We return to the tariff case and continue to hear from the justices and the advocates in their own voices from the oral argument. This time, a 20 year old argument from Vik Amar takes center stage with apparent approval from several key justices, and several of the Court’s female justices join forces to make life difficult for the Solicitor General. We also review some of the emerging implications from the recent election, and a bill coming out of Illinois that takes its inspiration from a 40 year old argument made by Professor Amar. Part 2 of 2. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

The economy, trillions of dollars, and consequences unknown are on the line in the tarrifs case, Learning Resources v. Trump. We present the justices and the advocates in their own voices from the oral argument, and Akhil reacts in real time as he hears the clips for the first time. It’s a three hour argument, so this is the first of a two-parter. The Court’s recent doctrines, including major questions and non-delegation are in play, perhaps, and therefore many are watching this case closely for consistency vs politics in the Court itself. And of course there’s history and constitutional issues at stake, so we are right at home. Join us! CLE is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

California. Meanwhile, the tariff case is about to come before the Supreme Court for oral argument. So it’s timely indeed that Vik Amar joins us with expertise on both topics. In fact, Vik has submitted an amicus brief in the tariff case. The “brothers in law” take us deep into the gerrymandering world, the major questions doctrine, and we also pause to reflect on the career of former Vice President Cheney who passed away this week. Insights galore await. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges at podcast.njsba.com.