//  3/8/18  //  Commentary

UPDATE: We've now published this episode, and you can listen on iTunes or in the player below. Sorry for the delay!

On a new episode of Versus Trump, Easha, Jason, and Charlie discuss a recent district court opinion that rejected California's challenge to the Trump Administration's expedited border wall projects in California. As usual, you can listen online below, and subscribe via this page with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

They start the episode by discussing the boringly-named but legally-interesting opinion in In Re: Border Infrastructure Environmental Litigation. As they explain, the plaintiffs in this case are California and several environmental groups, and all have challenged the Trump Administration's waiver of state and federal environmental laws in order to allow the federal government to build new border fencing in Southern California. After recapping the case, they mention the politics in the background, including the unique fact that the judge who ruled in favor of the Trump Administration—Judge Gonzalo Curiel—was previously demeaned by Trump during the campaign. The trio then grapple with the argument that Secretary of Homeland Security acted without any legal authority at all and move on to several consitutional challenges that the plaintiffs lost on. Easha also brings up an argument not made in the case: that the Secretary's actions were motivated by anti-Mexican animus. The episode ends with a few Trump nuggets.

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

Links

  • The opinion in the case is here. (All 101 pages of it.)
  • Jason's Trump nugget is about a trial that just started in Kansas over the state's new requirement that people show proof of citizenship to register to vote. High Plains Public Radio has excellent updates from the courtroom here
  • Easha mentioned the new lawsuit by DOJ against California over the state's alleged defiance of federal immigration laws. More info on that is here. We'll cover the case soon in detail.

Ask Mueller about Indicting a President: The Legal Error at the Heart of his Cryptic Report

7/23/19  //  Commentary

Let's not have unrealistic expectations of Mueller dropping bombshells. But if Congress is going to hold hearings, it should ask these questions.

Jed Shugerman

Fordham Law School

Versus Trump: The Past And Future Of Gerrymandering

7/18/19  //  Commentary

This week on Versus Trump, Jason and Easha are joined by guest host Melissa Murray of NYU Law and the new Strict Scrutiny podcast. They discuss the recent Supreme Court decision on gerrymandering (Rucho v. Common Cause), what's next in the fight, and where you can find Melissa's wonderful new podcast. Listen now!

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Easha Anand

San Francisco

The Costs Of The Census Debacle

7/15/19  //  Quick Reactions

Even though the administration ultimately caved and chose not to include a citizenship question on the census, its two-week flirtation with including a citizenship question on the 2020 census had significant costs.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School