//  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.

Versus Trump: Is The State Department Discriminating Against Same-Sex Marriages?

2/28/19  //  Uncategorized

On this week's episode of Versus Trump, Charlie, Jason, and Easha discuss a decision from a federal court in Los Angeles ordering the Trump Administration to grant citizenship to both children of a same-sex couple born abroad to one U.S. parent. Listen now!

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Against Establishment Clause Concession

2/28/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

There are reasons to worry about whether certain liberal justices on the Supreme Court fully appreciate that we are at an inflection point in the history of the Religion Clause

Nelson Tebbe

Brooklyn Law School

Micah Schwartzman

University of Virginia School of Law

A Note Of Caution About Timbs v. Indiana

2/25/19  //  Quick Reactions

The concurring opinions in Timbs v. Indiana raise some concerns about how (some of) the Justices would address the Trump administration’s treatment of undocumented minor women.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law