Amarica's Constitution

Epizody

• 
  Preclearing the President 19.08.2026 1h 14min

  What happens when the president loses in court, even at the Supreme Court, but repeatedly attempts to fight the battle again?  New tariffs are offered after the old ones are thrown out.  Birthright citizenship, resoundingly affirmed, is challenged anew.  To Americans who lived in the South after Brown v. Board, this might sound familiar.   And indeed, as we wrap up our Roberts court constitutional survey, and we arrive at the cases we take great issue with, this theme echoes back to the Shelby County case.  We therefore discuss a question that has rankled many Americans in recent years.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  There You Go Again 11.08.2026 1h 8min

  The President did not file for reconsideration of the Court’s decision in Trump v. Barbara, but the President nevertheless doesn’t let the Constitution rest, issuing two new executive orders that purport to extend the set of persons not receiving birthright citizenship upon their birth, among other things. We take a look.  Meanwhile, our review of the Roberts Court’s important constitutional cases brings us back to the Affirmative Action cases, and we take a look at them three years in.  Finally, another listener question takes us to yet another corner of the constitutional canon - and Akhil is ready even without advance notice.  CLE is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Dobbs and Bruen Plus Time 04.08.2026 1h 19min

  As we make our way through the 20 most constitutionally significant cases of the Roberts court, this episode takes us through two cases that have continued to have resonance with the American people and with the justices.  Dobbs saw an infamous leak, a momentous decision, powerful electoral impact, and ongoing questions that echo back to an important limiting concurrence.  Bruen brought a controversial methodology to questions of gun rights, caused mayhem at the lower courts, and spawned a number of subsequent cases that seek to clarify and perhaps recover from this sweeping opinion.  We take you back - and forward - as we examine these cases on our way to an overall accounting of the Roberts Court.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Faces of Intratextualism 28.07.2026 1h 23min

  We continue our survey of the Roberts Court’s oeuvre of constitutional cases, with particular emphasis on the series of cases that concerned making rules for voting and for voting districts.  These cases make particular use of “intratextualism” - a term coined by Professor Amar that provides tools - and traps - for textual analysis of the Constitution.  And as it turns out, it is also valuable on some of the most important themes and cases in the history of the nation, including Brown v. Board and its companion case, Bolling v. Sharpe.  A listener’s question takes us down this road, which intersects with our own prior path in fascinating ways.  These and more cases are explored as only Professor Amar can.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  The Surprising Score 23.07.2026 1h 22min

  The SCOTUS term is behind us, and we take a look back - not just at this term, but at the entirety of the Roberts Court.  What are the most important constitutional cases of its time?  Where do the justices line up on the important cases - that is, how often are they in the majority; how often is the opinion right-leaning, as many believe is usually the case, and how many are left-leaning?  How often is the Court “clearly wrong” according to Professor Amar?  And where does Professor Amar come out in terms of his alignment with the Court?  The cases may be familiar, but our own look at this suggests to us that you may well be surprised when it all gets added up.  We also have some listeners’ questions, and they turn out to be more far-ranging than you might have expected.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Dissenting from the Dissents 16.07.2026 1h 26min

  How could the vote in Trump v. Barbara have been as close as it was?  Many have been bewildered by the vote in this case, given the strength of the arguments in Chief Justice Roberts' majority opinion, the long history of birthright citizenship, the statutory history, and the clear text of the 14th amendment.  We try to understand this by looking at how the dissents took an aberrant and incorrect approach to the very act of dissenting.  To do this, we have to look at a general theory of dissents at the Supreme Court - and so we do.  Meanwhile, a foreign nation's holiday is celebrated, as well it should be given this nation's role in our own achievement of independence. Lawyers And Judges Are Eligible For Continuing Legal Education Credit by visiting podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Unitary Duality - Guests Steven Calabresi and Vikram Amar 07.07.2026 1h 30min

  he Supreme Court ruled in two cases framing Unitary Executive theory.  So it’s entirely appropriate that we have two great experts on the topic joining us.  Steve Calabresi literally wrote the book on this theory, and perhaps it’s not surprising that he is more pure than the Court itself.  Meanwhile, Vik Amar has seen his theories concerning non-delegation and Congressional lock-in come up again and again this term - and here we see it again; if the agencies were meant by Congress to preserve its role in exercising certain powers, how can it reclaim those powers when the independence of the agencies is eliminated?  Meanwhile, Akhil, cited in the Slaughter case, reviews the originalism involved in the opinions, and puts the cases in an overall perspective of sorts.  All in all, an impressive resource for you to draw on.  Lawyers and Judges are eligible for Continuing Legal Education credit by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.
• 
  Lincoln's Promise Kept 01.07.2026 1h 18min

  America gets a 250th birthday present from the Supreme Court as Chief Justice John Roberts authors an opinion for the ages in Trump v. Barbara.  The Court went big and decided on the basis of the Constitution, not merely the Congressional statutes, that Abraham Lincoln's wish for the nation, birthright citizenship, which gives rise to the chance for birth equality and therefore the "new birth of freedom" Lincoln bequeathed us, will live on - and will have its best chance to endure.  We look deeply into the opinion to find the great themes the Chief Justice, joined by four women, sounds.  And what about the arguments made on this podcast in recent months?  Can they be found in the opinion, and if so, do they strengthen it?  Join us for a close look. Lawyers and Judges are eligible for Continuing Legal Education credit by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.
• 
  No Coffee for You 26.06.2026 1h 29min

  In the wake of our recent discussion on private vs state action, a recent incident in New York regarding US Representative Dan Goldman’s banishment from a coffee shop because of his political stance brings these issues home, with additional questions related to public accommodations and more.  Meanwhile, the Supreme Court faced some of these similar issues in the case of Wolford v. Lopez, decided the day we record this, as well as a host of 14th amendment questions that are at once familiar and yet fresh for listeners to this podcast. CLE is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Reverence and Radicalism: Remembering Gordon Wood 19.06.2026 1h 22min

  The tributes to Gordon Wood have been pouring in, and as promised, we spend this episode with him and his peerless body of work.  Professor Steven Calabresi, Gordon’s neighbor, friend, and colleague, joins us, and how appropriate that is, as Steve and Akhil produced a tribute weekend at Yale Law School that reviewed and celebrated his lifetime of work.  Now we remember the man, the teacher, and most of all, the towering scholar, as we review some of his most important ideas, his methods, and his inspiration for so many who have read, and who will read, the greatest books ever written about the American founding period.  A giant has been lost, but his memory will be a blessing for many generations to come.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Bigotry vs Bureaucracy: State Action and Private Freedom 10.06.2026 1h 30min

  There’s some highly questionable behavior going on in an area of Missouri, where a fringe group seeks to establish a whites-only enclave.  Objectionable?  We think so.  Unconstitutional?  Therein lies an opening to a whole host of questions.  Government action versus private action.  When is private action beyond private purview?  When does state action overlap into private domains, and where are the lines?  Where do these rules come from?  How can we think about new issues that may arise?  Akhil has thought about this, and written about it, so now we offer you a framework to think about such questions as they arise, now and in the future.  And, sadly, a giant was lost this week.  We offer some thoughts, with more to come.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Rosen on Liberty; Gorsuch on Gorsuch - with Jeffrey Rosen and Justice Neil Gorsuch 02.06.2026 1h 17min

  It is an honor to introduce the initial episode of our new sister podcast: The Blessings of Liberty, hosted by Jeffrey Rosen, president emeritus of the National Constitution Center and Professor of Law at GW.  Prof. Rosen begins with a bang, as he holds a discussion with US Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, including two books newly authored or contributed to by Justice Gorsuch.  We precede this with our own interview of Jeff Rosen, discussing the mission of his new podcast and his special passion for history, the Constitution, and the American idea.  Meanwhile, listen, too, for a special EverScholar opportunity for our loyal podcast audience.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Unrehearsed Answers 26.05.2026 54min

  It’s time for listener questions, and no surprise that current events are on everyone’s mind.  We range from the supposed weaponization slush fund, to pardons;  illegal military orders; simultaneous office holding; and lots of converse-1983 discussion.  And Professor Amar looks at a possible error in one of his books.  Great questions from a great audience, and Akhil answers them without prep, on the spot.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Scrip for Scripture on the National Mall 19.05.2026 1h 22min

  After weeks of tracing the background history and constitutional principles at work on religious establishment, free exercise, and equality issues, the Administration on cue sponsors, holds, staffs, and headlines a “Rededication 250: A National Jubilee Of Prayer, Praise & Thanksgiving,” complete with a virtually all-Christian (one Jew) speaker roster, a White House website, money from Congress’ apportionment of funds for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration commemorations, and a drumbeat of emphasis of supposedly American Christian traditions.  We take it slowly and look at how it fits into the constitutional rubrics that we have examined.  Meanwhile, it’s the Yale Commencement, and Akhil has commentary on the main speaker.  And a number of news developments harken back to our podcasts past - how did we do?  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  JFK's Wall 12.05.2026 1h 13min

  Our journey through the centuries of religious practice, attitudes, and constitutionalism has reached the 20th century, when several presidential elections set mileposts for the American religious debate.  The first major party Catholic candidate, Al Smith, met the worst sort of vitriol and prejudice, and was destroyed by it.  This cast a shadow over the later campaign of John F. Kennedy, and he answered it in a speech that we analyze and place in context, even as we thrill to the great man’s voice one more time.  We then trace a line from that speech, through several Supreme Court memberships, to the American cultural and constitutional religious landscape as the 21st century dawns.  Fittingly, perhaps, one of the jurists who has been prominent on this issue, Justice Thomas, celebrates a milestone on the Court.  CLE is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Fourteen Colonies, Ten Commandments 05.05.2026 1h 35min

  As the 10 commandments case makes its way towards the Supreme Court, we add another chapter to our study of the historical events and factors that went into the American constitutional tradition when it comes to religious freedom, religious establishment, and the relationship of government and religion as a whole.  We begin this episode where The Words That Made Us began - in 1760.  We take it forward through the revolutionary period, into the Articles and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and then wind up with the Civil War and Reconstruction, leaving us poised at last to take a serious look at what the Fifth Circuit thought it was doing, and what it actually was doing, when it allowed a law to stand that mandates posting of the Ten Commandments in every classroom.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Remember the Alamo Heights 28.04.2026 1h 40min

  We continue to trace the historical origins of the constitution’s approach to religion in American government and American life.  We take you on a tour around Europe at the time of the Reformation and for centuries beyond, all the way to American migration.  All this is remarkably relevant to recent events, as the Alamo Heights/Ten Commandments case comes to a head. Meanwhile, Sarah Isgur returns for a third helping - or is it grilling? - as we continue to discuss her recent book and it finds its way onto the best-seller list.  Individual justices are discussed along with much more.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  Popes and Presidents 22.04.2026 1h 35min

  The President has picked a fight with the Bishop of Rome, Pope Leo X.  Putting aside some of the distasteful elements of language and hubris, we ask where this fits in with notions of church and state in a democracy.  What is the constitutional doctrine - is it “separation?” Where does it come from, historically and legally?  A general theory of such things can help us make sense - well, maybe not of everything that is said these days, but perhaps of the numerous cases that are percolating to and arriving at the Supreme Court.  And in a special treat, we continue our conversation with Sarah Isgur on her new book, Last Branch Standing, and look more deeply at the patterns of judicial behavior that have emerged from several of the justices, among other things.
• 
  Last Branch Stands, The Barbara Court Sits - Special Guest Sarah Isgur 14.04.2026 1h 42min

  This week it’s Attorney Cecilia Wang’s turn, as she appears before the Supreme Court to defend birthright citizenship in the Trump v. Barbara case, and we continue to analyze clips of the oral argument.  Meanwhile, we are joined by the host of the popular Advisory Opinions podcast: Sarah Isgur, who has written a new book that will be published, well, today.  Last Branch Standing takes us inside the Supreme Court from the life of a clerk to a tour of the Court’s history to a statistical analysis of voting patterns on the Court - which are far more complex than is commonly thought.  You can’t help but know more after this episode than you did coming in! CLE credit available from podcast.njsba.com.
• 
  New World, Same Constitution 07.04.2026 2h 6min

  Trump v. Barbara - the birthright citizenship case - reaches the Supreme Court, and we are there.  Akhil and Andy are at the oral argument, and immediately afterwards we stand outside the courthouse and you hear (and see, from the linked video) the emotions that affected not only your hosts, but no doubt the justices themselves as the case unfolded. Then it’s off to the audiotape, as we play the clips of the Justices and the advocates, and Akhil does his Howard Cosell imitation, analyzing the arguments as you hear them.  Given the Professor’s status as the author of an amicus brief in the case, a brief the Solicitor General chose to take on in his own reply brief, the perspective this episode offers our audience - you - is unique.  So with the arguments of the advocates; the questions of the justices; and the knowledge of the amicus, you will know as much as anyone and be in the best position to assess the case as a whole - after listening to this special episode and those to follow. And as always, CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.