x

75% of people globally want unbiased news (Pew Research) but are concerned they're not getting that.

Get balanced coverage with Symby. See how stories are covered across diverse outlets and spot when one side covers a story the other skips.

PODCAST

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and Commentary from Justia

Legal analysis and commentary from Justia.com with the columinst team of Vikram Amar, Neil Buchanan, Sherry Colb, John Dean, Michael Dorf, Joanna Grossman, Marci Hamilton, Julie Hilden, Joanne Mariner and Anita Ramasastry.

news & politics national

All Episodes

11:29

Complicity in Trump’s Bogus Emergency

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2019/02/18

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency after Congress denied him most of the funding he requested for a border wall. Dorf describes the legal framework that allows the president to do so even in the absence of an emergency and points out that combined actions of Congress, the courts, and the People have created this situation.

en-US

8:39

Justifying External Support for Regime Change in...

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2019/02/06

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on the recognition by the United States and some other constitutional democracies of Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s legitimate leader pending new elections. Dorf points out that many countries suffer under incompetent, corrupt, and authoritarian leaders just as Venezuela did under Nicolás Maduro, yet constitutional democracies typically do not rally behind the ouster of those leaders. What makes Maduro’s case different?

en-US

10:00

How Should the Law Address Illicit Motives in the Age...

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2019/01/23

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a case arising from the Trump administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census questionnaire—a case the US Supreme Court had on its calendar for oral arguments until late last week, when the federal district judge issued an opinion and enjoined the government from including the question. Despite the original issue presented in the case (a technical one about the scope of discovery) being made moot by the district court

en-US

8:54

Why Facebook’s Hate-Speech Policy Makes So Little Sense

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2019/01/09

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on Facebook’s global efforts to block hate speech and other offensive content and explains why formula-based policy necessarily makes very little sense. As Dorf explains, accurate determinations of hate speech require cultural understanding and evaluations of cases on an individual basis, but this approach also necessarily injects individual bias into those decisions. Thus, Facebook’s policy, while not ideal, may be but one of a handful of inadequate

en-US

12:00

Obamacare Nonseverability Ruling Exposes Uncertainty...

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2018/12/21

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on the recent ruling by a federal district judge in Texas striking down the entirety of the Affordable Care Act and argues that the judge relies on a highly unorthodox (and erroneous) interpretation of the doctrine of “severability.” As Dorf explains, there is a notable lack of judicial consensus as to what courts actually do when they declare laws unconstitutional, despite that the Supreme Court established its power of judicial review over two

en-US

11:24

Double Jeopardy Case in Supreme Court is About More...

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2018/12/12

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf discusses the double jeopardy question raised in Gamble v. United States, in which the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week, and explains how the extraordinary nature of the Trump presidency should inform judicial decision making. Building upon a point made in a 1985 Columbia Law Review article by Professor Vincent Blasi, Dorf argues that judges construing the Constitution and other legal texts in perilous times such as these should keep in mind that

en-US

11:21

The Department of Education’s Title IX Power Grab

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2018/11/28

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf discusses the Department of Education’s recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking rules requiring due process protections for those accused of sexual assault or harassment in Title IX cases. Dorf provides a history of Title IX, explaining how the Obama administration issued guidance and instituted reforms to how institutions should approach addressing allegations of such conduct. He acknowledges the Department of Education's shift in policy under the Trump

en-US

8:22

Matthew Whitaker and the Constitution’s Appointments...

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2018/11/14

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf considers the legality of President Donald Trump’s firing of US Attorney General Jeff Sessions and designating Matthew Whitaker as Acting Attorney General. Dorf points out that while the Constitution does not expressly address acting officers, Trump’s actions certainly violate the spirit of the law and the Constitution.

en-US

9:07

Justice O’Connor Withdraws From Public Life, and the...

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2018/10/31

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on the announcement that retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor would be withdrawing from public life and explains how, ironically, the exit of President Ronald Reagan’s Supreme Court nominees is giving rise to what could be called the Reagan Court. Dorf describes Reagan’s successes and failures with respect to shaping the Court and explains why only now, with its present composition, the Court may actually be poised to further Reagan’s

en-US

10:48

Trump’s—and the GOP’s—Hat Trick of Falsehoods About...

Justia Verdict Podcast | Legal Analysis and... ·

2018/10/17

Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf debunks President Trump’s claim that he has kept his campaign promise to “protect coverage for patients with pre-existing conditions.” Dorf provides three primary reasons that the claim is dishonest: the administration’s position in a pending lawsuit; the GOP’s proposed alternative, which does not require insurance companies to offer policies that actually cover pre-existing conditions, and the claim that Democratic support of Medicare for All is “radical

en-US

10 results

Similar Podcasts

千禧年代

RTHK.HK

Kit FM : Les Infos

Kit FM

BBC News

BBC World Service

DW Noticias

DW

Journal Monde

RFI