Dissenting in Concurrence
The Trump v. Anderson lead balloon continues to smolder. This episode looks at the areas wherein the concurring Justices took issue with the per curiam, and they are many. Indeed, the three Justices who concurred only in the judgment disagree with the scope of the per curiam as well as its particulars, and their concurrence reads more like a dissent. Can we find areas of agreement with ourselves and the concurrences? What can we learn from all this? CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.
Podcasten Amarica's Constitution är inbäddad på denna sida från ett öppet RSS-flöde. Alla filer, beskrivningar, bilder och annan metadata från flödet tillhör podcastens ägare och är inte anslutet till eller validerat av Podplay.