Professor Akhil Reed Amar, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science at Yale University and one of the nation's leading authorities on the Constitution, offers weekly in-depth discussions on the most urgent and fascinating constitutional issues of our day. He is joined by co-host Andy Lipka and guests drawn from other top experts including Bob Woodward, Nina Totenberg, Neal Katyal, Lawrence Lessig, Michael Gerhardt, and many more.
Don't just listen to podcasts. Learn from them with transcripts, summaries, and chapters for every episode. Skim, search, and bookmark insights. Learn more
It is an honor to introduce the initial episode of our new sister podcast: The Blessings of Liberty, hosted by Jeffrey Rosen, president emeritus of the National Constitution Center and Professor of Law at GW. Prof. Rosen begins with a bang, as he holds a discussion with US Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, including two books newly authored or contributed to by Justice Gorsuch. We precede this with our own interview of Jeff Rosen, discussing the mission of his new podcast and his special passi...
This episode features Professor Akhil Amar providing unrehearsed answers to a range of listener questions on American constitutional law. Discussions include a correction regarding Article I, Section 9 and 10, the constitutional implications of a presidential "weaponization fund," the legality of holding simultaneous legislative offices, and the challenges of assessing unlawful military orders. Amar also delves into the historical context of citizenship for Confederate-born individuals and clarifies aspects of Converse 1983 legislation, offering a deep dive into complex legal principles.
Hosts Akil Amar and Andy Lipka discuss the implications of a government-backed "Rededicate 250" event on the National Mall, exploring the fine line between church-state separation and religious equality, and questioning whether historical invocations of faith differ from modern sectarian expressions. They also cover recent legal victories related to "Converse 1983" and interstate abortion rights, reflecting on past podcast predictions regarding federalism and individual liberties. The discussion highlights the complexities of religion's role in government, politics, and public discourse, including legal exemptions for religious organizations.
Our journey through the centuries of religious practice, attitudes, and constitutionalism has reached the 20th century, when several presidential elections set mileposts for the American religious debate. The first major party Catholic candidate, Al Smith, met the worst sort of vitriol and prejudice, and was destroyed by it. This cast a shadow over the later campaign of John F. Kennedy, and he answered it in a speech that we analyze and place in context, even as we thrill to the great man’s voic...
As the 10 commandments case makes its way towards the Supreme Court, we add another chapter to our study of the historical events and factors that went into the American constitutional tradition when it comes to religious freedom, religious establishment, and the relationship of government and religion as a whole. We begin this episode where The Words That Made Us began - in 1760. We take it forward through the revolutionary period, into the Articles and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, ...
We continue to trace the historical origins of the constitution’s approach to religion in American government and American life. We take you on a tour around Europe at the time of the Reformation and for centuries beyond, all the way to American migration. All this is remarkably relevant to recent events, as the Alamo Heights /Ten Commandments case comes to a head. Meanwhile, Sarah Isgur returns for a third helping - or is it grilling? - as we continue to discuss her recent book and it finds its...
The President has picked a fight with the Bishop of Rome, Pope Leo X. Putting aside some of the distasteful elements of language and hubris, we ask where this fits in with notions of church and state in a democracy. What is the constitutional doctrine - is it “separation?” Where does it come from, historically and legally? A general theory of such things can help us make sense - well, maybe not of everything that is said these days, but perhaps of the numerous cases that are percolating to and a...
This week it’s Attorney Cecilia Wang’s turn, as she appears before the Supreme Court to defend birthright citizenship in the Trump v. Barbara case, and we continue to analyze clips of the oral argument. Meanwhile, we are joined by the host of the popular Advisory Opinions podcast: Sarah Isgur, who has written a new book that will be published, well, today. Last Branch Standing takes us inside the Supreme Court from the life of a clerk to a tour of the Court’s history to a statistical analysis of...
Trump v. Barbara - the birthright citizenship case - reaches the Supreme Court, and we are there. Akhil and Andy are at the oral argument, and immediately afterwards we stand outside the courthouse and you hear (and see, from the linked video) the emotions that affected not only your hosts, but no doubt the justices themselves as the case unfolded. Then it’s off to the audiotape, as we play the clips of the Justices and the advocates, and Akhil does his Howard Cosell imitation, analyzing the arg...
On the eve of the oral argument in Trump v. Barbara , we offer you a listener’s guide to the spectacle. What is the essence of the argument? What are the hard questions for Solicitor General Sauer, representing Trump? What should Attorney Wang, ACLU attorney for petitioners, be prepared to answer? What should the audience be listening for - clues to how the argument is going? We provide all this and more, so you can put yourself in the seat of a Supreme Court law clerk, listening to the argument...
Akhil and Andy visit a high school in Garden City, NY, to speak with outstanding high school students about Born Equal . In the process, we trace one of America’s great credos - “All Men Are Created Equal” - from the Founding, all the way to Lincoln - and beyond, to the fourteenth amendment; and finally to birthright citizenship and next week’s momentous Supreme Court case, Trump v. Barbara . The students’ great questions help show the way. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from pod...
We’ve been mentioning the birthright citizenship case, Trump v. Barbara , and Professor Amar’s amicus brief in the case. Now we begin to analyze it in depth. We begin with the structure of the brief; why is it so different from most such briefs? Why is it uniquely wide-ranging? How can it cover many aspects of the case with a strict word limit - what is it about the way it is done that allows this when other briefs - well-executed briefs - cannot cover as much ground? And then, what is the outli...
Amarica’s Constitution has joined with two other great podcasts! We’re still ourselves, but today we bring all three podcasts together to look at a recent case, Mirabelli v. Bonta , which brings substantive due process back to center stage. And because we are who we are, we take a look ourselves at some more aspects of - what else? - the birthright citizenship case. Learn what the future holds for our listeners, as we bring you what we always have, and more. Attorneys and judges can gain CLE cre...
In this shorter-than-usual episode, you are now a Supreme Court clerk getting ready for the Trump v. Barbara case. What do you do? What do you read? We guide you. And as we think about what will happen when the argument begins, we give you a taste in this unusual episode.
The Court has ruled Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariffs unconstitutional. Vik Amar, who offered important theories that appeared prominently in the opinion, joins us to explain the Major Questions Doctrine, why it applies to this case, and even more importantly, why it attempts to support significant structural features of the Constitution. We pay particular attention to the concurring opinion by Justice Gorsuch, which offers the most in-depth theoretical explanation for this Doctrine and attem...
Jeff Bezos emasculated the Washington Post; now he has virtually killed it. Why? And what does this mean for the nation? What is the importance of major newspapers to the American constitutional system? We bring you the great Ruth Marcus, former deputy editorial page editor, long-time columnist, with over 40 years at the Post, to offer an in-depth, insider perspective on this shocking set of events. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
It’s becoming apparent that the theory that Professor Amar put forth 40 years ago in a now-famous law review article, Of Sovereignty And Federalism, is being taken seriously by more and more legislatures, newspapers, and the general public. Therefore, we bring the two leading experts on this – Professor Akhil Amar, and his brother Professor Vik Amar - together to go over the background, theory, and intricacies of this important development. It’s a master class that takes you back to an earlier m...
In a wide-ranging episode, we finish looking back - and in doing so, we look into the near future as well. The birthright citizenship case will be heard in oral argument on April 1, and we go back to our reaction to the executive order. Unitary executive matters are awaiting court rulings; we look back at our back and forth with Steven Calabresi. Meanwhile, audience questions on court term limits and the virtues of virtue are addressed, and there are more tidbits to enjoy.
The look back over our five years of drama, humor, reason, and illogic continues, as perhaps the most notorious opinion of the five year period - the Trump immunity case - reappears in a clip, along with a revisit with Justice Breyer. Meanwhile, the oral argument in Wolford v. Lopez did, in fact, prompt the Professors Amar to write in SCOTUSblog.com, and we go even further here, with clips from that oral argument and answers to the justices that didn’t find their way into the record, but now, ho...
It’s five years of Akhil and Andy on Amarica’s Constitution, and our friends are lining up to talk about it. In typical fashion, it’s not just testimonials but reflections. And we do a clip episode, but this time it’s not the justices, or the oral advocates, or the pundits, on the hot seat: it’s us. We look back at two episodes per year, playing our sometimes correct, sometimes wildly wrong predictions, and our sometimes prescient, sometimes widely ignored so-called insights. It’s been quite a r...
A powerful and aggressive central government sends unwanted forces in huge numbers to a city where the residents oppose and resent this policy. The undertrained forces unleash violence against the population in the form of an obviously wrongful death. Minneapolis, yes - but also a seeming repeat of an important American historic event, that shaped a nation’s core beliefs, later reflected in the Declaration and the Constitution. We tell those stories, and look at the values and basic laws that em...
The military capture of the Venezuelan leader, Maduro, is an event with giant international strategic, moral, economic, political, and other considerations. It also raises fascinating constitutional questions, and Professor Amar is ready to discuss some matters that probably did not come to your mind right away. Much of this stems from the fact that Maduro will be tried in a U.S. civilian, not a military court, so constitutional protections are implicated. Whatever your thoughts about the policy...
Our listeners have a talent for inquiry; they follow Professor Amar’s arguments every week, and come up with their own. This week, we end the year by fielding a wide range of questions, including some related to presidential oath-taking; juries, asked by a Judge; pardons and their abuse; and many related topics. Akhil invokes Angela Bassett and Tina Turner, as we answer the questions first softly, and then not so softly. And we end the year with fond wishes sincerely offered. CLE credit is avail...
Presidential power is abridged, for a change, by the Supreme Court in its shadow docket ruling in Trump v. Illinois. Rather than ruling in silence, however, this time the Court gives us 25 pages and 4 opinions to chew on. We examine the history behind issues of deployment of the Army as well as the Guard/Militia on domestic soil, which leads us to discussions of Militia Acts, the Military Amendments, and basic constitutional principles. Professor Amar discusses the implications for the coming bi...
One of the most promising new faces in the US Congress, Representative Maggie Goodlander, joins us for a wide-ranging discussion, including the recent video assuring our troops that they may not obey illegal orders, and the aftermath of that simple offer of support. You may not know that this first-term congresswoman has served in our military for 11 years; has clerked for a Supreme Court Justice; has served in the White House; has been senior advisor to both Republican and Democratic Senators; ...
Oral arguments took place in the highly-anticipated unitary executive case, Trump v. Slaughter. The overruling of the case that seems to govern, Humphrey’s Executor, has been long expected, and indeed, the Chief Justice referred to the “dry husk” that was all that remained of that case after recent years of whittling by the current and recent Court. However, faced with the extremity of possible consequences, the Court veered this way and that, indicating that while the direction seems clear, the...
Secretary of Defense Hegseth is making use of his sights. He is focusing at times on Senator Mark Kelly, seeking to wreak havoc upon him for his utterances which have angered Hegseth’s master. Meanwhile, purported drug smugglers have found Davy Jones’ locker at the order of Hegseth, it has been reported, including those left helpless after initial lethal strikes. Yale Professor and Bancroft Prize winner John Fabian Witt joins us to help us make sense of the international law and laws of war issu...
Events in the news once again intersect with Professor Amar’s past work, as a little-known aspect of a clause in the Constitution has surprising relevance to the President’s fire-breathing response to a video from Senators and Representatives reminding our military and other officers of their lawful obligations. We trace other constitutionally newsworthy developments, on the filibuster and on the unitary executive. And the Born Equal tour continues, with some interesting reflections on the genes...
We return to the tariff case and continue to hear from the justices and the advocates in their own voices from the oral argument. This time, a 20 year old argument from Vik Amar takes center stage with apparent approval from several key justices, and several of the Court’s female justices join forces to make life difficult for the Solicitor General. We also review some of the emerging implications from the recent election, and a bill coming out of Illinois that takes its inspiration from a 40 ye...
The economy, trillions of dollars, and consequences unknown are on the line in the tarrifs case, Learning Resources v. Trump . We present the justices and the advocates in their own voices from the oral argument, and Akhil reacts in real time as he hears the clips for the first time. It’s a three hour argument, so this is the first of a two-parter. The Court’s recent doctrines, including major questions and non-delegation are in play, perhaps, and therefore many are watching this case closely fo...
