Podcasts about passing judgment

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson unpacks two pressing legal issues. First, she explores whether the President can legally bomb Iran, looking at the balance of war powers between Congress and the President, the War Powers Resolution, and recent historical precedents. Then, Jessica provides an update on the legal showdown between California Governor Newsom and the Trump administration over federalizing the National Guard, analyzing a recent Ninth Circuit decision and the role of the Posse Comitatus Act. Tune in as Jessica breaks down these timely constitutional questions and their real-world implications.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Presidential War Powers Are Limited—But Vague: Under Article 2 of the Constitution, the President can order military action in response to imminent threats or sudden attacks, but only Congress can declare war. The limits of what constitutes “imminent threat” or “war in the constitutional sense” are not clearly defined, leading to ongoing legal gray areas.Congressional Oversight Remains Weak: While laws like the War Powers Resolution were intended to check the President's power, in practice Congress often cedes authority, rarely using funding powers to halt military action even in constitutionally questionable situations.Judicial Review Is Highly Deferential: Courts are reluctant to second-guess military decisions, frequently relying on the political questions doctrine and issues of legal standing. This means even if constitutional boundaries are tested, legal recourse is rare.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson unpacks the legal battle between California and the Trump administration over the federalization of the National Guard in Los Angeles. She explains the statutes at play, including the limits of the Posse Comitatus Act and the potential use of the Insurrection Act. Jessica details Judge Breyer's ruling in favor of California, outlines the key legal questions for the upcoming Ninth Circuit hearing, and gives insight into the judges involved in this high-profile case.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss: Presidential Power to Federalize the National Guard: Jessica Levinson opens by explaining the legal mechanisms the president attempted to use to federalize the National Guard and send them, along with Marines, into Los Angeles. She breaks down the relevant federal statute (Title 10, Section 12406), which gives the president limited power to federalize the National Guard under specific conditions, such as responding to rebellion or when federal law can't be enforced with regular forces.The Scope and Limits of Military Involvement – The Posse Comitatus Act: Jessica addresses the significance of the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement. Even if the National Guard is federalized, their direct involvement in law enforcement (like making arrests) is limited unless a separate statute (the Insurrection Act) is invoked.The Insurrection Act as an Exception: She describes how the Insurrection Act is an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, allowing the military to more directly handle law enforcement under certain conditions (such as widespread unlawful conduct or when state authorities can't protect federal rights). She provides historical examples, such as federal intervention during desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s, and the Rodney King riots in 1992.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine the legal showdown in Los Angeles as President Trump sends the National Guard against California's wishes. Host Jessica Levinson analyzes the president's broad—though not unlimited—authority under Title 10 and California's legal case challenging the move on grounds of state sovereignty and the Tenth Amendment. Jessica explains how federal law and the Posse Comitatus Act restrict the National Guard's role, and why courts are usually hesitant to overrule presidential decisions on national security. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Presidential Authority to Federalize the National Guard Jessica Levinson breaks down the Trump administration's decision to send the National Guard into Los Angeles, despite objections from California officials. She explains that under federal law (Title 10), presidents have broad—though not unlimited—powers to federalize state National Guard troops. This authority can be exercised when there is a “rebellion or danger of rebellion” against federal authority, even if the state's governor disagrees.State Sovereignty vs. Federal Power California, led by Governor Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, challenges Trump's move, arguing it infringes on state sovereignty. Levinson examines the legal conflict between state autonomy (protected by the Tenth Amendment) and federal authority as outlined in Title 10. However, she concludes that the statute grants the president clear authority in these situations, making California's legal challenge an uphill battle.The Limitations of National Guard Powers (Posse Comitatus Act) Another key theme is what the National Guard can—and cannot—do once federalized. The Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits the military from acting as domestic law enforcement. Levinson clarifies that under Title 10, the National Guard cannot directly enforce domestic law (like making arrests or searches), unless additional powers are invoked (e.g., via the Insurrection Act).Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson previews the Supreme Court's most anticipated pending cases as the term nears its end. She highlights upcoming decisions on nationwide injunctions, Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors, evolving standards in discrimination lawsuits, and major cases involving religious exemptions and parental rights in education. Jessica offers her predictions and insight on how these rulings could shape the law and impact daily life, setting the stage for a dramatic finale to the Supreme Court term.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Nationwide Injunctions – Trump v. Washington/New Jersey/California: This case tackles whether federal district courts can issue nationwide injunctions blocking federal policies, as opposed to limiting decisions to just the plaintiffs in the case. The backdrop is Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, which attempts to limit who qualifies as a citizen by birth.Transgender Rights and Equal Protection – Skrmetti: The Court is considering whether Tennessee's ban on certain gender-affirming treatments for minors violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The predicted outcome is that the Court may allow such state restrictions, but notes there could be future challenges regarding parental rights under a different part of the Fourteenth Amendment.Religious Objections in Public Schools – Parental Opt-Outs for LGBTQ-Inclusive Curriculum: A Maryland case considers if public schools must offer opt-outs for parents whose religious beliefs conflict with LGBTQ-inclusive materials and lessons. The prediction: the Court may require such opt-outs under the Free Exercise Clause, but will need to write the opinion carefully to avoid overly broad exemptions.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson talks with Wall Street Journal tax reporter Richard Rubin to break down the GOP's "big beautiful" tax bill. Richard explains what's in the bill—from tax cuts and increases to spending shifts—and who will be most affected if it passes. They discuss how the bill squeaked through the House, the major sticking points, and what's likely to change as it moves to the Senate. Join us for a clear, accessible look at what's inside the bill and how it could impact Americans' wallets and the federal deficit.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:What's Inside the GOP Tax Bill: The bill primarily extends the 2017 tax cuts, including a higher standard deduction, lower rates, and business relief, while adding temporary cuts like a boosted child tax credit and tip or overtime exemptions. To offset costs, it includes tax hikes, mainly on clean energy and high earners, major cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, and increased spending on border security and defense.How “Typical” is This GOP Bill?: Richard describes it as a “mishmash”—there are conventional GOP elements (like tax cuts for the affluent), but also some Trump-specific provisions, like the “Trump account” (a new children's savings account), faster write-offs for American factories, and anti-immigration measures.The Path Forward in the Senate: Richard explains that the Senate will likely alter the House version, focusing on issues like Medicaid changes and clean energy tax credits.Follow Our Host and Guest: @RichardRubinDC @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine the legal controversy over James Comey's deleted “8647” social media post and the ensuing federal investigation. Host Jessica Levinson analyzes whether Comey's message amounted to an unlawful threat against former president Trump or was simply protected political speech. She guides listeners through the legal standards for incitement, fighting words, and true threats, concluding that the greater threat may be government efforts to silence political opponents. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:James Comey's Social Media Post: Jessica Levinson introduces the controversy surrounding former FBI director James Comey, who is under federal investigation for a now-deleted social media post featuring shells arranged as "8647" on the beach. The crux of the issue is whether this was a coded call to "get rid of" (86) President Trump, who is both the 45th and 47th president, or simply a form of political commentary.The Legal Question: Free Speech vs. True Threats: Levinson dives into the central legal dilemma: Was Comey advocating violence, or exercising his First Amendment right to political speech? She explains the importance of distinguishing between punishable incitement or threats and protected political advocacy.Historical and Contextual Perspective: The episode puts this controversy in a broader context, mentioning similar uses of "86" by other politicians, notably Matt Gaetz, without triggering federal investigations. Levinson argues that context matters—whether the intent is referencing a metaphorical political ouster or a literal threat.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine sweeping changes in the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division under the Trump administration. Reporter Sam Levine joins host Jessica Levinson to discuss how the division, long tasked with enforcing voting rights and other protections, has seen over 70% of its attorneys depart amid a shift in priorities toward the president's agenda. The episode explores what this means for civil rights enforcement, voter protections, and whether former DOJ lawyers can fill the gap by taking their expertise into private practice.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:The Role and Function of the DOJ Civil Rights Division and Voting Section: The conversation starts with an explanation of what the Civil Rights Division within the Department of Justice (DOJ) does. It is tasked with enforcing America's civil rights laws—including the Voting Rights Act—and consists of 11 sections dealing with various aspects of civil rights (voting, housing, education, anti-discrimination). Impact of Administrative Changes on DOJ Priorities: A significant theme is how changes in presidential administrations can redirect the focus and priorities of the DOJ and its sections—especially the Voting Section. While career attorneys (not political appointees) do most of the day-to-day work, political appointees set overarching priorities. Normally, shifts happen between administrations, but under the Trump administration, changes were described as “radical departures,” shifting focus to investigate noncitizen voting and prioritizing policies aligned with the president rather than traditional civil rights enforcement.Dismissal of Civil Servants and Dismantling of the Voting Section: The episode highlights the mass removal of senior civil servants in the Voting Section under Trump's administration, replacing experienced managers and ordering the dismissal of all active cases. This unprecedented action is portrayed as a clear signal of political influence overriding apolitical legal work—and is said to undermine the department's ability to fulfill its civil rights mandate.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@srl

In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson speaks with NPR's Elissa Nadworny to unpack the Trump administration's efforts to withhold federal funding from colleges and universities over issues like antisemitism and DEI practices. They discuss how these unprecedented moves are impacting not campus life, but vital medical and scientific research nationwide. Elissa explains the legal challenges schools like Harvard are mounting in response, the stakes involved for the entire higher education sector, and the broader implications for public policy.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Federal Funding as a Lever in Higher Education Policy: The episode opens by surveying recent actions from the Trump administration regarding federal funding for colleges and universities. The administration is using financial levers—pausing, freezing, or cutting funds—to influence policies on campus, particularly tied to issues like DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) and antisemitism. Mechanisms and Legality of Federal Control: The speakers discuss how and why the administration has the power to control this funding. The complexities of federal funding—who controls the purse strings, when Congress vs. the executive branch has authority, and what legal mechanisms are at play—come up. The episode highlights that while presidents can make funding conditional, the legality often hinges on whether proper procedures are followed (Administrative Procedures Act), not just on broad authority.Who Really Loses When Funds Are Cut: The speakers emphasize that federal research dollars are not just about student amenities—they fund major scientific, medical, and technological research. The implications of large-scale cuts ripple well beyond campuses, potentially hurting national health, technological innovation, and local economies (since universities are major employers and research hubs).Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson goes solo to break down the latest in legal and political news. She starts by analyzing fresh polling data on President Trump's approval ratings at the 100-day mark of his second term, noting significant public disapproval and discussing what drives this administration's bold use of executive power. Jessica then turns to the Supreme Court's current docket, spotlighting two major education-related cases: one about the legal standard for disability discrimination in schools, and another questioning whether a religious school can be established as a taxpayer-funded charter school. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Presidential Approval Down, But Base Remains Loyal: Despite approval ratings hovering around 39–43%, President Trump's core supporters (about 33–35%) aren't likely to abandon him, illustrating a growing divide between the general public and a steadfast political base.Economic Policies & Tariffs Fuel Discontent: Many respondents reported feeling worse off economically since Trump's reelection and a majority expressing disapproval of new tariffs and federal agency cuts.Supreme Court Watch—Education and Religious Freedom on the Line: Two major cases could redefine legal standards for disability discrimination in schools and determine whether religious institutions can operate publicly funded charter schools.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

Main Thing Radio Podcast

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica talks with USA Today reporter Erin Mansfield about the Trump administration's efforts to overhaul and reduce the federal workforce. They discuss the administration's push for greater executive power, the agencies hit hardest by job cuts, and the impact on public services like education and food safety. Erin also explains the legal battles unfolding over these changes, including the significance of the landmark Supreme Court case Humphrey's Executor and the future independence of federal agencies. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:The Federal Workforce Under the Trump Administration: Trump's administration is undertaking dramatic efforts to reshape--and notably reduce--the federal workforce, prompting widespread job insecurity, potential displacements, and structural overhauls throughout the government.Who is Affected by Federal Workforce Reductions: Erin outlines which agencies are most impacted. Socially-oriented agencies—like the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, USDA, and the Environmental Protection Agency—face the brunt of the cutbacks, while national security, law enforcement, and immigration agencies are largely exempt. She clarifies that massive cuts are not equally distributed across all departments. Real-Life Impacts of Workforce Reduction: Jessica and Erin discuss how these changes might touch everyday Americans. Reductions in the workforce could affect everything from food safety inspections and educational grant administration to public health services and climate research—potentially making certain public services less effective or slower.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@_erinmansfield

In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson sits down with Emily Bazelon to unpack pressing legal issues. They examine two major deportation cases, focusing on a Supreme Court order for the Trump administration to rectify a wrongful deportation, while assessing the broader context of executive authority in immigration. They also delve into President Trump's use of the Impoundment Act, analyzing the balance of power over federal funding. This conversation sheds light on current challenges to constitutional law and American democracy. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Deportation Cases: The conversation begins with the case of Mister Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported and the legal battle concerning his return to the U.S. Emily Bazelon discusses how the Trump administration is disobeying a court order to bring him back and the broader implications of this defiance on American constitutional law and the rule of law.Mahmoud Khalil Case: Another deportation case discussed relates to Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, with focus on the broad discretionary powers of the Secretary of State under the Immigration and Nationality Act and potential constitutional issues of free speech and due process.Impoundment Act and Presidential Powers: The discussion shifts to President Trump's actions regarding federal funding and the constitutional debate over Congress's power of the purse. Emily Bazelon explains how this ties into the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, highlighting the tension between legislative intent and executive authority.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessicaEmily Bazelon

Passing Judgment ~ Why some people don't want you to pass judgment on others ~ a short interview with Dr. Andy Bernstein. Listen to caller's personal dramas four times each week as Dr. Kenner takes your calls and questions on parenting, romance, love, family, marriage, divorce, hobbies, career, mental health - any personal issue! Call anytime, toll free 877-Dr-Kenner. Visit www.drkenner.com for more information about the show.

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine recent developments within the Department of Education under the Trump administration. Jonaki Mehta, an NPR education reporter, joins Jessica Levinson to clarify the Department's functions and discuss recent substantial funding cuts and layoffs, particularly affecting low-income and disabled students' support. They explore the Trump administration's push against diversity initiatives and the role of federal oversight in education. The discussion provides an overview of these changes and their potential impact on schools, highlighting the ongoing tension between federal and state control in the educational landscape.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Role of the Department of Education: The conversation starts with clarifying what the Department of Education does and doesn't do. It doesn't determine educational content; that role is for states and local districts. The department is mainly involved in funding and providing guidance through grants and investigating civil rights violations.Recent Department Cuts: There have been significant workforce cuts at the Department of Education, affecting key offices such as the Office for Civil Rights and the Office of the General Counsel. This reduction has hampered the department's ability to perform its duties effectively.Impact of Funding Cuts: The cuts have direct implications on the ground, with activities like investigations into discrimination cases being halted. There's concern about the future allocation of funds, especially for the 2026-2027 school year, which could affect low-income and Title I schools significantly.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessicaJonaki Mehta LinkedIn

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Claudia Grisales, NPR's congressional correspondent, joins Jessica to explore the evolving relationship between Congress and the Trump administration. Claudia provides an insider's view on the unprecedented unity within the Republican party under Trump and its impact on congressional oversight. The conversation also covers the recent signal chat controversy involving potential classified information breaches by high-level officials. Additionally, they discuss the Democrats' legal strategy and ponder the implications of these political shifts for the future of American governance. Listen in for a comprehensive look at the current political dynamics and what's next for Congress.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Congress as a Check on the Executive: Claudia and Lisa explore the idea that Congress is not acting as an effective check on the executive branch as was intended by the founders. They discuss the unity within the Republican Party under President Trump and the resulting lack of checks and balances.Signal Chat Controversy: The discussion addresses a situation involving a breach related to government officials using Signal chat to discuss potentially classified information. Claudia describes the internal dissent within the Republican Party about this issue and the investigation being demanded by Congress.Democratic Strategy: The conversation shifts to reflect on the Democratic Party's struggle to find a unified strategy. Claudia talks about moments when Democrats have come together, such as in stances against government shutdowns, but overall highlights challenges in forming a cohesive legal and political strategy.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@cgrisales

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica examines a pivotal voting rights case before the Supreme Court concerning Louisiana's congressional district lines. The case touches on the conflict between the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Jessica reviews the legal arguments, reflects on past decisions like Shelby County, and explores the case's broader implications. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Voting Rights Act and Supreme Court Case: Jessica Levinson delves into a Supreme Court case concerning the Voting Rights Act, highlighting a challenge over Louisiana's congressional districting. The essential question is whether the state violated the Act by diluting voting power or violated the Fourteenth Amendment by using race excessively in district creation.Louisiana District Lines Controversy: After the census, Louisiana's district lines came under scrutiny for having only one majority minority district, leading to lawsuits. The state later redrew the map to include two majority minority districts, sparking a new suit from non-African American voters claiming the excessive use of race in drawing these lines.Fourteenth Amendment and Equal Protection Clause: The tension between complying with the Voting Rights Act and the constraints of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause is a major theme. The conversation touches on recent affirmative action cases, emphasizing the court's perspective that race should not be the predominant factor.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine the Trump administration's controversial attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century law, to deport Venezuelan nationals. With guest Greg Storer, Jessica Levinson explores the historical precedent of the statute, the current legal arguments, and the implications for executive power. They also discuss the Supreme Court's role in these matters and other pressing legal issues. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Alien Enemies Act: The discussion centers around the Trump administration's attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act, a law from 1798, to deport individuals from Venezuela. The act has rarely been used and traditionally only in times of declared war. The Trump administration's approach has raised questions about its applicability without an official war declaration.Legal Proceedings and Executive Orders: There were significant legal maneuvers following Trump's proclamation about deporting Venezuelan nationals. The podcast delves into the temporary restraining order issued by a judge to halt these deportations, the legal arguments around jurisdiction, and differences in verbal and written orders.Supreme Court Considerations: The conversation segues into what cases might reach the Supreme Court, with a focus on significant issues such as birthright citizenship, the president's authority related to immigration laws, and overarching constitutional questions.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@GregStohr

In this episode of Passing Judgment, guest Amber Phillips returns to analyze President Trump's recent address to Congress and the implications of his administration's actions. Jessica and Amber explore the partisan nature of the speech and the administration's reliance on executive orders, notably within the Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE). They discuss the effects on the federal workforce, address questions surrounding the budget process, and examine entitlements. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Trump's Speech and Approach: The episode begins with a discussion about Trump's address to Congress. Both Amber and Jessica noted how the speech resembled more of a campaign rally than a traditional State of the Union address. They observed Trump's lack of engagement with Congress and his focus on executive orders to achieve his goals.Executive Orders vs. Congressional Legislation: Amber and Jessica explore why the Trump administration is relying heavily on executive orders despite having Republican control in Congress. They discuss the challenges of legislation and the perceived ease of presenting executive orders as actions to the public.Budget and Economic Implications: The speakers delved into the budgetary impacts of the Trump administration's policies, especially concerning cuts in government spending and workforce. They raised concerns about the broader economic consequences, such as potential unemployment and doubts about genuine savings versus necessary spending.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@byamberphillips

In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson is joined by Joey Garrison, USA Today's White House correspondent, to navigate the latest developments of the Trump administration. They discuss key topics such as executive orders, federal workforce cuts, tariffs, and the influence of Elon Musk's Doge efforts. Additionally, they explore the Democrats' strategic responses and the congressional dynamics surrounding President Trump's economic and foreign policies. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:White House Changes and Cuts: The discussion begins with Joey Garrison outlining the sweeping changes made by the Trump administration, particularly through executive orders aimed at fulfilling promises to the MAGA base. A significant emphasis was on the creation of Doge, led by Elon Musk, which has been actively involved in restructuring federal departments and proposing workforce reductions.Impact of Tariffs on the Economy: The tariffs imposed on neighboring Mexico and Canada, as well as increased tariffs on Chinese imports, formed another major topic. The discussion touched on the political and economic ramifications of these tariffs, including rising consumer prices, diminished consumer confidence, and negative polling for President Trump on economic management.Foreign Policy – Ukraine and Russia: A significant portion of the episode covers the meeting between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky, primarily concerning US-Ukraine relations and mineral agreements. The dispute and its implications for US support to Ukraine were discussed, with Trump administration's stance on withholding aid until diplomatic talks are pursued by Ukraine.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica@joeygarrison

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the Supreme Court's decision to abstain from ruling on a Trump emergency appeal about firing Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel. Jessica Levinson and Katie Buehler, Law360's Supreme Court reporter, analyze the nuances of presidential power and the debate over the constitutionality of restricting executive authority. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Supreme Court Decision on Trump Emergency Appeal: The episode discusses the Supreme Court's recent decision not to review an emergency appeal concerning the firing of Hampton Dellinger from his position as the head of the Office of Special Counsel. The court allowed the temporary restraining order, which pauses the firing, to run its course and expire. Legal Arguments and Statute Constitutionality: The legal argument centers on whether President Trump had to provide a reason for Dellinger's firing, as required by federal law. Trump's administration argues that the statute requiring a reason is unconstitutional and that the president should have the power to fire at will. This theme explores the larger question of presidential authority and statutory constraints.Significant Supreme Court Cases: Katie Buehler highlights other significant Supreme Court cases beyond the Trump-related decision, including a case involving the Federal Communications Commission's authority and executive power, as well as cases on religious rights such as opting-out of LGBTQ-related education and funding for religious charter schools. Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica@bykatiebuehler

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the Trump administration's controversial federal buyout plan aimed at reducing the workforce. Jessica is joined by expert guest Tami Luhby to unpack the deferred resignation offer's complexities, union opposition, and the vagueness surrounding its terms. We explore how these workforce reductions could impact government services and the ongoing legal battles related to this initiative. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Federal Buyout Plan: The Trump administration aimed to downsize the federal workforce, incorporating a controversial program called the deferred resignation offer. Approximately 2 million federal employees were offered this program, where 77,000 accepted the resignation offer. However, there was confusion and reported ineligibility among recipients.Legal Proceedings: A Boston judge twice paused the program, considering the unions' claims, but ultimately decided they lacked standing, supporting the administration's effort to proceed with the buyout program.Impact on Services: The reduction in workforce potentially affects various essential services such as Social Security and Veterans Affairs, leading to concerns about extended wait times and disrupted services for the public.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica@Luhby

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the uncharted territory of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk. Host Jessica Levinson, along with guest Lisa Mascaro, delve into the department's mission to overhaul federal operations and its legal uncertainties. We examine DOGE's drastic measures, including federal employee buyouts and the reduction of USAID, all under the influence of Musk. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Overview of the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge): The episode delves into the establishment of a new entity known as the Department of Government Efficiency, headed by Elon Musk. They explore what this department is meant to accomplish, how it is categorized (as a department or agency), and its power and influence. Legal and Political Dynamics Surrounding Doge: Lisa Mascaro highlights the legal challenges and political scrutiny faced by Doge. Questions are raised about the authority and legality of actions taken by this department. There is mention of the involvement of Vivek Ramaswamy in the initial establishment, and how this aligns with broader conservative goals of cutting back federal government size and spending.Congressional and Public Scrutiny: The initiative has sparked debates and raised questions in Congress and among the public. There are historical parallels with past governance styles, but nothing quite matches DOGE's scale and influence fueled by Musk's vast reach and resources.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica@lisamascaro

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the political landscape of President Trump's new cabinet picks through the expert lens of Michelle Shen from CNN's politics team. Jessica and Michelle dissect the confirmation hearings of controversial figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Health and Human Services Secretary and Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence, along with Elise Stefanik's smoother path as UN Ambassador. The discussion sheds light on the intrigues and political maneuvers surrounding these nominations and their potential impact on Trump's administration over the next four years. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:RFK Jr.'s Nomination for Health and Human Services Secretary: The discussion focuses on RFK Jr.'s controversial stance on vaccines and his break from the Kennedy family, who have been stalwarts in the Democratic Party. His views, which have been scientifically disproven, present difficulties in his confirmation process, even among some Republicans.Media and Reporting Challenges: Michelle Shen shares the challenges faced in reporting on the Trump administration, emphasizing the importance of careful fact-checking and contextualization in her journalism work.Inauguration Reflections: Shen reflects on the inaugural weekend, highlighting the contrast between Trump supporters and the wealthier individuals who have close access to him. This theme underscores questions of who will have influence in Trump's administration.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica@Michelle_shen10

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we dive into the rapid-fire executive orders issued during the first week of President Trump's second administration. Joined by political reporter Megan Lebowitz, Jessica explores key topics such as immigration, energy policies, transgender rights, and foreign policy changes. Megan also discusses her recent article on Trump's comments about Ukraine and his stance on international relations. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Unprecedented Volume of Executive Orders: President Trump has issued dozens of executive orders in his first few days, a stark contrast to his previous term. From birthright citizenship to energy production, the scope is extensive and impactful.Immigration Policies Under Scrutiny: Key actions include the reinstatement of the remain-in-Mexico policy and the suspension of refugee resettlement. These orders are set to face significant legal pushback.Shift in Foreign Policy and Public Health: Withdrawal from international organizations like the WHO and the Paris Climate Accord signifies a return to Trump's "America First" policy. Public health funding and higher education grants are also restructured, particularly impacting DEI initiatives.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica@megan_lebowitz

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the Supreme Court's current term with Lindsay Whitehurst from the Associated Press. Jessica Levinson and Lindsay discuss three significant cases: a Tennessee law on transgender minors' access to gender-affirming care (Skirmiti), regulations on ghost guns, and flavored e-cigarettes. They explore the implications of these cases, potential judicial leanings, and the role of presidential administrations in legal arguments.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Transgender Rights in Healthcare: A case involving the access of gender-affirming care for minors, which touches on parental rights and the role of the state in healthcare decisions.Ghost Guns and Federal Regulations: A significant case about the regulation of untraceable homemade firearms and the broader implications for federal agency powers.E-Cigarettes Rules Challenge: The court's review of regulations around flavored vapes, further tying into the authority of administrative bodies.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica@lwhitehurst

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we unravel the current status of the four pending criminal cases against former President Trump. Host Jessica Levinson explains that while Trump was convicted in the New York State hush money case, he received no real sentencing. The Georgia election interference case stalled due to conflict of interest allegations against the district attorney. Jessica provides a detailed overview of each case and what it means now that Trump is set to return to office. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:New York State Hush Money Case: Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts related to falsifying business records for hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. However, the sentence resulted in no jail time, fines, or probation due to constitutional concerns about punishing a sitting president.Georgia Election Interference Case: This case, involving Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election results, stalled due to conflict of interest allegations against District Attorney Fani Willis. The delay and constitutional concerns have put the case on indefinite hold.Federal Cases: Both the DC election interference and Mar-a-Lago classified documents cases stalled due to legal challenges and questions of immunity. Following Trump's recent election victory, Special Counsel Jack Smith resigned, and the cases were effectively closed.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

Multiple wildfires continue to sweep through LA county, causing massive evacuations and the most destructive fires Los Angeles has ever seen. We'll provide an update on the fires, and the fierce winds and weather conditions intensifying their spread. Guests: Anthony Edwards, newsroom meteorologist, SF Chronicle On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to take up TikTok's appeal challenging a federal law that could effectively ban the popular social media app beginning on January 19. President-elect Donald Trump has asked the court to delay implementation of the law, which requires TikTok's Chinese owner, ByteDance, to sell the social media company to an American firm. We'll preview the arguments and look at what a ban could mean for the company and creators. Guests: Emily Baker, an investigative reporter and senior writer, Forbes; She is currently writing a book on TikTok. Jessica Levinson, professor of law, Loyola Law School; host of the podcast “Passing Judgment; Website URL: PoLawTics.lls.edu

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we analyze the high-stakes TikTok ban case as it heads to the Supreme Court on an accelerated timeline. Host Jessica Levinson explains the key arguments: ByteDance claims the ban violates First Amendment rights, while the government cites national security concerns over TikTok's Chinese ownership. With oral arguments set for January 10th, Jessica discusses potential outcomes and actions President Trump might take once in office. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Overview of the Legislation: The law in question mandates that TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, divest its U.S. operations by January 19th, 2024, or face a nationwide ban. The ban would affect app stores and Internet providers, eventually causing TikTok to stop working as updates and downloads would be prohibited.2️⃣ Lower Court Rulings: The DC Circuit upheld the law as constitutional. A three-judge panel determined that the national security concerns cited by Congress justify the legislation. Judges generally defer to the political branches on national security issues.3️⃣ Arguments by ByteDance and TikTok: ByteDance argues that the law violates the First Amendment by eliminating a mode of communication without a compelling government interest. They contend that the national security concerns are baseless and accuse the U.S. government of targeting TikTok based on its content, which is potentially a content-based restriction—a key concern in First Amendment law.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we unpack two significant legal developments. First, Jessica covers the Supreme Court's expedited review of the TikTok ban, weighing national security concerns against First Amendment rights. Then, she dives into the controversy surrounding a federal judge who criticized Justice Alito over flags flown at his residences, examining the broader implications for judicial impartiality and trust. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ ByteDance's Argument: ByteDance argues that restricting its platform violates users' First Amendment rights and contends that national security concerns are either exaggerated or unfounded.2️⃣ Potential Actions by President Trump Regarding TikTok case: President Trump could instruct the Attorney General not to enforce the law, attempt to persuade Congress to repeal it despite bipartisan support, argue that the law no longer applies if a qualified divestiture occurs, or advocate for the sale of TikTok to an American company.3️⃣ Judiciary Impartiality and Trust Issues: Judicial impartiality is crucial for maintaining public trust, and any erosion of respect for the judiciary could potentially lead to a constitutional crisis, as emphasized by quotes from Justice Thurgood Marshall underscoring the importance of civic duty.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica sits down with Sam Levine from The Guardian to unpack the future of voting rights under the Trump administration. They explore the role of the Department of Justice, the impact of stalled federal legislation, and the current state of the Voting Rights Act. Sam also clarifies common misconceptions about election fraud and administration, highlighting what to watch for in the coming years. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Trump Administration and Voting Rights: Sam Levine outlines the anticipated approach of the Trump administration regarding voting rights, including the potential use of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to challenge election outcomes and influence election administration.2️⃣ Role and Powers of the Department of Justice: The DOJ's role in enforcing federal laws, particularly civil rights and voting rights laws, is explained. Shifts in administration can significantly alter DOJ priorities.3️⃣ Election Security and Misconceptions: The podcast addresses common misconceptions about voter fraud and the robustness of election systems. Sam Levine stresses the rarity of voter fraud and the extensive safeguards in place.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@srl

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore a pivotal Supreme Court case that could redefine federal agency power. Jessica is joined by journalist David Ovalle to unpack the FDA's authority over e-cigarette regulation and the legal battle surrounding its rejection of flavored vape products. Plus, Jessica delves into a critical Supreme Court hearing on transgender healthcare for minors, shedding light on the stakes and potential implications.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ FDA Regulation of Vaping Products: There's a high volume of applications for vaping product approvals, but only a few have been approved. The debate surrounds the popular and attractive fruity-flavored vapes, which are targeted for regulation due to concerns about their appeal to young people.2️⃣ Legal Challenges and Circuit Split: The 5th Circuit Court ruled that the FDA acted arbitrarily and capriciously, a decision that challenges the FDA's authority and methods. This created a split among appellate courts.3️⃣ Parent's Rights in Transgender Care Case: A new argument based on the due process clause regarding parents' rights to direct their children's medical care might offer a different legal challenge in the future.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@DavidOvalle305

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the legal complexities of President-Elect Trump's proposed tariffs. Jessica Levinson explores how power over foreign commerce has shifted from Congress to the President, highlighting key laws like the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 and the Trade Act of 1974. The episode also covers President Biden's controversial pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, examining the constitutional power of presidential pardons, historical precedents, and political implications. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Congressional Abdication of Trade Powers: Jessica Levinson points out that Congress has gradually ceded its constitutional authority to regulate foreign commerce to the executive branch over the past century. 2️⃣ Legal Hurdles for Trump's Proposed Tariffs: Despite President-elect Trump's promises to impose sweeping tariffs on countries like Mexico, Canada, and China, there are significant legal and procedural hurdles to clear. These include mandatory investigations by the Department of Commerce, and potential court challenges under doctrines like the major questions doctrine and nondelegation doctrine.3️⃣ Presidential Pardons and Political Implications: The episode delves into President Biden's pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, explaining the broad and exclusive presidential power to grant pardons for federal crimes. Resources Mentioned:Jessica's MSNBC articleFollow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica provides updates on two prominent legal stories. She delves into the Menendez brothers' ongoing legal challenges, including their bids for resentencing, a habeas petition, and clemency, explaining the possible outcomes. Jessica also analyzes a proposed bill by Congresswoman Nancy Mace that seeks to ban transgender individuals from using bathrooms aligned with their gender identity in federal buildings. She breaks down the legal scrutiny surrounding such laws and relevant court precedents. Happy Thanksgiving!Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Menendez Brothers Resentencing Claim: They're pushing for resentencing based on their model behavior in prison and the argument that they were victims of severe sexual abuse by their father.2️⃣ Proposed Transgender Bathroom Bill: Congresswoman Nancy Mace introduced a bill aiming to ban transgender individuals from using bathrooms aligning with their gender identity in federal buildings.3️⃣ Classification of Law: The bill's focus on transgender individuals can be seen as a quasi-suspect classification, which is subject to intermediate scrutiny.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson is joined by Josh Gerstein from Politico, they explore accusations of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia, recent appeals, and the constitutional questions of prosecuting a sitting president. The episode highlights the Georgia Court of Appeals' decision to pause the case, logistical and legal complexities if Trump were to face jail time, and the broader implications for presidential power. They also discuss the potential impact of a second Trump administration on the DOJ and strategies from the Biden administration to solidify its policies. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Constitutional and Supreme Court Considerations: There is a discussion on whether a state can prosecute a sitting president, involving constitutional implications and the Supreme Court's views on presidential power and immunity. Historical cases like Clinton v. Jones are referenced.2️⃣ Trump's Legal Troubles and Sentencing Complexities: Trump's legal issues are detailed, including complications stemming from his behavior during trials, contempt issues, and potential sentencing challenges, especially given his status as a former president.3️⃣ Transition Strategies of the Biden Administration: Potential strategic moves by the Biden administration to solidify policies before a Trump reentry, such as issuing pardons and "midnight regulations," are contemplated.Follow Our Host and guest: @LevinsonJessica@Joshgerstein

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we dive into the immediate aftermath of the 2024 election results. Jessica discusses the implications of President Trump's return to the Oval Office, the Republican trifecta in controlling the White House, Senate, and likely the House of Representatives. Join us as Jessica unpacks the pending federal and state legal cases against Trump, explores possible legal challenges and strategies over the next four years, and examines significant legal issues such as federal power, immigration, the Department of Justice, environmental policies and more. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Legal Cases Against Trump: Federal cases against Trump, including the DC election interference and Mar-a-Lago documents cases, may be dismissed when Trump regains office and appoints new officials.2️⃣ Federal Power and Separation of Powers: With Republicans potentially controlling both legislative branches, there might be more legislation rather than executive orders.3️⃣ Organizational Framework for Legal Issues: The episode discussed potential changes to laws, executive orders, judicial appointments, and expansions of executive power, highlighting their hypothetical nature and the need for ongoing monitoring.

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we engage in a thought-provoking discussion with retired Justice Stephen Breyer. Host Jessica Levinson delves into Breyer's critique of textualism, focusing on whether "costs" in legal contexts should include educational experts. The episode also touches on public trust in the judiciary, the role of the First Amendment, and the complexities of precedent. Breyer's engaging stories and reflections provide a comprehensive perspective on modern judicial challenges.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Critique of Textualism and Originalism: Breyer critiques the methodologies of textualism and originalism, which focus strictly on the text and original meaning of the law. He highlights the limitations of these approaches, given the evolving societal and political contexts since the laws were written.Pragmatism in Constitutional Interpretation: Advocating for a pragmatic approach, Breyer emphasizes the importance of interpreting the Constitution by considering historical context, consequences, and inherent values such as democracy and human rights. Supreme Court's Political Perception: Addressing public concerns about the Supreme Court's political influence, especially with the conservative supermajority appointed by Republican presidents, Breyer contends that legal analysis should be distinct from political thought. Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson tackles the controversial actions of Elon Musk, who has set up a lottery system pledging $1,000,000 a day to registered voters in swing states who sign a particular petition. Join us as we delve into the legal complexities and potential impacts of Musk's actions on the integrity of our democratic system.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Electoral Integrity and the Influence of Money: Jessica explores the risks and ethical concerns surrounding the influence of money on elections. She discusses the principle that elections should not be bought and the potential for wealthy individuals like Elon Musk to influence election outcomes through financial incentives. Historical Context of Federal Laws: The discussion includes the historical foundations of federal laws aimed at limiting the impact of money on elections. She references the 1925 federal law and subsequent legislation, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which both aim to prevent monetary inducements related to voting and voter registration.Legal Implications and Ethical Considerations: The episode delves into the legal nuances and potential federal law violations in Musk's actions. Jessica discusses how a judge might interpret these actions and the importance of maintaining the integrity of election systems by avoiding financial incentives that could influence voter behavior.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we welcome New York Times reporter Maggie Astor for her first podcast appearance, diving into her comprehensive comparison of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump's policy positions. Jessica Levinson and Maggie explore key issues like abortion, climate change, democracy, crime policy, and the economy, highlighting the vast differences in each candidate's approach.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Abortion Standpoints: Kamala Harris is pro-choice, a strong supporter of Roe v. Wade, and advocates for protective abortion rights legislation. Donald Trump supports overturning Roe v. Wade, state-level abortion restrictions, and has ambiguous positions on a federal abortion ban.2️⃣ Democracy: Kamala Harris is committed to upholding the democratic process and respecting election outcomes, while Donald Trump's refusal to accept the 2020 results and unwillingness to acknowledge potential future losses has fueled skepticism about the legitimacy of the electoral process.3️⃣ Climate Change Policy: Trump opposes major climate change initiatives, having withdrawn from the Paris Agreement and supporting expanded fossil fuel production, including coal and oil. Harris supports the Paris Agreement, advocates for renewable energy, and has backed legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act to combat climate change.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we dive into the key cases of the Supreme Court's 2024-2025 term. Jessica Levinson highlights an October 8th case on ghost guns and the ATF's regulatory powers, drawing parallels to a previous bump stock ruling. Additional cases discussed include the FDA's authority over flavored e-cigarettes, a Texas law's First Amendment challenges on adult age verification for online materials, and a lawsuit by the Mexican government against U.S. gun manufacturers. Jessica also previews potential cases related to post-election litigation and federal criminal charges against former President Trump.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Ghost Guns Case: The Supreme Court will hear a critical case regarding the regulation of ghost guns by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). The core issue is whether this regulation should be within the executive agency's power or if it requires new congressional legislation.2️⃣ Transgender Rights for Minors: A major case this term focuses on Tennessee's 2023 law prohibiting most gender-affirming medical treatments for minors. This case could set a precedent on how transgender status is viewed under the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.3️⃣ FDA's Authority on E-Cigarettes: The court will evaluate the power of the FDA in regulating flavored e-cigarette products. The decision hinges on whether the FDA's actions were "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedures Act.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we delve into the recent federal indictment against New York City's mayor, Eric Adams. Jessica Levinson is joined by Eric Levenson, a senior writer for CNN Digital, who provides a comprehensive overview of Mayor Adams' background, the specifics of the charges, and the potential legal and political fallout. From his unique public persona and controversial political stances to the detailed allegations of bribery and campaign fraud, we unpack the complexities of this high-profile case. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Background of Eric Adams: Eric Adams, a former NYPD captain, Brooklyn borough president, and now mayor of New York City, is discussed. He has a mixed persona, presenting himself as a "tough on crime" candidate while also seeking to revitalize New York's nightlife. 2️⃣ The Indictment: Adams faces a federal indictment on charges including bribery, wire fraud, and solicitations of illegal campaign contributions from foreign nationals.3️⃣ Adams' Re-election Prospects: The indictment complicates his re-election campaign. Some politicians, like AOC, have called for his resignation, but others, including Governor Kathy Hochul, have been more cautious.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@ejleven

In this episode of Passing Judgment, political science professor Michael Genovese joins host Jessica Levinson to explore the complexities of predicting presidential elections, highlighting the electoral college's impact and the importance of swing states. Voter priorities on economic issues and the limitations of presidential power are also examined, alongside the role of media influence and hyperpolarization. Jessica and Michael dissect these intricate dynamics, the strategic significance of key battleground states, and the potential influence of celebrity endorsements on voter turnout in this episode of Passing Judgment.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Presidential Election Complexity: Genovese highlights the unique nature of U.S. presidential elections, describing them as 50 individual races due to the electoral college. Winning requires state-specific strategies, especially targeting battleground states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan.2️⃣ Economic Priorities and Presidential Power: Both Genovese and Levinson underscore that while the economy remains a top voter concern, the president's actual influence over economic conditions is limited. 3️⃣ Celebrity Influence on Young Voters: Additionally, the significant influence of social media on voter registration, particularly among younger demographics, is discussed.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson is joined by Gram Slattery from Reuters to delve into the recent presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. From Harris rattling Trump with strategic jabs to the contentious discussions on key issues like the economy and abortion, this episode unpacks the critical elements that could shape the upcoming election. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Kamala Harris's Strategic Advantage: Harris accomplished her primary goals by setting the tone right from the handshake and taking the initiative, which helped her keep Trump on the defensive through most of the debate.2️⃣ Trump's Challenges on Economic and Cultural Issues: Despite Trump's perceived strength in economic issues, the discussions on the economy and immigration did not favor him. His diversion to unfounded claims about Haitian immigrants highlighted his inability to stick to impactful topics.3️⃣ The Impact of Polarization: Despite the consensus that Harris won the debate, the polarized electorate and the scarcity of swing voters suggest that winning debates might not significantly shift the numbers.Follow Our Host and Guest:@G_Slattery @LevinsonJessica

Grit-rock five piece Been Stellar hit hard with their debut album (which doubles as a nod to their city) Scream from New York — a scathing, white-knuckled ride from start to finish. Let’s take the pressure off with the frenzy of  “Passing Judgment.” 

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we engage with Maureen Groppe, who delves into the nuanced arena of Supreme Court reporting. Host Jessica Levinson probes into the personal dynamics among justices, leading Maureen to emphasize their professional decorum despite ideological differences. Jessica's students' questions introduce topics like maintaining objectivity and Supreme Court reform, with Maureen discussing the hurdles of simplifying complex legal issues for a general audience. This discussion offers a unique glimpse into the behind-the-scenes world of Supreme Court reporting and its impact on public perception.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Court's Collegiality: Groppe shares that justices stress their collegiality, although social interactions are often downplayed by some, like Justice Kagan, who emphasizes professional respect.2️⃣ Impact of Oral Arguments: Groppe shares the challenge of determining the impact of oral arguments on court decisions, using an emergency abortion case as an example where Justice Barrett's reactions played a crucial role.3️⃣ Reporting Impartiality: The episode includes a discussion on how reporters like Groppe maintain neutrality when covering Supreme Court cases with significant implications.Follow Our Host and Guest:@mgroppe @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson is joined by political science and history professor Paul Savoie to break down the intricacies of the US electoral system. They explore the historical roots and ongoing impact of the electoral college, the challenges of polarized politics, and the reliability of modern polling. The conversation examines the potential advantages of reforming the electoral college and delves into the implications for American democracy. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Framers' Intent and the Electoral College: The framers of the Constitution were cautious about giving voters too much power and thus created a bicameral Congress and the Electoral College. The system was designed to balance public influence with a moderated selection process, initially allowing electors to make independent choices but later tying their votes to state popular votes.2️⃣ Electoral College Impacts and Controversies: The electoral college has led to significant discussions about its impact on the political landscape, particularly regarding scenarios where candidates can win the popular vote but lose the election. 3️⃣ Student Concerns: Students discuss significant current issues like reproductive rights and the Israel-Hamas conflict, reflecting diverse concerns and single-issue voting tendencies.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of The Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson engages in an insightful conversation with USA Today White House Correspondent Joey Garrison, who provides an inside look at the Democratic National Convention. Recorded from his hotel room in Chicago just after the convention, Garrison offers a detailed recount of the key moments, speeches, and political dynamics of the event, including Joe Biden's farewell address and Michelle Obama's highly acclaimed speech. This episode provides listeners with a rich perspective on the DNC and what to watch for in the coming weeks of the campaign.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Excitement and Logistics of the Democratic National Convention: Joey Garrison discusses the overwhelming excitement and energy among Democrats during the DNC in Chicago. He highlights the logistical challenges of covering the event, such as security measures and the exhaustion that follows a packed schedule.2️⃣ Speeches and Messaging: The conversation covers various speeches delivered at the DNC, including critiques and observations on Joe Biden's farewell and Michelle Obama's impactful address.3️⃣ Kamala Harris's Campaign Strategy and Challenges: Joey Garrison offers insights into Kamala Harris's speech, her strategic messaging, and the challenges she faces moving forward. He discusses her role in uniting the party and energizing voters, as well as the expectations surrounding her debate performance against Donald Trump.Follow Our Guest and Host:@Joeygarrison @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson speaks with Perry Stein to gain a deeper understanding of the ongoing legal challenges in former President Trump's Mar-a-Lago case. Stein shares unique insights into the strategies and dynamics at play in the courtroom, highlighting the roles of key figures like Judge Aileen Cannon and special counsel Jack Smith. The discussion explores the intricacies of legal proceedings, the significance of intent in charges, and the impact of procedural delays on the trial's progression.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Courtroom Dynamics and Decision-Making: Perry Stein provides an analysis of Judge Eileen Cannon's distinctive courtroom style and decision-making approach, explaining how these factors influence the legal proceedings and the strategies employed by both the defense and prosecution.2️⃣ The Role of Intent in Legal Charges: The conversation delves into the importance of intent in the charges being faced by the defendant, exploring how this legal concept plays a critical role in shaping the arguments and potential outcomes of the trial.3️⃣ Impact of Procedural Delays: Perry Stein discusses the procedural delays that have arisen during the trial and their impact on the timeline and overall dynamics of the case, offering insights into the strategic maneuvers by both sides and the implications for the defendant's legal journey.Follow Our Guest and Host:@PerryStein @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica speaks with Dan Morain, celebrated author of Kamala's Way, to gain a deeper understanding of Kamala Harris' journey to becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee for president. Dan shares his unique insights into Harris' career trajectory, from her early days in California politics to her tenure as vice president. Dan also delves into specific moments that highlight Harris' political savvy and resilience, providing a comprehensive look at a candidate who could become the first female president of the United States. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Kamala Harris' Career Trajectory: Dan Morain traces Kamala Harris' career from being appointed to a state position in 1994 by then-Speaker Willie Brown, to becoming a surrogate for Barack Obama in 2008, and eventually serving as the Attorney General of California and a U.S. Senator. 2️⃣ Presidential Campaigns: Morain discusses Harris' 2019 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, describing it as poorly managed and fraught with stumbles, leading to her early withdrawal. Conversely, he notes her current campaign as more confident and focused on one primary opponent: Donald Trump.3️⃣ Public and Media Perception: Harris' public and media perception is explored, with Morain noting how she can be both celebrated and criticized. Her ability to handle media scrutiny and maintain a positive public image is highlighted, demonstrating why she is effective in her role despite the challenges.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we explore the robust start of Kamala Harris's 2024 campaign. Joined by political reporter Carla Marinucci, we discuss Harris's impressive early achievements, including 170,000 volunteers and $200,000,000 in donations, mostly from first-time donors. Carla provides insights into Harris's newfound confidence, her strategic focus on reproductive rights and environmental justice, and her strong appeal to young voters. We also address concerns about office turnover and the challenges Harris faces as a female candidate of color. Discover how Harris is reshaping her image and what it means for her political future.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Challenges and Media Criticism: Concerns about high turnover rates in Harris's office and campaigns and how her status as a tough boss and a woman of color might impact public perception. 2️⃣ Electoral and Policy Strategy: Harris's strategy of making critical connections within the Democratic Party helped her win races, including establishing relationships with key donors and mentors.3️⃣ Future Challenges: Potential hurdles for her presidential campaign include negative ads, criticisms on policy issues like urban crime and immigration, and her ties to Joe Biden's presidency.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@Cmarinucci