Station Selected:
In the whirlwind days of this past business week, our federal courts at all levels have continued to issue decisions affecting who we are and what we will be as Americans:
Among the many judicial rulings that have rightly attracted headlines are the rejection by the United States Supreme Court of an emergency application to review the planned start of the President’s student loan forgiveness program—and, in that same connection, an injunction issued by the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals (overturning a trial judge in St. Louis) to stop the administration of that landmark initiative.
In other areas, federal trial courts in Washington, D.C. imposed criminal sentences of imprisonment on former Presidential advisor Steve Bannon for contempt of Congress and on one (among many others) of the youngest January 6 insurrection-rioters; much-related, another federal judge in California released yet another set of emails between former Presidential lawyer John Eastman and former President Trump—finding that they revealed crime-inspired attempts to defraud the American public about the results of the 2020 election.
Back in the nation’s capital, a trial jury found a third defendant prosecuted by Special Counsel (and former United States Attorney) John Durham not guilty of lying to the FBI—effectively bringing to an end a 3-1/2 year “investigation of the investigation” of the connections between the Trump Campaign and Russia in the 2016 Presidential election.
In New York, both a trial judge and an appellate court were wrestling with the civil defamation claims brought by a journalist against the former President for statements he made about her truthfulness reporting on an alleged sexual assault in the mid-1990s—about which Donald Trump was deposed this past week.
And in the context of the continuing focus on documents seized at the Mar-a-Lago resort, the Special Master this week expressed skepticism (“Where’s the beef?,” he said) about the arguments made by lawyers for the former President in attempt to stop the Justice Department investigation into the sources, possession, and uses of official government documents—some of which (related to pardons and immigration policy) the President curiously described as his “personal possessions.” A tumultuous week in the pursuit of justice—dissected and explained in this episode.
In reply to the always-engaging questions and comments from listeners, some important clarifications about what Roe v. Wade did and did not establish about abortion and privacy rights, the status of various federal and state investigations into the criminal behavior of the “false electors” from Wisconsin and six other states, the effect of the upcoming Congressional elections on the capacity of the Justice Department to litigate on behalf of our citizenry, and the inter-relatedness of all of this on the future of our Republic.
