//  8/31/17  //  Commentary

On this week’s episode of Versus Trump, we talk about web-hosting company Dreamhost's refusal to cooperate fully with the Trump Administration's broad request for information about the visitors to DisruptJ20.org, a website allegedly used by those involved in an Inauguration Day riot. As usual, you can listen online below, and subscribe here with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

We begin the episode [at 2:00] by discussing the background of the case. Over 200 people were charged in connection with an Inauguration Day riot in Washington, D.C., and, during the investigation, the U.S. Attorney obtained a warrant that ordered Dreamhost to turn over a vast collection of data about visitors to the website DisruptJ20.org. The government says this site served as an online organizing tool for the rioters. Dreamhost, however, pushed back against the broad scope of the warrant; as we discuss, the government later narrowed the request, but a court last week ordered Dreamhost to comply with the newly-narrowed warrant, though the court will continue to supervise the data collection. We next [at 6:00] discuss whether the Trump Administration's request was a break with earlier attitudes about the scope of warrants for collection of electronic data. That leads us [at 24:00] into a discussion of the merits of the so-called two-step process of electronic data search and seizure, according to which government agencies are allowed to sift through large collections of electronic data and discard irrelevant information. One host is even persuaded of a new position live on air! (We won't reveal who.)

The episode concludes [at 34:00] with Trump nuggets about Carl Icahn and Joe Arpaio.

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

  • There is no written ruling in the Dreamhost case, but a good description of what happened is available here via Dreamhost or here at the New York Times.
  • The narrowed scope of the warrant is explained here. Dreamhost’s opposition to the warrant is here, and the government's brief explaining that it was narrowing its request is here. 
  • We discuss the Supreme Court’s opinion in Riley v. California, and the opinion in that case is available here. Jason quotes from the Solicitor General’s brief in that case, and the brief can be found here.
  • Take Care has featured multiple posts about the Arpaio pardon, including most recently those by Chiraag Baines here, and Leah Litman and Lark Turner here. 
  • Easha’s Trump nugget highlights a New Yorker article, available here, about investor and former Trump advisor Carl Icahn.

Unbinding Leniency: Evaluating the Obama Clemency Initiative and Its Lessons

6/22/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

A recent article evaluates President Obama's clemency initiative and its lessons for criminal justice reform.

Take Care

Versus Trump: Easha's Back, To Talk Qualified Immunity and Police Reform

6/21/20  //  Commentary

On this week’s Versus Trump, Easha Anand makes her triumphant return to talk qualified immunity and police reform. The trio talk about the proposal to reform qualified immunity and debate whether that will do much. They then break down other new legal innovations in the various proposals and ask: is it enough to create new grounds for people to sue? Or are other reforms more important? Listen now!

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

On Bill Stuntz, the Supreme Court’s (Sort of) Unanimous Opinion In Bostock, and the Relationship To Black Lives Matter

6/16/20  //  Commentary

Following the Supreme Court's decision in Bostock, it's worth asking: Why has the law been so successful at improving the lives of gay people but much less successful at improving the lives of people of color?