Claim OwnershipExecutive Functions Chat
Subscribed: 6Played: 13
Subscribe
© Bob Bauer and Jack Goldsmith
Description
26 Episodes
Reverse
Jack Goldsmith is joined by Professor Aditya Bamzai of the University of Virginia Law School. They discuss the president’s constitutional removal power, whether the president satisfied the statutory “for cause” standard in firing Cook, why that issue is hard, whether Cook’s pre-Fed actions are relevant, whether Cook gets notice and a hearing before firing, and whether a reinstatement remedy is available. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
In this episode we review the Epstein scandal and discuss Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s conflict-of-interest problems, the White House challenge, and the looming role of Congress. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
President Trump yesterday evening withdrew the nomination of Alina Habba for U.S. attorney for the District of New Jersey so that Attorney General Pam Bondi could appoint Habba as the “first assistant” in the U.S. attorney’s office—with the aim of positioning Habba to serve as U.S. attorney in an acting capacity. This came after DOJ, purportedly pursuant to the president’s authority, fired the official who was appointed by a panel of district judges to serve as interim U.S. attorney.We’re pleased to welcome Anne Joseph O’Connell, the Adelbert H. Sweet Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, as our first guest on Executive Functions Chat to break down the relevant legal issues in this saga and discuss the broader legal landscape. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss the response of TikTok providers to the administration’s non-enforcement pledges—including the companies’ legal liability and whether their responsibility to comply with the law runs past potential liability.Read Bob’s piece from yesterday about the providers’ conduct here.And check out Jack’s assessments of the legal basis for the non-enforcement of the statute here and here. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss the Supreme Court’s Tuesday stay of the district court order blocking implementation of the reductions-in-force executive order. Jack thinks the Court got it right. Bob is skeptical.Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We break down the opinions in Trump v. Casa—including the majority opinion’s statements on Solicitor General John Sauer’s concession to the bindingness of the Court’s judgments and opinions on the executive branch, the narrow scope of the majority, the opposing conceptions of the Court’s role in the majority and in Justice Jackson’s dissent, and how challenges to birthright citizenship are likely to proceed from here. Read Jack’s post from Sunday arguing that the Supreme Court was the clear winner in this ruling.Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
Jack argued early this week that it’s impossible to know whether the U.S. attack against Iran was constitutional “because the constitutional law of war powers is inscrutable.” Bob responded to Jack’s post, contending that although executive branch legal opinions provide support for the attack, that doesn’t resolve the constitutional problem.On this episode, we disagree about the constitutionality of this particular attack, but we agree that our war powers law has reached an unfortunate state of presidential dominance. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss the law relevant to U.S. engagement in the conflict between Israel and Iran, fledgling congressional resistance to unilateral action in the region, and how public opinion might affect the administration’s decisionmaking. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss Judge Breyer’s ruling yesterday evening on California’s challenge to Trump’s federalizing of the National Guard, how the decision might have set forth helpful parameters defining the president’s constitutional authority in this context, and how much the administration’s out-of-court statements influence the opinions flowing from the courts. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss California’s complaint challenging the Trump administration’s actions in Los Angeles, take a closer look at the president’s authorities and legal strategy, and conclude by considering the politics underlying it all. Timestamps:0:00-11:30: The substance of California’s complaint11:31-18:28: The aims of the complaint18:29-30:35: The president’s relevant statutory and constitutional authority30:36-34:34: The administration’s broad legal approach34:35-47:38: The politics of the momentFind California’s complaint here.And find Chris Mirasola’s article in the Harvard National Security Journal here.Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss the president’s memorandum mobilizing National Guard troops in response to protests against federal immigration enforcement in Los Angeles. We break down the authorities Trump is relying on, how much it matters that Trump has not yet invoked the Insurrection Act, and more. After we recorded, California Governor Gavin Newsom said that the state will sue the Trump administration over Trump’s decision to “federalize the National Guard.”Read Chris Mirasola’s article that Jack mentioned during the chat here. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
President Trump lashed out at the Federalist Society and Leonard Leo last week. We discuss what is behind the attack, how the administration may try to reshape the judiciary, and how Congress could get involved. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
The Supreme Court issued a consequential decision yesterday staying two district court rulings that had blocked President Trump from firing board members of executive agencies. We discuss the decision, what it means for Humphrey’s Executor, and other potential short- and long-term consequences. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss the oral argument in the birthright citizenship case and dive into Jack’s post analyzing Solicitor General Sauer’s concessions that the Supreme Court has the authority to issue “binding precedent nationwide.”Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss Jack’s post on the administration’s habeas trial balloons, the legal issues and possible strategic aims underlying the comments, and how it all fits into the administration’s larger program of attack on the courts. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss reports of extensive corrupt conduct in the administration, the innovations that facilitated the corruption, the reasons for the muted public reaction, what might generate a stronger reaction, reform possibilities, and more.Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss an op-ed Jack published in the New York Times this morning in which he argued that much of the aggressive action Trump 2.0 is taking stems from similar, but less extreme, actions in prior presidencies. He contended that the Supreme Court and Congress have some capacity to limit the dangers of “presidencies run amok,” but that a constitutional amendment might be necessary to impose sufficient constraints. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss the ongoing conflict between the Trump administration and Harvard in light of the Trump Organization’s firing today of ethics adviser William Burck. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss the Supreme Court’s Saturday Alien Enemies Act ruling, a district court ruling in a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau case, and whether the administration is starting to experience negative consequences from its attacks on courts.* See Jack’s piece from yesterday assessing, among other things, what the Supreme Court’s order reveals about the Solicitor General’s Office in Trump 2.0. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
We discuss Judge Wilkinson’s opinion denying the government’s stay motion in the Abrego Garcia case, Judge Boasberg’s opinion finding probable cause that government defendants’ conduct in the Alien Enemies Act case constituted contempt of the court, and where the administration might go from here. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions. Get full access to Executive Functions at executivefunctions.substack.com/subscribe
Comments
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store
United States