What the Oral Argument Should Have Said - Part 2 - podcast episode cover

What the Oral Argument Should Have Said - Part 2

Feb 15, 20241 hr 49 minSeason 4Ep. 165
--:--
--:--
Listen in podcast apps:
Metacast
Spotify
Youtube
RSS

Episode description

As promised, we return in very short order with the completion of our analysis and response to the oral argument in Trump v. Anderson - before the Court has ruled. Again, key clips from the argument are played and dissected. The previous Part I episode concentrated on arguments concerning self-execution of Section Three; this episode reviews many of the other issues addressed by the Court, from questions of the nature of the Presidential Election and the closely related Electoral College, to the persistent irritant of "officer" and "office" questions.  As in the prior episode, Professor Amar “slows everything down” to allow you and hopefully the Court avoid sweet-sounding but flawed paths.  This episode is posted 8 days early for this reason. Continuing legal education credit is available; visit podcast.njsba.com after listening.

For the best experience, listen in Metacast app for iOS or Android
Open in Metacast
What the Oral Argument Should Have Said - Part 2 | Amarica's Constitution podcast - Listen or read transcript on Metacast