Skip to content
TrackPodcasts
newsFeb 15, 20241:48:32pending

What the Oral Argument Should Have Said - Part 2

About this episode

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.

Get every episode summarized

Each time Amarica's Constitution publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.

Email me new episodes

Free for 3 shows. No card needed.

Hosts & guests

No transcript yet

This episode has not been transcribed. Request it and it moves to the front of the queue.

What the Oral Argument Should Have Said - Part 2

Amarica's Constitution

0:00
1:48:32

More episodes

More from Amarica's Constitution

View all episodes →