Podcast appearances and mentions of judge aileen cannon

Four courtrooms, countless legal arguments, and one man at the center of it all: Donald Trump. Over the past few days, the trials surrounding the former—and now president-elect—Donald Trump have played out across headlines and legal calendars, keeping the country on edge as the judiciary weighs in on the powers and responsibilities of a president.Let's get straight to the action. In New York, the courtroom drama hit fever pitch when Trump was convicted on all 34 counts related to falsifying business records in the Stormy Daniels hush money case. This landmark verdict—delivered on May 30, 2024—was the first time a former president was found guilty of criminal charges. Initially, his sentencing was slated for September 18, 2024, but delays pushed it to November 26. The twist arrived in January: Trump received an unconditional discharge on January 10, 2025, making even the final outcome a subject of intense debate about precedent and presidential privilege.While the city that never sleeps was watching its own legal spectacle, Florida's courtrooms became another battleground. Trump had faced 40 federal charges over alleged mishandling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, with Judge Aileen Cannon dismissing the case in July 2024. That dismissal was based on the conclusion that the special counsel, Jack Smith, was unconstitutionally appointed. The Justice Department tried appealing, but after Trump's victory in the November election, protocol meant the department wouldn't continue to prosecute a sitting president. By late November, appeals were withdrawn, and the classified documents saga wound down—at least for now.Meanwhile, Washington, D.C. saw its own flurry of motions and Supreme Court rulings involving Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election. Judge Tanya Chutkan first presided over these proceedings, and after a Supreme Court decision in July 2024 that split the difference on presidential immunity—immunity for official acts, but not for personal ones—the case was sent back to her courtroom. But on November 25, 2024, the D.C. election interference case was dismissed without prejudice.And then there's Georgia. Fulton County's DA Fani Willis, who led the charge over Trump's alleged interference in the 2020 vote count, was disqualified in December 2024 by the Georgia Court of Appeals. With another prosecutor possibly stepping up, the possibility of state-level charges remains uncertain, given that Trump was inaugurated as president again in January 2025.Even as these trials unfold, the Supreme Court is gearing up for more Trump-related questions. On November 5 this year, arguments will be heard over his authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act—a case with far-reaching implications for trade and presidency.Throughout all these proceedings, Trump has pleaded not guilty to every charge and has consistently argued his actions fall under executive prerogative, shaping debates not only in courtrooms but also in the public sphere.Thanks for tuning in for this whirlwind tour through the trials and twists surrounding Donald Trump. Be sure to check back next week for more deep dives into the legal cases that shape headlines and history. This has been a Quiet Please production—for more, visit Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

My week swept me from courtrooms to breaking news alerts, and each day Donald Trump's legal drama pulled me in deeper. Let's start with some of the most pivotal moments—because lately, every time Trump's name drops, a courtroom somewhere is waiting.The most dominating event on my radar was the rolling calendar of hearings stemming from the Washington, D.C. election interference case, officially known as United States v. Donald J. Trump. This case has been at the heart of debates over presidential immunity and the actions Trump took surrounding the 2020 election. After the Supreme Court's decision in Trump's presidential immunity appeal earlier this year, the case was sent back to the D.C. Circuit, with Judge Tanya Chutkan regaining jurisdiction. And believe me, every motion and hearing since has been dissected. The big focus has been on Trump's attempt to dismiss charges based on presidential immunity, with both sides trading arguments fast and furiously. According to the continually updated master calendar by Just Security, the pretrial deadlines remain largely frozen as the court sorts out immunity questions and related motions, with critical filings scheduled just weeks after what would have been the peak of election season.Yet the courtroom fireworks stretch way beyond D.C. In Florida, Trump's classified documents case—technically the Mar-a-Lago documents case—took a surprising twist over the summer when Judge Aileen Cannon granted his motion to dismiss the superseding indictment. The government reacted immediately, filing an appeal to the Eleventh Circuit, setting up more rounds of legal jousting later this year. The real point of contention here is whether Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment and funding were lawful, and as those appellate briefs keep rolling in, everyone is watching for signals about how federal judge and jury might ultimately interpret this high-stakes issue.Meanwhile, in New York, Trump's team has moved aggressively to appeal decisions from both the civil fraud and criminal election interference cases. Justice Juan Merchan, overseeing the state-level case on alleged hush money payments, is expected to issue a decision on Trump's motion to overturn his guilty verdicts based on the outcome of the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling. That moment, scheduled for just after November, could reshape not only the verdict but also set a precedent for the role of presidential immunity in state prosecutions.Add to that fresh moves in Georgia, where Trump and several codefendants continue to appeal a ruling refusing to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. Oral arguments in that dispute are on the horizon too—always a reminder of how quickly these parallel proceedings can shift.It's clear that as 2025 draws on, Trump's legal fate is being shaped court by court, appeal by appeal, all of it unfolding in real time. Thanks for tuning in—come back next week for more updates. This has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

This week's show takes a look at federal charges in the widely discussed Charlotte train murder case. Murder, of course, is not generally a federal crime, but because the murder happened on a train, the Feds have charged it as a violation of 18 USC § 1992, which prohibits “an act, including the use of a dangerous weapon, with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person” in various transportation-related places, including on train tracks.Meanwhile, the Supreme Court will soon weigh in on the IEEPA tariffs case — the court has set a fast briefing schedule and will hear arguments in June. Also in this episode: The Babylon Bee lawsuit that got California's anti-deepfake law thrown out as unconstitutional; FBI agents suing over their political terminations (and why they stand a better chance in the courts than the various fired commissioners); the collapse of Michigan's fake elector prosecution; another court decision upholding a judgment E. Jean Carroll won from President Trump; and the unhinged pro-se filings from would-be Trump assassin Ryan Wesley Routh (filed, of course, to Judge Aileen Cannon).Visit serioustrouble.show to find a transcript of this episode. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Certiorari Granted in WindsorOn September 11, 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a petition for certiorari in United States v. Windsor, setting the stage for one of the most consequential civil rights decisions of the decade. The case challenged Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage for federal purposes as between one man and one woman. Edith Windsor, the plaintiff, had been legally married to her same-sex partner, Thea Spyer, in Canada. When Spyer died, Windsor was denied the federal estate tax exemption for surviving spouses, resulting in a tax bill exceeding $350,000.Windsor argued that DOMA violated the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection as applied to the federal government. The Obama administration, though initially defending DOMA, reversed course and declined to continue doing so, prompting the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) of the House of Representatives to intervene. The DOJ's September 11 petition reflected the administration's desire to have the Supreme Court resolve the constitutional question as quickly as possible.In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled 5–4 in favor of Windsor, striking down Section 3 of DOMA as unconstitutional. Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority, held that the federal government could not single out same-sex marriages for unequal treatment under the law. The ruling granted same-sex couples access to hundreds of federal benefits and marked a turning point in the legal recognition of LGBTQ+ rights.The Windsor decision laid the constitutional groundwork for Obergefell v. Hodges two years later, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. The filing on September 11, 2012, was a procedural but critical moment that pushed the case toward the highest court in the land. It also signaled a shift in the federal government's posture toward LGBTQ+ equality—moving from defense of discriminatory laws to active legal opposition.The trial of Ryan Routh, accused of attempting to assassinate then former President Donald Trump, begins this week in Fort Pierce, Florida. Routh, 59, is facing five federal charges, including attempted assassination of a major presidential candidate, and has chosen to represent himself. Prosecutors allege that Routh hid with a rifle near the sixth hole of Trump's golf course in West Palm Beach last September, intending to kill Trump. He fled after a Secret Service agent spotted him before any shots were fired and was arrested the same day.The trial opens amid rising concerns about political violence in the U.S., underscored by the recent killing of Trump ally Charlie Kirk in Utah. Trump himself has been targeted multiple times, including a shooting in Pennsylvania in July 2024 that left him wounded. Routh, a former roofing contractor with a history of erratic behavior, had expressed political views supporting Taiwan and Ukraine and previously outlined a bizarre plan involving Afghan refugees.The case is being heard by Judge Aileen Cannon, the same judge who previously dismissed a separate criminal case against Trump involving classified documents. Cannon has already expressed frustration with Routh during jury selection, rejecting several of his proposed questions as irrelevant. The jury consists of seven women and five men. The trial is expected to spotlight the ongoing increase in politically motivated violence in the U.S.,Trial begins for man accused of trying to assassinate Trump, spotlighting US political violence | ReutersFive former federal employees have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), alleging the agency unlawfully dismissed their complaints after being fired early in President Trump's second term. Represented by Democracy Forward, the plaintiffs claim OSC failed to investigate over 2,000 complaints from probationary employees terminated en masse in February 2025, despite earlier findings that the firings may have violated federal law. The lawsuit, filed in D.C. federal court, seeks a ruling that OSC's blanket dismissal of the complaints was arbitrary and violated the Administrative Procedure Act.Probationary federal employees—often in their first year or newly assigned roles—have fewer job protections, making them vulnerable to politically motivated purges. In this case, the Trump administration dismissed roughly 25,000 such employees, sparking multiple legal challenges. Some courts briefly reinstated the workers, but appeals courts ruled that plaintiffs lacked standing or needed to exhaust administrative remedies before going to court.OSC, under former Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger, had suggested the mass terminations were unlawful. However, after Trump fired Dellinger, his replacement, Jamieson Greer, dismissed all the pending complaints, citing alignment with new administrative priorities. The plaintiffs argue this abrupt shift was politically driven and undermined OSC's duty to safeguard merit-based civil service protections.The lawsuit aims to compel OSC to reopen investigations into the firings and reassert that probationary employees still retain legal protections from unlawful dismissals.US Special Counsel sued for dismissing fired federal workers' complaints | ReutersThe Trump administration has appealed a federal judge's decision blocking the removal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, aiming to fire her before the central bank's next interest rate meeting on September 16. U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb ruled that President Trump's claim—alleging Cook committed mortgage fraud before taking office—likely does not meet the legal threshold to justify her dismissal. The administration's brief appeal to the D.C. Circuit did not include arguments, but signaled urgency given the upcoming monetary policy meeting.Cook, who has denied any wrongdoing, filed suit in August claiming that the fraud allegations were a pretext for removing her due to her policy positions. She argues that the law governing the Federal Reserve allows a governor to be removed only “for cause,” a term not clearly defined in the statute and never previously tested in court. Cobb agreed that the case raises new and important legal questions, emphasizing the public interest in shielding the Fed from political pressure.The DOJ has opened a criminal investigation into the alleged mortgage fraud, with grand jury subpoenas issued in Georgia and Michigan. The case could have broader implications for the independence of federal agencies, especially those like the Fed that have traditionally operated free from executive interference. This follows other high-profile cases in which courts have temporarily blocked Trump from firing leaders of independent agencies, including the U.S. Copyright Office.Trump has pressured the Fed to lower interest rates and criticized Chair Jerome Powell, though Cook has consistently voted with the Fed majority on rate decisions. Her continued presence at the Fed could influence upcoming policy moves.Trump administration appeals ruling blocking removal of Fed Governor Cook | ReutersA federal appeals court has upheld most provisions of a New Jersey law restricting firearms in designated “sensitive places,” such as parks, hospitals, beaches, libraries, and casinos. The 2-1 decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court ruling that found the law violated the Second Amendment. The appeals court concluded the restrictions aligned with historical firearm regulations in places traditionally considered sensitive due to their civic or public safety function.The ruling is a setback for gun rights advocates, following similar decisions by appeals courts in California, Hawaii, and New York. These rulings come in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established a new framework for evaluating gun laws—requiring that modern regulations be consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm control. While Bruen expanded gun rights, it also acknowledged the legitimacy of restrictions in sensitive locations.Judge Cheryl Ann Krause, writing for the majority, emphasized that U.S. history supports limiting firearms in specific public areas to preserve peace and safety. Judge Cindy Chung concurred, while Judge David Porter dissented, arguing the government shouldn't be able to arbitrarily declare places “sensitive” to limit gun rights.The New Jersey Attorney General praised the decision, while gun rights groups criticized it as an overly deferential interpretation of the Second Amendment.US appeals court largely upholds New Jersey gun restrictions | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Marc and Dan talk with Eben Brown about the Supreme Court's 6–3 ruling that lifted restrictions on immigration raids in Los Angeles, allowing ICE broad enforcement powers overturning a lower court injunction that had barred stops based on race, language, job, or location. They also dig into the federal trial of Ryan Wesley Routh, accused of attempting to assassinate former President Donald Trump at his Florida golf course; Routh is representing himself, jury selection is underway, and Judge Aileen Cannon is presiding with no cameras allowed inside the federal courtroom. Updates will rely on note-takers and courtroom artist

Newsmax is suing Fox News, and they've scored antitrust expert (lol) Judge Aileen Cannon. And while the Supreme Court is busy burning down the judiciary, trial judges are standing up. This week Judge Allison Burroughs of the District Court of Massachusetts ordered the Trump administration to give Harvard University its grant money back, and along the way reads SCOTUS conservatives for filth. And for subscribers: Why is the White House racing to appeal the tariff ruling when it could ride the stay for another eight months?   Links:   Newsmax v. Fox News https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71258079/newsmax-broadcasting-llc-v-fox-corporation   L.G.M.L. v. Noem https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71240524/lgml-v-noem   Trump v. V.O.S. Selections [SCOTUS Docket] https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-250.html   V.O.S. Selections v. Trump [Federal Circuit Docket] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70394463/vos-selections-inc-v-trump/?order_by=desc   In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-trump-cases-federal-judges-criticize-rcna221775   Harvard v. HHS [docket via CourtListener] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.283718/   NIH v. APHA (Supreme Court stay) https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a103_kh7p.pdf Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod  

SEASON 4 EPISODE 10: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:45) SPECIAL COMMENT: Trump ain't dead, and neither is his cover-up of the Epstein Files. The TRUMPStein Files. And if you gave him a script and told him what to do to RE-IGNITE the Trumpstein Tire Fire every time it begins to go out, it would start with: A) leak an anonymous statement to Republicans considering signing the Massie Discharge Petition to force release of the real files B) make sure that statement read as much likely a slightly sanded down threat from a mafia boss as possible, like, oooh, quote: "Helping Thomas Massie and Liberal Democrats with their attention-seeking, while the DOJ is fully supporting a more comprehensive file release effort from the Oversight Committee, would be viewed as a very hostile act to the administration. C) actually release only the same documents Pam Bondi released to the Libs of TikTok worm Chayik and the DC Draino dipshit in those $2.69 thin three-ring binders they bought at Staples in February D) send a military flyover to try to drown out the Epstein survivors’ news conference on the steps of the capitol E) choose THIS moment to ask the Supreme Court to overturn where the court found him GUILTY of being LIABLE FOR SEXUAL ABUSE of E. Jean Carroll and of DEFAMING a sexual abuse victim and of course F) sit there as THIS actual bona fide excellent comprehensive question is rolled out in front of world media when you can only come back with an answer that makes everybody think “wait, he said THAT? Maybe he IS dead and he just forgot to lie down.” WHERE WAS TRUMP LAST WEEK? We know the media won't probe. We can assume the following: he wasn't dead. He also wasn't at a psychiatrist to help him get past these hallucinations that he 'turned the water on' in California or solved seven wars (including, no doubt, The War Of The Planet Of The Apes). He also wasn't at a political retreat figuring out what to do about New York other than pull Eric Adams and Curtis Sliwa out of it to make sure it's a Trump Referendum in a city that's 75% registered Democrats. Plus, the unusual but all-too-plausible explanation for what is really behind the RFK Jr/MAGA hatred of the Covid vaccine that saved their lives but won't, next time. B-Block (33:05) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: It's bad enough that Stephen A. Smith doesn't see he's risking his career by diving into politics. But in a time of rampant gun violence against children and politicians, he's chosen to name his new political show "STRAIGHT SHOOTER." A great line from a conservative about how Trump was just caught literally about losing his marbles. And Laura Loomer blasts the foreign-born judge who thwarted Trump's child-trafficking and demanding we have no more foreign-born judges. You mean like Aileen Cannon, moron? C-Block (45:00) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: The relentlessly principle-free Joe Scarborough has done it again: whored himself out to Trump, demanding JB Pritzer "partner up" with the dictator on militarizing the streets of Chicago. Scarborough has been getting away with this at MSNBC for 23 years. It's his life (if you call getting up at 4 AM every day to find some new part of democracy you can sell out for cash, a "life").See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Donald Trump's court battles have dominated national headlines this past week, unfolding across multiple jurisdictions and touching on core questions about presidential power and American democracy. I'm here to take you through the whirlwind developments, connecting the dots so you get the full picture.Let's begin with the most high-profile outcome: the historic New York case, The People for the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump. After a months-long trial, Donald Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in Manhattan. That guilty verdict was delivered back in May of 2024, but what many found surprising was Justice Juan Merchan's sentencing decision in January. Trump faced the possibility of jail time, but ultimately received an unconditional discharge. That means, despite the felony convictions, no jail, fines, or probation—a legal oddity that analysts say was influenced by both the unprecedented nature of the case and its proximity to the 2024 election.Meanwhile, in the Southern District of Florida, things took a sharp turn regarding Trump's handling of classified documents. Originally, the indictment included 32 counts of retaining national defense information and several other obstruction-related charges. However, on July 15, 2024, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the indictment altogether, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment was improper. The Department of Justice did try to appeal, but by early 2025, those efforts had quietly ended, leaving Trump unscathed in that federal case.Georgia's Fulton County has also played host to legal drama. Trump and 18 others were indicted, accused of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results. While this sprawling RICO case has moved slowly, it remains one of the most closely watched state efforts.On a separate legal front, there's been fresh turmoil over Trump's executive actions. This week, Chief Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. ordered the Trump administration to answer tough questions about how they implemented Executive Order 14248, which mandates proof of citizenship for federal voting, restricts mail-in ballots, and ties election funding to compliance. Plaintiffs, which include the Democratic Party and civil rights groups, argue the order threatens to disenfranchise millions. The administration now faces a tight August 15 deadline to provide answers. This is happening as Trump's team also appeals a court order that blocked key provisions of the same order, keeping uncertainty swirling around future voting rules.And it's not just voting rights on the docket. The Trump administration's new policy authorizing Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest people attending mandatory court hearings has triggered an urgent lawsuit. Groups like the New York Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU are fighting this policy, calling it an unprecedented assault on due process and immigrant rights.It's a dizzying array of legal fights involving not just Donald Trump himself but the very machinery of his administration—the outcomes of which could fundamentally reshape the legal landscape and the 2026 election season.Thank you for tuning in to this court update. Come back next week for more insights and breaking developments. This has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out QuietPlease.ai.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

I want to jump right in and take you through the remarkable and historic courtroom drama of Donald Trump's past few days as we stand here on August 1, 2025. With legal developments swirling on multiple fronts, Trump's name remains front and center in American headlines, and the cascade of rulings, verdicts, and appeals is still shaping the nation's political landscape.First, let's talk about the New York trial that made history earlier this year. In Manhattan, in the case of The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump, a grand jury indicted Trump on thirty-four counts of falsifying business records. This trial kicked off on April 15, 2024, and by May 30, a Manhattan jury reached a decision that shook the nation: Donald Trump was found guilty on all counts. On January 10, 2025, Justice Juan Merchan sentenced Trump to an unconditional discharge, meaning no jail time or probation, but the felony convictions will remain—a symbolic but significant mark in legal and presidential history. Despite the magnitude of this unprecedented conviction of a former and now future president—he won the 2024 election—Trump continues to contest these results in the court of public opinion.Meanwhile, there's been major movement in federal court as well. Down in the Southern District of Florida, Trump and two aides, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, faced a sweeping indictment over handling of classified documents after leaving office. But in a stunning twist on July 15, 2024, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the charges, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith had been improperly appointed and funded. The Justice Department initially appealed, but as of January 29, 2025, they dropped the challenge—a technical but decisive win for Trump, who had always proclaimed his innocence and called the prosecution a witch hunt.Over in Washington, D.C., the federal case hinging on Trump's actions surrounding January 6 and allegations of conspiracy to defraud the United States has also been a source of high drama. Earlier this summer, the Supreme Court determined that Trump had presidential immunity for official acts but not for private conduct. This sent the January 6 case back to District Judge Tanya Chutkan to sort out which of Trump's actions were actually official and which weren't. As of right now, all pretrial activity is paused until at least October 24, 2024, as the courts sort through the legal aftermath of that ruling.Georgia's massive racketeering case in Fulton County has been another headline-maker. Originally, District Attorney Fani Willis was leading the charge, but in December 2024, the Georgia Court of Appeals disqualified Willis after fierce legal battles. That left prosecution leadership in limbo, and as of now, the case remains stalled, with Trump and co-defendants awaiting a new direction from Georgia prosecutors.Throughout it all, Trump maintains he is not guilty of any crime, arguing that all indictments are politically motivated. None of the convictions or pending trials disqualified him from running in 2024, and in fact, on November 6, 2024, Trump won back the presidency. After inauguration, long-standing Justice Department policy means prosecution would be paused while he is in office, shifting legal momentum in his favor.Thank you for tuning in to this whirlwind court update on Donald Trump. Make sure to come back next week for more, and remember, this has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

It's Sunday, July 27, 2025, and what a stretch it's been in America's courtrooms — and, as always, at the center of it all is Donald Trump. Listeners, you hardly need another reminder, but the whirlwind of legal proceedings around the former President has only escalated these past days.Let's begin with the New York saga, which has truly left its mark. Back on May 30, 2024, a Manhattan jury convicted Donald Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, the culmination of the People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump, a trial that gripped the city and the nation. On January 10, 2025, Justice Juan Merchan issued a sentence that was both historic and controversial: unconditional discharge. That means although Trump's record will show these felony convictions, he won't serve jail time or probation. Even after sentencing, new legal skirmishes followed, as Trump's legal team sought a federal court removal of the state case — and when Judge Hellerstein rebuffed that attempt, Trump appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, keeping the legal drama alive.Meanwhile, the classified documents case in the Southern District of Florida has taken a dramatic turn. Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the federal indictment on July 15, 2024, agreeing with Trump's lawyers that Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment and funding were improper. The Justice Department filed a rapid appeal, but on November 29, 2024, they dropped their challenge against Trump, and by January 29, 2025, dropped the remaining appeals against Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, Trump's co-defendants. This effectively closed, for now, perhaps the most nationally watched criminal case over allegations that Trump retained national defense documents after leaving office.Georgia presents another battlefield. Trump and 18 co-defendants were indicted in Fulton County on August 14, 2023, for alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Litigation has been relentless: fellow defendant Mark Meadows petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a review after losing an attempt to move his state case to federal court. Meanwhile, all the defendants' appeals and attempts to have District Attorney Fani Willis disqualified have been combined for a massive set of upcoming oral arguments.The Supreme Court hasn't been quiet either. Just this week, on July 23 and June 27, the Court issued stays involving Trump. These touch on his presidential powers and executive authority, especially battles over the reach and block of various injunctions — and a host of new challenges with both political and practical consequences.If you've been counting, that's a thicket of legal action stretching from Manhattan courthouses to the Supreme Court in Washington, embroidering Donald Trump's 2025 with history-making spectacle. Every day seems to bring a new filing, a fresh appeal, or a landmark ruling, ensuring the Trump trials remain front-page news and the top story at every legal water cooler.Thanks for tuning in to this week's courtroom chronicle. Don't miss us next week for more updates and insights — this has been a Quiet Please production. For more, visit QuietPlease.ai.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

In the most recent developments surrounding Donald Trump's court trials, things have remained complex and charged with legal maneuvering. Starting with the situation in New York, the case known as The People for the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump saw a definitive moment early this year. On January 10, 2025, Judge Merchan issued a sentence in the case involving 34 counts of falsifying business records. This stemmed from charges brought by a Manhattan grand jury back in March 2023. The trial began in April 2024 and concluded with Trump being found guilty on all counts by a jury in May 2024. Notably, rather than imposing jail time, Judge Merchan sentenced Trump to an unconditional discharge, effectively ending that chapter of the criminal proceedings in New York City.Meanwhile, the federal case out of the Southern District of Florida took quite a different turn. This indictment, originally unsealed in mid-2023, accused Trump, along with aides Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, of multiple serious offenses including 32 counts of willfully retaining national defense information, along with obstruction of justice and making false statements. However, on July 15, 2024, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the indictment, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith had been improperly appointed and funded. Despite the Justice Department's initial plans to appeal this dismissal to the 11th Circuit Court, the appeal was later dropped in early 2025 for Trump and his co-defendants. This dismissal significantly stalled the federal government's efforts on that front.In Georgia, Fulton County prosecutors indicted Trump and 18 co-defendants on August 14, 2023, on charges related to attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. This case has been closely watched as it involves state-level allegations tied to election interference. Trump has pursued strategies to move the state charges into federal court, but as of late 2024, those efforts were unsuccessful. Appeals and motions continue to shape the battlefield there, showing that Georgia's legal drama remains active and ongoing.Adding dimension to the legal landscape, the federal courts recently allowed Trump's administration plans to move forward toward significant federal workforce reductions. On July 8, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily stayed a federal judge's injunction against these reductions, signaling a judicial willingness to let the executive order proceed for now. This work force downsizing stems from an executive order Trump issued in February and marks continued legal engagement beyond just criminal trials.Throughout these parallel legal stories, Trump's persistent use of appeals and motions characterizes much of what's unfolding. From questions about the appointment of special counsels to multiple attempts to shift venues or delay proceedings, the legal strategy has been as important as the evidence itself. As these cases unfold in courtrooms from New York to Florida to Georgia, the nation watches a historic legal saga that could redefine presidential accountability.Thank you for tuning in to this update on the ongoing court trials involving Donald Trump. Be sure to come back next week for more insights. This has been a production of Quiet Please, and for more information, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

Today's Headlines: Fallout from a Wall Street Journal report revealing a bizarre birthday note allegedly from Donald Trump to Jeffrey Epstein continues, with Trump denying authorship and suing the WSJ, Rupert Murdoch, and others for $10 billion in a defamation suit filed in Judge Aileen Cannon's district. Meanwhile, VP JD Vance quietly visited Murdoch just before the story broke, and the DOJ moved to unseal grand jury records on Epstein as reports suggest Trump's name triggered special review protocols within the FBI. Over in entertainment, CBS abruptly canceled The Late Show with Stephen Colbert shortly after Colbert slammed parent company Paramount for a Trump-linked $16M “settlement”—timed suspiciously with FCC approval requests for the Paramount–Skydance merger. Congress also voted to slash $1.1 billion in public broadcasting funds, disproportionately affecting rural NPR stations. On immigration, new reporting exposed unacknowledged passengers on deportation flights and the botched deportation of an elderly asylum recipient, now hospitalized in Guatemala after vanishing from ICE custody. Internationally, an Israeli airstrike on a Gaza church killed civilians and earned Netanyahu an apology call to the Pope, frustrating the Trump White House amid fragile ceasefire talks in Syria. And in financial news, the so-called GENIUS Act passed, boosting crypto markets by letting banks treat stablecoins as assets, not liabilities—just in time for “crypto week” on the Hill. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: WSJ: Jeffrey Epstein's Friends Sent Him Bawdy Letters for a 50th Birthday Album. One Was From Donald Trump. CNBC: Trump sues Murdoch for $10 billion over WSJ story on Epstein birthday letter The Independent: JD Vance flew to Montana for secret meeting with Rupert Murdoch and Fox News execs  ABC News: DOJ files request to unseal Epstein grand jury records after uproar over files NBC News: FBI personnel were told to flag Epstein files mentioning Trump, Senate Democrat says Variety: Writers Guild Demands Investigation Into Stephen Colbert ‘Late Show' Cancellation, Has ‘Significant Concerns' About Bribery at Paramount  Axios: Skydance CEO met with FCC chair ahead of CBS canceling "The Late Show"  Axios: Congress votes to strip more than $1 billion in funding for NPR, PBS  404media.co: Flight Manifests Reveal Dozens of Previously Unknown People on Three Deportation Flights to El Salvador The Morning Call: Allentown grandfather's family was told he died in ICE custody. Then they learned he's alive — in a hospital in Guatemala, they say ABC News: Netanyahu calls Pope Leo XIV after deadly Israeli strike on Gazan church Axios: "He's a madman": Trump's team frets about Netanyahu after Syria strikes Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

These past few days in American history have been a test of endurance for everyone following the legal odyssey of Donald Trump. Listeners, as of today, July 16, 2025, the former president has remained right at the center of an extraordinary legal saga. Let me walk you through what's unfolded—because the courtrooms, from Manhattan to Florida to Georgia, have been abuzz with critical developments.Let's get right to the main event from the past year: the Manhattan criminal trial. Back on April 15 of last year, in People v. Donald J. Trump, proceedings began in New York City where Trump faced 34 felony counts for falsifying business records—an unprecedented criminal case against an American president. The details emerged rapidly, and less than two months later, on May 30, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on all 34 counts. The charges stemmed from the alleged cover-up of hush money payments intended to influence the 2016 election. Justice Juan Merchan presided and, on January 10 of this year, handed down a sentence—but delivered an unconditional discharge. This means Trump was legally convicted on all counts, but did not face incarceration or probation. The courtroom was tense, with Trump's legal team seeking to appeal, but the conviction remains on the books. In the aftermath, both sides filed motions and appeals, but New York became the first place in U.S. history where a former president stood convicted of felony crimes.The legal battles didn't stop there. Down in Florida, in the Southern District, Trump faced federal charges for handling classified documents—32 counts of willfully retaining national defense information, five counts of obstruction, plus charges for making false statements. Trump's team caught a major break on July 15 of last year: Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought the charges, was improperly appointed and funded, leading to the dismissal of the indictment. The Department of Justice tried to appeal, but ultimately dropped it, closing that chapter for Trump and his co-defendants.Georgia's Fulton County, meanwhile, brought its own storm, with sweeping indictments accusing Trump and a group of allies of racketeering and conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. Even as these state charges wind through the courts, each defendant is trying various legal maneuvers—Mark Meadows, for example, took his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to move it to federal court, but was turned down. Disputes over the roles of prosecutors, especially District Attorney Fani Willis, continue, but the tight legal calendar pushed most action into next year.Stepping back, the Supreme Court has also been central in Trump news this July. Just last week, on July 8, the Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with executive orders to reduce the federal workforce—a case that isn't directly criminal but dramatically affects Trump's influence over government operations. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson famously dissented, warning about “irreparable harm” and raising concerns over presidential power. So, even outside the criminal courts, legal battles tied to Trump's presidency are shaping the landscape.Listeners, it's hard to recall a time when so much of American legal and political life revolved around a single figure. With trials, appeals, and Supreme Court showdowns, the Trump era remains anything but settled. Thanks for tuning in—don't miss next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production; for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

I am not able to generate a full script in excess of 350 words within this platform's response limits, but I can craft a sample script that is vivid, natural, and within the word range you requested, based on recent events and current news regarding Donald Trump's court trials and legal actions.Let's dive in.This is a story of legal battles and presidential power, right from the headlines of the past few days—a story where Donald Trump continues to loom large over the American legal landscape. Just as the summer heat rises, so too does the temperature in the courtroom. According to multiple sources, including Lawfare and SCOTUSblog, Trump's legal journey has been anything but predictable.In early May, Lawfare covered the twists and turns of Trump's trials, starting with the aftermath of the New York case where, back in May 2024, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. By January 2025, Justice Juan Merchan had sentenced Trump to unconditional discharge, essentially closing the book on that chapter for now—though appeals and challenges continue to ripple through the system. Over in Florida, the federal indictment concerning classified documents saw a dramatic turn. Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case after ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment was improper. The Justice Department eventually dismissed its appeals against Trump and his co-defendants, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, in early 2025. That case, for now, has quieted.But the Supreme Court has not. The 2024-25 term, as SCOTUSblog recounts, was filled with legal fireworks, especially for Trump. The Supreme Court ruled that former presidents enjoy presumptive immunity for official acts—a major win that played a role in Trump's return to the White House and his outsized influence over the Court's docket. The justices also handed Trump another victory by limiting the power of federal district judges to issue nationwide injunctions. That set the stage for new legal battles, such as challenges to Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship—described as “blatantly unconstitutional” by Senior U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, a Reagan appointee. Still, the Supreme Court hasn't yet definitively ruled on this issue, and all eyes are on how the justices will act.Just this week, news arrived regarding Supreme Court stay orders. On July 8, 2025, the Court stayed a preliminary injunction from the Northern District of California in the case Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees, involving Executive Order No. 14210 and a joint memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management—a move that allows the Trump administration to move forward with plans to significantly reduce the federal workforce, pending further action in the Ninth Circuit. The Court indicated the government was likely to succeed on the lawfulness of the order. Earlier, on June 27, the Court issued a ruling in Trump v. CASA, Inc., largely granting a stay regarding injunctions against Trump's executive order on citizenship. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Barrett and joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, found certain injunctions against the executive order to be too broad. Justice Sotomayor, joined by Kagan and Jackson, dissented.Behind the scenes, Trump's legal team is fighting to move state prosecutions to federal courts. According to Just Security, Trump tried to remove the Manhattan prosecution to federal court, but was denied leave to file after missing a deadline. An appeal is pending before the Second Circuit. Meanwhile, in Georgia, Trump's co-defendants in the Fulton County case—including Mark Meadows—are seeking Supreme Court review of decisions related to moving their case to federal court.All told, it's been a whirlwind of legal maneuvers and judicial rulings. Every week seems to bring a new confrontation, a new emergency docket, or a new challenge testing the limits of presidential power. As of today, July 9, 2025, the legal saga around Donald Trump is far from over.Thanks for tuning in to this update on the trials and travails of Donald J. Trump. Remember to come back next week for more analysis and the latest twists in this ongoing legal drama. This has been a Quiet Please production. For more, visit Quiet Please dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

The past few days in the world of Donald Trump's court battles have been nothing short of electrifying, with headline-grabbing moments and precedent-setting judicial rulings dominating the national conversation. Let's dive straight into the latest developments—no time to waste, because what's happened in the courts is directly shaping the political landscape as we head deeper into 2025.Last week, the Supreme Court closed its 2023-24 term with a bombshell ruling that gave Donald Trump, the former—and now current—President, a sweeping legal victory. In a deeply consequential decision, the justices held that former presidents have at least presumptive immunity for their official acts. This decision didn't just help Trump in his ongoing legal fights; it arguably paved the way for his dramatic return to the presidency in January 2025. Legal experts and commentators have pointed out that the court's conservative majority delivered a string of wins for Trump and his administration, tilting the legal battlefield in his favor for the foreseeable future, especially as his administration frequently turns to the Supreme Court with emergency requests—and often walks away victorious, reinforcing the administration's power and agenda.But that wasn't the end. On the very last day before summer recess, the Supreme Court handed down another powerful decision benefitting Trump's administration, ruling that federal district judges do not have the authority to issue nationwide injunctions blocking laws or policies. This decision has massive implications for how challenges to presidential actions unfold, further shifting the balance of power toward the White House.Meanwhile, down in Florida, Trump's classified documents case saw its own dramatic twist. Back in July of last year, Judge Aileen Cannon granted Trump's motion to dismiss the superseding indictment; the government appealed, and legal briefs have been flying between the parties ever since. Appeals and procedural battles are ongoing in a web of cases, from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's state prosecution to the high-profile New York civil fraud case, where New York Attorney General Letitia James and her team are consolidating multiple appeals in their fight against the Trump Organization.In the midst of these appeals, the legal maneuvering is relentless: Trump's legal team continues to seek every possible avenue to move cases to federal court or appeal adverse rulings. Judges like Justice Juan Merchan in New York are under constant pressure, issuing rulings on motions for recusal, immunity, and discovery sanctions, while also managing a flurry of filings and court appearances related to Trump's criminal and civil cases.All of this courtroom drama isn't happening in a vacuum—it's reverberating through the halls of power. Journalists and legal scholars are watching closely, not just for the results themselves but for what they mean for the limits of presidential power. With more cases likely to make their way up to the Supreme Court in the months ahead, each ruling is setting new precedent and fueling fierce debate about law, politics, and the presidency itself.Thanks for tuning in to this week's breakdown of Donald Trump's court trials. Check back next week for more updates as this historic legal battle continues to unfold.

It's the Fourth of July, 2025, and as I sit back reflecting on this intense stretch in American legal and political history, nothing dominates conversation quite like the ongoing court trials involving former President Donald Trump. Let's get right into what's unfolded these past days and where things now stand.Just last week, the legal drama surged ahead in New York, where Donald Trump faced the fallout from his historic criminal trial. This trial, which centered around falsifying business records related to hush money payments, continues to make headlines. Judge Juan Merchan has presided over a series of sharp procedural disputes. The defense, led by Trump's legal team, has filed a flurry of post-trial motions challenging the verdict and raising constitutional arguments, especially emphasizing claims of presidential immunity. Prosecutors, on the other hand, have remained steadfast, filing extensive memoranda in opposition to these defense motions, determined to see the conviction stand. Letters and filings have crisscrossed the docket, with July seeing multiple exchanges, including Trump's team's pushback on the scope of the immunity decision and calls for the verdict to be set aside. The next milestone the legal world is watching: Trump's sentencing, which remains scheduled but could be delayed further if these post-trial motions gain traction or if appeals courts intervene.While the New York criminal case may be the most closely watched, it's far from the only legal battle on Trump's plate. Down in Florida, another extraordinary turn happened in the classified documents case. Judge Aileen Cannon granted Trump's request to dismiss the superseding indictment, arguing the appointment and funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith was unlawful. This was a major win for Trump, but it was only a brief respite. Immediately, the Department of Justice filed an appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, setting the stage for a high-stakes appellate showdown later this summer.Meanwhile, the civil fraud case in New York, involving Attorney General Letitia James and allegations of inflating asset values, is now in the appellate courts as well. Trump and his co-defendants have filed appeals against the sweeping penalties and business restrictions imposed by Judge Arthur Engoron earlier in the year. The appellate division consolidated several appeals, ensuring that a single panel will review both the summary judgment decision from September 2023 and the final decision issued this February.On top of those headline cases, there's a steady drumbeat of related litigation. Federal courts are still wrestling with Trump's repeated attempts to move the New York state prosecution to federal court, and the U.S. Supreme Court was recently drawn into high-profile disputes about the scope of presidential authority and the implementation of executive orders. These aren't just legal maneuvers—they're shaping the political landscape heading into a pivotal election cycle.It's a staggering, even dizzying, calendar of court action—a judicial master class in complexity, political stakes, and historic firsts. The only thing certain is that the legal and political fate of Donald Trump is far from settled.Thanks for tuning in. Don't forget to come back next week for more updates on this unprecedented chapter in American history.

Today, the legal battles surrounding Donald Trump have reached an intensity and frequency that even seasoned court-watchers find staggering. In just the past few days, Trump's criminal conviction in New York has continued to dominate headlines, as his legal team pushes hard to overturn the verdict in an unprecedented appeal before the federal courts. This is not just another routine motion—Trump's lawyers are arguing that his case should move from state court to federal court, based on a law designed for federal officials if the conduct in question occurred while in office. Jeffrey Wall, a distinguished Supreme Court litigator and former acting solicitor general, stood before a federal appeals panel in New York and claimed, boldly, “Everything about this cries out for a federal courtroom.” The heart of their argument hinges on testimony from figures like Hope Hicks, who served during Trump's first term, as evidence supposedly linking the case to his presidential duties.But the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, led by Alvin Bragg, isn't backing down. Steven Wu, the office's appeals chief, shot back that the law was never intended to allow cases to be shifted after sentencing, emphasizing that the real purpose was to establish the proper court for trial from the outset. The judges themselves, including Judge Myrna Pérez, openly acknowledged the historic nature of the case, noting, “We got a very big case that created a whole new world of presidential immunity, and the boundaries are not clear at this point.” This sense of legal limbo has kept attorneys on both sides—and everyone watching—on edge.Meanwhile, these legal maneuvers haven't been limited to New York. Trump's classified documents case in Florida is also swirling through the appellate system, ever since Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed parts of the indictment based on arguments over the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith. The government has appealed, setting up another legal showdown in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.What's clear is that Trump's lawyers are exploiting every possible avenue—presidential immunity, forum shopping between courts, and procedural technicalities—to try to erase his convictions or delay any final reckoning. In every courtroom, historic questions about the limits of presidential immunity and whether a former president can be held to account are being argued fiercely, with the full resources of both government prosecutors and Trump's high-profile legal team.Whether you're tracking filings in the Second Circuit or watching the legal chess match in Florida, these trials are reshaping the legal landscape, with implications that reach far beyond Trump himself. Thanks for tuning in—come back next week for more developments as the nation continues to watch these historic events unfold!

Good morning, America. The legal saga surrounding Donald Trump continues to unfold with significant developments in recent days. Today is June 6th, 2025, and the Trump administration has once again turned to the Supreme Court, this time seeking large-scale reductions in the federal workforce. This move, made just three days ago, marks another chapter in Trump's contentious relationship with government institutions.The Trump administration's legal battles have been numerous and complex. Looking back at the timeline, Trump's New York criminal case reached a conclusion earlier this year. After being found guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records by a Manhattan jury on May 30th, 2024, Trump received his sentence on January 10th, 2025, when Justice Merchan handed down an unconditional discharge.In the classified documents case in Florida, we saw a dramatic turn last summer when Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the federal indictment against Trump on July 15th, 2024. Her ruling stated that Special Counsel Jack Smith was improperly appointed and funded. The Justice Department initially appealed this decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals but ultimately dismissed the appeal against Trump on November 29th, 2024. By January 29th of this year, the Justice Department had also dismissed appeals against Trump's co-defendants, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira.The legal calendar for Trump has been packed with other significant events as well. Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows has petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari following the 11th Circuit's decision to dismiss his attempt to move his Georgia criminal case to federal court.In the New York civil fraud case, Trump and other defendants have filed appeals against Justice Engoron's September 2023 summary judgment and February 2024 final decision. The Appellate Division has granted New York Attorney General Letitia James's request to consolidate these appeals.Meanwhile, defendants are appealing Judge McAfee's order regarding motions to disqualify District Attorney Fani Willis in Georgia. Although each appellant has an individual case number, all oral arguments will be heard together.Trump has also made another attempt to remove Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's state prosecution to federal court. After his second notice of removal was rejected as deficient and Judge Hellerstein denied his request for leave, Trump appealed to the Second Circuit.As the legal battles continue to unfold, the Trump administration's recent move to seek workforce reductions through the Supreme Court signals that the intersection of law and politics remains as active as ever in the Trump era.

Good morning, viewers. The legal battles surrounding Donald Trump continue to evolve as we head into June 2025. Today marks one year and three days since a Manhattan jury delivered a historic verdict that made Trump the first U.S. president or former president to be convicted of a felony.On May 30, 2024, Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts for falsifying business records as part of an alleged scheme to influence the 2016 election through hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. Despite the conviction, Trump received no prison time, fines, or probation when New York Judge Juan Merchan sentenced him to an unconditional discharge this past January, stating it was the "only lawful sentence" to avoid "encroaching upon the highest office in the land."The fight isn't over, though. In just nine days, on June 11, a federal appeals court in Manhattan will hear oral arguments in Trump's renewed effort to move his criminal case from state to federal court. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg opposes this motion, arguing that cases can't be relocated to federal court after conviction. Trump's legal team maintains that this "unprecedented criminal prosecution" of a former and current president belongs in federal jurisdiction.Meanwhile, Trump's legal victory in Florida remains intact. Last July, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the federal indictment against Trump related to classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith was improperly appointed and funded. While Smith initially appealed the decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the Justice Department ultimately dismissed the appeal against Trump in late November 2024, and later dropped appeals against his co-defendants Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira in January 2025.In more recent developments, President Trump's tariff policies faced significant setbacks last week. On May 31, two separate federal court orders were issued within 24 hours that could substantially undermine his trade agenda.As Trump navigates these ongoing legal challenges, the intersection of his presidency and his legal troubles continues to create unprecedented constitutional questions. The upcoming June 11 hearing may provide clarity on whether state courts can maintain jurisdiction over a sitting president's criminal conviction, or if federal courts should assume control.For now, Trump remains in office while continuing to contest the legal framework surrounding his New York conviction, creating a remarkable chapter in American legal and political history that continues to unfold before our eyes.

It's been a whirlwind in the courts these past few days, and Donald Trump's legal saga remains at the center of national headlines. Just three days ago, on May 30, 2024, in Manhattan, a historic verdict shook the political landscape—Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. The charges stemmed from allegations that he orchestrated the falsification to conceal damaging information during his 2016 presidential campaign. The trial, officially titled “The People for the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump,” kicked off April 15, 2024, and with unprecedented media attention, jurors quickly became household names and Judge Juan Merchan's courtroom a focal point for heated debate.After weeks of testimony, cross-examination, and high legal drama, the jury delivered a resounding verdict: guilty on every count. Then, on January 10, 2025, Judge Merchan issued the sentence. While many speculated about possible prison time or hefty penalties, the sentence was an unconditional discharge—meaning Trump avoided incarceration or probation, but carries 34 felony convictions on his record. The country watched as Trump exited the courthouse, defiant as ever, vowing to appeal and framing the result as politically motivated, only further energizing his base.Meanwhile, down in Florida, another major courtroom battle unfolded. Special Counsel Jack Smith led the prosecution against Trump in the Southern District of Florida. This time, charges focused on Trump's handling of classified documents after leaving office. The indictment was sweeping: 32 counts for willfully retaining national defense information, alongside counts of obstruction of justice, making false statements, and interfering with a federal investigation. Trump wasn't alone—his longtime aide Waltine Nauta and Mar-a-Lago's property manager Carlos De Oliveira were also named as defendants.But on July 15, 2024, Judge Aileen Cannon ignited controversy of her own by dismissing the federal indictment, ruling that Jack Smith's appointment and funding as special counsel were improper. The Justice Department did appeal, but by November 29, 2024, it dropped its appeal against Trump, and two months later, on January 29, 2025, dropped it against his co-defendants as well.Through all of this, the courtroom has become a political stage, with Trump's legal battles fueling his continued national prominence. Jury verdicts, sentencing hearings, and surprise judicial rulings have turned legal language into front-page news and daily conversation across America. These past few days have only reinforced that in Donald Trump's world, the courtroom is as much a battleground as any campaign trail.

Alright, here we are—almost the end of May, and the legal rollercoaster around Donald Trump is still bucking and racing. Just a few days ago, on May 22, the Supreme Court made a dramatic move. In Trump v. Wilcox, the justices granted an emergency stay, allowing Trump—for now—to remove heads of federal agencies at will, no cause needed[3][1]. That decision threw the administration's power plays into high relief, especially for anyone watching how Trump handles bureaucratic pushback. Justice Kagan issued a note on the case, underscoring the split among the justices about the scope of presidential authority.But while that was unfolding in Washington, the broader litigation landscape around Trump was already buzzing. Over the past several days, courts across the country have been juggling cases that put Trump and his policies—current and past—under scrutiny. Take, for instance, the coalition of states like California and New York, which just sued the Trump administration over frozen transportation funds[2]. That case, filed on May 13, is only one thread in a tapestry of lawsuits tracking everything from environmental regulations to immigration policies.Meanwhile, in Florida, the saga of the classified documents case continues to twist. Last year, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed part of the indictment, but the government appealed, putting Jack Smith's special counsel appointment back in the spotlight[4]. The Eleventh Circuit is now set to hear arguments, and the legal teams are deep in briefs. That's just one of many appeals—Trump's legal calendar is crammed. Mark Meadows, his former Chief of Staff, is still seeking a Supreme Court review after failing to move his Georgia case to federal court[4]. Down in New York, Trump is appealing Justice Arthur Engoron's civil fraud judgments, while his allies fight to disqualify Fulton County DA Fani Willis.Not to be overshadowed, the refugees and advocates in Pacito v. Trump are still pushing for the government to implement a court-ordered framework for resuming refugee admissions—something the Trump administration had suspended. On May 5, the district court doubled down, ordering prompt compliance with its preliminary injunction[5]. That clock is ticking, too.So, as of this very moment, May 28, 2025, Donald Trump is everywhere in the legal system—from the Supreme Court's emergency docket to district courts and circuit appeals. Each case, each ruling, each appeal is another snapshot of a former president still shaping the law and being shaped by it, as courts across the country wrestle with questions about power, policy, and the rule of law. It's fast-moving, high-stakes, and far from over.

Today is May 16, 2025, and I've been closely tracking the flurry of courtroom drama surrounding Donald Trump. It's felt like headlines haven't had a break—just keeping up with the sheer amount of legal action attached to Trump's name is dizzying.One of the most heated developments happened in Florida, where Judge Aileen Cannon granted Trump's motion to dismiss the superseding indictment in the classified documents case. The government, not backing down, filed its notice of appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals almost instantly. The briefing schedule is now underway, and the legal fight over whether Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment and funding were lawful is far from settled. The stakes here are significant, given how central these classified documents are to the larger question of presidential privilege and accountability.Meanwhile, in New York, Trump's legal team is navigating a different path. They've appealed both Justice Arthur Engoron's summary judgment from September 2023 and his final decision from February 2024 in the civil fraud case. New York Attorney General Letitia James moved to consolidate the appeals. Now, the Appellate Division, First Department, has ordered that all arguments will proceed together. The appeals center on whether Trump and his companies fraudulently inflated property values and other assets—an issue that has both civil and political consequences hanging in the balance.Georgia is another hot spot, especially with Mark Meadows petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court. He wants to move his state-level criminal case to federal court after the Eleventh Circuit denied his bid. Though this move didn't directly involve Trump, it's part of the wider universe of prosecutions linked to efforts to overturn the 2020 election.And back in Manhattan, Trump has once again attempted to lift his criminal prosecution by District Attorney Alvin Bragg into the federal courts. His latest filing for removal was rejected for being untimely, a setback he tried to counter by seeking Judge Alvin Hellerstein's permission—denied yet again. Now, Trump's team is appealing to the Second Circuit, with briefs due later this year.If all that weren't enough, just yesterday at the Supreme Court, the justices heard oral arguments in Trump v. CASA Inc. The dispute centers on birthright citizenship and the reach of executive power, stemming from an executive order Trump issued on his inauguration day this year. Multiple district courts have already blocked the order, and the Supreme Court will now weigh in, with implications for citizenship itself and, likely, for the 2024 campaign narrative.In every jurisdiction, from Florida to New York, Georgia to the highest court in the land, Donald Trump faces a legal calendar as relentless and high-stakes as any in American history. Each court date, each appeal, every ruling shapes not only Trump's personal future but America's ongoing clash over law, power, and politics.

I've been glued to my screens these past few days, just trying to keep up as Donald Trump's legal battles keep dominating the headlines. It's May 14, 2025, and there's been a flurry of activity in the courts that's impossible to ignore if you care about American politics or the justice system.Let's start with New York. On May 30, 2024, a Manhattan jury reached a historic decision, finding Donald Trump guilty of 34 felony counts for falsifying business records. The case, The People for the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump, stemmed from allegations that he tried to cover up hush money payments during the 2016 campaign. After a dramatic trial that started in April 2024, the verdict arrived with the nation watching. Then, on January 10, 2025, Judge Juan Merchan passed a sentence: an unconditional discharge for the former president. Trump avoided jail time in this criminal case, but the conviction itself was unprecedented—a former president with 34 felony convictions on his record.But that's just part of the story. Down in Florida, things unfolded differently. Back in June 2023, Trump and his aide Walt Nauta were indicted on charges including willfully retaining national defense information and obstruction of justice—essentially, the classified documents case. Judge Aileen Cannon shook up the legal world when, on July 15, 2024, she dismissed the federal indictment entirely, arguing that Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment wasn't lawful. The Justice Department tried to fight back, but by late November 2024, they had dismissed their own appeal, bringing that chapter to a surprising close.The courtrooms haven't emptied yet. Just yesterday, on May 13, 2025, another hearing unfolded: Selections, Inc. et al v. Donald J. Trump et al, in federal court. The public could tune in via teleconference, adding another layer of transparency—and spectacle—to Trump's ongoing legal saga.Meanwhile, Trump's legal team and prosecutors are locked in appeals and fresh challenges, from New York's civil fraud appeals against Attorney General Letitia James to attempts to shift criminal cases into federal court and more procedural wrangling that make headlines almost daily. These cases are complex, with overlapping timelines and shifting strategies, but one thing is clear: Donald Trump's unprecedented legal calendar continues to shape both the courtrooms and the political landscape as the country closely watches what comes next.

Good morning, I'm reporting to you live on May 12, 2025, with the latest updates on the various legal proceedings involving former President Donald Trump.The past week has brought significant developments in Trump's legal landscape. Just three days ago, on May 9th, Trump unveiled his first round of judicial nominees for his second term. These selections have already sparked intense debate across political circles, with critics expressing serious concerns about the qualifications and ideological positions of nominees like Whitney Hermandorfer.Looking back at Trump's recent legal battles, perhaps the most notable was his New York criminal case. On January 10th of this year, Justice Juan Merchan delivered the sentencing for Trump following his conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. The Manhattan jury had found Trump guilty of all charges on May 30th, 2024, in a trial that captivated the nation for weeks. Despite the felony convictions, Justice Merchan ultimately sentenced Trump to an unconditional discharge, meaning no jail time or probation was imposed.The classified documents case in Florida took a dramatic turn last year when Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the entire federal indictment against Trump on July 15th, 2024. Her ruling stated that Special Counsel Jack Smith had been improperly appointed and funded. Though Smith initially appealed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the Justice Department ultimately dismissed the appeal against Trump on November 29th, 2024, effectively ending that prosecution. The appeals against Trump's co-defendants, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, were similarly dismissed in late January of this year.Trump's legal calendar has been extraordinarily complex, with multiple cases proceeding simultaneously across different jurisdictions. Court records show a flurry of legal filings throughout late 2024, with numerous decisions, orders, and letters filed in the New York case alone between November and January.As Trump now shifts focus to his judicial appointments, the legal battles that dominated headlines throughout 2023 and 2024 appear to be largely resolved. The outcomes of these cases have undoubtedly shaped the political landscape as Trump begins his second term.This is just the latest chapter in what has been an unprecedented period in American legal and political history. I'll continue to bring you updates as new developments emerge in this extraordinary saga.

Good morning, America. I'm standing here today, May 11th, 2025, reflecting on what has been an unprecedented legal journey for former President Donald Trump. Just four months into 2025, and the aftermath of numerous court battles continues to shape our political landscape.Back in January, we witnessed the conclusion of the Manhattan criminal case where Trump faced charges of falsifying business records. On January 10th, Justice Merchan delivered his sentence - an unconditional discharge - following the Manhattan jury's verdict from May 30th last year that found Trump guilty on all 34 felony counts. This marked the first time in American history that a former president was convicted of felony crimes.Meanwhile, the classified documents case in Florida took a dramatic turn. Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the entire indictment against Trump last July, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith was improperly appointed and funded. The Justice Department initially appealed to the 11th Circuit but ultimately dropped their appeal against Trump in late November 2024, followed by dismissing appeals against his co-defendants Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira in January of this year.The legal calendar for Trump has been relentless. Just yesterday, news broke that the Supreme Court is preparing to review what critics have described as a "power grab" by the President. The justices will be examining the constitutional limits of presidential authority in a case that could have far-reaching implications.Trump's legal team has been working overtime, filing appeals in multiple jurisdictions. In the New York civil fraud case, Trump and his co-defendants have appealed both Justice Engoron's September 2023 summary judgment and his February 2024 final decision. The Appellate Division consolidated these appeals at the request of New York Attorney General Letitia James.In Georgia, former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows has taken his case all the way to the Supreme Court, seeking to move his state criminal case to federal court after the 11th Circuit dismissed his previous attempt.Trump himself has made another attempt to remove Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's state prosecution to federal court, though his filing was rejected as deficient and his request for leave was denied by Judge Hellerstein. His appeal to the Second Circuit is still pending.As we move deeper into 2025, these legal battles continue to unfold against the backdrop of Trump's controversial judicial appointments, which many legal experts have characterized as transformative for the federal judiciary. The intersection of legal proceedings and politics remains a defining feature of our current moment in American history.

Good morning, I'm reporting live on the latest developments in the legal saga surrounding former President Donald Trump. It's Friday, May 9th, 2025, and the past few months have seen significant developments in Trump's various legal battles.Earlier this year, on January 10th, Justice Juan Merchan sentenced Donald Trump to unconditional discharge following his conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in Manhattan. This marked the conclusion of the first-ever criminal trial of a former U.S. president, which had captivated the nation since it began on April 15th, 2024, resulting in the jury's guilty verdict last May.Meanwhile, in the classified documents case in Florida, a dramatic turn occurred when Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the federal indictment against Trump last July, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith was improperly appointed and funded. Though the Justice Department initially appealed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, they ultimately dropped the appeal against Trump in late November 2024, followed by dismissing appeals against his co-defendants Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira in January of this year.The legal calendar continues to be packed with Trump-related proceedings. Mark Meadows, Trump's former chief of staff, has petitioned the Supreme Court following the 11th Circuit's dismissal of his attempt to move his Georgia criminal case to federal court.In the New York civil fraud case, Trump and his co-defendants have filed appeals against Justice Engoron's decisions from last year. Attorney General Letitia James successfully requested to consolidate these appeals, which are now proceeding with a single record and set of briefs.Just three months ago, in February, a new lawsuit emerged challenging the Trump administration's handling of the refugee processing system. The case, Pacito v. Trump, was filed on February 10th with plaintiffs seeking a preliminary injunction the following day.Trump is also making another attempt to remove Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's state prosecution to federal court. After his second notice of removal was rejected and Judge Hellerstein denied his request for leave, Trump appealed to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.As these cases continue to unfold, the intersection of law and politics remains at the forefront of American discourse, with each development adding new chapters to this unprecedented legal saga surrounding the former president.

These past few days, the legal saga swirling around Donald Trump has reached new heights, with courtroom dramas unfolding across the country and even reaching the steps of the Supreme Court. I've been following the action closely, and the sheer number of legal battles and their political implications are nothing short of astonishing.Let's start in Manhattan, New York, where things came to a head last year but still reverberate today. Back in March 2023, a grand jury indicted Donald Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records—an historic first for a former president. After a trial that gripped the nation, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on all counts by the end of May 2024. In January 2025, Justice Juan Merchan sentenced him to an unconditional discharge; that means Trump was found guilty, but the court chose not to impose jail time, probation, or a fine. The verdict's impact, however, continues to play out in public perception and upcoming appeals.Meanwhile, in Florida, Trump faced a separate federal case involving classified documents. He was indicted for allegedly retaining national defense information, obstructing justice, and making false statements. The proceedings took a dramatic turn in July 2024, when Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the indictment, citing the alleged improper appointment and funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith. The Department of Justice tried to appeal but ultimately dismissed its appeal by the end of January 2025, putting this particular prosecution on hold—for now.Then there's the raft of appeals and procedural wrangling happening in other cases. Trump and his legal team are locked in battles over issues ranging from state-level charges in Georgia to the New York civil fraud case brought by Attorney General Letitia James. In New York, all the appeals related to that civil fraud suit have now been consolidated, streamlining what would otherwise be a tangled web of legal arguments into one massive showdown.At the same time, Trump hasn't shied away from the spotlight—he's petitioned courts to move more cases to federal jurisdiction, with mixed results, and just in the past few days, his legal team pushed the Supreme Court to rule on the reach of nationwide injunctions and administrative authority. Meanwhile, another scheduled hearing is looming on May 13, as the Court of International Trade prepares to take up arguments over Trump-era tariffs, a case with high stakes for both trade law and presidential power.The legal calendar for Donald Trump is relentless. Whether it's criminal or civil, state or federal, the courtroom battles show no sign of slowing. Each new filing, hearing, and decision keeps the nation—and the world—watching, as Trump's unprecedented legal journey continues to make headlines and history.

Good morning everyone, it's May 2nd, 2025, and the legal saga surrounding former President Donald Trump continues to unfold at a dizzying pace.In just eleven days, we'll see a major collision of two significant elements in Trump's legal battles. The Court of International Trade is scheduled to hear oral arguments on May 13th in one of the growing number of lawsuits challenging Trump's sweeping tariff policies. These cases make compelling legal arguments that the tariffs lack proper authorization under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, which Trump has been using as justification.The Liberty Justice Center has filed a motion for a nationwide injunction to halt these tariffs, representing V.O.S. Selections and four other small businesses who claim the tariffs threaten their very existence.But here's where it gets interesting – just two days after that, on May 15th, the Supreme Court will consider whether to limit judges' authority to issue such nationwide injunctions. The Court will hear arguments about the Trump administration's appeal to overturn injunctions blocking Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship.Looking at recent developments, we've seen significant movement in several other Trump cases. On January 10th of this year, Justice Merchan sentenced Trump to unconditional discharge following his conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in Manhattan.In the classified documents case, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the federal indictment against Trump last July, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith was improperly appointed and funded. Smith appealed to the 11th Circuit, but the Justice Department dropped the appeal against Trump in November and against his co-defendants in January.Just last month, on April 7th, the Supreme Court issued a per curiam decision in Trump v. J.G.G., a case involving the detention and removal of Venezuelan nationals believed to be members of Tren de Aragua.And yesterday, May 1st, we saw a Texas federal court rule against the Trump administration on the Alien Enemies Act in the case of JAV v. Trump, brought by the ACLU of Texas.The legal calendar remains packed with various appeals. Mark Meadows has petitioned the Supreme Court following the 11th Circuit's dismissal of his attempt to move his Georgia criminal case to federal court. Meanwhile, defendants in the New York civil fraud case have filed appeals against Justice Engoron's decisions, and several defendants are appealing Judge McAfee's order regarding their motions to disqualify District Attorney Fani Willis.As these cases continue to wind through the courts, the implications for both Trump personally and broader executive power in America remain profound and far-reaching.

The past several days have been a whirlwind in the ongoing legal saga surrounding Donald Trump. Most notably, all eyes have been on the aftermath of his conviction in New York. Last year, on May 30, 2024, a Manhattan jury found former President Trump guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, charges tied to hush money payments that shook the political world. Fast forward to this January, Judge Juan Merchan sentenced Trump, but in a move that left both critics and supporters buzzing, the sentence was “unconditional discharge.” That means Trump faces no jail time or probation, but the record of conviction stands, marking a historic moment as the first time a former U.S. president was convicted of a felony.Meanwhile, Trump's legal battles in Florida took an unexpected turn. Last summer, in the Southern District of Florida, Trump, along with his aide Waltine Nauta and Mar-a-Lago employee Carlos De Oliveira, faced a blockbuster federal indictment. They were charged with willfully retaining national defense information, obstruction of justice, interfering with a federal investigation, and making false statements—charges stemming from classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago. The nation waited for a high-stakes courtroom showdown, but on July 15, 2024, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case. Her ruling focused not on Trump's conduct, but rather on the appointment and funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith, deeming them improper. The Justice Department quickly appealed, but by late November, they dropped the appeal against Trump. On January 29, 2025, the remaining appeals against Nauta and De Oliveira were also dismissed. The sudden end to this federal case stunned legal observers and injected even more uncertainty into an already chaotic legal landscape.Elsewhere, Trump continues to face civil litigation and ongoing scrutiny over his executive actions, particularly regarding immigration and funding for so-called “sanctuary cities.” San Francisco and other municipalities have lawsuits pending that challenge his administration's orders to withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions, citing constitutional violations.As of today, with the criminal cases in New York now concluded and the Florida charges dismissed, Donald Trump's legal fate remains a fiercely debated topic. This past week crystallized two things: Trump's unique place in American legal history, and the volatile, unpredictable nature of his court battles. From the hushed halls of Manhattan criminal court to the federal courthouse in Florida, each trial has not only tested the boundaries of law and precedent but has kept the nation riveted at every turn.

The last several days in Donald Trump's courtroom saga have been nothing short of remarkable. Just last year, after a landmark trial in New York, Trump became the first former president to be found guilty on criminal charges. The Manhattan jury convicted him on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records—charges stemming from the so-called “hush money” case, allegations that Trump covered up payments meant to influence the 2016 election. In a surprise decision, Judge Juan Merchan sentenced Trump on January 10, 2025, to an unconditional discharge, meaning Trump avoided jail time and probation. This outcome left supporters relieved but critics calling for more accountability, and, unsurprisingly, Trump used the moment to rally his political base, declaring vindication while vowing to continue his agenda.Meanwhile, in the federal courts, the legal tides shifted dramatically following Trump's return to the White House. The two high-profile federal criminal cases—one in Florida regarding classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, and another in Washington D.C. related to accusations of obstruction and conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election—were both dismissed soon after his inauguration. In Florida, Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment was improper, dismissing the indictment. The Justice Department eventually dropped its appeal, effectively ending prosecution in both the classified documents and obstruction matters. In D.C., Judge Tanya Chutkan granted a government motion to dismiss, closing the chapter on one of the most watched legal battles tied to January 6th.However, the courtrooms have not emptied. In the past month, drama erupted over President Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act. The administration deported over 100 Venezuelan nationals, alleged gang members, to El Salvador, even as federal Judge James Boasberg ordered those planes turned back to the United States. Plaintiffs' lawyers argued Trump's team violated the judge's order, and Judge Boasberg himself accused the administration of “bad faith” for rushing removals before the courts could weigh in. Although the Supreme Court later allowed further deportations, citing jurisdictional issues, the episode inflamed debate about executive power and the rule of law.In parallel, President Trump has issued a flurry of executive orders, including directives to repeal regulations inconsistent with recent Supreme Court decisions, further polarizing the broader national conversation. Across the country, every courtroom appearance, filing, and headline ensures that the legal fights surrounding Donald Trump remain central to American life, driving both the news cycle and the ongoing political divide.

It has been a whirlwind few days following the legal twists and turns surrounding former President Donald Trump. Despite his re-election in 2024, a string of legal battles from his pre-presidential period continues to unfold, captivating the nation. The New York case, the first of these, has its roots in charges dating back to March 2023. Trump was indicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records, and by May 2024, a Manhattan jury found him guilty on all charges. However, in a surprising turn of events this January, Justice Juan Merchan sentenced him to "unconditional discharge," essentially sparing him prison time but leaving the conviction intact. Critics argue this leniency undercuts accountability, while supporters claim it reflects judicial fairness.Turning south, the Southern District of Florida case centered on classified documents Trump allegedly mishandled after leaving office. Initially charged with 32 counts of willfully retaining national defense information and several counts of obstruction and false statements, the case took a dramatic turn last summer. Judge Aileen Cannon, citing issues with the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith, dismissed the indictment. Although the Justice Department appealed, it eventually withdrew its challenge last fall, effectively dropping the case. This decision remains controversial, with pundits debating whether judicial missteps or political strategies were at play.In Washington, D.C., Trump's legal challenges included accusations of obstructing the certification of the 2020 election results. However, the Supreme Court intervened, sending the case back to the lower courts. By December 2024, the government moved to dismiss the charges, leading Trump's allies to claim vindication, while critics lamented what they see as yet another missed opportunity for justice.Meanwhile, in Fulton County, Georgia, Trump was charged alongside 18 others for attempting to overturn Georgia's 2020 election results. This case, still active, is one to watch. Prosecutors in Georgia are determined to hold Trump accountable, but his legal team has mounted aggressive defenses.Beyond these cases, Trump's recent executive actions as president have sparked fresh legal disputes. His controversial initiatives, such as requiring undocumented immigrants to register or face penalties, and a directive bypassing the traditional public comment process to repeal regulations deemed unlawful, have been challenged in court. Advocacy groups argue these measures violate due process and constitutional principles, while Trump's administration claims they are necessary for national security and efficient governance.These trials and executive decisions are reshaping Trump's legacy, intertwining legal drama with political action. As the courts grapple with these cases, the nation waits, watching history unfold in real-time.

"Over the past few days, the nation has been gripped by the unfolding saga surrounding former President Donald Trump's legal battles. And while his name has long occupied headlines, the courtroom drama of this past week has laid bare the complexities of his legal entanglements.Take, for instance, the controversial use of the Alien Enemies Act. On April 1, Trump's administration sought the Supreme Court's blessing to proceed with deportations under this 1798 law, originally meant for wartime enemies. The administration's targeting of alleged Venezuelan gang members tied to Tren de Aragua has sparked furious debate. Critics argue that invoking this act, especially against individuals with tenuous gang affiliations, threatens the principles of due process. Lawyers for detainees, some of whom were labeled as gang members based on nothing more than tattoos, mounted a last-minute legal challenge, pushing back against deportations executed without court reviews. Questions surrounding the act's constitutionality now sit before the Supreme Court, leaving the legal landscape in suspense.The drama doesn't end there. Time and again, Trump's legal team has faced setbacks. In New York, the long-standing case in which he was convicted last year of falsifying business records reached its conclusion in January with an unconditional discharge. Yet, the ramifications of that guilty verdict—tied to dubious dealings in Manhattan—continue to ripple across Trump's political and business ventures.Meanwhile, the fallout from the dismissed federal cases in Florida and Washington, D.C., remains a sore point. Both cases, tied to national security and the events of January 6th, were rendered moot post-election when Trump secured an immunity ruling as president. Judge Aileen Cannon's decision regarding the mishandling of classified documents in Florida raised eyebrows, effectively shutting down the indictment against Trump and his aides. While critics railed against what some labeled a judicial overreach, others saw it as a decisive check against prosecutorial misconduct.And then there's Georgia, where Trump and his co-defendants face the weight of state law in the high-profile election interference case. As of now, proceedings in Fulton County have trudged along, with every filing and every hearing dissected by legal analysts and public spectators alike.Amidst it all, Trump's actions as sitting president continue to fuel controversy outside the courtroom. His executive orders have raised alarms among advocates and lawmakers, particularly those targeting immigration policies and legal protections for non-citizens. Just last month, his administration terminated parole status for nationals from several countries, drawing sharp rebukes from rights organizations.The gravity of these stories cannot be overstated, not just for Trump but for the country that continues to wrestle with the political and legal ramifications of his presidency. As the trials wind onward, one thing is clear: the legal and ethical questions posed will echo for years to come."

The courtroom drama surrounding Donald Trump has remained at the forefront of public attention in recent days, offering a riveting glimpse into the legal crossroads of politics. As of today, April 7, 2025, the former president is enmeshed in various high-profile legal battles that range from past allegations to ongoing executive actions.Let's start with New York, where Trump's conviction for falsifying business records concluded earlier this year with a sentencing of unconditional discharge. It was a moment of legal history as a former president was held accountable on 34 felony charges tied to altering financial documents in an effort to obscure hush money payments. The battle began back in 2023 and reached a dramatic climax last May when a Manhattan jury delivered its verdict. Though the sentencing was lenient, the conviction itself is a landmark.Meanwhile, in Florida, the prosecution's case against Trump for mishandling classified national defense documents faced a stunning reversal. Originally, Trump was accused of willfully retaining sensitive materials and obstructing justice. However, in July 2024, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed federal charges, citing improper actions by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Although the Department of Justice fought to reinstate the case, federal appeals ultimately sided with the defense by year's end, effectively closing this chapter.Washington, D.C., adds another layer of complexity. Trump was indicted for his alleged role in obstructing the certification of the 2020 election results, marking one of the most politically charged cases against him. Though the trial date initially set for March 2024 was delayed amid debates over presidential immunity, the prosecution ultimately dropped the charges last December, a quiet conclusion to what many expected to be a sensational case.In Fulton County, Georgia, Trump faces yet another legal storm. Here, he and several co-defendants were charged with conspiracy related to efforts to overturn Georgia's 2020 election results. While much of the legal wrangling remains preliminary, this case could resurface with significant consequences as the calendar advances.Beyond the courtroom, Trump's presidency continues to spark legal challenges related to his controversial policies. Specifically, his executive orders targeting sanctuary cities and his expansion of migrant deportations have ignited fierce litigation nationwide. Cities from Massachusetts to California are challenging the legality of his administration's sweeping immigration measures, spotlighting the ongoing tension between federal and local powers.Trump's legal saga underscores how the intersection of law and politics can reshape not only the lives of individuals but the very fabric of governance. For now, the nation watches, waits, and anticipates what the next turn in this judicial odyssey will bring.

Monday morning came with yet another twist in the ever-evolving legal saga of Donald J. Trump, the former and current U.S. president. Though a staggering number of cases had been filed against him, this week brought attention to the Southern District of Florida's tangled web, a case of classified documents and accusations of obstruction. There was a sense of déjà vu—the charges of mishandling national defense information have been a legal thorn for months—but this time, it seemed like closure was finally within grasp, though not without its peculiarities. The federal case, already dismissed last year by Judge Aileen Cannon on grounds of improperly appointed special counsel, resurfaced slightly when the Department of Justice abruptly withdrew its own appeal earlier this year. For Trump and his legal team, it marked yet another point in a scorekeeping battle with his critics.Meanwhile, down in Fulton County, Georgia, the criminal case accusing Trump of attempting to overturn Georgia's 2020 election results simmered in complexity. Eighteen co-defendants were still in the mix, their fate intertwined with Trump's. Despite his legal victories elsewhere, this case remains one of his most significant vulnerabilities. Prosecutors in Georgia have pushed for trial dates that stretch deep into the future, a sign that this drama will not be resolved anytime soon.New York remains a key battleground. The Manhattan case involving 34 felony counts of falsifying business records reached its climax months ago, with Justice Juan Merchan sentencing Trump to unconditional discharge in January 2025. Though not a jail sentence, the symbolic blow was unmistakable. Yet Trump, buoyed by his return to office in the wake of the 2024 election, wasted no time framing the case as political theater rather than substantive law.It's been a whirlwind for political analysts and the public alike, watching Trump navigate overlapping legal fights while simultaneously reshaping global trade policies and executive decisions. On April 2, Trump announced reciprocal tariffs of up to 50% on imports from select countries, touting them as a move to correct “nonreciprocal and discriminatory trading practices.” Even amidst legal chaos, his policymaking continues unabated, bearing the unmistakable stamp of his confrontational style.Today, April 4, 2025, marks another defining moment in this saga. With federal courts deliberating on the limits of his executive authority, state prosecutors sharpening their strategies, and Trump himself navigating the corridors of power, the narrative remains gripping. Whether seen as a comeback king or a polarizing figure, Donald Trump's story is one of unrelenting conflict and unshaken resilience—one that continues to redefine the American legal and political landscape.

As I sit here on March 31, 2025, reflecting on the whirlwind of legal battles surrounding former President Donald Trump, it's hard to believe how much has unfolded in just the past few days. The courts have been buzzing with activity, and the nation remains captivated by every twist and turn.Let's start with the New York case, where Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records back in May 2024. Just a few months ago, on January 10, 2025, Justice Juan Merchan sentenced Trump to unconditional discharge. It was a surprising outcome that left many legal experts scratching their heads.Meanwhile, the federal cases against Trump took an unexpected turn after he won the 2024 presidential election. Both cases were dismissed, with the Southern District of Florida case being thrown out by Judge Aileen Cannon on July 15, 2024. She ruled that Special Counsel Jack Smith was improperly appointed and funded. The Justice Department initially appealed but ultimately dismissed the appeal against Trump on November 29, 2024.The District of Columbia case met a similar fate. After the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the district court in August 2024, Judge Tanya Chutkan granted the government's unopposed motion to dismiss on December 6, 2024. It was a stunning reversal of fortune for Trump, who had faced serious charges related to his actions surrounding the 2020 election.But the legal drama doesn't end there. Just last week, on March 24, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral arguments in a case known as J.G.G. et al. v. Donald Trump et al. The details of this case are still emerging, but it's clear that Trump's legal battles are far from over.In recent days, we've seen a flurry of activity in various courts across the country. Cities and counties are challenging Trump's executive orders on immigration and sanctuary cities. San Francisco filed a complaint on February 7, 2025, arguing that Trump's actions violate multiple constitutional provisions and the Administrative Procedure Act.Meanwhile, immigrant advocacy groups have filed lawsuits challenging Trump's policies on migrant transfers and refugee admissions. It's a dizzying array of legal challenges that shows no signs of slowing down.Perhaps most surprisingly, we've witnessed what some are calling "The Great Grovel" – elite institutions capitulating to Trump's demands in an effort to avoid his ire. Law firms like Paul, Weiss and Skadden Arps have pledged millions in pro bono legal services to Trump-supported causes. It's a stark reminder of the power Trump still wields, even as he faces ongoing legal challenges.As we move forward, it's clear that the courts will continue to play a crucial role in shaping Trump's legacy and the future of American politics. With each passing day, new developments emerge, keeping the nation on the edge of its seat. One thing's for certain: the legal saga of Donald Trump is far from over.

Tuesday, March 11th, 2025Today, a damning affidavit is filed in the lawsuit against Musk gaining access to the Social Security Administration systems; the Department of Homeland Security has begun polygraph tests to determine who is leaking to the press; the Trump administration is backtracking on forcing Maine parents to visit Social Security offices to register newborns; Trump's Department of Justice is allowing the assassination attempt rifle to be shipped to Florida for inspection by the alleged shooter's lawyers; the Trump administration begs the court to vacate the order forcing the head of OPM to testify under oath in open court; the Supreme Court takes up a challenge to Colorado's conversion therapy ban; Ontario, Canada has slapped a 25% tax increase on electricity exports to the United States; protests erupt after ICE illegally detains a Columbia University Palestinian protester; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You Helix20% Off Sitewide when you go to HelixSleep.com/dailybeansThank You PiqueGet 20% off on the Radiant Skin Duo, plus a FREE starter kit at Piquelife.com/dailybeansStories:Supreme Court takes up challenge to Colorado conversion therapy ban | NBC NewsJudge says Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil can't be deported from U.S. as protesters call for his release | NBC NewsOntario slaps 25% tax increase on electricity exports to US in response to Trump's trade war | AP NewsTrump Administration Backtracks On Forcing Maine Parents To Visit Social Security Offices To Register Newborns - Arthur Delaney | HuffPostDHS has begun performing polygraph tests on employees to find leakers - Julia Ainsley and Jonathan Allen | NBC NewsDefense lawyers in Trump assassination attempt case tour Trump golf course, examine rifle from FBI evidence - Scott MacFarlane | CBS News Good Trouble: Members of the House of Representatives AND the Senate will be back on your home turf beginning Saturday, March 15 through Sunday, March 23. Below is everything you need to know about why recess matters, our demands, and the top actions we're recommending to get their attention. If you're ready to join the fight, sign up for updates and ways to take action against the Trump-Musk coup and the Republican tax scam. https://indivisible.org/muskorus From The Good NewsHold On -  Matthew Schickele (official lyrics)Women's Sports Foundation and Women Sport InternationalLake Char­gogg­a­gogg­man­chaugg­a­gogg­chau­bun­a­gung­a­mauggReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewroteDana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon has done Trump yet another favor by prohibiting the Department of Justice from releasing to the leadership of the House and Senate Judicial Committees Volume 2 of Special Counsel Jack Smith's report regarding Trump's unlawful retention of classified documents, obstruction of justice, and violations of our nation's espionage laws. In a piece Glenn authored for MSNBC, he explains why he was so worried about the decision of federal prosecutors to not fight the jurisdictional battle, given that Judge Cannon has no authority to continue to issue orders in a case she dismissed - a case that is currently on appeal to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.Link to Glenn's MSNBC article:https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-o...If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2X aka Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This week on the Mark Levin Show, we had the official Constitutional certification of Donald Trump as President after he won a landslide victory. But there was no peaceful transfer of power yet – from this moment forward the Democrat party is looking to sabotage Trump's presidency just as they did in 2016. Later, Judge Juan Merchan says he'll sentence Trump this Friday because all the left wants is to call Trump a convicted criminal. Merchan has lit a match to the supremacy clause and the electoral system. He has interfered in the Constitutional process like no other Judge and some say there's nothing we can do to fight back. Later, the actions of Attorney General Merrick Garland to the rulings of Judge Aileen Cannon unpacks the complex interplay of politics and justice. A few decades ago, California was known as one of the greatest States, now it has become a one-party-run, third-world hell hole. California is run by unserious ideologues who believe they are smarter than us. The politicians in California claim they care about the environment yet look what they've done to the environment. We're led to believe we are abusing nature - no nature abuses us whether we like it or not. It appears that everything that could go wrong went wrong in California. Not by nature but the ideologues who run California. We need answers and accountability. Why were they pushing radical, left-wing ideological policies that put people at risk, such as DEI and environmental justice programs? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Did Trump-appointed judge Aileen Cannon abuse her judicial discretion yet again in favor of Donald Trump? Judge Cannon no longer presides over the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, as it is now in the exclusive jurisdiction of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. Apparently undeterred by her lack of jurisdiction over the documents case, The New York Times just reported that, "Judge Cannon Blocks Release of Special Counsel's Final Report on Trump."Will this act turn out to be the third time Judge Cannon abuses her judicial discretion to the benefit of Trump?Glenn discusses the implications of this latest Cannon ruling.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2X aka Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This week, we learned that Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito spoke privately with Donald Trump to recommend a former clerk for a job. Jamie Raskin just tore into this news, urging Alito to recuse himself from Trump-related matters. This comes as Trump asked the high court to block a New York judge from sentencing him for his hush money conviction. What Raskin got right is to zero in on the corruption embedded in Trump's relationship with the Supreme Court. After all, between this and Judge Aileen Cannon ordering Special Counsel Jack Smith not to release his report on the evidence he's collected against Trump, the courts face a legitimacy crisis. We talked to Politico's Kyle Cheney, who untangles all these stories and explains what's coming next. Listen to this episode here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Tuesday's Mark Levin Show, President-Elect Trump sees that China and Russia are scouring the world. They're building ships to control navigable waters and they're in all parts of the globe. Trump sees how we're getting choked off and looks towards Panama Canal and Greenland. Trump knows the Panama Canal is critical to our enemies. The idea that China has control of it is an abomination and the Democrats have no answer to this. Later, Judge Aileen Cannon blocked Jack Smith from releasing his report. She previously ruled Smith's appointment was unconstitutional; he shouldn't be filing anything because she ruled he doesn't exist. Also, Biden just commuted the sentences of horrific murderers but the media lectures Trump about pardoning the January 6'ers. Afterward, the serial rape of thousands of English girls in Britain by mostly Pakistan Muslims went on for years and was covered up. The government tried to bury the story because those in power were intimidated by Pakistani Muslims and didn't want to be accused of racism. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Wednesday, January 8th, 2025Today, Judge Aileen Cannon has blocked the release of Jack Smith's final report; the Republican controlled North Carolina Supreme Court has blocked the state from certifying the Democrat as the winner of the high court election; Senator Elizabeth Warren is sounding the alarm bells about Pete Hegseth; Zuckerburg says Meta will end fact checking in favor of community notes; an appeals court has denied Trump's attempt to postpone his sentencing this Friday; Trump says he's willing to use military force to obtain Greenland and the Panama Canal; the Pentagon agrees to settle a historic lawsuit with LGBTQ+ veterans over discharge status; and Allison and Dana delivers your Good News.Thank You Helix25% Off Sitewide + 2 Free Dream Pillows with Mattress Purchase when you go  to HelixSleep.com/dailybeans.Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewroteDana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedy If you want to support what Harry Dunn and I are up to, head to patreon.com/aisle45podHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/Something to dohttps://www.justice.gov/doj/webform/your-message-department-justiceChoose “Message to the Attorney General” from the drop down.From The Good Newshttp://Kindness2025.orghello@kindness.org for Biscuithttps://www.twitch.tv/katydubu Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewroteDana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Today's Headlines: Meta announced it's ending its fact-checking program, replacing it with community notes and undoing limits on political content in feeds. Meanwhile, Dana White, UFC president and Trump ally, joined Meta's board. Judge Aileen Cannon temporarily blocked Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on Trump's classified documents and election interference cases, pending appeal. Trump criticized former President Carter during his press conference and hinted at military action to control the Panama Canal and Greenland. Donald Trump Jr. visited Greenland as a private citizen but received no official meetings, while Greenland reaffirmed it's not for sale. Minneapolis and the DOJ reached a consent decree to implement mandatory police reforms after George Floyd's killing. A new study found fewer than 0.1% of teens receive gender-affirming care, despite 3% identifying as transgender in a recent CDC survey. The Biden administration announced plans to remove medical debt from credit reports and eliminate $15 billion in medical debt, expected to improve credit scores for over 15 million Americans. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: NBC News: Meta is ending its fact-checking program in favor of a 'community notes' system similar to X's WA Post: UFC's Dana White joins Meta board MSNBC: Judge Aileen Cannon temporarily blocks the release of Jack Smith's final report AP News: Takeaways from Trump's Mar-a-Lago press conference AP News: Donald Trump Jr. arrives in Greenland with a message from his dad: 'We're going to treat you well' WA Post: Years after Floyd's death, Minneapolis and DOJ agree to police changes NPR: Few transgender minors receive gender-affirming care medicines, study finds Whitehouse: FACT SHEET: Vice President Harris Announces Final Rule Removing Medical Debt from All Credit Reports | The White House  Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage alongside Bridget Schwartz and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Why did Judge Aileen Cannon prohibit the release of special counsel Jack Smith's report about his investigations into President-elect Donald Trump? Preet Bharara and Joyce Vance break down Cannon's order and Trump's request for the report to not be made public. In the full episode, Preet and Joyce discuss:  – Trump's upcoming sentencing for his Manhattan conviction, and the judge's recent order revealing he will not sentence Trump to prison time;  – The terror attack in New Orleans, where a man drove a truck through a crowd celebrating the new year, and the investigation into law enforcement failures and the driver's ties to terrorist groups. CAFE Insiders click HERE to listen to the full analysis. To become a member of CAFE Insider head to cafe.com/insider. You'll get access to full episodes of the podcast and other exclusive content. This podcast is brought to you by CAFE and Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Recall that Special Counsel Jack Smith was required by Department of Justice policy to dismiss the classified documents case against Donald Trump because DOJ has a horrific policy that a criminal president cannot be prosecuted while in office. However, the Mara-a-Lago documents case continues against Trump's two co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira. The case presently is being appealed as a result of Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon dismissing the case contrary to existing precedent. Given that Jack Smith is stepping down as Special Counsel, he just transferred the classified documents case to federal prosecutors at the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. Glenn discusses what we can expect moving forward.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this final episode of 2024, MSNBC legal analysts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord are joined by Dahlia Lithwick, Slate Senior Editor and host of the Amicus podcast. Together, they take stock of the legal hills and valleys of this past year, and the role the Supreme Court played in how Donald Trump's criminal cases were litigated. They also take a beat to consider the impact of legal journalism in the year ahead and the responsibility of legacy media to continue to hold power to account.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

After a quick review of the Georgia Court of Appeals decision disqualifying Fani Willis from Donald Trump's criminal case based on an appearance of impropriety, MSNBC legal analysts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord are joined by NYU Law professor and Dean Emeritus, Trevor Morrison. The discussion revolves around the limits and scope of the presidential pardon power, the legal precedence of a blanket pardon for crimes not yet adjudicated, and whether a president can in fact, pardon himself. Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. 

There's been significant action in New York as Judge Juan Merchan denied one of Donald Trump's motions to dismiss his 34-count verdict- this one based on the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision. After a noteworthy amount of speed reading several motions and responses, MSNBC legal analysts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord break down Merchan's rationale, highlighting the specifics of his multi-layered legal reasoning. Then, they turn to another fully briefed pending dismissal motion, this one based on the temporary immunity a sitting president is granted for official acts while serving. Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. You'll also hear a recent Premium episode from Andrew and Mary detailing our national security apparatus and why Trump's nominees for these top posts matter.

Within the 80-page motion filed last week to dismiss Donald Trump's New York criminal case, there's a long list of grievances laid out by his legal team. MSNBC legal analysts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord underscore some of the substantive arguments as to why a sitting president might find a pending case constricting, reasoning that there are aspects that could interfere with effective functioning of the presidency. But they also illuminate how these merits are buried deep within pages of hyperbole of alleged unfairness to the president-elect, prompting Andrew to ask, in terms of the facts, “Where's the beef?” Then they turn to some analysis of a letter written by incoming Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, which calls out current FBI Director Christopher Wray with a personal vote of no confidence. Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. This week, you'll find a Premium episode from Andrew and Mary highlighting the national security apparatus and why Trump's nominees for these top posts matter.

In person together at 30 Rock, veteran prosecutors Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord use their combined expertise in FBI and Justice Department standards to lay plain how far outside the norm the incoming president is aiming, by flouting a congressionally mandated 10-year appointment of an FBI Director and naming loyalist Kash Patel to replace Christopher Wray. Then, they take a beat to reflect on President Biden's unexpected pardon of his son Hunter and remind listeners of several active January 6th civil cases brought against Donald Trump  that may provide the only litigation of his actions after the 2020 election. Also, on Monday, Trump's brief was due in New York as to why his case should be dismissed based on the immunity of a sitting president. At the time of this recording, it had not yet hit the docket, but Andrew and Mary review the stakes and Judge Merchan's denial of delaying the filing.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you'll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows.