Amarica's Constitution

There’s some highly questionable behavior going on in an area of Missouri, where a fringe group seeks to establish a whites-only enclave. Objectionable? We think so. Unconstitutional? Therein lies an opening to a whole host of questions. Government action versus private action. When is private action beyond private purview? When does state action overlap into private domains, and where are the lines? Where do these rules come from? How can we think about new issues that may arise? Akhil has thought about this, and written about it, so now we offer you a framework to think about such questions as they arise, now and in the future. And, sadly, a giant was lost this week. We offer some thoughts, with more to come. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

In a wide-ranging episode, we finish looking back - and in doing so, we look into the near future as well. The birthright citizenship case will be heard in oral argument on April 1, and we go back to our reaction to the executive order. Unitary executive matters are awaiting court rulings; we look back at our back and forth with Steven Calabresi. Meanwhile, audience questions on court term limits and the virtues of virtue are addressed, and there are more tidbits to enjoy.

It’s five years of Akhil and Andy on Amarica’s Constitution, and our friends are lining up to talk about it. In typical fashion, it’s not just testimonials but reflections. And we do a clip episode, but this time it’s not the justices, or the oral advocates, or the pundits, on the hot seat: it’s us. We look back at two episodes per year, playing our sometimes correct, sometimes wildly wrong predictions, and our sometimes prescient, sometimes widely ignored so-called insights. It’s been quite a ride, and quite a recap - so much so that this part one of at least two. And still, after five years, CLE credit remains available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

The military capture of the Venezuelan leader, Maduro, is an event with giant international strategic, moral, economic, political, and other considerations. It also raises fascinating constitutional questions, and Professor Amar is ready to discuss some matters that probably did not come to your mind right away. Much of this stems from the fact that Maduro will be tried in a U.S. civilian, not a military court, so constitutional protections are implicated. Whatever your thoughts about the policy matters, it behooves you to join us in this exploration of how this escapade reveals a strain in constitutional doctrine that remains unresolved. Meanwhile, you will learn of cases with names like “Frisbie,” hence our title. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges at podcast.njsba.com.

Presidential power is abridged, for a change, by the Supreme Court in its shadow docket ruling in Trump v. Illinois. Rather than ruling in silence, however, this time the Court gives us 25 pages and 4 opinions to chew on. We examine the history behind issues of deployment of the Army as well as the Guard/Militia on domestic soil, which leads us to discussions of Militia Acts, the Military Amendments, and basic constitutional principles. Professor Amar discusses the implications for the coming big rulings on tariffs and birthright citizenship he sees in the alignment the Court assumes in this ruling. Just as this is not the Court’s last word in this case, we will have more to say in subsequent episodes, but this discussion will leave you armed, if you will, with the tools to see the issues clearly. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.