//  1/25/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

On this week's episode of Versus Trump, Jason asks Charlie to take us through the mammothly long, massively important opinion from the Southern District of New York invalidating the proposed citizenship question on the 2020 Census.  As usual, you can listen online below, and subscribe via this page with any podcast player or here in iTunes. 

Jason starts by asking Charlie to lay out the background of the case and then take us through the highlights of the 277-page opinion in New York v. Dep't of Commerce. He talks about the factual findings about how damaging the question would be for response rates, and then gets into several reasons the court found the addition of the question was either contrary to law or arbitrary. They then discuss why the court did not accept the plaintiffs' constitutional claims—but why that may be a good thing. They end, as usual, with listener feedback. (Note: we apologize for the poor audio quality on this episode; everyone is on the road this week!)

You can find us at @VersusTrumpPod on twitter, or send us an email at versustrumppodcast@gmail.com. You can buy t-shirts and other goods with our super-cool logo here

Notes

  • The opinion is here.

Versus Trump: A Ninth Circuit Compromise

6/20/19  //  Commentary

This week on Versus Trump, Jason and Charlie discuss the Ninth's Circuit's recent somewhat cryptic, compromise decision regarding the ban on service by transgender individuals in the military. Listen now!

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Legitimacy and the Supreme Court

6/19/19  //  Commentary

It is illegitimate to consider legitimacy. So say many conservatives who seem terrified that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. might care about public perception of the U.S. Supreme Court. But they are wrong.

Stephen Vladeck

University of Texas

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Joshua Matz

Publisher

A Landmark (But Qualified) Victory for Transgender Rights

6/14/19  //  Quick Reactions

The Ninth Circuit's decision regarding the 'trans ban' has broad implications and marks a vital development in protecting transgender rights under the U.S. Constitution.

Joshua Matz

Publisher