42 episodes
What Trump Can Teach Us About Con Law Radiotopia
-
- Government
-
-
4.7, 2.9K Ratings
-
Professor Elizabeth Joh teaches Intro to Constitutional Law and most of the time this is a pretty straight forward job. But with Trump in office, everything has changed. Five minutes before class Professor Joh checks Twitter to find out what the 45th President has said and how it jibes with 200 years of the judicial branch interpreting and ruling on the Constitution. Hosted by acclaimed podcaster Roman Mars (99% Invisible, co-founder Radiotopia), this show is a weekly, fun, casual Con Law 101 class that uses the tumultuous and erratic activities of the executive branch under Trump to teach us all about the US Constitution. Proud member of Radiotopia from PRX.
-
41- The Socially Distanced SCOTUS
The Supreme Court may not be able to meet in person, but they are still doing business over conference call. This month, they've considered three cases about Donald Trump's finances, and whether they should be released to Congressional committees and prosecutors in New York. What does history tell us about these cases which could have major consequences for executive power?
-
40- Jacobson and COVID
In mid-April, 2020, states are beginning to explore ways to re-open their economies amid the global coronavirus pandemic. But with states devising their own paths forward, many are wondering what powers the government has, even during a national emergency. Are the states violating our civil liberties by enforcing these lockdowns? To answer this question, many legal scholars are looking to a 115-year-old Supreme Court case for answers, Jacobson v. Massachusetts.
-
39- Quarantine Powers
During a health crisis, what is the government allowed to do? As the novel coronavirus spreads across America, there have been closures and lockdowns across the country. In this episode, we look to history to understand who has the power to quarantine, and how the office of the president can be used to slow down a pandemic.
-
38- Prosecutorial Discretion
Prosecutors recommended that Roger Stone, an associate of Donald Trump, be given a heavy penalty after being convicted of seven felony counts, including lying to authorities. But after intervention from Attorney General Barr, and tweets from the President, those recommendations were rescinded. What can his case tell us about presidential interference and prosecutorial discretion?
-
37- War Powers and Impeachment Update
After Donald Trump ordered the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani, many wondered if the two countries were on the brink of a major conflict. This incident is only the latest in the long-standing fight between Congress and the President over who has the power to make war, and if an act of violence against another state can be legitimate without Congressional approval.
This episode also includes an update on the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump, which began earlier this week.
Make your mark. Donate at http://radiotopia.fm -
36- Bribery
Bribery is one of the three offenses listed in the Constitution as grounds for impeachment. Even though that is attempting to bribe Ukraine is the act that precipitated to Trump’s impeachment, it’s not explicitly listed in the articles of impeachment. Why is that?
Make your mark. Go to radiotopia.fm to donate today.
Customer Reviews
Thank you for Constitution 101
Many current event stories involve Constitutional powers-lately vs Executive powers.
Many times of late I’ve felt embarrassingly ignorant of what powers POTUS actually has vs hyperbole/grandstanding/lying.
I’m binge-listening to this podcast!
Not only do the hosts discuss ongoing cases of interest, but they explain in depth the constitutional basis and arguments offered.
I’m getting insight not only into cases currently before the court, but historically relevant cases and why the court ruled as they did.
This is my new favorite podcast & many thanks to the format & hosts.
Thank goodness this podcast exists.
We need this. Thank you, Roman!
Great legal - nonpartisan - discussion
I think this is an incredibly well done podcast that helps educate lay individuals on what the U.S. Constitution really says, how it's been applied. If you're looking for absolutes, this program does not generally provide absolutes. If you're looking for what the Constitution really says (rather than what is implied) and how has the Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution in the past, this is a grfeat resource. As is generally the case with the law the answer to whether something is legal frequently is that "it depends". The program makes that point in the very first episode and comes back to that pretty consistently. It dependes on the specifics of the case, it depends on the judge's legal perspective and philosophy, and can depend on past decisions.
Each podcast is only about 13 - 15 minutes and works to avoid getting into clearly partisan wrangling, but focuses on what the Constitution says. Very helpful to gain perspective on what's going on.
