//  10/26/17  //  Commentary

On this week’s episode of Versus TrumpEasha and Charlie have a quick turn-around emergency pod to discuss an ongoing—wait, just now resolved—case filed by a pregnant 17-year-old girl in federal immigration custody who seeks an abortion. Easha and Charlie first talk about the procedural wrangling that this case has wrought and second about the legal claims in the case, which bring them into the exciting worlds of reproductive rights, immigration law, and international relations.  

As usual, you can listen online below, and subscribe here with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

Please share or provide feedback, and rate us in iTunes. You can find us at @VersusTrumpPod on twitter, or send us an email at versustrumppodcast@gmail.com. 

 Links

  • The ACLU's statement confirming that Jane Doe aborted her pregnancy is here.
  • The D.C. Circuit's en banc opinion, issued on October 24, is here. This returned the case to the district court.
  • Other legal documents in the case can be found at the ACLU's website here (scroll down to "Legal Documents").
  • Leah Litman's Take Care post on this case can be found here.
  • Charlie and Easha talked about several Supreme Court cases. The recent Whole Women's Health case is herePlyler v. Doe is hereBoumediene v. Bush is here.
  • We also talked about some of the issues related to the rights of non-citizens or those outside the United States in earlier episodes, including those about the Muslim ban. Our archive is here.

Versus Trump: Legal Challenges, Plus The Post Office Case

11/8/20  //  Commentary

On this week's Versus Trump, Charlie and Jason discuss the (frivolous) legal challenges to come. They are then joined by Public Citizen's Matthew Seligman to learn what happened with all those last-minute ballots, and what might happen in ongoing litigation in the Supreme Court.

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

The Affordable Care Act Does Not Have An Inseverability Clause

11/5/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

Contrary to challengers’ claim, Congress nowhere directed the Supreme Court to strike down the entire ACA if the individual mandate is invalidated. Congress knows how to write an inseverability directive, and didn’t do it here. That, combined with Congress’s clear actions leaving the ACA intact and the settled, strong presumption in favor of severability, make this an easy case for a Court that is proud of its textualism.

Abbe R. Gluck

Yale Law School

Versus Trump: The Law Headed Into The Election

11/2/20  //  Commentary

Will this be the last Versus Trump before Trump loses reelection? Who knows, but, on this week’s episode, Jason and Charlie discuss key theories that will shape which votes count. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps