Podcasts about presidential immunity

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.

In this special mailbag edition of The Tristan Snell Show, Tristan breaks down the Supreme Court's controversial presidential immunity ruling, explaining its limitations and implications for Trump's second term. We know what you're thinking, what about Elon? Tristan provides detailed answers about whether Elon Musk enjoys presidential immunity protections (he doesn't), explores the lack of recall mechanisms for federal representatives, and outlines how state governments can serve as bulwarks against federal overreach.

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.

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.

In this week's Main Justice episode, hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord explore a disturbing pattern of the Trump administration's attack on lawyers and what it means for the rule of law, as firings and demotions continue to reverberate around the federal government. They examine the firing of the three top nonpartisan military JAG lawyers without cause— and why Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth referred to these officers as ‘roadblocks'. They look at Trump's decision to revoke security clearances from a law firm with ties to former Special Counsel Jack Smith. And they update a few cases on their radar, to include the firing of Hampton Dellinger as well as the latest in the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. And before closing, Andrew and Mary zoom out to look at how the Trump administration is redefining the US's role in world, after voting against a UN resolution that condemned Russian aggression in Ukraine, ignoring violations of international law.Further reading: Here is the latest statement from the ABA that Andrew spoke about: The ABA rejects efforts to undermine the courts and the legal profession.And soonest, we'll add a link here to the letter Andrew and Mary talked about in this episode: A Statement of Conscience and Principle By Those Who Have Served as Assistant United States Attorneys For the District of Columbia Over the Past Fifty Years.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

In a news cycle that keeps on churning, Main Justice hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord wade through the nonstop dispatches to set some focal points for this episode. They begin with the hearing held by Judge Dale Ho last week over the Eric Adams dismissal and the Judge's appointment of Paul Clement as amicus, a.k.a. a friend of the court. Andrew details the important decisions Judge Ho has before him as Mary drives home why this case will reverberate beyond the embattled New York Mayor. Then, they touch on the latest resignation- this one, from Denise Cheung, the chief of the criminal division in the DC US Attorney's office, after being asked to do something by the administration she believed was unsupportable.  And last up, Andrew and Mary look at the Supreme Court denial of a stay in the case involving Trump's firing of Hampton Dellinger, and the disconnect between DOJ representations about Elon Musk's role in court versus what Musk is saying and doing in practice.Further reading: Here is Andrew's piece on Just Security: Why the Rule of Law Depends on an Evidentiary Hearing in Mayor Eric Adams' Case.And HERE is the letter of resignation from the head of the criminal division in the U.S. attorney's office in D.C.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

The directive sent from acting deputy attorney general Emil Bove to drop the corruption charges against NYC Mayor Eric Adams has hit a fever pitch, so hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord use the bulk of this episode to break down this evolving story and what has come to light so far. They tick through how this standoff between federal prosecutors and the DOJ's directive has led to a slew of resignations, and what to watch for as Judge Dale Ho calls for a Wednesday hearing on the matter in Manhattan.  Andrew and Mary then take a beat to preview the first Supreme Court test of Trump's executive power, over his attempt to fire Hampton Dellinger, the head of the Office of Special Counsel, without cause. (Note: this office is an independent watchdog agency- not part of DOJ). And they wind up this episode by highlighting allegations from whistleblowers that Kash Patel, Trump's nominee to head the FBI, has been directing the firing of senior officials at the FBI.Further reading: Here is Andrew's piece in Just Security: The People of New York v. Mayor Adams: Will Manhattan DA Bragg Come to the Rescue Yet Again?Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Additional Reading Basics: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/unitary_executive_theory_%28uet%29US Constitution Art. 2The Virginia Plan ContextNY Times Article on Vance commentsGuardian article on Courts  Host: Adam Sommer Find Adam on tik-tok (maybe) and bluesky as "midmapdadenergy" - follow The Process on instagram. JOIN PATREON FOR MORE “Change The Conversation”Outro Song: “The World Is On Fire” by American Aquarium http://www.americanaquarium.com/ Nothing on this channel is to be taken as legal advice for any jurisdiction. All statements are opinions that reflect on that of the speaker and the purpose of the show is to provide space for discussion that may include statements or opinions shared only for the purpose of discussion. Listening to "The Process" is not legal advice and should not be relied upon for personal legal needs.

Additional Reading Basics: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/unitary_executive_theory_%28uet%29US Constitution Art. 2The Virginia Plan ContextNY Times Article on Vance commentsGuardian article on Courts  Host: Adam Sommer Find Adam on tik-tok (maybe) and bluesky as "midmapdadenergy" - follow The Process on instagram. JOIN PATREON FOR MORE “Change The Conversation”Outro Song: “The World Is On Fire” by American Aquarium http://www.americanaquarium.com/ Nothing on this channel is to be taken as legal advice for any jurisdiction. All statements are opinions that reflect on that of the speaker and the purpose of the show is to provide space for discussion that may include statements or opinions shared only for the purpose of discussion. Listening to "The Process" is not legal advice and should not be relied upon for personal legal needs.

The flood of memos issued by newly minted Attorney General Pam Bondi in her first days was dizzying, so hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord zero in on several that have significant implications for national security and criminal law enforcement. Next, they give a rundown of litigation happening across the country, as courtrooms become the first defense in challenging some of President Trump's questionable orders. And last up, Andrew and Mary talk through a few legal battles brewing over sanctuary cities and detail Mary and ICAP's latest case aiming to protect places of worship as safe havens from immigration enforcement. And btw, the corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams just went poof-- they dissect that too.Further reading: Here is Just Security's Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions.HERE is the DOJ memo dropping the corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams without prejudice.And here is the statement from the American Bar Association that Andrew and Mary spoke about: The ABA supports the rule of law.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Sotomayor hits presidential immunity decision in first public comments since new Trump admin Please Subscribe + Rate & Review KMJ’s Afternoon Drive with Philip Teresi & E. Curtis Johnson wherever you listen! --- KMJ’s Afternoon Drive with Philip Teresi & E. Curtis Johnson is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music or wherever else you listen. --- Philip Teresi & E. Curtis Johnson – KMJ’s Afternoon Drive Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 & 105.9 KMJ DriveKMJ.com | Podcast | Facebook | X | Instagram --- Everything KMJ: kmjnow.com | Streaming | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

With the deluge of news about the Trump administration's actions and orders, hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord zoom out to talk through what seems to be the overarching goal here- to clear out all opposition and have a presidency unbound by law. As former officials at the Justice Department and the FBI, they have a clear-eyed view on the broad swath of firings and how this wrecking ball approach will be litigated in court as challenges mount. Then, Andrew and Mary give some legal context to Trump's attempt to cut off congressional aid, both through the funding freeze that already has several temporary restraining orders, and the ongoing news involving attempts to dismantle USAID by Trump and Musk.Further reading: Here is Mary's piece in Just Security asking the Senate to get answers from Bondi and Patel: From Pardons to Purges: Pressing Questions that Bondi and Patel Must Answer NowAnd this is the article Andrew and Mary referenced in this episode from Adam Cox and Trevor Morrison, also on Just Security: Trump's Dictatorial Theory of Presidential Power – What the Executive Orders, in the Aggregate, Tell UsWant to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

A week into the second iteration of Donald Trump's White House, hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord take stock of the abrupt and unrelenting changes to our federal government. Andrew points to security details yanked and security clearances revoked as blatant retaliation against Trump's perceived foes. Mary highlights several judges who are pushing back against blanket pardons for J6 convictions. Then, they turn to Trump's executive action on birthright citizenship, reviewing several challenges already in motion, including a case brought by Mary and her ICAP team. And before wrapping up, our two resident career litigators look at the withering independence of the Justice Department from the White House, and how all roads lead through the DOJ.Further reading: Here is the New York Times' piece on Kash Patel that Andrew mentioned in this episode: F.B.I. Pick Pushed False and Misleading Claims About Trump InvestigationsWant to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Within hours of Donald Trump's inauguration, numerous executive actions were signed and over 1500 pardons were issued for nearly all of the January 6th defendants, despite his vice president and attorney general nominee suggesting a more refined approach. So, on this first full day of Trump's second term, hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord review the blunt nature of these pardons, especially for those convicted of violent acts that day. Then they turn to pardons issued by President Biden in his final hours in office to shield those targeted by Trump for retribution- including members of Congress, those who testified in the J6 investigation, and members of his own family. And finally, Mary and Andrew dive into the myriad of executive actions signed by Trump as legal challenges begin to mount around things like getting rid of birthright citizenship, using the military domestically at our border, undoing the TikTok ban and the creation of DOGE.Further reading: Here is Mary's recent write up in the Atlantic: A Sweeping January 6 Pardon Is an Attack on the JudiciaryWant to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

While this podcast's name has changed, this week's episode revolves around all things prosecuting Donald Trump. After a detailed review of Judge Juan Merchan's reasoning and limitations for sentencing the president-elect after his New York criminal conviction, veteran prosecutors Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord wind through the barrage of motions in Florida to block the release of both volumes of Special Counsel Jack Smith's final report. After underscoring why Volume Two-- concerning the now dismissed classified documents case-- is still under wraps, they dig into the finer points of Volume One, released to the public at 1:00 a.m. Tuesday morning. This first volume lays out the facts and the law as it relates to Trump's DC election interference case which has also been dismissed, though Smith writes, "but for Mr. Trump's election and imminent return to the Presidency, the Office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial."Further reading: Here is Volume One of Jack Smith's final report.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

In the early hours of January 14, 2024 the Department of Justice released its long-awaited election interference report against President-elect Donald Trump. It was a long and winding road to that moment—and one marked, ultimately, by justice delayed. In November 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel to oversee criminal investigations by the Justice Department into former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of classified documents. The two cases were brought in different jurisdictions—with charges for the classified documents case filed in Florida and the elections case in Washington, D.C. After false starts, the blockbuster Supreme Court ruling on July 1, 2024 that former President Trump is entitled to some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken to overturn the results of the 2020 election, and the subsequent re-election of Trump in November, Smith and the DOJ dropped both cases. (Publication of Smith's report regarding the documents case is delayed due to pending charges against co-conspirators.) Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law pageCriminal Justice in Divided America, Police, Punishment, and the Future of Our Democracy >>> Stanford Lawyer magazine online feature(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Role of Special ProsecutorsPam Karlan and David Sklansky discuss the history and purpose of special prosecutors, their use in politically sensitive cases, and the implications of their reports. Sklansky explains the transition from independent counsels to special counsels and highlights examples like the Mueller Report and investigations into Hunter Biden.(00:05:01) Chapter 2: Insights from Jack Smith's ReportThe conversation shifts to Jack Smith's report on Donald Trump. Karlan and Sklansky explore the evidence presented, its connection to the January 6th events, and the debates around releasing such reports. Karlan questions the timing of appointing a special counsel, given much was already public knowledge.(00:08:25) Chapter 3: Prosecution Outcomes and Future ImplicationsKarlan and Sklansky discuss the slow progress of Trump's investigation compared to other January 6th prosecutions. They also cover Trump's promise to pardon convicted January 6th defendants, the fate of unnamed co-conspirators, and the ethical questions surrounding Todd Blanche's involvement at the DOJ. (00:12:16) Chapter 4: Decisions and Legal Strategies in Trump's ProsecutionKarlan and Sklansky discuss the decision not to charge Donald Trump with insurrection, focusing instead on charges like fraud and voter suppression. They analyze why the special counsel avoided certain charges and the challenges of applying existing statutes to unprecedented events.(00:16:30) Chapter 5: The Supreme Court's Role and the Impact on ProsecutionThe conversation explores delays caused by the Supreme Court, including its handling of presidential immunity. Karlan and Sklansky explain how these rulings affected timelines and created legal ambiguities that could influence appeals and the overall process.(00:19:00) Chapter 6: Restoring Trust in Criminal Justice and DemocracyKarlan and Sklansky shift focus to broader implications for democracy, discussing how Trump's prosecutions might deepen distrust in institutions. They consider paths to reform, including bipartisan efforts to reinforce the rule of law and community policing. The episode concludes with reflections on lessons from past legal leaders and the enduring relevance of Robert Jackson's warnings about prosecutorial overreach.

In a Manhattan courtroom on Friday January 10th 2025, president-elect Donald Trump was sentenced in his New York hush money case after being convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records. The Judge in the case, Juan Merchan, elected to unconditionally discharge Trump, meaning he'll receive no further penalties. Once sworn in on January 20th, Trump will be first convicted felon to occupy the White House.

As the political landscape transforms and Donald Trump's criminal cases wind down, MSNBC legal analysts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord shift focus to keep watch on the incoming president and how his Department of Justice will use the law to move his agenda forward. With this realignment comes a new name: Main Justice. In this episode, Andrew and Mary explain what Main Justice is before breaking down the barrage of incoming news, from Trump's pending New York sentencing to his attempt to stop the public release of Special Counsel Jack Smith's final report. They also give a taste of the broader scope they plan to cover, with analysis of Trump's unusual filing in the Supreme Court, urging a pause in the TikTok ban until he takes office.Also, note to listeners: since the time of our recording, a New York Appellate judge has denied a stay of Trump's sentencing. You can read that decision HERE.This podcast will still cover any lingering issues around Trump's criminal and civil cases, and you'll continue to find new episodes in the “Prosecuting Donald Trump” feed. It will now just fall under the name “Main Justice”. So if you haven't already, follow the feed to receive weekly episodes.

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

In this December 26, 2024 episode, Hawk analyzes a recent court decision regarding Donald Trump's claims of presidential immunity in his Manhattan criminal case, where he was convicted on 34 felony counts for falsifying business records. The decision, written by Judge Juan Merchan on December 16, 2024, came in response to Trump's motion to dismiss the indictment and vacate the jury's verdict based on a Supreme Court immunity decision from July 1, 2024.Hawk details how Judge Merchan systematically dismantled Trump's immunity claims, explaining that the evidence in question related to unofficial rather than official acts, and therefore wasn't protected by presidential immunity. The judge also concluded that even if some evidence was improperly admitted, it would constitute harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt from other sources, including documentary evidence and testimony from multiple witnesses.Throughout the episode, Hawk praises the thoroughness and readability of Judge Merchan's decision while noting how the judge subtly criticizes the Supreme Court's immunity doctrine. He emphasizes that despite Trump's claims, the judge clearly states in the decision that Trump "stands convicted" of the 34 felony counts, and ultimately denied Trump's motion to dismiss the case.REFERENCE LINKS:12/16/24 Judge Merchan Decision and Order, the subject of the podcast:https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFs/press/PDFs/CPL330.30Dec.pdf7/1/24 Supreme Court Trump immunity decision:https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdfJudge Tanya Chutkan immunity ruling, Jack Smith SC case:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24180338-12_1-chutkan-rejects-mtd/Judge Engeron final decision in NY AG civil case against Trump:https://www.scribd.com/document/706231478/452564-2022-People-of-the-State-of-v-People-of-the-State-of-Decision-After-Trial-1688#1fullscreen=1 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/@mdg650hawk7thacct- Connect on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Podcasts Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.com- Listen to Hawk Droppings 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 Droppings RSS Feed: https://feeds.simplecast.com/pPVtxSNJ

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

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

Glenn Greenwald and Elizabeth Price Foley debate Trump v. United States and its implications for presidential powers.

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

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

SEASON 3 EPISODE 74: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) BULLETIN: Biden pardons his son. Terrific. Fully support. Now, do the rest of us. Literally offer a pardon to anybody Trump might go after for prosecuting him, criticizing him, covering him, or looking at him funny. I want a 1-800-PARDONME hotline. I want 10 million pardons. SPECIAL COMMENT (2:44): And the pardons should be a jumping off point for how Biden can protect the citizens of this country. What does THIS mean, exactly? “I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” Joseph Robinette Biden Junior has taken that exact oath NINE times – seven, as Senator, two as Vice President. He has sworn to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and nothing I have found, and no Constitutional scholar I have consulted, indicates that once taken, those oaths expire.  And the obligation to defend the United States becomes more profound still now that presidents have been immunized by the Supreme Court from prosecution for.. effectively anything. The incoming President, the one who wants an unqualified toady like Kash Patel to head the FBI and desperately wanted a lawless menace like Matt Gaetz to head the DOJ but will instead settle for a cheap lawyer who LED the “lock her up” chanting against Hillary Clinton at the Republican convention, that president-to-be will be immune and thus unstoppable. The CURRENT  president IS immune and thus unstoppable. And already in power and in command and… under oath. So. This raises this theoretical constitutional question: Do the TEN oaths Joe Biden took as Senator, as Vice President, and as President, even PERMIT him to NOT act against enemies, BOTH foreign and domestic – and defend the Constitution of the United States? So help him god? When the Supreme Court has immunized him from prosecution for doing… anything? Anything at all? As long as it's official? B-Block (24:52) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: You do realize that Trump's lies about his phone call with the president of Mexico means we will, soon or late, invade Mexico, right? The quote from the Trump Transition Team member to Rolling Stone is "How MUCH do we invade Mexico?" Trump has now nominated both his daughters' fathers-in-law as envoys to the Middle East - including the one who set up his brother-in-law with a taped sex sting and sent the tape to his own sister. And why did JD Vance post a meme of himself in a dress? C-Block (36:00) THE OTHER WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Vivek Ramaswamy self-owns over unelected bureaucracy. We've found George Carlin's Worst Doctor In The World and he owns The Los Angeles Times. And Sideshow Bob (RFK Junior) is seen, uh, hanging out, in his wife's new supplements commercial.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As the Special Counsel winds down the DC criminal case and the Florida appeal, veteran prosecutors Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann analyze the strategy behind getting a dismissal without prejudice before Donald Trump takes office, while dispelling the notion that Jack Smith “folded” in any way. Then, they head to New York to break down the nuance of Judge Merchan's decision to postpone Trump's sentencing, as he accepts briefing on a motion to dismiss the case that both parties agreed to. And before wrapping up, Mary and Andrew review some of the presumptive nominees Trump has named for top Justice Department posts, and the contrast of working on behalf of a client versus working on behalf of the Constitution.A note to listeners: Since we recorded, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also granted Special Counsel Jack Smith's request to dismiss that appeal without prejudice.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you'll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows. 

Even after the New York DA's position with respect to a dismissal of Donald Trump's New York case was filed, there are lingering questions about what happens next with his other criminal cases as he begins his transition back to power and unveils his cabinet nominees. MSNBC legal analysts Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann give an insider's perspective on what a final report in the DC case might look like from Special Counsel Jack Smith, as is a requirement within the special counsel rules. What will it encapsulate? And will it be made public? Next up: a few cases involving J6 rioters have been denied a stay, while others have had their trials postponed, but an overarching theme is that Trump's immunity should not extend to these defendants. And finally, Mary and Andrew ‘nerd out' on the Constitutional process of how a recess appointment works, why the early framers thought it necessary, and how the president-elect is angling to use it to avoid the Senate's long held role of advice and consent when it comes to political appointees.  Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you'll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows. This week, you can get a premium-only bonus episode of Chris Hayes' podcast “Why Is This Happening?”. In it, Chris sits down with Rachel Maddow to reflect on lessons learned from this election cycle and what to expect in the new administration, including the recess appointments Andrew and Mary spoke about in this episode. 

What's going to happen to Jack Smith's criminal cases against president-elect Donald Trump? In this excerpt of CAFE Insider, Elie Honig and Trevor Morrison explain why they agree with the Office of Legal Counsel's 1973 and 2000 memos on presidential immunity. Trevor Morrison is a law professor and Dean Emeritus at New York University School of Law. In the full episode, Elie and Trevor look at the political context behind the policy and how it will affect Trump's pending federal, state-level, and civil cases. This is the latest installment in a series of special episodes exclusively for members of CAFE Insider. Each week, Elie Honig and special guests will tackle one major legal or policy issue, helping you stay informed. For a limited time, get 40% off your membership for the first year, by heading to cafe.com/November. You'll get access to two full episodes of the podcast each week and other exclusive content. This podcast is brought to you by CAFE and Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

There's a lot to unpack around Donald Trump's ongoing criminal and civil cases after he won last week's election. To begin with, veteran prosecutors Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann explain why Judge Merchan agreed to the joint request to put off today's decision on the impact of immunity in his hush money case. Then, they dig into the constitutional arguments against prosecuting a president while in office, whether federally or as a state prosecution, and how that might also relate to sentencing in New York. Next up, Andrew and Mary illustrate how Trump's win might impact his civil cases, to include both E Jean Carroll cases and his New York civil fraud case. And wrapping up, the duo reflect on the efforts by those convicted in J6 cases to have them dismissed or stayed, as they await a potential pardon by the president-elect.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you'll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows.

After Donald Trump's decisive win this week, election litigation expert Ben Ginsberg joins MSNBC legal analysts Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann to drill down on why we are not seeing any post-election challenges, despite a bevy of concerns and allegations before voters went to the polls. Then, Andrew and Mary tick through what's next for each of the president-elect's criminal cases in DC, Florida, Georgia, and New York.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you'll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows.

As a level set for post-election litigation, MSNBC legal analysts Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann look at two cases in Pennsylvania and Virginia that have already made their way through the courts involving naked ballots and purging alleged noncitizens from voter rolls. Then, newly unsealed court documents in the DC case show long-held concerns from judges around former President Trump's efforts to delay. And Andrew and Mary close with the latest from Florida: the 11th Circuit appeal of the dismissal of the Florida documents case is moving along and Judge Cannon doesn't think her recusal is necessary in the case involving the second assassination attempt of the former president. 

With eight days to go until Election Day, veteran prosecutors Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann tackle several issues related to the vote and its aftermath: if Donald Trump doesn't win the election, could his DC criminal case be dismissed based on the Appointments Clause? Can a president use the military domestically against "the enemy within" despite the constraints of the Posse Comitatus Act? Will another ‘red mirage' followed by a ‘blue shift' cause the former president to cry foul and call for stopping the electoral count? And, will Elon Musk and his America PAC be held liable for paying residents in swing states to register?  Andrew and Mary address these questions and remind listeners to vote!Further Reading: Andrew and Ryan Goodman's recent piece on Just Security: An Overlooked January 6 Charge: The “Stop the Count” SchemeWant to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you'll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows.

Former President Donald Trump has talked about using the Department of Justice to go after those he sees as disloyal, raising concerns about democratic institutions and civil rights. And a Supreme Court decision recently affirmed that Trump and future presidents have sweeping immunity from prosecution for core acts they take as part of their office, including contacts with the Justice Department.This episode: national political correspondent Sarah McCammon, national justice correspondent Carrie Johnson, and senior national political correspondent Mara Liasson.The podcast is produced by Jeongyoon Han, Casey Morell and Kelli Wessinger. Our editor is Eric McDaniel. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi.Listen to every episode of the NPR Politics Podcast sponsor-free, unlock access to bonus episodes with more from the NPR Politics team, and support public media when you sign up for The NPR Politics Podcast+ at plus.npr.org/politics.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

There's been a flood of activity recently in Judge Tanya Chutkan's DC courtroom. In the last week, she released a 50-page ruling on several outstanding issues including the Brady doctrine, a pretrial discovery rule requiring the government to share all exculpatory evidence with Donald Trump's defense team. MSNBC legal analysts Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann shed some light on the judge's decisions and detail the release of the Special Counsel's heavily redacted appendix, which was unsealed last Friday. Also in the hopper: an explainer on Jack Smith's response to a renewed motion from Trump's legal team to dismiss the DC case based on the Supreme Court's Fischer decision on obstruction. And lastly, Andrew and Mary head to Florida where Ryan Ruth, the suspect in the second assassination attempt against the former president, asked Judge Aileen Cannon to recuse herself from the case.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you'll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows.

Last week, the DC election interference case inched forward, as Judge Tanya Chutkan approved the public release of Jack Smith's redacted source documents that helped frame his already public immunity briefing. But she also agreed to stay that release until October 17th, as Trump's legal team decides if they want to seek an appeal. MSNBC legal analysts Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann walk through how that scenario might play out, and why it could become a moot point after Thursday. Then, they take aim at critics who've been publicly decrying the release of the government's immunity briefing, by pointing out that the DOJ's “60-day rule” is not a law, and that the guidance is for new matters, not for cases that have already been charged. And before wrapping up, Andrew and Mary give their read on the disturbing politicization of FEMA's disaster response and answer a few listener questions. Further Reading: As Andrew mentioned, here is his piece, co-authored with Ryan Goodman, on Just Security: Refuting the Latest Baseless Attacks Against Special Counsel Jack Smith.Also, just two more days to vote! Prosecuting Donald Trump and Into America have been nominated for the Signal Listener's Choice Award! And MSNBC needs your help to win. Use the links below to vote for both shows:Prosecuting Donald Trump in the Shows - News & Politics category.Into America presents: Uncounted Millions in the Limited Series & Specials - Money & Finance category and Limited Series & Specials - News & Politics categories.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you'll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.