88 min listen
What the Concurrences Should Have Said
ratings:
Length:
77 minutes
Released:
Mar 12, 2024
Format:
Podcast episode
Description
The concurrence by three Justices (as opposed to that of Justice Barrett) in Trump v. Anderson concurs only in the judgment. We look at different types of concurrences and why a Justice might choose one type or the other; and as for this one, we find much to dissent with. We dissect the arguments and now with the benefit of a week since the opinion, we “slow it down” and take you carefully through the logic and illogic we find. Can we locate common ground among justices who claim to be unanimous but in fact significantly diverge? And how do we address our own position, which seems to lie firmly opposed to the entire Court? CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.
Released:
Mar 12, 2024
Format:
Podcast episode
Titles in the series (100)
Jefferson Ben Amar: As “The Words That Made Us” approaches its May release, we continue to explore new perspectives on the early Presidents. Akhil’s disillusionment with Jefferson is explained, and the rise of the third President’s cousin and near-usurper makes for some su... by Amarica's Constitution