Podcasts about presidential immunity

Military action is a stark theme this week, as Oregon and Illinois sue the Trump administration over its attempts to federalize National Guard troops for deployment into both states. Mary and Andrew break down not one, but two temporary restraining orders that block deployments to Oregon, as Trump appointed Judge Karin Immergut cites Trump's own words to show the facts don't support what he alleges about “war ravaged” cities. Then, they dig into the administration's fourth deadly boat strike on alleged drug traffickers near Venezuela, highlighting how the lack of apparent legal authority might play out, as Attorney General Pam Bondi answered questions from the Senate Judiciary committee Tuesday. Last up, Andrew and Mary turn to two consequential decisions that don't bode well for the Trump administration: one decision out of Boston, barring efforts to deport non-citizen activists; and a second finding of a “likelihood of vindictive prosecution” from a Nashville judge as it relates to the seeming retaliatory charges against Kilmar Abrego-Garcia.Further reading: MSNBC's Carol Leonnig and Ken Dilanian report: Top prosecutor is rejecting Trump pressure to charge New York AGMary And Tess Bridgeman's piece for Just Security:  What the Senate Judiciary Committee Should Ask A.G. Bondi on Drug Cartel StrikesJudge Karin Immergut's two decisions in Oregon:Immergut's First TRO blocking federalization of the Oregon National Guard. Immergut's Second TRO blocking deployment of any “federalized members of the National Guard” to the state.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

It's Friday, October 3, 2025, and the legal drama swirling around Donald Trump is at a fever pitch once again. For listeners who have been following every twist and turn, the past few days have been loaded with developments across federal courtrooms, appellate panels, and even the Supreme Court. Let's jump right to the heart of the matter.Earlier this week, a major story unfolded as the Supreme Court formally consolidated two headline cases involving Donald Trump—one titled “Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al., Petitioners v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., et al.” The Court granted a motion to expedite these cases, fast-tracking them for oral argument the first week of November this year. The eyes of the country, political analysts included, are already zeroing in on November 5, when those arguments will hit center stage in the nation's highest court.These Supreme Court cases aren't happening in isolation. They stem from recent decisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and also from the ongoing legal battles over claims tied to presidential immunity, Trump's 2020 election interference allegations, and disputes over the appointment and funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith. The litigation landscape is as broad as ever—with criminal indictments, civil fraud appeals, and constitutional questions all converging.Just days ago, the Supreme Court declined to take immediate action on Trump's unusual request regarding firing a sitting Fed governor. This non-decision keeps the issue simmering, hinting at possible future conflicts over the extent of presidential power—a subject at the core of Trump's legal defense in several other cases.Meanwhile, in federal courts, new briefs and motions are flooding in. Trump's legal team is vigorously pushing arguments about presidential immunity and contesting the legitimacy of Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment. These questions fuel both legal debate and political intrigue, as deadlines for briefs and responses keep stacking up on the master calendar. For example, Trump's next major opening brief in his Second Circuit appeal regarding the New York case is due October 14.Political allies and opponents alike are watching, as each court ruling has ripple effects on Trump's standing, campaign ambitions, and broader constitutional precedents. What's especially dramatic now is that deadlines for amicus curiae briefs and oral arguments across several circuits are colliding with arguments in the Supreme Court—a rare, high-octane moment in legal history.Every day seems to bring a new motion, a fresh appeal, or another layer to these battles. From consolidating appeals in the New York civil fraud case to new filings aimed at Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's prosecution, Trump's legal calendar looks more crowded than ever.To all those tuning in, thank you for sticking with this intricate, high-stakes story. Join me again next week as these cases unfold and fresh developments emerge. 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

In Mary and Andrew's estimation, there is no effort from the Trump administration to say things softly, the quiet part is very much out loud. They begin with the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey by Trump's newly installed U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, noting how much these targeted charges upend the tradition of a separation between the White House and the Justice Department. The next stop is Portland Oregon, where the president announced his intent to deploy troops to the city in a Saturday Truth Social post, calling it “war ravaged”. Oregon immediately sued to stop the national guard deployment, so Mary and Andrew catch listeners up on where this stands and what to expect. And last, they turn to Trump's domestic terror memorandum, announcing his intent to investigate left-leaning groups he suggests may be funding political violence. Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

It's been another remarkable stretch in the world of courtrooms where Donald Trump's legal battles have made headlines across the country. Here we go right to what's happened for Donald Trump in the past few days and right up to this moment, September 28, 2025.Just days ago, the Supreme Court issued an order in Trump v. Slaughter—this case is all about Trump's removal of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter without cause earlier in the year. That's significant because it challenged an almost century-old precedent from the Supreme Court's decision in Humphrey's Executor, which restricts a president's ability to remove FTC commissioners unless there's proven inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance. President Trump didn't claim any of those grounds, just policy differences. A federal judge had ordered Slaughter to be reinstated. The lower court's ruling was then stayed by the Supreme Court. The justices decided, in a 6-3 vote, that Trump's action could stand, at least for now, while the case moves forward. They ordered the parties to prepare for oral arguments this December. Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, issued a dissent, pointing to the statutory protection Congress gave FTC commissioners and warning about threats to the independence of agencies like this. The implications could be dramatic if the Court ends up narrowing or overturning the protection set in 1935, potentially reshaping not just the FTC but other independent agencies.Meanwhile, Trump's legal schedule remains packed with deadlines and developments. In the D.C. election interference case, Trump has been filing motions on presidential immunity and on dismissing charges using a slew of statutory arguments. Most deadlines for pretrial filings have been put on pause until October 24, as Judge Tanya Chutkan, who returned to jurisdiction after the Supreme Court's ruling on immunity, issued a scheduling order. The battle continues over whether Trump should be shielded from prosecution for acts taken while in office. These are questions the courts are wrestling with right now, and will be through the end of this year.In Florida, the classified documents case has advanced after Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the superseding indictment, arguing that the appointment and funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith was unlawful. The government appealed to the Eleventh Circuit, and now both sides are filing briefs, with friends of the court chiming in too. Oral arguments and decisions from that appeal could affect the timeline for any trial, or even its scope.Trump is also tangled up in New York—with appeals on last year's civil fraud judgment and the criminal conviction, where Justice Juan Merchan is now weighing a motion to set aside the jury's verdict, citing presidential immunity in light of the Supreme Court's recent guidance. A decision is expected from Justice Merchan in November.In Georgia, Trump and his codefendants are pushing appeals about disqualifying District Attorney Fani Willis, and all those appeals will be heard together, with oral arguments scheduled soon at the Court of Appeals.There has even been a class action suit filed by groups like the ACLU and NAACP, following a Supreme Court decision in CASA v. Trump, challenging aspects of the Trump administration's policy actions.As you can hear, it's a legal whirlwind that touches multiple corners of the country and asks fundamental questions about presidential power, agency independence, and the limits of the law. Come back next week for more, and thanks again for tuning in. This has been a Quiet Please production and 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

The U.S. Supreme Court has vastly reshaped American democracy — rolling back voting rights, enabling secret money in politics and expanding presidential power. These decisions have a real impact on all Americans by making it harder for citizens to exercise their freedom to vote, easier for wealthy interests to sway elections and more difficult to hold leaders accountable.In this episode, host Simone Leeper speaks with law professor and co-host of the Strict Scrutiny Podcast Leah Litman, Campaign Legal Center Senior Vice President Bruce V. Spiva and Campaign Legal Center Campaign Finance Senior Counsel David Kolker. Together, they unpack the real-world impact of landmark Supreme Court decisions — from voting rights cases like Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. DNC to campaign finance rulings like Citizens United — and explore what reforms could restore balance, accountability and trust in the Court.Timestamps:(00:05) — What do Americans really think about the Supreme Court?(02:18) — Why does the Supreme Court's power matter for democracy?(07:01) — How did Shelby County v. Holder weaken voting rights?(16:39) — What was the impact of Brnovich v. DNC?(23:39) — How has the Supreme Court reshaped campaign finance?(29:24) — Why did Citizens United open the floodgates for money in politics?(32:37) — How have super PACs changed elections?(34:02) — How have wealthy special interests reshaped U.S. elections?(35:44) — What does presidential immunity mean for accountability?(37:30) — How do lifetime seats protect the Supreme Court from accountability?(39:22) — What role can Congress play in restoring trust and democracy?Host and Guests:Simone Leeper litigates a wide range of redistricting-related cases at Campaign Legal Center, challenging gerrymanders and advocating for election systems that guarantee all voters an equal opportunity to influence our democracy. Prior to arriving at CLC, Simone was a law clerk in the office of Senator Ed Markey and at the Library of Congress, Office of General Counsel. She received her J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center in 2019 and a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 2016.Leah Litman is a professor of law at the University of Michigan and a former Supreme Court clerk. In addition to cohosting Strict Scrutiny, she writes frequently about the Court for media outlets including The Washington Post, Slate, and The Atlantic, among others, and has appeared as a commentator on NPR and MSNBC, in addition to other venues. She has received the Ruth Bader Ginsburg award for her “scholarly excellence” from the American Constitution Society and published in top law reviews. Follow her on Bluesky @LeahLitman and Instagram @ProfLeahLitman.Bruce V. Spiva is Senior Vice President at Campaign Legal Center. He is an attorney and community leader who has spent his over 30-year career fighting for civil rights and civil liberties, voting rights, consumer protection, and antitrust enforcement.Over the past three decades, he has tried cases and argued appeals in courtrooms across the country, including arguing against vote suppression in the United States Supreme Court in 2021. In 2022, in his first run for public office, Bruce mounted a competitive run in the primary election for Washington, D.C. Attorney General. In addition to founding his own law firm where he practiced for eleven years, Bruce has held several leadership and management positions as a partner at two national law firms. Most recently, Bruce served as the Managing Partner of the D.C. Office and on the firm-wide Executive Committee of Perkins Coie LLP, where he also had an active election law practice. He first-chaired twelve voting rights and redistricting trials across the country, and argued numerous voting rights appeals in U.S. circuit courts and state supreme courts during his tenure at Perkins. David Kolker is Campaign Finance Senior Counsel at Campaign Legal Center. He focuses on both short- and long-term strategies to improve campaign finance laws across the country, and precedent interpreting those laws. David has spent decades litigating cases in both the public and private sectors. He worked for nearly 20 years at the Federal Election Commission, where he litigated cases on federal campaign finance law and for several years led the agency's Litigation Division. He represented the government in dozens of oral arguments, including the government's defense in SpeechNow.org v. FEC before the D.C. Circuit sitting en banc. He litigated many cases decided by the Supreme Court, including the landmark cases of McConnell v. FEC and Citizens United v. FEC. David joined CLC from the Federal Communications Commission, where he served as the deputy bureau chief, Enforcement Bureau. He previously was a partner at the law firm Spiegel and McDiarmid in Washington. Early in his career, David worked as a trial attorney in the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. Links:The Supreme Court Needs to Start Standing Up for Democracy – CLCThe Supreme Court's Role in Undermining American Democracy  – CLCSupreme Court's Impact on Voting Rights Is a Threat to Democracy  – CLCWhy the Current U.S. Supreme Court Is a Threat to Our Democracy  – CLCU.S. Supreme Court Reinstates Illegal Virginia Voter Purge at the Eleventh Hour – CLCWhat Does the U.S. Supreme Court's Recent Arizona Decision Mean for Voters? – CLCAlito Flags the Fatal Flaw of the Supreme Court Ethics Code – CLCU.S. Supreme Court Reinstates Illegal Virginia Voter Purge at the Eleventh Hour – CLCImproving Ethics Standards at the Supreme Court – CLCSupreme Court tossed out heart of Voting Rights Act a decade ago, prompting wave of new voting rules – The HillU.S. Supreme Court Significantly Limits Restraints on Unconstitutional Presidential Actions – CLCCampaign Legal Center Responds to SCOTUS Ruling Limiting Court Restraints on Unconstitutional Presidential Actions – CLCProtecting the Promise of American Citizenship – CLCBringing the Fight for Fair Voting Maps to the U.S. Supreme Court – CLCThe Supreme Court Must Uphold Fair Voting Maps for Fair Representation – CLCAbout CLC:Democracy Decoded is a production of Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization dedicated to solving the wide range of challenges facing American democracy. Campaign Legal Center fights for every American's freedom to vote and participate meaningfully in the democratic process. Learn more about us.Democracy Decoded is part of The Democracy Group, a network of podcasts that examines what's broken in our democracy and how we can work together to fix it. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Listeners, the whirlwind of legal action surrounding Donald Trump has barely slowed as we move through September 2025. Just days ago, the Supreme Court made headlines yet again by stepping directly into a case involving Trump and the removal protections of Federal Trade Commission members. On September 22, Chief Justice John Roberts granted Trump's application for a stay, effectively pausing the District Court's order from July and elevating the matter to a landmark petition for certiorari before judgment. That means the Justices will be reviewing, arguably for the first time at this stage, whether statutory removal protections for FTC officials breach the separation of powers—and even whether Humphrey's Executor, the historic 1935 case defining those powers, may be overturned. The case will be heard in December and has already sparked dissent from Justice Kagan, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson, who sharply criticized the immediate empowerment of the President to discharge a sitting FTC member.But that Supreme Court drama is just one thread. The past several weeks have been thick with new filings, deadline jockeying, and complicated appeals spanning federal and state courts. The Master Calendar, as continually updated by Just Security, lays out an intense series of deadlines. October alone promises major swings in several pivotal criminal and civil cases. Trump's legal team is preparing filings for challenges in the D.C. election interference case, with supplemental motions and redaction objections, arguing—once again—about the boundaries of presidential immunity. The government, meanwhile, is sharpening its own responses, aiming to block or overturn Trump's renewed bids to avoid prosecution under immunity doctrines.New York is also in the spotlight. Trump's appeal from Judge Alvin Hellerstein's rejection of his attempt to move the criminal case out of Manhattan is due by October 14. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has been relentless, and Trump is fighting tooth-and-nail to keep his hearings away from local courts, banking on the hope that federal judges might prove more favorable.And in Georgia, things are just as fiery. Mark Meadows, Trump's former Chief of Staff, has petitioned the Supreme Court after the Eleventh Circuit dashed his hopes of moving his own criminal case out of state to the federal level. Trump, alongside other defendants, is also challenging Judge McAfee's decision not to disqualify District Attorney Fani Willis—expect oral arguments on that tangled issue in early December before the Georgia Court of Appeals.Behind the scenes, the fallout from that major Supreme Court presidential immunity decision in August is still echoing. Judge Tanya Chutkan in D.C. now holds jurisdiction once again. All pretrial deadlines are stayed through late October, pushing the calendar further into the campaign season and setting up a tense winter for Trump, his attorneys, and prosecutors alike.With appeals stacking up—on everything from the funding and appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith in Florida to the consolidated appeals in the New York civil fraud case brought by Attorney General Letitia James—the months ahead are set to be a constitutional reckoning that could redefine not only Trump's fate, but the boundaries of presidential authority and accountability in America.Thank you for tuning in today. Come back next week for more of the latest legal developments—this has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out QuietPlease 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

President Trump's pressure campaign to take action against perceived adversaries is unrelenting. Mary and Andrew start this week by breaking down a public push for Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute Trump's political foes, just as Virginia's U.S. Attorney was ousted for failing to bring charges against Letitia James and Jim Comey. The focus then turns to the government's attempt to control critics and silence opposition after last week's abrupt suspension of Jimmy Kimmel, backed by FCC Chair Brendan Carr, as well as what the president designating ANTIFA as a “terrorist organization” actually means. On the flip side comes the effort to dismiss investigations into those aligned with Trump's cause. See MSNBC's reporting on the FBI bribery investigation into “Border Czar” Tom Homan that was shut down after Trump returned to office. And last up: Mary shares the reasoning behind a court's decision to block the removal of dozens of Guatemalan children, citing that the governments explanation "crumbled like a house of cards.”  And a reminder: There are still tickets available for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

It's been a whirlwind few days in the world of U.S. courtrooms, and Donald Trump remains firmly at the center of the storm. Nearly every headline I've caught since the middle of the week has opened with the latest twist in Trump's sprawling legal calendar—a saga stretching from New York streets to Washington, D.C. federal offices, and onward to Florida's district courts. You'd think by now folks might slow down, but the cases keep coming at a dizzying pace.Right now, listeners, several major cases demand Trump's attention. The stakes are extraordinary—not just for him personally, but for the American judicial system. According to Just Security, Trump's legal schedule for fall and winter has been crowded with deadlines and appeals. On October 24, Trump is due to submit a request to dismiss one of the most talked-about cases: the D.C. Election Interference prosecution. His lawyers argue the indictment should be tossed based on the Appointments and Appropriations Clauses, naming Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment and funding as suspect. The following day, October 25, Trump's legal team faces the federal government in Florida, defending Judge Aileen Cannon's earlier move to dismiss the classified documents case over similar concerns about Special Counsel Smith's legitimacy.That's not all. Late last month Trump tried—unsuccessfully—to move his Manhattan criminal case, led by District Attorney Alvin Bragg, to federal court. Judge Alvin Hellerstein wasn't convinced, rejecting Trump's request and delivering a setback. The push for federal jurisdiction continues, with Trump appealing to the Second Circuit, his opening brief now due October 14.Meanwhile, in Georgia, Trump is linked to broader appeals as his co-defendants challenge the fairness of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis's role. All oral arguments are scheduled together, making Atlanta another courtroom buzzing with activity.But possibly the most significant legal moment this summer came in Washington, D.C. The Supreme Court vacated the D.C. Circuit's ruling that had previously denied Trump's presidential immunity argument. This sent the whole affair back to Judge Tanya Chutkan in the district court, where all pretrial deadlines are on pause until late October, a move that will shape the next pivotal months of proceedings.Experts like Max Yoeli at Chatham House warn that these intertwining court battles could be a prelude to a constitutional crisis if the judiciary cannot effectively check Trump's actions—especially with appeals mounting and deadlines extended whenever a new wrinkle appears.Thank you for tuning in. 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.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Last week's fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk was deeply disturbing, and as Andrew establishes at the start, “murder is murder” and those responsible must be held to account. So Mary and Andrew begin with where the investigation stands and how the FBI has handled the case, as well as the lawsuit filed against FBI Director Kash Patel over alleged politically motivated firings at the Bureau. Then, co-editor-in-chief of Just Security, Ryan Goodman stops in to share his research around the end of “the presumption of regularity” in the Trump era, amid growing frustration from many lower courts. And lastly, Andrew and Mary dig into the latest twists and turns in the President's attempt to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook.A note to listeners: After today's recording, Tyler Robinson was charged with felony aggravated murder, among other charges.Further reading:  Here is Ryan Goodman's research in Just Security: The “Presumption of Regularity” in Trump Administration LitigationAnd a reminder: There are still tickets available for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This episode begins with Mary and Andrew digesting the 2-1 decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals halting the Trump administration's ability to use the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan nationals accused of being members of Tren de Aragua. Andrew calls the administration's recent arguments “outlandish” before moving to the questionable legality of the U.S. military's deadly boat strike last week – an unprecedented action which left eleven dead. Next, they move to Monday's Supreme Court decision undoing limits set by a lower court on how ICE conducts immigration raids. Plus, a federal judge issues a win for Harvard University on the topic of frozen and terminated funds. Further reading:  The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling on Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport VenezuelansAnd a reminder: tickets are on sale now for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

You wouldn't believe the whirlwind the courts have become with Donald Trump at the center stage these past few days. Just as September started, a major moment landed when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a 7-4 decision, struck down Trump's broad use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs on nearly all imported goods. The judges ruled that Trump simply didn't have Congressional authority for such sweeping actions, but interestingly enough, the government has until October 14 to ask the Supreme Court to weigh in. On September 4, Trump's team went ahead and petitioned for that expedited Supreme Court review, and now the cases are set for arguments in the Supreme Court's early November session, starting November 3, putting Trump's trade legacy directly on the line.But tariffs aren't even the hottest legal fire Trump's grappling with. On Monday, September 8, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals out of New York cemented a staggering $83.3 million judgment against Trump for defaming E. Jean Carroll. Carroll, the former magazine columnist, accused Trump of sexual assault dating back to the 1990s, and his public denials—combined with reckless disregard for the truth—landed him in legal jeopardy. The appeals panel wasn't swayed by Trump's efforts to invoke presidential immunity or claim excessive damages. Instead, they declared the jury's awards both fair and reasonable, highlighting how Trump's statements about Carroll, calling her a liar and denying her allegations, were made with, at the very least, reckless disregard. And this follows a separate $5 million jury award Carroll won after Trump was found liable for sexual abuse. Trump's legal team has vowed to push that appeal to the Supreme Court, but for now, the massive judgment stands.Outside the courtroom, the Supreme Court itself is preparing for more Trump-centered drama. Not only are his tariffs and broader powers as the executive on the chopping block—his capacity to ramp up deportations and even send military troops into U.S. cities is now being tested in front of the highest bench. There's real tension over just how much power the President can wield, especially with a Supreme Court super majority that often leans toward a very expansive view of executive authority.Listeners, the wheels of justice are cranking at a furious pace. Court calendars have become minefields, filled with dates, stays, appeals, and new developments erupting almost daily. For Donald Trump, each week seems to bring a fresh legal cliffhanger, with the nation watching every twist and turn. That's it for this wild week in Trump's legal saga. Thank you so much for tuning in. Don't forget to come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out QuietPlease.ai.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

After a Labor Day weekend that saw a judge halt the Trump administration's attempt to deport dozens of Guatemalan children already loaded onto airplanes, Andrew and Mary had planned to start their conversation there. But just this morning, Judge Charles Breyer ruled the administration cannot deploy U.S. military to carry out law enforcement operations, as this violates the Posse Comitatus Act. Andrew and Mary provide historical context for the act and walk us through the rationale of this latest ruling. Then, they take a beat on moves to oust two more Trump appointed U.S. Attorneys in California and Nevada who have yet to be congressionally approved. And last up, they review several big cases on tariffs, Lisa Cook, and cuts to foreign aid.Further reading:  Here is Judge Thomas T. Cullen's opinion dismissing Trump's lawsuit against Maryland federal judges.And here is Judge Charles Breyer's ruling on the Posse Comitatus Act: Opinion granting injunctive reliefAnd a reminder: tickets are on sale now for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

I'm tuning in just after one of the most dramatic stretches in recent American political history, as the legal storm surrounding former President Donald Trump's court trials hits new highs. Let's jump right in—the courtroom battles featuring Trump have been exploding across national headlines, from Washington D.C. to California and beyond.Over the past few days, the nation's attention has been gripped by a federal judge's ruling out in California. California Attorney General Rob Bonta confirmed that President Trump's deployment of federalized California National Guard troops and Marines for civilian law enforcement in Los Angeles was in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, that foundational law limiting the military's role on our soil. According to Bonta, the District Court not only found Trump's actions unlawful, but also permanently blocked the administration from engaging in similar behavior in future, whether for arrests, riot control, or evidence gathering. The judge's order is stayed only until September 12th, making this a pivotal moment for executive reach and civil liberties.Meanwhile, the legal calendars covering Trump's trials have become almost as tangled as the cases themselves. After the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on Trump's presidential immunity claims in early August, the D.C. Circuit Court handed jurisdiction back to Judge Tanya Chutkan. However, the most recent scheduling order—coming just this week—has paused all pretrial deadlines until late October, essentially putting everything on hold in the Washington election subversion case. With time ticking away under the Speedy Trial Act, legal experts say this delay throws uncertainty over the proceedings, especially as appeals and procedural wrangling continue.It's not just criminal matters. On the civil side, Trump's legal team is still grappling with the fallout from previous verdicts, notably those involving E. Jean Carroll's defamation suits. The appeals are underway at the Second Circuit, but movement has slowed as defense attorneys look for openings in the appeals process. These cases, filed back in 2020 and 2022, have been persistent thorns in Trump's side, flaring up anew with each ruling.Also in the mix is the Democratic National Committee's lawsuit, challenging Trump's use of Executive Order 14215 to sway the Federal Election Commission. The U.S. District Court in D.C. dismissed the challenge earlier this summer, citing a lack of concrete injury. Still, with the FEC's independence on the line, insiders expect the issue to resurface as the end of election season nears.With Trump back in office, there's no shortage of Supreme Court petitions—over four dozen right now—ranging from immigration to telemarketing, tax laws, and challenges to federal policy moves dating back years. The administration is wielding the emergency docket as a powerful tool, regularly pressing to overturn lower court decisions and keep executive power front and center.So, as the clock moves forward, these cases are more than just legal drama—they're signposts of where America's institutions stand and how the rule of law will look in a rapidly shifting political landscape. Thanks for tuning in. Join me again next week for another 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

On Monday, after Kilmar Abrego Garcia was taken into ICE custody, Judge Paula Xinis temporarily barred the Trump administration from deporting him to Uganda. Mary and Andrew begin here, reminding listeners that the origin of his case stems from a mistake made by our government. Next, they detail the questionable nature of the FBI raid on former National Security Advisor John Bolton's home and office before diving into some 30+ letters sent by Attorney General Pam Bondi to blue-leaning jurisdictions, with the aim of ending their sanctuary policies. Last up, Mary and Andrew drill down on Trump's latest executive order related to a rapidly deployable National Guard unit, as he sharpens threats to send troops into more cities.Further reading: Trump's Executive Order: ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO ADDRESS THE CRIME EMERGENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIAGarrett Graff's piece Mary referred to: America Tips Into FascismAnd a reminder: tickets are on sale now for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

The world of Donald Trump's legal battles has shifted yet again over these past few days, with courtrooms buzzing from Atlanta to Washington, D.C. and even all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. Let me walk you through what's unfolded, because the headlines haven't stopped and the stakes keep rising.Just last week, Trump claimed victory after a court threw out a massive civil fraud penalty that was hanging over him. That multimillion-dollar judgment stemmed from years of litigation around alleged financial misstatements in his business empire. While Trump declared this a vindication, things remain anything but quiet. There are still plenty of legal clouds on the horizon—especially when it comes to criminal charges tied to the 2020 election.Let's zoom in on the federal election obstruction case, one of the country's most closely watched trials. Jack Smith—the special counsel with the Department of Justice—charged Trump with conspiracy to overturn his loss to Joe Biden. This all ties back to the January 6th Capitol riot, and the allegation is that Trump spread lies about election fraud to pressure state officials and even tried to get then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject the results. Trump pleaded not guilty, but the case became tangled in questions about presidential immunity. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in early 2024 that Trump wasn't immune. He pushed it up to the Supreme Court, which decided in July 2024 that former presidents do have some immunity for their official acts, but not everything.Things took another twist when Jack Smith filed an updated indictment last August, only to later drop the charges in November after Trump won reelection—in part because as a sitting president, he'd be immune from prosecution on at least some charges. By January of this year, Smith issued a detailed report saying there was enough evidence to convict, but action has stalled.Meanwhile in Georgia, the election interference case has been bogged down by drama surrounding Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis—her personal relationship with a special prosecutor even led to her removal by a state appeals court last December. While Georgia's Supreme Court still has to decide if it'll take up an appeal on her removal, six counts have already been thrown out, and Trump still faces ten counts there. Whether that case goes forward during his presidency is completely up in the air.But Trump's legal teams aren't just fighting on criminal fronts. As of yesterday, the Trump administration jumped back into the Supreme Court ring, appealing a federal judge's order demanding that billions in foreign aid be paid out—foreign aid that was frozen by Trump's executive order back in January. Solicitor General John Sauer warned that if the court doesn't intervene, Trump's government will have no choice but to quickly spend billions they want to keep frozen under a review led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.That is the whirlwind—the cases are overlapping, the legal arguments are novel, and with Trump back in the White House, every trial is a political earthquake. For now, all eyes are on higher courts, and we're all waiting to see what the next headline brings. Thanks for tuning in. Come back next week for more updates. This has been a Quiet Please production, and 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 been another wild week, after the D.C. Attorney General sued the government for attempting to install the head of the D.E.A. as D.C.'s emergency police commissioner. Following an emergency hearing, US Attorney General Pam Bondi backed down and re-wrote the directive. But Andrew and Mary highlight why that's just the start: it's no longer just the D.C. National Guard being deployed in the nation's capital, National Guard units from five other red states are being sent to the city, making a complicated stew of who's in charge and who has jurisdiction. Next, they weave this thread into last week's trial over whether California's National Guard performed law enforcement operations in Los Angeles, a potential violation of The Posse Comitatus Act. And with Russia and Ukraine so much in the news, Andrew offers some reflections from the 2019 Special Counsel's report that exposes Russia's long-held goal of taking over the Donbas region. And last up, Andrew and Mary fill listeners in on two DC Circuit cases that have their attention: a decision allowing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to be dismantled and another that allows Trump to withhold billions in foreign aid.And a reminder: tickets are on sale now for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

When “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength” we are living in an era of alternate facts. Mary and Andrew apply this Orwellian concept to what's happening this week, after President Trump cited section 740 of the Home Rule Act to federalize the DC police force and send in the national guard to the nation's capital. They detail how the president was able to do this and why Congress will be the ultimate arbiter of this move. Then, they highlight some litigation befitting this theme, with Judge Breyer's trial starting this week on the use of the national guard in Los Angeles, and some decisions including not to unseal grand jury testimony in the Ghislaine Maxwell case, plus an Appeals court blocking contempt proceedings in JGG. Last up, Andrew and Mary take a look at Judge Henderson's opinion in the OMB case and why it deserves more attention than it's received. Further reading: Here is President Trump's letter to Congress citing section 740, courtesy of the New York Times.And some exciting news: tickets are on sale now for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

It's August 6, 2025, and these past several days have felt like a relentless ride on the legal rollercoaster that is the ongoing saga of Donald Trump's court trials. Just this week, chatter around Trump's name in courtrooms from Manhattan to Atlanta has heated up again, and the energy outside those courthouses is as buzzing as ever. Let me walk you through where all the high-stakes proceedings stand, and how Trump—now back in the White House—remains a central figure in the courtroom drama that continues to grip the nation.First, New York. The city's legal powerhouse, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, made history last year by securing Donald Trump's felony conviction. Back on May 30, 2024, a jury found him guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records, stemming from hush money payments and bookkeeping maneuvers during his first presidential run. But what turned more heads in January 2025 was the sentence. Justice Juan Merchan handed Trump an unconditional discharge—which means no jail time, but the felony conviction remains on his record. Even with Trump now serving as president again, the legal and political weight of being the only U.S. president ever convicted of a felony still looms large over his administration. Protesters and supporters alike continue making their presence known along Centre Street, where the courthouse became a national stage.Down in Florida, federal prosecutors faced a stunning twist in what was billed as the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case. Last July, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the entire indictment against Donald Trump. Special Counsel Jack Smith, who had charged Trump with more than 30 counts of mishandling national defense information and several counts of obstruction, suddenly saw his case collapse over a controversy about his own appointment and funding. Although Smith appealed, by the end of January 2025 the Department of Justice had withdrawn all appeals—effectively ending federal prosecution in that venue, at least for now.Meanwhile, Fulton County, Georgia remains a focal point of public interest, as Trump and a cohort of alleged co-conspirators face charges connected to alleged interference in the 2020 election. The sheer number of defendants and legal maneuvers has kept this case from reaching trial quickly, but it's set to escalate in the coming weeks. Observers in Atlanta watch for the next moves from District Attorney Fani Willis, whose office charges Trump and others with racketeering and other election-related offenses.While those three criminal trials dominate headlines, there's more just beneath the surface. Federal courts in Washington, D.C. have paused most proceedings as higher courts continue to hash out Trump's arguments that he's immune from prosecution for acts taken while president—a fight reignited by a Supreme Court decision just days ago, sending questions about presidential immunity back to the lower courts. That pause means, for now, any trial regarding Trump's actions leading up to January 6 remains at a legal crossroads, adding yet more uncertainty to the picture.From Manhattan to Miami and Atlanta to Washington, the narrative of Trump in court remains ever-evolving—a mix of sharp legal arguments, unexpected dismissals, and the ceaseless spin of political consequence. As the country watches, the weight of these court proceedings shadows the highest levels of government.Thanks for tuning in to this week's recap. Don't forget to come back next week for more. 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

Accountability or weaponization? That's the question Andrew and Mary tackle in their 150th episode together, starting with the distraction of the Office of the Special Counsel's investigation into Jack Smith for possible Hatch Act violations. In other DOJ related matters, they give some context to the Trump administration's continued battle to keep Alina Habba, a Trump ally, as New Jersey U.S. Attorney, just as The Legal Accountability Center filed bar complaints against lawyers who have represented Trump's White House in court. In another sideshow, Andrew and Mary break down what to make of a report on the “Clinton Plan” emails, declassified amid the Epstein controversy. And last up, they detail the decision out of the 9th Circuit Court which upheld a pause on ICE raids in California.  Further Reading: Here is the piece Andrew and his colleague Ryan Goodman wrote for Just Security in October 2024: Refuting the Latest Baseless Attacks Against Special Counsel Jack SmithHere is the 9th Circuit Court decision on ICE Raids: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California And some exciting news: tickets are on sale now for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

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

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger Picture Countries limited their CO2 production to save the planet, all they did was. shift everything to China, Trump is now shutting down Obama's climate programs. Trump's economy explodes and the D's/fake news/Fed don't know how to counter the narrative, they tried but it failing. Trump is dividing the Fed and setting everything up for the new economy. Hawaii was going to get hit with a Tsunami because of a major earthquake. Did Trump post Tsunami to let us know that a massive amount of info is going to be dropped? Different countries and the US have have been hit by a cyber attack. The fake news/D's are trying their best to spin the Russia evidence and they are losing to the facts. Did Trump trap Obama with Presidential immunity?   Economy https://twitter.com/Geiger_Capital/status/1950545248825798729 Trump Axes Obama's Endangerment Finding During his two terms, Obama enacted several policies that subsidized uncompetitive, unneeded, and unwanted green energy while placing onerous regulations on fossil fuels. During his first term, Trump tried to reverse much of the Obama administration's anti-fossil fuel actions. However, there was only so much that could be done given the constant distractions Trump faced throughout his first term. One of the most consequential environmental regulations that Trump was unable to eliminate was Obama's “Endangerment Finding.” Most Americans have probably never heard of the Endangerment Finding. But this obscure rule has effectively allowed the federal government to label carbon dioxide a harmful “pollutant” that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Unfortunately, a U.S. Supreme Court decision allowed the Obama administration to enact the rule in the first place. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that “greenhouse gases are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act and that EPA must determine whether or not emissions of greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” Although this is the standard reading of the ruling, it is not totally accurate. According to the majority opinion, written by former Justice John Paul Stevens, “We need not and do not reach the question whether on remand EPA must make an endangerment finding, or whether policy concerns can inform EPA's actions in the event that it makes such a finding. We hold only that EPA must ground its reasons for action or inaction in the statute.” So, the 2007 decision did not determine that carbon dioxide is a harmful air pollutant. Rather, it granted that the EPA has the authority to determine if carbon dioxide is a harmful greenhouse gas based solely upon unequivocal data. Trump's EPA Administrator, Lee Zeldin, has made rescinding the Endangerment Finding a priority. “A lot of people are out there listening, they might not know what the endangerment finding is. If you ask congressional Democrats to describe what it is, the left would say that it means that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, carbon dioxide is an endangerment to human health. They might say methane is a pollutant, methane is an endangerment to human health,” Zeldin said on the Ruthless podcast. “That's an oversimplified, I would say inaccurate way to describe it,” Zeldin added. “The Obama administration said that carbon dioxide, when mixed with a bunch of other well-mixed gases, greenhouse gases, that it contributes to climate change. How much?

If it's customary, it's probably not happening in this Justice Department. Starting with the latest from the Epstein controversy, Andrew and Mary unpack what to make of the two days Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche spent interviewing Ghislaine Maxwell. This, after a Florida judge denied the release of Epstein grand jury transcripts last Wednesday.And in immigration related news, three decisions came through in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia saga, just as the first claim is filed against the U.S. over one man's deportation to El Salvador without due process. Then, in an eye-popping move, Attorney General Pam Bondi's office filed a misconduct complaint against Judge James Boasberg for “making improper public comments” about the President and his administration. And before wrapping up this week, Mary and Andrew give some context to the former J6 prosecutor who's suing the administration over his abrupt firing.Further Reading: Here is the misconduct complaint filed against Judge Boasberg: Complaint Against United States District Court Chief Judge James E. BoasbergAnd some exciting news: tickets are on sale now for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Today's question/frustration comes as many on the right want accountability for deep state actors responsible for the Trump-Russia collusion hoax of nine years ago.

-Carson breaks down the latest revelations linking Barack Obama and other top officials to the Russia collusion hoax. -Tulsi Gabbard and Jim Jordan call for criminal referrals, reporter Mike Davis says Obama is not shielded by Presidential Immunity in this case. Today's podcast is sponsored by : BIRCH GOLD - Protect and grow your retirement savings with gold. Text ROB to 98 98 98 for your FREE information kit! To call in and speak with Rob Carson live on the show, dial 1-800-922-6680 between the hours of 12 Noon and 3:00 pm Eastern Time Monday through Friday…E-mail Rob Carson at : RobCarsonShow@gmail.com Musical parodies provided by Jim Gossett (www.patreon.com/JimGossettComedy) Listen to Newsmax LIVE and see our entire podcast lineup at http://Newsmax.com/Listen Make the switch to NEWSMAX today! Get your 15 day free trial of NEWSMAX+ at http://NewsmaxPlus.com Looking for NEWSMAX caps, tees, mugs & more? Check out the Newsmax merchandise shop at : http://nws.mx/shop Follow NEWSMAX on Social Media:  -Facebook: http://nws.mx/FB  -X/Twitter: http://nws.mx/twitter -Instagram: http://nws.mx/IG -YouTube: https://youtube.com/NewsmaxTV -Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/NewsmaxTV -TRUTH Social: https://truthsocial.com/@NEWSMAX -GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/newsmax -Threads: http://threads.net/@NEWSMAX  -Telegram: http://t.me/newsmax  -BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/newsmax.com -Parler: http://app.parler.com/newsmax Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Rich Zeoli Show- Full Episode (07/21/2025): 3:05pm- A kiss cam moment during Coldplay's concert in Boston has gone viral—for all the wrong reasons. The clip features a man and woman immediately distancing themselves from one another and hiding their faces the moment they're placed on the big screen. The band's frontman, Chris Martin, joked that they must be “having an affair.” Turns out, they were! The couple was identified as Astronomer CEO Andy Byron and the company's head of H.R. Kristin Cabot. Did the video blow up because it was funny—or because it captured everything people hate about corporate H.R. hypocrisy? 3:35pm- In a profanity-laced interview with YouTube personality Andrew Callaghan, Hunter Biden lashed out at the Democratic Party for forcing his father to withdraw from the 2024 presidential election—specifically George Clooney and the Pod Save America hosts. During the interview, Hunter also denied being responsible for the cocaine found at the White House during his father's presidency and referred to Donald Trump as a “dictator thug.” 4:05pm- Bill D'Agostino—Senior Research Analyst at Media Research Center—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to breakdown some of the best (and worst) moments from corporate media: Hunter Biden sits down for a profanity-laced interview with a popular YouTube personality, the Russia collusion narrative is being debunked once and for all, and Brian Stelter claims Stephen Colbert's late show being cancelled is evidence that America “is not a free country.” Can Stelter get fired from CNN for a second time? 4:30pm- Justin saw Superman over the weekend, Rich insists butter is healthy, and Matt says In & Out is sort of overrated (except for the milkshakes). Plus, Pepsi vows to remove artificial dyes from Doritos! 5:05pm- According to a report from Fox News reporter Brooke Singman the “Obama administration ‘manufactured' intelligence to create the 2016 Russian election interference narrative.” Appearing on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard stated: “Accountability is essential for the future of our country.” She continued: "There must be indictments. Those responsible, no matter how powerful they are and were at that time, no matter who was involved in creating this treasonous conspiracy against the American people—they all must be held accountable.” You can read the bombshell report here: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-admin-manufactured-intelligence-create-2016-russian-election-interference-narrative-documents-show. 5:10pm- While appearing on Benny Johnson's podcast, Mike Davis—of the Article III Project—explained that former President Barack Obama may not have presidential immunity related to the Russia collusion hoax: “when he's participating in the coverup of this conspiracy, he doesn't have presidential immunity.” 5:30pm- On Monday, Border Czar Tom Homan spoke at a news conference on the New York City border agent who was shot by a migrant residing in the country illegally. Homan stated: “Sanctuary cities are now our priority. We're going to flood the zone.” 5:40pm- In a profanity-laced interview with YouTube personality Andrew Callaghan, Hunter Biden lashed out at the Democratic Party for forcing his father to withdraw from the 2024 presidential election—specifically George Clooney and the Pod Save America hosts. During the interview, Hunter also denied being responsible for the cocaine found at the White House during his father's presidency and referred to Donald Trump as a “dictator thug.” 6:05pm- Jimmy Failla—Host of “Fox News Saturday with Jimmy Failla” & “Fox Across America”—joins The Rich Zeoli Show. Jimmy reacts to the viral Coldplay Kiss Cam video, Stephen Colbert's late-night show being canceled by CBS, and attending his high school reunion over the weekend. Failla will be performing at SoulJoel's in Montgomery County, PA on August 9th. You can find information about tickets here: https://radio.foxnews.com/fox ...

Did Obama Commit Treason? Hawk Dismantles Tulsi Gabbard's Claim In this podcast episode, Hawk focuses on the latest controversy involving Tulsi Gabbard's declassified report accusing former President Barack Obama of treason during the 2016 election. The report claims that top Obama officials coordinated efforts to sabotage Donald Trump's campaign—an accusation that Hawk thoroughly challenges using facts already established by bipartisan Senate investigations, the Mueller report, and multiple intelligence community assessments.Hawk discusses how the report misrepresents the facts by focusing narrowly on election infrastructure while ignoring Russia's proven influence operations, including the DNC and Podesta email hacks, fake social media campaigns, and other efforts aimed at boosting Trump and damaging Hillary Clinton. Drawing from official records and long-standing investigations, Hawk highlights how Tulsi Gabbard's conclusions collapse under scrutiny and explains why, even if her claims were true, the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity would still shield Obama from prosecution.Throughout the video, Hawk brings a sharp, informed, and often humorous take on current political events, cutting through misinformation with clarity and confidence. If you're looking for a no-nonsense review of what really happened in 2016—and what didn't—this is the episode to watch. SUPPORT & CONNECT WITH HAWK- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mdg650hawk- Support Hawk's Merch Store: https://hawkmerchstore.com- Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hawkeyewhackamole- Connect on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mdg650hawk.bsky.social- Connect on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Podcasts Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.com- Listen to Hawk Podcasts On Your Favorite Platform:Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3RWeJfyApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/422GDuLYouTube: https://youtube.com/@hawkpodcastsiHeartRadio: https://ihr.fm/47vVBdPPandora: https://bit.ly/48COaTBSimplecast: https://hawk-droppings.simplecast.com- Hawk Podcasts RSS Feed: https://feeds.simplecast.com/pPVtxSNJ

Following the emergence of new evidence from messages submitted by the Department of Justice's whistleblower, Erez Reuveni, Andrew and Mary discuss its potential implications for the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia and the confirmation process of Emil Bove III. They also examine a Southern California ruling to halt immigration stops based on race. On the other coast, they look at a temporary block of Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship—a case where Mary has particular expertise via her role in a related birthright citizenship case: CASA v. Trump. Finally, SCOTUS paves way for mass layoffs of federal workers, and DOJ opens investigations into former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan.Listener Note: This podcast was recorded several hours before the Supreme Court decision allowing for the dismantling of the Department of Education. Andrew and Mary will discuss on next week's episode.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

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

This week's episode begins with a Supreme Court decision to allow the deportation of eight migrants to South Sudan without due process, despite it not being their country of origin. And after a comparative review of the new beefed-up ICE budget and what it means for deportation operations moving forward, Andrew and Mary spotlightthe latest from Kilmar Abrego Garcia's civil and criminal cases. Also not to be missed: the newly disclosed letters Attorney General Pam Bondi sent to tech firms assuring them they would not be penalized for supporting TikTok operations in the US, despite a federal ban. Plus: how a pardoned J6 defendant received a life sentence for plotting to kill the agents who investigated him, and what led to FBI agent Michael Feinberg's forced resignation.Further reading: Here are the letters sent from Attorney General Pam Bondi to Google, Apple and Amazon, among others. And here is a write up from former FBI agent Michael Feinberg, explaining his coerced resignation. Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

After Friday's Supreme Court ruling to limit nationwide injunctions, Mary and Andrew begin by breaking down what it means for future challenges to executive actions as they make their way through the courts, and what's next for Mary's birthright citizenship case. They also tackle the DHS lawsuit against all federal judges on the district court in Maryland, before reviewing the Justice Department's plans to prioritize cases revoking citizenship—aka ‘denaturalizing' US citizens. This, along with their discussion of ICE targeting migrant workers and using routine traffic stops to check legal status, shines a light on the legal limits of ICE's tactics.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

The United States entered the conflict between Israel and Iran this weekend after bombing three Iranian nuclear sites. Andrew and Mary start this week's episode here, discussing the scope of presidential war powers and the norms of international law following the strikes. After, they shift focus to immigration, zeroing in on a whistleblower complaint from a former DOJ lawyer against Principal Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove among others, as well as the releases of Mahmoud Khalil and Kilmar Abrego Garcia. And after a nod to the Supreme Court's decision on removing immigrants to countries other than their own, Mary and Andrew touch on the 9th Circuit decision allowing Trump to retain control of the California National Guard, and what happens next.Further reading: Here is the compliant from the Justice Department whistleblower (courtesy New York Times): Protected Whistleblower Disclosure of Erez Reuveni Regarding Violation of Laws, Rules & Regulations, Abuse of Authority, and Substantial and Specific Danger to Health and Safety at the Department of Justice and here is more on the dissent from the Supreme Court's recent decision: Supreme Court allows Trump to swiftly deport certain immigrants to 'third countries'Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Political violence is never OK. So after the horrible news out of Minnesota, Mary and Andrew begin with a breakdown of the federal charges against the man accused of murdering a Minnesota state lawmaker and her husband and attempting to murder several others.Next, they move to an explainer of an appeals court ruling that temporarily blocked a lower court decision ordering the control of the California National Guard back to the state, while tying in the scuffle during Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's press conference last week as Senator Alex Padilla was forcibly removed and handcuffed. And rounding out this episode, Andrew and Mary note Trump's failed attempt to appeal the $5 million judgement in the E Jean Carroll case, and the arguments heard last week on his attempt to remove his NY state hush money case to a federal court.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Protests intensified in Los Angeles and around the country after the Trump administration stepped up ICE raids largely targeting immigrants working in service industries. And after Trump deployed the National Guard without any buy-in from the state, California sued. So what now? That's where Andrew and Mary begin this week, parsing the legality of using the military domestically, and how responsibilities shift when the National Guard is federalized. The rest of this episode is focused on the intertwined news of Judge Boasberg's sweeping decision to ensure due process for the Venezuelan immigrants deported to El Salvador, with Kilmar Abrego Garcia's return to the US, as he faces charges of human smuggling in Tennessee.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Media coverage over the economic impact of President Trump's tariffs has been robust,but not a ton of attention has been paid to the actual legality of them. So that's where Andrew and Mary begin, after two court decisions in the last week questioned the merits and where jurisdiction lies. Then they turn to the president's significant use of the pardon power to commute sentences and override convictions of some friends and allies, and what it says about maintaining a belief in blind justice. And after some great reporting from the New York Times, Mary and Adnrew detail some changes happening within Director Kash Patel's FBI, as bureau leaders are taken down a peg and emphasis on public corruption is dialed back.Further reading: Here is the New York Times reporting concerning the FBI: Unease at F.B.I. Intensifies as Patel Ousts Top OfficialsWant to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. 

Andrew and Mary launch this week's episode by digging into the details on some of the latest acts of retribution coming out of the Trump administration as Trump targets Harvard, the Jenner & Block law firm gets a decision and Rep. LaMonica McIver gets charged with assault. Afterwards, they review a preliminary decision from the Supreme Court to stay a DC District Court's injunction that paused the firing of Gwynne Wilcox from the National Labor Relations Board, as well as Cathy Harris from the MSPB governing board while they challenge their removals. And lastly, Andrew and Mary get listeners up to speed on the O.C.G. case and the DOJ's continued defiance of Judge Murphy's TRO regarding extractions of migrants to countries they have no ties to.Further listening: HERE is a clip of Rep LaMonica McIver responding to the charges against her.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

With so many issues stemming from President Trump's executive orders now before the Supreme Court, it's tough to know where to begin. So Andrew and Mary start this week with the arguments heard last Thursday from Mary's ICAP team on the courts issuing national injunctions in several birthright citizenship cases. They recap Thursday's highlights and note the Justices' interest in getting to the merits of the birthright issue. Then, they talk through two SCOTUS decisions from Friday and Monday: one on the Trump administration using the Alien Enemies Act to ‘extract' Venezuelan migrants, and the other on their attempt to revoke the protected status of Venezuelans. Last up, Andrew and Mary turn to the specifics of a few of the immigration removal cases, as hearings continue and the lack of due process continues to be challenged.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Stephen Miller's got some ideas. So this week, Mary and Andrew start with a focus on his recent acknowledgement that the White House is considering suspending habeas corpus altogether for migrants. They talk about what that means, and the reality that it lacks any legal sniff test, which the Supreme Court agrees with. Then, they highlight what happens when due process works, after the release of Rumeysa Ozturk, a Tufts student who was detained by ICE over an opinion piece she wrote for the student newspaper. Next up, a significant decision from Judge Susan Illston out of California, putting a temporary hold on reducing the federal workforce. Mary and Andrew note what she held, including that the administration needs to follow procedure and get congressional buy in. And lastly, they preview the Supreme Court argument Mary's ICAP team is bringing this Thursday on birthright citizenship- not on the merits per se, but on the issue of national injunctions. And a quick eye pop on Trump's decision to swap out Ed Martin as the US Attorney for DC with yet another Fox News host, Jeanine Pirro.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

The Supreme Court is working hard to tend to Mr. Presidential Immunity's wounds because he just can't abide lower federal court judges telling him he can't kick trans people out of the military, or that the 14th Amendment is a real thing. Meanwhile, Kristi Noem is defiling her own birthright citizenship by kidnapping people and sending them to a foreign gulag. Plus, how the Dems should fight the party that only wants to break things—and craft a better economic message that appeals to both moderates and progressives.  Rep. Greg Casar of Texas and Katie Phang join Tim Miller. show notes Katie's Substack NYT profile of Rep. Casar

Long established legal norms continue to be challenged by Trump's Justice Department, leading Andrew and Mary to emphasize how the courts have grown increasingly frustrated with the administration's tactics. They begin with last Thursday's ruling from Judge Rodriguez in Texas, that Trump was unjustified in using the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants. After a review of what that means for his ‘extraction' efforts, Andrew and Mary go deep on an assessment made public from the National Intelligence Council, that indicates despite Trump's presidential proclamation evoking the Alien Enemies Act, intelligence officials do not see a strong link between the Venezuelan government and Tren de Aragua. And lastly this week, they look at the latest judicial pushback on Trump's attempts to threaten law firms, after Judge Beryl Howell ruled against his targeting of Perkins Coie by executive order.Further reading: Here is the assessment from the National Intelligence Council on the relationship between the Maduro government and Tren de Aragua, courtesy of the New York Times.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Andrew and Mary begin this week by acknowledging that, as the Trump administration approaches its 100th day mark, some themes have materialized. One is intimidation, exemplified most recently with the arrest of Wisconsin state court judge Hannah Dugan last Friday, while Trump continues to clash with local authorities over his deportation efforts. Another theme is due process, or the lack of it. Our Main Justice hosts point to a litany of immigration issues front and center this week, including the wrongful deportation of US citizen children, Attorney General Pam Bondi's March memo to law enforcement laying out how to implement the Alien Enemies Act, and what happened when the government was compelled to have a hearing in a Texas case: they fell flat on the merits. And before wrapping up, Andrew and Mary explain why Trump's media policy change, tossing out Biden era protections for journalists, is problematic for a free press.Further reading: Mary's recent Op-ed in the Washington Post: What Alito got right in his El Salvador case dissent.Pam Bondi's March 14th memo issuing guidance for implementing the Alien Enemies Act.Pam Bondi's April 25th memo updating the policy regarding obtaining information from, or records of, members of the news media.A note to listeners: In the Abrego Garcia case, despite the earlier admission in court that his removal was a mistake, the government's current position is that he a member of MS 13, which his lawyers deny.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Andrew and Mary host this week's episode in front of a live audience at Princeton University, starting with the latest in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case where last Tuesday, Maryland district judge Paula Xinis ordered the Trump administration to provide among other things, “butts in seats” to explain their efforts to get him back. Then they describe what led up to the Supreme Court's early Saturday decision temporarily blocking the deportation of more Venezuelan migrants, after a flurry of back and forth between the Solicitor General and the ACLU. And being at Andrew's alma mater, he and Mary hold up the absolute necessity of academic freedom and independence in the wake of Trump's attempts to defund universities who do not comply with his demands. Last up, they touch on the Supreme Court granting argument in the birthright citizenship cases- not on the merits, but on whether a nationwide injunction is appropriate in this instance.Further reading: HERE is Judge Harvie Wilkinson's sharply worded opinion, writing for a 3-judge panel in the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, rejecting the Trump administrations effort to stop a lower court's order that the government facilitate Kilmar Abrego Garcia's return.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

The US government's mistaken removal of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to El Salvador has captured national attention, and it's as stunning as it is heart breaking. So Mary and Andrew dedicate the bulk of this week's episode to what's happened since the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration must follow the lower court's order to facilitate his return. So far, the administration seems to be slow-walking the process, dodging accountability for the fact that Abrego Garcia was never afforded his due process rights, a core American principle. Andrew and Mary go on to explain each consecutive government response, and two habeas petitions that have been granted a TRO since last week's Supreme Court decision. Before wrapping up, they highlight the cancelling of a landmark civil rights deal in Alabama, and Trump's latest retribution in action-- targeting individuals, the Associated Press and Harvard.Further reading: Here is Mary's OpEd in the Washington Post: It's time to compel Justice officials to testify on Abrego García.And please vote for your favorite MSNBC podcasts in this year's Webby Awards:Prosecuting Donald Trump in the Podcasts - Crime & Justice category: VOTE HEREWhy Is This Happening? With Chris Hayes in the Podcasts - Interview/Talk Show category: VOTE HEREInto America: Uncounted Millions in the Podcasts - News & Politics category: VOTE HEREVoting closes this Thursday, April 17th.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

As the Supreme Court weighs in on the president's use of the Alien Enemies Act, Mary and Andrew approach this week's developments with both concern and relief. While relieved at the unanimity of the High Court's belief that due process is a necessity, the concern lies with the Trump administration's response to a court order directing them to arrange the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the man who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador. They also see cause for alarm after the government retaliated against their own lawyer in this case. Andrew and Mary then take a beat to spotlight the DC circuit upholding a judge's decision related to scope of Trump's J6 pardons. And before closing out this week's episode, they detail the lawsuit brought by the conservative leaning NCLA over the constitutionality of the sweeping tariffs the president has announced.Further reading: This is Mary's recent op Ed in the Washington Post: The White House war on Big Law hits some speed bumpsAnd please vote for your favorite MSNBC podcasts in this year's Webby Awards:Prosecuting Donald Trump in the Podcasts - Crime & Justice category: VOTE HEREWhy Is This Happening? With Chris Hayes in the Podcasts - Interview/Talk Show category: VOTE HEREInto America: Uncounted Millions in the Podcasts - News & Politics category: VOTE HEREVoting closes April 17th.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Six emergency applications have now made their way to the Supreme Court concerning President Trump's executive orders, so Andrew and Mary begin this episode by breaking down the emergency stay motions in several key cases involving birthright citizenship, federal workers, the use of the Alien Enemies Act and canceling education grants. Then, after a review of Trump's latest law firm blacklist targets and the problematic nature of targeting of universities and students, they focus on an executive order aiming to change how U.S. elections are run. And last up, Andrew and Mary decry the lack of accountability over Signalgate, as Trump resists doling out any consequences to his senior National Security leadership.For more on Trump's continued attacks on universities, check out the latest episode of Trumpland with Alex Wagner about the fallout at Columbia University and maintaining free speech on campus.Further reading: Here is the order from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals over Judge Boasberg's TRO pausing deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, which includes separate concurring statements of Judge Henderson and Judge Millett and a dissenting statement of Judge Walker.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

On this week's episode, Andrew and Mary start with the major capitulation of the Paul, Wiess law firm to Trump's demands late last week, in exchange for rescinding an EO targeting the firm. This is the chilling effect they've been talking about in action. Then: what are the consequences of the Trump administration defying court orders from US District Chief Judge James Boasberg? The deportation of Venezuelan migrants without due process seems to be careening into that constitutional question, so Andrew and Mary break down the latest on that case, as the government invokes the “state secrets privilege”. And lastly, they detail the legal issues surrounding the now-infamous Signal chat reported by The Atlantic- an extraordinary demonstration of gross negligence when it comes to national defense information. Further reading: Here is Mary's piece on Just Security: Dissecting the Trump Administration's Strategy for Defying Court OrdersAnd here is Andrew's piece, also from Just Security: The New “Blacklists” Work When Law Firms Stay SilentAnd here is the criminal code Andrew and Mary referenced: 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense informationWant to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Last Friday, President Trump spoke before a gathering at the Department of Justice to lay out what was seen largely as a grievance fest, singling out individuals and media organizations he perceives as his enemies. Main Justice hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord lay plain the unorthodox nature of a speech like this, especially before a department that is meant to maintain independence from the executive branch. But that was just the start of a wild weekend, after Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act to deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants, just as a court order blocking their removal was filed. So, Andrew and Mary tackle the latest developments in several buckets before breaking down the Supreme Court's consideration of the request by the president to lift the pause on his birthright citizenship executive action.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

In an opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court created the doctrine of presidential immunity, bestowing upon Donald Trump the power of lawlessness.At his recent address to a joint session of Congress, Trump thanked Roberts and said he "won't forget it," although Trump did not tell Roberts what he was thanking him for.The question often is posed: Would there be any circumstance under which the Supreme Court could and would revisit its horrific, democracy-busting presidential immunity ruling? Glenn explains - the answer is YES!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 Glenn 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/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.

After news this weekend that Columbia student and permanent legal resident Mahmoud Khalil was arrested by ICE agents, hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord explain the petition filed from his lawyer and the significance of his case as a harbinger of things to come, as a hearing is set over the effort to deport him. Then, they shift focus to the Trump administration's continued attacks on law firms and universities themselves, after the president cut federal funding to Columbia, and Georgetown was rebuked by the DC US Attorney for teaching principles related to diversity, equity and inclusion. Last up, Andrew and Mary review the latest in the Eric Adams case, with a shocking court filing containing texts from prosecutors, and they break down a few cases making their way through the courts right now: some of which have been touched by SCOTUS, others likely on their way to the High Court.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.