//  4/27/17  //  Commentary

This Week's Episode: "Get 'Em Out!" + Richard Primus

This week on Versus Trump, the Take Care podcast, we start off with discussion of a lawsuit against Donald Trump (and others) for allegedly inciting violence at a campaign rally in Kentucky [1:30-28:00]. We debate whether the First Amendment protects what Trump said, and we talk about what might happen with the case going forward. (Amanda Shanor discussed the case on Take Care here.)

Next, Easha talks about the concept of unconstitutional animus with Professor Richard Primus of the University of Michigan Law School [28:12-56:25]. Easha and Richard discuss what animus is, the source of the constitutional prohibition against it, and what that prohibition means for the litigation against President Trump’s Muslim travel ban. (You can find his writing on the subject here.)  

We close with a quick segment that we’re tentatively calling “Trump Nuggets” [56:30-end]. Suggestions for a better name are welcome.

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.

Here are links to some of the other things we talked about this week:

  • The Complaint in the Kentucky protester case against President Trump is here, and the court's recent ruling denying a motion to dismiss is here.
  • Brandenberg v. Ohio, which establishes the test for un-protected incitement, is here.
  • Youngdahl v. Rainfair, a labor-picketing case referencing the prior history of violence in similar circumstances, is available here.
  • A dissent by Justice Thomas in Virginia v. Black, a case about cross burning, is available here.
  • The New York Times covered what it's like to attend a Trump rally, and quoted from the pre-rally safety video.
  • Here’s a Mashable compilation of violent rhetoric Trump has used at his rallies.
  • The Southern Poverty Law Center called Matthew Heimbach “the new face of white nationalism.”
  • roundup of all the measures state legislators are taking to criminalize protest, including a measure in Arizona to expand racketeering laws to cover organizers of protest events.
  • Neil Kinkopf’s Take Care article explaining why Trump’s lawyers can be sanctioned for claiming that Trump is immune from suit is available here.
  • Easha’s Trump Nugget was about Judge Davis’ concurrence in the GG litigation, and it's available here.
  • Politico's report that Trump is interviewing judges in their late 30s is available here.

Key Context for Trump's Rhetoric About Immigrants

5/17/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

President Trump's rhetoric draw upon a familiar narrative that pathologizes immigration and immigrant reproduction as a threat while protecting and supporting the nation’s “good” mothers, families, and neighborhood

Yvonne Lindgren

UCSF Law School

Versus Trump: Trump Loses On Family Planning, Wins In The Ninth, and More

5/16/19  //  Uncategorized

This week on Versus Trump, Jason and Easha go through a few updates to cases involving Title X, which provides money for family planning; the Administration's policy to have many asylum applicants removed to Mexico; and the controversial border wall. Trump lost one, won one—for now, and hasn't yet gotten a decision in the third. Listen now!

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Versus Trump: Trump Versus Trump's Banks

5/9/19  //  Uncategorized

This week on Versus Trump, Jason, Charlie, and Easha discuss a new lawsuit by the President seeking to prevent two banks from responding to Congressional subpoenas that seek information about the his business dealings. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Easha Anand

San Francisco