//  3/7/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

On this week's episode of Versus Trump, Charlie and Jason discuss a new lawsuit from California challenging new regulations regarding Title X, an important federal family planning program. As usual, you can listen online below, and subscribe via this page with any podcast player or here in iTunes. 

Jason and Charlie first discuss the history and background of Title X, which goes back to the Nixon Administration. They then discuss the new changes the Trump Administration has just adopted, which include strict separation requirements between funding recipients and organizations that provide abortions, and new rules that come very close to prohibiting providers from even mentioning the existence of abortion providers. Jason and Charlie speculate about California's prospect for success before turning to some Trump nuggets, including a return of Uncle Charlie's Sanctions Corner—or is it???

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 Complaint in California v. Azar is here.
  • At National Review, Ramesh Ponnuru defends the (proposed) rules here.

Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue – Requiem for the Establishment Clause?

7/1/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

Those who still believe that the Constitution precludes state involvement in promoting religious thought and experience now have some work cut out for them

Ira C. Lupu

George Washington University Law School

Robert W. Tuttle

George Washington University Law School

Religious Discrimination And Racial Discrimination

6/30/20  //  Quick Reactions

The Court’s decision in Espinoza is similar to the trajectory of the law of racial discrimination in some respects, it also offers a striking contrast in others

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

June Medical As The New Casey

6/29/20  //  Quick Reactions

As in prior abortion cases, the Chief Justice gave abortion supporters a victory while at the same time laying the groundwork for much weaker protections for abortion rights.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School