Listen to the latest episode of our podcast, Divided Argument, where Dan Epps and I delve into the Court’s immunity ruling in Trump v. United States. While we both agree that the consequences of the opinion are uncertain and not necessarily negative, we find fault with the legal basis and craftsmanship of the opinion. You can catch the full episode, “Back on the Island,” here:
In our recent episodes, we have also discussed:
SEC v. Jarkesy and Grants Pass v. Johnson in “Hope Springs Eternal.” (Check out my earlier post on Jarkesy, which aligns with the majority’s decision.)
United States v. Rahimi and Erlinger v. United States in “Felony-Adjacent.” (Read my previous analysis on Rahimi, which mirrors the majority’s outcome.)
Garland v. Cargill, FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, and John Q Hammons v. US Trustee in “Small Victories.”
Stay tuned for my upcoming piece on the entire term, including a focus on the Trump cases, coming out tomorrow.
