//  5/3/18  //  Commentary

On a new episode of Versus Trump, Easha, Charlie, and Jason continue their investigation of the relationship between federal and state law by debating the Trump Administration's reversal of Obama-era guidance about marijuana enforcement. As usual, you can listen online below, and subscribe via this page with any podcast player or here in iTunes. 

The three start the conversation with a recap of the law with respect to recreational marijuana. While possession, sale, and distribution of the drug is illegal under federal law, several states now have in place comprehensive regimes permitting the sale and regulation of marijuana for recreational use. The Obama Administration issued several memos that indicated to states that it would not enforce federal law against individuals and businesses that complied with state law. But, in January, the Trump Administration revoked that guidance. That leads to a discussion of whether state laws permitting recreational use of marijuana are preempted by federal law, and whether the states should be permitted to continue operating these schemes. The debate concludes with all three acknowleding that this is a difficult legal question—and Jason even admits that his mind has been somewhat changed by points that Charlie and Easha made.

You can find us at @VersusTrumpPod on twitter, or send us an email at versustrumppodcast@gmail.com. And you can buy t-shirts and other goods with our super-cool logo here.

Notes

  • The Sessions memo from January 2018 that rescinded the Obama-era guidance on marijuana enforcement is here.
  • At the Marijuana Law, Policy, and Authority blog, Robert Mikos discusses the takeaways from Sessions' 2018 memo here.
  • Here is a very helpful Congressional Research Service Report that outlines the arguments on either side of this question.

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

Versus Trump: Versus The Post Office

10/15/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

On this week’s Versus Trump, Jason and Charlie are joined by Matthew Seligman of Public Citizen to discuss several lawsuits—including one in which he is counsel, NAACP v. USPS—where plaintiffs have challenged the cuts by the postal service that may slow down election mail. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps