Easha Anand, Charlie Gerstein  //  7/13/17  //  Commentary


On this week’s episode of Versus Trump, Charlie and Easha discuss the cases against Trump University, the global settlement that was reached, and whether the pending challenge by a lone objector can—or should—alter the result. As usual, you can listen online below, and subscribe here with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

Charlie and Easha dive right into the background of the cases, which were brought by both a class of individuals and the State of New York, claiming that Trump University was a fraudulent "educational" institution. They then [at 7:30] discuss the global settlement that was reached after Trump was elected, and they wonder what drove the settlement, whether it was a fair result, and whether the settlement was in the public interest. Easha and Charlie next discuss the pending appeal by Sherri Simpson, a lone objector seeking to opt-out of the settlement, and they are quite critical of Judge Curiel's reasoning in the opinion rejecting her claim. Finally, [24:30-end] Easha and Charlie wonder about some unusual aspects of this case and speculate about why everyone involved seems to think it best not to take this case to trial while Trump is president. 

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

  • Judge Curiel's ruling approving the settlement and rejecting Sherri Simpson's objection is here.
  • Charlie and Easha mentioned Politico's excellent coverage of the Trump University case, in particular the work of Josh Gerstein. Politico's Trump University coverage can all be found here.
  • They also mentioned a recent amicus brief of Civil Procedure professors. That can be found here. An additional amicus brief in support of the objector's appeal can be found here.
  • You can (sort of) see what Trump University was all about by accessing a limited, archived version of the "school's" webpage at the Internet Archive here. (Note: not all images are archived, and not all links work.)
  • Charlie also mentioned Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, which is here.

The Government And Grandparents (What's The Big Deal?)

7/15/17  //  Quick Reactions

DOJ rushed to the Supreme Court to ensure that the government wouldn't have to admit grandparents. Its arguments are silly.

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law

Trump Jr. and Citizens United

7/13/17  //  Commentary

In a perfect world, federal election law would distinguish between foreign governments involving themselves in U.S. elections and foreign nationals doing so. Unfortunately, we don't live in that perfect world because of the Supreme Court.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

A Reality Check On Proceedings Related To The Entry Ban Injunctions

7/13/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Some commentators are seizing on court orders in the proceedings related to the scope of the injunction against the entry ban as an indication that courts are rethinking their decisions against the entry ban. That's wrong (with a cautionary note about the federal courts).

Leah Litman

U.C. Irvine School of Law