Podcasts about vikram amar

The U.S. Supreme Court wrapped up its term today with a controversial decision on presidential immunity — a ruling widely seen as a big victory for former President Donald Trump as he faces charges of trying to subvert the results of the 2020 election. In addition to that case, Scott analyzes the high court's recent decisions on homeless encampments, abortion and the environment with Vikram Amar, professor at UC Davis Law School, and Jessica Levinson, professor at Loyola Law School and host of the podcast "Passing Judgment." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Tuesday, December 4, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Moore v. United States. The case concerns a challenge to the “mandatory repatriation tax,” and asks whether the Constitution allows Congress to tax American shareholders for the unrealized earnings of a foreign corporation. In this episode, Akhil Amar of Yale Law School and Anastasia Boden of the Cato Institute join Jeffrey Rosen to break down the arguments on both sides of the case. The conversation touches on the history of taxation in the Founding era, the extent of Congressional power, and the very meaning of the word “taxation.”   Resources: Anastasia Boden, Amicus Brief for Petitioners, Moore v. United States Akhil Amar and Vikram Amar, Amicus Brief for Respondents, Moore v. United States   Moore v. United States (oral argument via C-SPAN)   Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.  Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.  Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.  You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library. 

Governor Gavin Newsom rolled out a bold new plan to combat gun violence. A new constitutional amendment that would put limits on who can buy a gun and what kind. And while many are saying the plan isn't very feasible, some wonder if it may be a catalyst for other local leaders. For more on this, KCBS Radio's Bret Burkhart and Patti Reising spoke with Vikram Amar, Constitutional law professor at UC Davis and the University of Illinois. 

On December 7, 2022, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Moore v. Harper, a case out of North Carolina about the power of state courts to review election regulations set by state legislatures. At the heart of the case is the “independent state legislature” theory, an interpretation of the Constitution that would give state legislatures essentially the sole power to regulate federal elections and would restrict the involvement from state courts in reviewing those decisions.  Joining us to recap the oral arguments in Moore v. Harper is Vikram Amar, dean of Illinois College of Law; and Jason Torchinsky, partner at Holtzman Vogel. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Check out What is the “Independent State Legislature Doctrine”? – Part 1 and Part 2 from March 2022 and July 2022, respectively. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

Legal scholar Vikram Amar joins me to discuss the controversial case of Moore v. Harper that the Supreme Court will hear this term.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to block new congressional maps in North Carolina and Pennsylvania from going into effect. Both states' maps had been redrawn by state courts, overriding maps that had been enacted by the states' Republican legislatures. This means that the 2022 congressional elections in both states will proceed using the court-drawn maps. Despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene, four of the justices indicated they're ready to address the doctrine at the heart of the cases: the independent state legislature theory. To unpack all that's at stake—and explain what that theory is and what effect, if implemented, it could have on the power of state courts to review actions by state legislatures in regulating elections—Jeffrey Rosen moderates a conversation with two constitutional law experts: Vikram Amar, dean and Iwan Foundation Professor of Law at Illinois College of Law and co-author of Constitutional Law: Cases and Materials; and Evan Bernick, assistant professor at the Northern Illinois University College of Law and co-author of The Original Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment: Its Letter and Spirit.   The National Constitution Center relies on support from listeners like you to provide nonpartisan constitutional education to Americans of all ages. Visit www.constitutioncenter.org/we-the-people to donate, and thank you for your crucial support. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to block new congressional maps in North Carolina and Pennsylvania from going into effect. Both states' maps had been redrawn by state courts, overriding maps that had been enacted by the states' Republican legislatures. This means that the 2022 congressional elections in both states will proceed using the court-drawn maps. Despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene, four of the justices indicated they're ready to address the doctrine at the heart of the cases: the independent state legislature theory. To unpack all that's at stake—and explain what that theory is and what effect, if implemented, it could have on the power of state courts to review actions by state legislatures in regulating elections—Jeffrey Rosen moderates a conversation with two constitutional law experts: Vikram Amar, dean and Iwan Foundation Professor of Law at Illinois College of Law and co-author of Constitutional Law: Cases and Materials; and Evan Bernick, assistant professor at the Northern Illinois University College of Law and co-author of The Original Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment: Its Letter and Spirit.   The National Constitution Center relies on support from listeners like you to provide nonpartisan constitutional education to Americans of all ages. Visit www.constitutioncenter.org/we-the-people to donate, and thank you for your crucial support. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

Vikram Amar became the dean of UIUC Law School in 2015, after having been a professor of law for many years at law schools in the University of California System. Dean Amar is also one of the most eminent and frequently cited authorities in constitutional law, federal courts, and civil procedure, having produced several books and over 60 articles in leading law reviews. TY for being here. Erwin Chemerinsky has been the Dean of Berkeley Law since July 1, 2017. Prior to that, he taught at Duke University, USC Law School, and UCLA, where Victor will be starting next quarter. Dean Chemerinsky is also the author of eleven books, including leading casebooks and treatises about constitutional law, criminal procedure, and federal jurisdiction.Intergenerational Politics is a podcast created by Jill Wine-Banks and Victor Shi dedicated to engaging all generations in politics with weekly unfiltered conversations with experts across the nation. Be sure to subscribe to and rate us on Apple Podcasts. You can also find us on Spotify or any other podcast streaming services.Intergenerational Politics on social media:Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/intergenerational-politics/id1522241906Twitter: https://twitter.com/IntrgenpoliticsInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/intergenpoliticspodcast/

Is the Constitution “democratic” enough? What does it mean to be a democracy as opposed to a republic—is there a significant difference, and why does it matter? Should institutions like the Senate and the Electoral College, which are sometimes criticized for being undemocratic, be reformed or abolished? Constitutional scholars and professors Randy Barnett of Georgetown Law and Vikram Amar of the University of Illinois College of Law sat down for a rich debate of these questions here at the National Constitution Center, moderated by NCC President Jeffrey Rosen. Questions or comments about the podcast? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.

Longtime listener, first time Oral Arguer Derek Muller joins us to talk about the bar exam, through issues particular (the great ExamSoft meltdown of 2014), large (the purpose and utility of the exam overall), and sartorial (Virginia). Joe makes a shocking confession. This show’s links: Derek Muller’s faculty profile and writing The Virginia Board of Bar Examiners’ Mandatory Dress Code Derek Muller, Visualizing the Grim Final Numbers from the July 2014 Bar Exam National Conference of Bar Examiners, National Data for 2014 MBE and MPRE Administrations Reuters, U.S. States Extend Bar Exam Deadlines After Software Havoc Jerry Organ, What Might Have Contributed to an Historic Year-Over-Year Decline In the MBE Mean Scaled Score? Gary Rosin, Unpacking the Bar: Of Cut Scores, Competence, and Crucibles Oral Argument 12: Heart of Darkness Deborah Merritt, ExamSoft Update (including links to Merritt’s other posts on the topic) Karen Sloan, Software Maker Settles ‘Barmageddon’ Class Action for $2.1M Vikram Amar, Lower Bar Pass Rates in Some States Should Cause Us to Examine This Year’s Test, and the Bar Exam in General and Additional Thoughts (and Concerns) About the Low Bar Pass Rates in California and Elsewhere in 2014 Derek Muller, Here We Go Again: February 2015 Bar Pass Rates Down over Last Year About the Daniel Webster Scholar Program and its curriculum Stephanie Clifford and James McKinley Jr., New York to Adopt a Uniform Bar Exam Used in 15 Other States Erwin Chemerinsky, It’s Time for California to Accept the Uniform Bar Exam About the Uniform Bar Examination Special Guest: Derek Muller.

We talk about the Supreme Court with writer and reporter, Dahlia Lithwick. How should one report on the Court, at a time when analysis of opinions is expected within hours or even minutes? What is the role of the Court press: middle men, translators, or something else? And come to think of it, what’s the role of the Supreme Court? Oracles, politicians, teachers? Should judges give speeches like politicians do? Politics, policy, religion, guns. And, of course, speed traps. This show’s links: Dahlia Lithwick’s latest articles on Slate Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (pdf) and wikipedia summary Slate Plus Derek Muller, The Five Law-Related Podcasts You Should Listen To Jack Shafer, Serving up the Supreme Court Dough Before It’s Baked Tom Goldstein, We’re Getting Wildly Different Assessments (a deep look into what went wrong with the reporting on the Obamacare decision) RonNell Andersen Jones, U.S. Supreme Court Justices and Press Access Jesse Wegman, (Supreme) Court TV and the Magically Disappearing Protest Kenneth Vogel, Defiant Clarence Thomas Fires Back Vikram Amar, Why Did Justice Scalia Decline to Participate in the "One Nation Under God" Case? Jack Balkin, ”High” Politics and Judicial Decisionmaking Justice Scalia’s memo on a recusal motion in Cheney v. United States District Court for the District of Columbia Oral Argument Episode 6: Productive Thoughtlessness, in which we previously discussed Dahlia Lithwick Pew Research Center, Political Polarization in the American Public Eduardo Peñalver, Property as Entrance Town of Greece v. Galloway Dahlia Lithwick, You Don’t See What I See Oral Argument Episode 8: Party All Over the World, for some of our discussion on speed traps Waze app Artist Aaron Fein Statler and Waldorf: Special Guest: Dahlia Lithwick.

Vikram Amar, associate dean for academic affairs and professor of law at UC Davis, speaks on the constitutional challenges to the health care law as part of the Institute of Governmental Affairs Policy Watch Seminar series.