founder the University of Washington's Center for an Informed Public.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
We have you covered on all of your HIPAA FAQs.
What can employers, business owners, and journalists ask you about your health and vaccine status?
And a bonus new segment -- that's not how it works.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It is Mississippi versus Roe v. Wade. Jessica and Joe talk through the state's assault on Roe. Jessica discusses the case law leading up to the Roe decision and whether the case is not vulnerable to being overturned.
Joe gives an update on the indictment of Tom Barrack, the chair of former President Trump's 2017 inauguration committee.
And Joe and Jessica talk through the implications of the firing of NFL Coach Rick Dennison for his failure to get vaccinated.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Is the DACA program itself now illegal? We breakdown all of the legal ins and outs and tell you what is likely become of this immigration program.
Will CA Governor Gavin Newsom be recalled? Probably not. But there are plenty of fun legal topics surrounding the recall to discuss.
Also, we have decided to add a new segment on called Passing Judgment called - THAT IS NOT HOW IT WORKS! (Say it with me listeners). And for our first installment of this segment, here is looking at you Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Welcome to our second year and third season of Passing Judgment.
In this episode we look back on the biggest legal and political issues we covered in the first year of Passing Judgment and preview some of the most pressing questions we are sure to address in the coming weeks and months.
We look back on the election, the insurrection, and the impeachment. Then we turn to talking about whether there will be meaningful legislative reform in the areas of health care, immigration, gun control, and more. We also talk about the past SCOTUS term and discuss what is ahead for the October 2021 term.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Some Texas lawmakers have literally left town, why? Texas democrats are leaving their state to deny republicans of the quorum needed to vote on a another bill that would restrict voting rights.
Will this be successful? Will it put pressure on federal lawmakers to implement new voting rights protections on the federal level?
Jessica and Joe discuss on the latest episode.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Another big week of legal news.
We cover Trump v. Facebook; Congressman Swalwell v. Trump, Trump Jr., Guiliani, & Congressman Mo Brooks; Nike v. Avenatti, and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti's next gig.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Our guest, Renee DirResta, is the Research Manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory.
We talk through what disinformation is, why it is harmful, how we can combat it, and who should be in charge of combatting it.
Our conversation with Renee occurred during Loyola Law School's Journalist Law School.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
This episode is overflowing with legal news.
What do the Trump Org indictments mean, and will the former president himself be indicted?
Is the Supreme Court acting to subvert our democracy? We talk about the last two blockbuster cases of the term -- one dealing with voting rights and the other with First Amendment rights.
And finally -- Cosby is freed. Is this actually a win for the rule of law?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
The Supreme Court left in place a lower court decision that requires that transgender students in public high schools be able to use the bathroom of their choosing.
We talk about the legal and psychological implications of the case with Felicia Ortiz, who has a JD from UC Berkeley and is a therapist who works with transgender youth and adults.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
USA Today national correspondent Tami Abdollah brings us inside the courtroom for the sentencing of Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd.
The Supreme Court handed down three big decisions today.
The Court answered the following questions:
Can schools punish students for certain off campus speech?
Can union organizers enter employers' property?
Can the police enter a suspects house without a warrant if they suspect a violation of a noise ordinance?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
As the end of the current Supreme Court term draws near, today the Court issued a narrow ruling on compensation for college athletes. In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica and Joe talk about how the court applied anti-trust statues to the NCAA's claim that their rules should continue to prevent additional academic and other compensation for college athletes, and how justice Kavanaugh - a former coach - issued a fiery retort to the NCAA's position.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It's playoff season for Supreme Court aficionados! This morning the Court issued three decisions, the first of which both retained the Affordable Care Act as the law of the land at the same time that it punted a bit, leaving the door open to future challenges. The second decision ruled that the First Amendment can be interpreted to mean that the City of Philadelphia cannot prevent a Catholic organization from discriminating against same-sex couples when it comes to fostering children. And as horrific as it sounds, the third decision states that Nestle and other cocoa bean producers are not culpable for child slavery practices in Africa's Ivory Coast. Jessica and Joe break down how the court voted and give some insight how these changes may affect American society.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Jessica talks with Dan Epps of Washington University about the current state of the court and the pros and cons of proposed reforms.
This episode was recorded during a panel of Loyola Law School's Journalist Law School program.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
In this episode of Passing Judgment we speak with NBC and MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirshner. Glenn is a former federal prosecutor and he shares his insights into whether Trump will face prison or jail time. Glenn also touches on issues of potential civil liability.
Jessica's conversation with Glenn took part during Loyola Law School's Journalist Law School.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It’s June! That means a bunch of big, controversial Supreme Court decisions are coming your way. Jessica and Joe preview the biggest cases pending on the Court's end-of-term docket. They also talk about a case that might be destined for the Supreme Court down the road - a federal judge’s recent decision to strike down California's ban on assault weapons. And they wrap up by talking about the Department of Justice’s decision to seek to defend former president Donald Trump in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Hear from former white supremacist and the author of My Life After Hate, Arno Michaelis.
Arno talks to Jessica about how he moved from being a white supremacist to working with people to prevent radicalization, violence, and extremism.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Colin Woodard stops by Passing Judgment to talk about American regionalism and what truly causes the fissures in our political ideology.
Colin is author of numerous books, including Union: The Struggle to Forge the Story of United States Nationhood.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Journalist and author Tim Madigan stops by Passing Judgment to talk about the 100th anniversary of the Tulsa Massacre, an vitally important but somewhat forgotten tragedy in our nation's history. He wrote the critically acclaimed and best-selling book The Burning: The Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921.
Tim talks about the Jim Crow era and whether we are living through "Jim Crow 2.0."
His discussion is an important reminder of how much the past informs the present.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
How did the court come to its decision in Roe v. Wade? Is that decision now under attack?
We talk with Prof. Mary Zeigler author of_Abortion in America: A Legal History, Roe v. Wade to the Present, After Roe: The Lost History of the Abortion Debate, and Beyond Abortion: Roe v. Wade and the Fight for Privacy._
Note: This episode was recorded before the Supreme Court decided to weigh in on a Mississippi abortion law that could overturn Roe v. Wade. We have a special episode on that case which dropped on 5.18.21.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
The New York Attorney General’s office just announced that it’s investigation into the Trump organization is criminal as well as civil. We will tell you what that means.
President Biden is about to sign a new anti-Asian hate crimes bill. We will talk about what it does.
The Supreme Court clarifies that when it comes to the 4th Amendment, your home is your castle.
And finally … Space junk. Who is responsible if it lands on you?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
The Supreme Court has agreed to weigh in on a Mississippi law that could threaten its landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade. Jessica and Joe will talk through whether this current conservative Supreme Court could rule that the right to obtain access to an abortion is no longer protected under the Constitution.
Let's talk about two members of Congress in the news this week -- Reps. Liz Cheney and Matt Gaetz. Liz Cheney lost her leadership position for speaking truth to power. Gaetz could be closer to facing federal charges.
Also, are you ready to go maskless in light of the new CDC guidance?
And, perhaps our most pressing topic ever, will we get year round daylight saving time?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Want to go beyond the legal and political headlines? We have you covered.
In this episode Jessica and Joe talk about the federal grand jury indictments of the four former officers involved in the death of George Floyd, Florida's new voting law, whether former President Trump will be permanently banned from Facebook, fake vaccination cards, and the recall election facing CA Governor Gavin Newsom..
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
We talk with one of the nation's leading labor and employment attorneys to get the real answers about mandating vaccination.
Can any employer require that their employees get a COVID-19 vaccine?
Can schools require that teachers, parents, and / or employees get a COVID-19 vaccine?
Can you be required to show proof of vaccination before entering a restaurant, plane, train, or stadium?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
We have a legal and political roundup!
Is Merrick Garland putting the "justice" back in the Department of Justice?
Why did Newsmax apologize to Dominion Voting Systems?
Will Idaho's transgender sports ban survive a court challenge?
What will Florida's new voting bill do to voter turnout?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Welcome to another legal and political roundup.
Is Rudy Giuliani in serious legal trouble?
Were President Biden's first 100 days a success?
What do the federal hate crimes charges against those who are accused of being involved in the death of Ahmaud Arbery mean?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It is already a big week for legal and political news.
For the first time in more than a decade, the Supreme Court just decided to take a big gun control case. The Court heard arguments in a case that could have big implications for the rise of so-called "dark money." And the Court will hear arguments about free speech protections for public school students.
We also preview the new census numbers and talk about California Governor Gavin Newsom's recall election.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
After less than 12 hours of deliberation, the jury concluded that Derek Chauvin is guilty of second and third degree murder and second degree manslaughter.
USA Today criminal justice reporter Tami Abdollah has been covering the trial from the beginning. She stops by Passing Judgment to walk us through the trial; we talk jury selection, opening arguments, witnesses, and much more.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It is legal-roundup time.
We talk about closing arguments in the Chauvin trial, a new suit by MyPillow against Dominion Voting Systems, the legal end (finally? hopefully?) of the 2020 election, and calls to reform the Supreme Court.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It is your weekly legal roundup with Jessica and Joe.
We update you on the trial of former Officer Derek Chauvin for the death of George Floyd. We talk about the prosecution's and the defense's strategies.
We discuss the big ruling regarding abortion rights out of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and what it could mean for the future of abortion rights in our country.
We also talk about the Supreme Court's "shadow docket" decision in a case that pitted COVID-19 restrictions against the freedom of religion.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Tom (T.J.) Wait, CBSLA / KCLA political reporter visits Passing Judgment to talk about how the press can engender more trust in their work.
Tom talks about how he helps to decide what to cover and how to cover it, what it is like to cover protests, whether reporters have an obligation to tell people they interview that they are members of the media, and more.
Join us for a fun and topical conversation about the role of the media.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
We've got all your legal and political updates.
Jessica and Joe talk about President Biden's executive order on gun control, the murder trial of former Officer Derek Chauvin for the death of George Floyd, the continuing investigation of Congressman Matt Gaetz, and the "revenge porn" case filed by former Congresswoman Katie Hill.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
This week the worlds of politics, the law, and sports collide. We are talking about MLB's decision to pull the all-star game out of GA after GA passed new, restrictive, voting laws.
We have separate episodes on the politics behind GA's new law with Greg Bluestein of the Atlanta Journal Constitutional and the legal challenges GA's law faces with me and Joe.
On this episode with talk with Dave Zirin, the Sports Editor for the Nation, about the history of professional sports organizations acting like, well, political actors. We also talk about whether these organizations will increasingly become key political players.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Rep. Matt Gaetz is allegedly under federal investigation for sex trafficking. He has denied the charges and said he’s the victim of an extortion plot.
Former Apprentice contestant Summer Zervos’ defamation case against former President Trump continues.
The prosecution makes its case against former officer Derek Chauvin.
And there’s breaking SCOTUS news!
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
PJ host Jessica Levinson is joined by co-host Joe Armstrong to recap day 1 of the trial of former officer Derek Chauvin, who is accused of killing Georgia Floyd, and analyze Georgia's new (restrictive) voting laws.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
President Joe Biden described Georgia's new voting law as "un-American" and "Jim Crow in the 21st Century."
We dive into what this new law says, what consequences it will have for voters in Georgia, what motivated the law, and the legal challenges the law will face with Atlanta Journal-Constitution political reporter Greg Bluestein.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
It is time to get you caught up on all of the legal news of the week.
We talk about the possibility of federal gun control legislation, how hate crimes prosecutions work, whether former Congresswoman Katie Hill will succeed in her revenge porn case, and the defamation case against Sidney Powell, one of former President Trump's attorneys.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Curious about how Kamala Harris became the first female vice president of color? Veteran political journalist has written the book on Harris' historic rise -- Kamala's Way: An America Life.
Dan stops by Passing Judgment to provide insight into our current Vice President.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Yes, according to Dr. Peter Hotez, we are. Dr. Hotez shares his thoughts on where we are in the pandemic, what to expect next, and what we can do to fight disinformation.
Arkansas banned almost all abortions. Is that legal?
Former Officer Chauvin, the man accused of killing George Floyd, goes to trial.
Andrea Sahouri, a reporter from Iowa who covered the George Floyd protests, is acquitted.
Merrick Garland has a new title -- Attorney General.
And President Joe Biden addresses the nation.
Join us and we roundup the biggest stories of the week.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Just last week, almost exactly 56 years after Bloody Sunday, the House passed a sweeping set of electoral and political reforms. What exactly is included in these reforms? And will they pass? (Spoiler alert - probably not because of the filibuster).
Also, what is the latest news out of Georgia and Iowa when it comes to proposed changes to voting laws?
And finally, there's another suit against Trump related to the insurrection at the Capitol. Will he be held liable?
Join us as we talk through these topics.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Is there a typical day for David McCraw, the Deputy General Counsel at the New York Times and the author of “Truth in Our Times: Inside the Fight for Press Freedom in the Age of Alternative Facts”? Answer, not really.
David stops by Passing Judgment to talk about what it is like to be the New York Times' top newsroom lawyer at a time when public trust in the media is at an all-time low, how he supports the work of reporters, and why faith in the press may matter as much as the freedom of the press.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Against the backdrop of a slew of new proposals that could restrict the right to vote, this week the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a big election law case out of Arizona. The case could determine the level of protection that voters have under the Voting Rights Act.
Jessica talks through the case and what is at issue for voters across the country.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Congresswoman Barragan visits Passing Judgment to talk about three "Is" -- immigration, insurrection, and impeachment. Congresswoman Barragan also shares her experience running for local and federal office and talks about what it takes to be a political candidate.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Happy 100 episodes to the Passing Judgment podcast.
We are so deeply grateful to our listeners for being along for this ride.
In this episode we talk about how future Attorney General Merrick Garland is likely to change the Department of Justice, the Supreme Court's ruling in the Trump tax returns case (and whether we will ever see those returns), the next big abortion case before the Court, and whether the 2020 election litigation has finally come to an end.
Pull up a chair and join us.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Former President Trump is now a private citizen and faces significant criminal or civil legal exposure.
Jessica and Joe talk through the federal and state criminal and civil cases and investigations pending against Trump.
Jessica brings you up to date on the potential claims related to the insurrection, the Trump Organization's financial dealings, obstruction of justice, campaign finance, and more.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
The New York Times' cybersecurity reporter and author of the new book, 'This is How They Tell Me The World Ends,' Nicole Perlroth visits Passing Judgment.
Nicole explains how the U.S. has possibly fallen behind in the cyber arms race, what that means for our lives, and what we might be able to do to stop it.
We also talk Moneyball, Dessa, Yoshimi, Nora Ephron, and Sam Sifton.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
The historic second impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump is now over. The U.S. Senate voted 57-43 to convict Trump, failing to reach the needed threshold by 10 votes.
In less than 20 minutes we answer all your legal questions about the trial.
1) What exactly was Trump accused of? 2) What did the house managers (the prosecution) argue? 3) What was Trump's defense? 4) What is the standard for impeachable conduct? 4) What did the Senators who voted to acquit give as their rationale?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Dr. Anne W. Rimoin, a Professor of Epidemiology at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health and Infectious Disease Division of the Geffen School of Medicine, stops by Passing Judgment.
Dr. Rimoin talks about how to prioritize who should get the vaccine, how to distribute the vaccine, how to safely re-open schools, and what a new normal looks like.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
In a late-night decision, the Supreme Court has again weighed in on the battle between religious freedom and public safety.
California churches recently challenged some of the state's health and safety restrictions. Specifically, the churches argued that restrictions on indoor services, capacity restrictions, and bans on indoor singing and chanting violated their First Amendment rights.
What did the Supreme Court say? And what do the justices' decisions say about religious freedoms moving forward?
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Congresswoman Norma Torres (D-CA), forced to shelter-in-place in the House gallery, shares the harrowing details of January 6th, 2021.
As the Capitol was under siege, Congresswoman Torres donned a gas mask and crawled on hands and knees to safety. She spent hours worried her life was at risk. When one of her sons called, she picked up the phone only to tell him that she was safe but running for her life.
This is not merely an academic discussion about disinformation and security breaches. This is a personal conversation about one representative's fight to stay safe amid real danger.
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
Do Senate rules and procedures sound boring and arcane? Brookings Institution fellow Dr. Molly Reynolds stops by Passing Judgment to demystify practices like the filibuster and explain how they affect our daily lives. Surprise - it's a lot more complicated than depicted in the Frank Capra and Jimmy Stewart classic, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington!
This podcast is powered by Pinecast.
SCOTUS news! Get your latest SCOTUS news right here.
We talk about calls to reform the federal judiciary, the latest news in the Emoluments cases, abortion rights, and President Biden's ability to fire the directors of federal agencies.
Former F.B.I. Special Agent, Yale faculty member, and CNN legal analyst Asha Rangappa stops by Passing Judgment to talk about the impeachment trial, whether former President Trump will ever face criminal charges, and threats of disinformation.
President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were officially sworn into office today. Jessica and Joe unpack the inauguration, the new executive orders, the structural reforms we will need to tackle in the next administration, and the outgoing president's pardons.
Security expert and former State Department Special Agent Dave Benson joins Jessica to talk about the unique security concerns at the Biden inauguration ceremony in the aftermath of the Capitol insurrection, and how social media, self-radicalization, and individual responsibility play into being an active and alert member of society.
Dr. Jack Pitney, an expert on the American presidency, public policy, and politics, stops by Passing Judgment. Jack talks to Jessica about how to make sense of Trump and Trumpism. Jack discusses the rise of Trumpism, institutional weaknesses in our government, and what the next few years might look like.
Dr. Elisabeth Rosenthal, bestselling author of "An American Sickness: How Healthcare Became Big Business and How You Can Take It Back," visits Passing Judgment to talk about our some of the systemic problems of America's healthcare system, our dismal response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and what we can do moving forward.
Episode Notes President Trump is the first president in our nation’s history to be impeached twice. The House of Representatives voted, along a bipartisan basis, to impeach Trump for inciting a riot in the Capitol.
What will happen next during the Senate trial? And what does this all mean for the Biden administration?
The House of Representatives is moving forward with articles of impeachment against President Trump and a resolution asking Vice President Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment. There is also talk of using a little-discussed provision of the 14th Amendment to remove President Trump from office. And of course, there is the looming question of whether President Trump will attempt to pardon himself for crimes related to the insurrection and beyond.
Jessica and Joe talk through these issues give you answers to all of these questions.
Nse Ufot, CEO of the New Georgia Project, joins Jessica Levinson to talk about how Democrats won both U.S. Senate races in Georgia, and how the New Georgia Project worked to register new voters and plan to create a new class of super voters.
Wednesday 1/6/2021 was a surreal day for our country. A violent mob stormed the Capitol building and our federal representatives, their staff, and members of the press sheltered in place. Jessica and Joe walk through the legal and political implications of what just happened. They talk about whether we just saw an attempted coup d'etat, whether the Vice President and members of the cabinet will invoke the 25th Amendment, and whether impeachment proceedings will begin again.
Why are all eyes on Georgia? On 1/5/2021, Georgia voters will head to the polls to pick their two U.S. Senators. If both democrats win, the Senate will be split 50-50 and with Vice President-elect Kamala Harris holding the tie-breaking vote, will in fact be controlled by Democrats. This has enormous implications for the Biden administration.
Greg Bluestein, of the Atlanta Journal Constitution, stops by to tell us everything we need to know about these races.
President Trump called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, and spent just over an hour trying to convince him to overturn the results of the election in Georgia in favor of Trump. Jessica and Joe will walk you through the legal and political implications of the call.
President Trump cannot obtain a second term. However, some Republicans will engage in Trump-supporting, country-degrading political theatre to try to claim that he can.
Jessica and Joe break down what is going to happen on Wednesday 1/6/2021 when Vice President Mike Pence presides over Congress' counting of the Electoral College votes. The 12th Amendment and the Electoral College Act of 1887 both dictate what will happen. And while Republicans will object, in the end, President-elect Joe Biden will receive 306 votes and will be inaugurated on 1/20/2021.
USC Professor Nick Cull stops by Passing Judgment. He answers Jessica's questions: What is Brexit? What is the new trade deal? And what does this mean for Americans?
This is a different kind of episode for us.
Join Jessica and Joe for an end-of-the-year look back on the first 6 months of Passing Judgment. We talk the guests that surprised us the most, the episodes that hit us the hardest, and how the podcast came to be. We also chat about how we celebrated the holidays, the first thing we will do post-vaccination, and what is ahead in the new year for the podcast.
Please join us, and as always, tweet Jessica @LevinsonJessica
Economist Christopher Thornberg stops by Passing Judgment to talk about how the COVID-19 pandemic has and will affect the American economy. Chris talks with Jessica about what Congress and the President should do to help Americans recover from the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic and how systemic inequality affects our economy.
Dr. Eric Feigl-Ding, one of the nation’s leading epidemiologists, stops by Passing Judgment to answer all of your pressing COVID-19 questions. Are the vaccines safe? When can we safely go back to work? When will our kids go back to school? What did the Trump administration do wrong? What can the future Biden administration do right?
Senior political reporter for Politico, Carla Marinucci, stops by to talk about all the breaking political news. President Trump issued twenty controversial pardons. Governor Newsom named Secretary of State Alex Padilla to fill Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris’ U.S. Senate seat and Assemblywoman Shirly Weber to be the next Secretary of State. Carla, who has covered Kamala Harris since the beginning of her career, also tells us what else Americans should know about the future Vice President. Come for the political chat, stay for the immigrant success stories.
Join Jessica and Joe to talk about whether President Trump can declare martial law, Sidney Powell will become the special counsel to look into election fraud, and Attorney General Barr will appoint a special counsel to look into Hunter Biden.
Amber Phillips of the Washington Post stops by Passing Judgment for a short talk about what it is like to analyze political news during the Trump administration.
Jessica and Amber talk about Trump's post-election litigation strategy and whether anything could stop President-Elect Joe Biden from being inaugurated on January 20th, 2021.
Join Jessica Levinson and Joe Armstrong as they discuss the biggest political and legal news of the week. Jessica walks through the latest census news and why it matters to you, Joe talks about the latest on the cyber attacks, and then Jessica and Joe discuss whether the Biden transition team will get security briefings over the holidays.
Join Congresswoman Karen Bass and host Jessica Levinson for a discussion about diversity in government, why Republicans have continued to support President Trump throughout his presidency and in the post-election period, how we can increase trust in government, and how California Governor Gavin Newsom could re-shape California with his ability to appoint Vice President-elect Kamala Harris's senate seat.
Happy voting day! Yes, again. Members of the Electoral College just voted in every state throughout the country and, no surprise, Joe Biden received 306 votes. This is more than the 270 needed to win the presidency. This is a day that typically passes unnoticed, but in the topsy-turvy 2020 election, many eyes were on this typically pro forma event. Could anything else happen before inauguration day?
And because why would we ever have a slow news day, Attorney General Bill Barr resigned. We re-live Barr's greatest hits and talk about the timing of his resignation.
Thank you for listening and please do provide us with feedback. You can tweet Jessica @levinsonjessica@yahoo.com
Join senior Boston Globe columnist and MSNBC contributor Kimberly Atkins and host Jessica Levinson for a wide-ranging discussion about the Supreme Court, post-election litigation, and President-elect Biden's next steps.
Congressman Eric Swalwell stops by Passing Judgment to talk about what it is like to serve in the House of Representatives, what he would do to reform the institution, how President-Elect Biden can bring together our country, and more!
So, is election 2020 finally over?
Host Jessica Levinson and co-host Joe Armstrong walk through the biggest legal and political developments of the week.
Jessica and Joe explain where we are in the post-election litigation, what is happening with DACA, why Xavier Becerra was tapped to become part of the Biden administration, and what Trump's executive order about vaccines really means.
For more on Safe Harbor Day, read Jessica's piece on NBC News here: https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/safe-harbor-day-highlights-trump-s-election-lawsuit-failures-judiciary-ncna1250433
Get caught up on all your legal news of the week.
Big stories so far -- Can President Trump pardon himself? What about his adult children?
Why did AG Bill Barr admit there is no evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 elections but then appoint a special counsel to investigate the 2016 election investigators?
And what is happening in the Supreme Court these days regarding COVID-19 restrictions and religious freedoms?
Join Jessica and Joe.
Host Jessica Levinson is joined by civil rights attorney, author, host, and CNN legal analyst Areva Martin for a discussion of racial inequality, what the Biden administration's top priorities should be, the electoral college, and more.
There is a lot of legal and political news to catch up on this week!
The Supreme Court made a big decision regarding religious freedom and coronavirus restrictions, they heard a big case dealing with the census and immigrants, and they may be avoiding a big post-election litigation case.
Surprise! The man who won the 2020 election (both the national popular vote and the Electoral College vote) will be the next president.
Why did the Trump administration finally agree to let the Biden transition team officially begin? What is happening with all of the post-election litigation? And what can we expect between now and inauguration day?
Former Senator Barbara Boxer joins host Jessica Levinson to talk about women in politics, her book, "The Art of Tough," how to improve the Senate, why she ran for office, "the year of the woman," and much more.
Congressman Ted Lieu stops by Passing Judgment to share his thoughts on the 2020 election and how we move forward from our current state of polarization. Congressman Lieu talks about whether voters repudiated Trump, Trumpism, or the GOP. Congressman Lieu also discusses some of the biggest challenges our country faces in the future and how to solve them.
The Supreme Court could determine the fate of the Affordable Care Act.
This week the high court heard arguments in a case addressing whether the individual mandate is legally valid and whether, if it is not, the entire ACA must be declared invalid.
This is one of the first blockbuster cases the court has heard this term. And its decision could affect how and whether tens of millions of Americans obtain health insurance.
Happy post-election week.
We're back to discuss the most pressing political and legal issues.
What is happening with all of this post-election litigation? Will any of these cases end up before the Supreme Court?
What about the Department of Justice investigation into voter fraud?
Will the GOP continue to support President Trump's efforts to claim the election was rigged?
And are there any other election nightmares we should be thinking about?
Congratulations to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris!
What happens next? Will there be civil unrest?
When will the pre-election litigation be resolved?
What if Donald Trump does not concede?
What can Trump do during his lame duck session? Can he pardon himself?
Jessica Levinson and Joe Armstrong discuss and explain.
We all watched yesterday's election results tumble in, and it was a long night for everyone. In this episode, Jessica Levinson and Joe Armstrong talk about riding the final waves of the 2020 election storm. There was no blue wave, and although President Trump prematurely declared victory, the show's not over. Ballots are still being counted as Election Day bleeds into Election Days. Which candidate has a clearer path to be inaugurated on January 20th, 2021? What voting blocs broke for which candidate? How is the electoral map different from 2016? And did you sleep last night?
Our second election day special episode!
What are the latest results?
Can we trust the polls?
Will we know the result on election night?
How did you spend election day?
What did Joe buy to get himself through the week?
Will Trump declare victory on election night?
Will Trump concede? What if he loses and refuses to leave?
Where does the pre-election litigation stand?
Where were you on Election Day 2016?
Hear from Sarah Longwell, a Republican political strategist and founder of Republican Voters Against Trump. Sarah and host Jessica Levinson talk about who will win the 2020 presidential election and why, who undecided voters are, how you can persuade voters that certain information is false, and the future of the Republican Party.
David Rothkopf is out with a new book - Traitor: A History of Betrayal from Benedict Arnold to Donald Trump.
David is the host of "Deep State Radio" and CEO of the Rothkopf Group media and podcasting company. He is also the former CEO and editor of Foreign Policy magazine.
David joins host Jessica Levinson to discuss what makes President Donald Trump a traitor and how he compares to other historical figures.
What to expect when you're expecting the 2020 elections. We have got you covered, from the likely to the improbable. We talk post-election litigation, DOJ investigations, Electoral College breakdowns, and contested elections. And of course, we discuss Joe's love of Halloween.
Jesse Wegman, New York Times editorial board member and author of Let the People Pick the President: The Case for Abolishing the Electoral College joins host Jessica Levinson.
Jesse discusses the fascinating history behind the Electoral College, how it has affected presidential elections, and proposals to reform it.
Veteran Democratic campaign strategist Bob Shrum joins host Jessica Levinson to talk about the 2020 election. Bob gives his advice for the candidates, explains what makes a good presidential candidate, and helps us to sort out current presidential election.
Host Jessica Levinson is joined by Sam Levine, a reporter for the Guardian who covers voting rights. Jessica and Sam talk about the biggest voting rights issues of the day, the current state of pre-election litigation, and which suits are likely to be filed post-election.
America's debate coach, Dr. Todd Graham, is back with host Jessica Levinson to unpack the presidential debates and town halls and the vice presidential debate. Hear from an expert about how the candidates and moderators performed and whether anything that happened will move the electoral needle.
Brian Karem, senior White House correspondent for Playboy, CNN contributor, and author, joins Passing Judgment to talk about covering the Trump administration. Brian talks about what it is like to be in the White House briefing room, the role of the press when covering this administration, why he was once jailed, and much more.
The Supreme Court just agreed to hear three big immigration cases. The first deals with President Trump's use of money to build the border wall and more broadly a president's power to declare a national emergency and use funds that Congress appropriated for other purposes. The second deals with the Trump administration's policy to make asylum seekers from South and Central America wait in Mexico while their cases are processed. The third centers around whether undocumented immigrants need to be counted as part of the census.
What, if anything, did we learn from the four days of hearings about Judge Amy Coney Barrett's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court? Is Judge Coney Barrett's refusal to answer questions typical of U.S. Supreme Court nominees? Did her lack of answers actually speak volumes?
Join Jessica Levinson and Joe Armstrong for the discussion.
The CA GOP has put up ballot drop boxes throughout the state. The CA GOP has defended this practice as legal "ballot harvesting." But that explanation may obscure what is really going on both legally and politically. The CA Secretary of State has said, "[u]nauthorized ballot drop boxes are illegal."
What can voters do now?
Did the vice presidential debate change the election? Will people remember anything other than the fly seen round the world?
Host Jessica Levinson and co-host Joe Armstrong review the debate.
Host and Loyola Law School Professor Jessica Levinson is joined by Erwin Chemerinsky, one of the nation's leading lawyers, legal educators, and legal scholars, and the Dean of UC Berkeley School of Law.
Join Jessica and Erwin for a smart and accessible discussion of the most pressing issues before the Supreme Court. Erwin also talks about how Judge Amy Coney Barrett could change the Supreme Court if the Senate confirms her nomination.
Host Jessica Levinson and co-host Joe Armstrong preview the legal and political issues 2020-2021 Supreme Court term. There are big cases related to healthcare, religious rights, and voting rights on the court's docket.
Tune in and let us know what you think!
Michael Waterstone, the Dean of Loyola Law School, joins host Jessica Levinson for a discussion about leadership and legal education. Michael talks about what it takes to be a good leader and a lawyer. Michael also shares insights about what it is like to be a law school dean.
Host Jessica Levinson and co-host Joe Armstrong talk through the breaking news that President Trump has contracted COVID-19. Because President Trump is both a sitting president and a candidate for the presidency, there are a myriad of hypothetical legal questions to discuss.
Join host Jessica Levinson and guest Leslie Marshall for a lively conversation about what is happening in the political world this week. Jessica and Leslie discuss the first presidential debate, the latest news regarding Trump's financial records, and how the Supreme Court is likely to factor into the presidential election.
Welcome to presidential and vice presidential debate season! Join host and Loyola Law School Professor Jessica Levinson and debate expert Dr. Todd Graham to talk about why debates matter, what each of the candidates should do to win, and what they should each avoid.
President Trump has officially nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's vacancy on the Supreme Court. Host Jessica Levinson and regular co-host Joe Armstrong talk about what is likely to happen next, and how Judge Barrett could change the shape of American law and society if she is confirmed by the Senate.
Host Jessica Levinson and producer Joe Armstrong talk about the biggest legal and political news of the week — Court packing and peaceful transfers of power.
Hear from a reporter and fact-checker from the Associated Press about what campaign misinformation and disinformation is and how to combat it.
Host Jessica Levinson and guest Amanda Seitz talk about why we are all so susceptible to campaign misinformation and disinformation and how we can be on alert to "fake news."
United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed away. Our country has lost a champion of gender equality.
What does her death mean for the future of our country both legally and politically?
With only weeks to go before the election, will President Trump nominate someone to fill the seat and will Senator Mitch McConnell hold confirmation hearings?
What happened to AG Bill Barr?
He compared COVID-19 restrictions to slavery.
He has talked about protecting protesters under the Sedition Act.
The DOJ has intervened to get favorable treatment for friends of President Trump -- think Michael Flynn and Roger Stone.
Is Bill Barr acting to protect the American president or the American people?
Join host and Loyola Law School Professor Jessica Levinson as she talks with New York Times reporter Matt Stevens about what it is like to be a political reporter in 2020. Matt explains why journalists don't just make up stories or sources, why they can't just be stenographers and what goes into writing headlines.
A cyber attack? A contingent election decided by the House of Representatives? Law enforcement at the polls? The closing of polling places? The invocation of the Presidential Succession Act?
Join host and Loyola Law School Professor Jessica Levinson and producer Joe Armstrong for a rundown of the top election 2020 nightmares.
Host Jessica Levinson is joined by Dr. Julie Cantor, physician, attorney, and entrepreneur. Jessica and Julie talk about everything from why California Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks was forced to bring her infant to the state capitol to cast in person votes to why wearing masks has become a proxy for partisan affiliation.
Happy Labor Day everyone.
On this special Labor Day episode, host and Loyola Law School Professor Jessica Levinson and producer Joe Armstrong talk about a issue near and dear to many workers -- whether they are independent contractors or employees. Jessica and Joe unpack the current legal wrangling surrounding rules for gig economy workers. Starting January 1, 2020, California changed the law to categorize many gig economy workers as employees, not independent contractors.
But the law, known as AB 5, cast a wide net and covered some freelancers who lost jobs as a result. Joe shares his story of work that he lost. In addition, one of those famous freelancers is former San Francisco Mayor and Speaker of the Assembly, Willie Brown. As Politico's Carla Marinucci wrote, just this week his regular Sunday op-ed column for the San Francisco Chronicle was temporarily put on hold as a result of the law. https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/09/04/former-sf-mayor-willie-brown-ensnared-by-ab5-gets-assist-from-newsom-1315782
A few days ago, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill that narrows AB 5, and exempts many freelance workers, like Willie Brown.
But wait, there's more. There is a measure on the ballot, sponsored by companies like Uber and Lyft, to undo the California law which treats most gig workers as employees.
Where does the law stand and what could happen next?
Join host and Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson and guest Elex Michaelson, anchor and host of the only statewide political show in California -- The Issue Is.
Jessica and Elex talk about how social media has changed news consumption and coverage, whether reporters have an obligation to be real-time fact checkers, why we are so polarized, how to deal with campaigns of disinformation and misinformation, why we should all be taking media literacy classes, and the importance of cookies in a greenroom.
Host Jessica Levinson explains whether the president has the power to send law enforcement officers to polling places on Election Day. She is joined by producer Joe Armstrong to walk through the legal and political limits on the president.
Jessica and Joe discuss who typically observes a polling place, whether Trump can send federal or state law enforcement, what power states have over their polling places, and what recourse voters have if they feel intimidated at the polls.
Host and Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson is joined by television and radio legend Steve Edwards. Steve has been a member of the media for more than four decades, covering every major news event in that time.
Steve talks with us about the changing role of the media and why we are more polarized than ever.
What is the Hatch Act? A law that prohibits certain government employees from engaging in political activities. The purpose is to ensure that civil servants are serving the public and not working as political operatives while engaging in official duties or using public facilities or vehicles.
Have members of the Trump administration violated this federal law in front of our eyes? Probably! Let's talk about what is happening the Republican National Convention.
What recourse is there for violations of the Hatch Act? It looks like not much right now. This is arguably an existential crisis in our democracy -- we have a federal law that looks like it is being violated but ignored.
Join host Jessica Levinson and producer Joe Armstrong to walk through these issues.
Host and Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson takes a quick tour through the nuts and bolts of what it takes to make sure your vote counts in the 2020 election.
Elections in America are decentralized. The U.S. Constitution gives states the power to run elections and so it is important to know the laws in your state.
Jessica walks you through what is different about voting this election, spoiler alert -- a pandemic and a president who is actively trying to undermine our election process. Jessica talks about everything from registering to vote, to getting a vote by mail ballot, to returning that ballot.
For more information, read Amber Phillips' great piece in the Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/17/how-to-make-sure-your-vote-is-counted/?itid=ap_amberphillips
Sound engineer - Andrei Padilla
What is it like to be a state lawmaker?
Join host Jessica Levinson and California State Senator Ben Allen for a wide-ranging discussion about being a lawmaker in 2020. Senator Allen talks about why he ran, what most surprises him about the job, his favorite part of being an elected official, the power of lobbyists, the influence of money and politics, mandatory vaccinations, and much more.
Join host Jessica Levinson and Los Angeles Times political reporter Melanie Mason, for a discussion about political reporting during a pandemic. Melanie chats about how Senator Kamala Harris changed as a candidate, covering presidential candidates, what it takes to be an effective presidential candidate, what makes President Trump a good or bad presidential candidate, the influence of money on our presidential campaigns, and more.
Host Jessica Levinson talks with Los Angeles Times political reporter Seema Metha about the 2020 presidential campaign.
Jessica and Seema chat about these questions and more.
Are voters more polarized than ever before? Are social media and cable television to blame?
Do Republicans have a choice between following President Trump or following public health experts?
Why do evangelical voters continue to support President Trump?
Will the Supreme Court become a focal point of the 2020 election?
Who is Biden likely to pick as his VP candidate?
How has Pres. Trump changed what is means to be a journalist?
President Trump signed four executive actions in the wake of Congress' failure to come to a resolution regarding COVID-19 relief for Americans.
President Trump's actions are both much more narrow than he alleged and likely stand on legally shaky grounds. Specifically, Trump's actions may violate the separation of powers and invade Congress' power to tax and spend.
Host Jessica Levinson walks through the political and legal implications of Trump's actions on unemployment benefits, an eviction moratorium, student loan deferrals, and payroll tax deduction deferrals.
Sound engineer - Andrei Padilla
Join host Jessica Levinson as she details which potential election catastrophes keep her up at night. Jessica talks about the possible problems associated with voting in a pandemic, President Trump's efforts to undermine the integrity of our elections, whether Nancy Pelosi could become president, and much more.
Sound engineer extraordinaire - Andrei Padilla
Join host Jessica Levinson and guest Eric Segall. Eric is a professor at Georgia State University College of Law and an expert on the Supreme Court.
How does the Supreme Court make its decisions? Does the Court function as intended?
In this episode, Eric makes the provocative argument that the Supreme Court is not really a court, and that judges make their decisions on little more than their ideological views.
Vice President Joe Biden is about to choose his running mate. He has pledged that he will pick a woman. But who?
Host Jessica Levinson talks about whether or not a presidential candidate's running mate makes any real difference in a presidential campaign and who Biden might pick as his running mate.
Jessica runs down the top contenders including Senators Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, and Tammy Duckworth, former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and Congresswomen Karen Bass and Val Demings.
Sound engineer-Andrei Padilla.
President Trump just signed an executive order directing the Department of Commerce not to count undocumented immigrants for the purposes of drawing congressional district lines. Is Trump's executive order? What are the political consequences of this order?
Host Jessica Levinson walks you through everything you need to know about Trump's decision to weaponize the census.
For more, read Jessica's recent pieces on NBC.com
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-census-order-unconstitutional-coronavirus-distraction-ncna1234564 https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-citizenship-census-question-battle-legally-dubious-he-may-ncna1028236 https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/supreme-court-knows-citizenship-census-question-likely-bogus-it-doesn-ncna1012546
Chief Justice John Roberts as a junior woodchuck?
When does a judge go "Christopher Walken" on you?
Come for the My Cousin Vinny references, stay for an in-depth look at the most powerful court in the land - the Supreme Court - with Professor Garrett Epps.
What happened between Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ted Yoho?
Rep. AOC made a speech on the floor of the House to discuss Yoho's comments and what they say about gender dynamics more generally.
Women are underrepresented in the public and private sphere. Why does that matter?
Host Jessica Levinson and producer Joe Armstrong discuss Rep. AOC's speech and the great gender divide in rooms of power throughout the country.
The Lincoln Project co-founder Mike Madrid joins host Jessica Levinson to talk about the rise of President Trump and Trumpism. Mike discusses the biggest issues surrounding the 2020 election and what The Lincoln Project is doing to try to defeat President Trump and protect our democracy.
President Trump and his daughter, senior advisor Ivanka Trump, went to social media to promote Goya products. They did this in the wake of the CEO of Goya's praising of President Trump and the ensuing backlash against that praise. Is the White House for sale? Did President Trump or his daughter, Ivanka Trump, violate any federal ethics laws?
Join host Jessica Levinson and producer Joe Armstrong for a quick analysis.
In this special episode of Passing Judgment host Jessica Levinson tells you everything you need to know about the last Supreme Court term. Jessica explains the biggest decisions of the year and how they affect you. Jessica covers abortion rights, religious rights, LGBTQ rights, executive authority, Congressional power, and more.
Producer Joe Armstrong is back by popular demand to ask the questions you want answered.
Guest Mr. Mo'Kelly joins host Jessica Levinson for a frank discussion about race relations, racism, and more. Mr. Mo'Kelly talks about confederate statutes, calls to defund the police, and the so-called cancel culture.
Host Jessica Levinson walks you through the breaking news of President Trump's commutation of Roger Stone's sentence. Jessica discusses why and how presidents have the power to commute and pardon people, what Roger Stone was convicted of doing, what the Stone case means for the independence of the Department of Justice, how this is another example of President Trump's norm-breaking behavior, and where we go from here. Jessica is joined by producer Joe Armstrong.
Today, on the last day of the Supreme Court term, the court handed down two cases that will define the contours of congressional power and presidential immunity.
In one case, congressional committees subpoenaed the president’s personal financialrecords, claiming that they needed this information to analyze government ethics laws and foreign influence into domestic elections. In the other case, a New York prosecutor, on behalf of a grand jury, issued subpoenas for Trump’s accountant and banks as part of an investigation into hush money payments made to women who allegedly had affairs with Trump. What did the Supreme Court say?
Join host Jessica Levinson as she walks you through these blockbuster decisions and explains what they mean for future presidents.
The bottom line? Unless President Trump decides to release his financial records(which he won’t), the public will still not see that information before the 2020 election.
The Supreme Court handed down two decisions with big implications for religious employers and their employees. In one case the court ruled that employers with religious or moral objections may opt out of a part of the Affordable Care Act which requires insurance plans sponsored by certain employers to provide free access to contraception. In another case, the court concluded that some employees of religious schools are not protected from anti-discrimination laws.
Host Jessica Levinson tells you everything you need to know about the decisions.
The Supreme Court just upheld the right of states to punish electors, members of the Electoral College, who go rogue and vote for a candidate other than the presidential candidate chosen by the popular vote of the state they represent. The court unanimously concluded that the Constitution allows states to fine or remove electors who fail to vote for the candidate chosen by a majority of the voters in their state.
Host Jessica Levinson explains what this decision means for the next presidential election and the future of the Electoral College. Producer Joe Armstrong is back to ask the questions.
A deeply divided Supreme Court just upheld the legality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, but struck a blow to its independence. The court's decision could threaten the work of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and also undermine Congress' ability to create executive agencies relatively free of presidential influence.
Jessica unpacks what could turn out to be the biggest case of this Supreme Court term.
Carla Marinucci, a senior reporter for Politico, joins Jessica to talk about what it is like to be a journalist during the Trump administration, what it takes to be a good journalist, and the political prospects of California Governor Gavin Newsom and Senator Kamala Harris.
LMU Professor Michael Genovese joins Jessica to chat about how President Trump governs, and whether or not he will win re-election. They talk about what makes a good presidential candidate, the skills a president needs, and how the Trump presidency has exposed the cracks in our political system.
CNBC reporter Jane Wells and Jessica tackle some of the biggest political stories of the moment. They discuss everything from the polarization of American voters during the Trump administration, to “fake news,” to mask shaming, to the pitfalls of social media.
Episode Notes This podcast is for you, people who are curious about politics and the law and how the biggest political and legal issues of the moment affect you. Pull up a chair and join host Jessica Levinson, a professor at LMU Loyola Law School, and a rotating cast of experts. Jessica will be joined by journalists, politicians, politician scientists, lawyers, and many others.
Join Jessica and her guests for a wry, and sometimes irreverent take on the most pressing issues of our time. Is the Constitution in crisis? What are the laws of our democracy? How are they changing? And what does that mean for your daily life?