The Presidential Assassination Argument

Assassinating rivals on Fifth Avenue.

By and
74

Sarah and David address a few corrections from Tuesday’s episode before turning to the oral argument on Trump’s prosecutorial immunity.

The Agenda:
—Can presidents order Seal Team Six to assassinate rivals?
—Who is going to win this case?
—Did we just fix qualified immunity? (No.)
—Political advertising at the Ninth Circuit
—Should I go to law school? Pt. 97

Show Notes:
—Marbury v. Madison
—Mississippi v. Johnson

By and
Comments (74)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Jane_from_CO

    Oh Sarah. Please stop using the phrase “unless you were living under a rock”.

    It’s so condescending and insulting. Everyone has different obligations and interests, and just because they don’t follow everything you do doesn’t mean that they are ignorant.

    There are many things to know about in this world, even things that you don’t know about (not that you would ever admit that). It doesn’t mean that YOU are living under a rock.

    MEOW.

    Collapse
  2. Jay Murphy

    Hi, first time commenter. I’m a lay person who deeply appreciates you all and your podcast. I honestly use it as spending time hanging out with likable people while I run.

    That said, I subscribe to a Substack authored by someone a guy who goes by Patterico that you all have referenced before. He today made a detailed and very persuasive case that the January 4th episode detailing the Maine SoS disqualifying Donald Trump was quite problematic. Would love for you all to address this. I deeply appreciate this podcast (to the point I subscribed to the dispatch to support it) and feel there is a good case there was a miss here, although as I note above, what legal knowledge I have is from this podcast.

    Collapse
  3. Nikitas Hatzimihail

    Re the law school discussion, I would tend to agree with David (not necessarily on the military option, it depends on personal status. But a four-year scholarship could cover say a joint JD/MBA or JD/MPP?

    I like the idea of law school as an option expanding choice (of course I studied in the national law school as an undergraduate, did my graduate legal studies in the same option-multiplying august institution as David and Sarah and now teach in effectively the national law school… so I am biased and only accrued moral debts during my studies)

    Collapse
  4. Deleted Comment

    This comment has been deleted

  5. Daniel Schweizer

    Would be interested in the AO team's perspective on the Federal vs. State authority raised by this ongoing matter in Texas. I can't imagine it passing Constitutional muster, but then a lot of things that happen in Texas lately seem that way to me. https://www.texastribune.org/2024/01/12/texas-blocking-border-patrol-justice-department-eagle-pass/?utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=20240113&lctg=651533dd667b794a0209f8f1&utm_term=The%20Atlantic%20Daily

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Clay

    I thought for sure one of the corrections would be David changing "I MAY kill you in the morning" to the correct "Good night, Westley. Good work. Sleep well. I'll MOST LIKELY kill you in the morning."

    I got to think the details matter there in regards to intent! :)

    Collapse
  7. Cmires

    I am not sure we can blame it on the NYT affiliation as David is much to smart to get overly influenced by his useful opinionist colleagues but I would suggest David take the logic that he applies to the use of “woke” and apply it to MAGA. I actually think I stand a better chance of defining and using woke effectively than anyone, especially the pundit class writ large, has of defining MAGA. As with other terms like MAGA it covers all manner of sins. Are “MAGA” just those blindly slavish to Trump? As it is used by most it usually is meant to cover, and embarrass, anyone suggesting the slightest bit of support of Trump or willingness to vote for him. Whatever happened to policy arguments? There was a time when I think David would have lined up with most of the broader agenda of the Republican Party. And I would say there is a large contingent of Republicans, including me, who will gladly vote for Trump on policy and put up with his intemperance and periodic lack of judgement. What we have with Biden is misguided and regularly failing policies that many of us think pose far greater risk than a second Trump term. But for starters let’s just ditch the use of MAGA and leave it to the rest of the useful opinionist army to think they are being very clever and damning in using it at almost every turn.

    Collapse
  8. Daniel Spector

    Hello,

    I would be very curious to hear your legal analysis of the ICJ genocide proceedings against Israel. Whatever one’s opinion of the current conflict, the charge seems dubious to me, but as an American lawyer I’m not familiar with the framework used by the ICJ and would appreciate hearing analysis from a trusted source.

    Collapse
  9. Desiree Colvin

    I would like to just to take a moment regarding David French's advise regarding the joining of the military as an opportunity expanding option. I am a nurse, not a lawyer - I found your podcast perhaps a year ago and have learned a lot and enjoy the discourse on a subject that I am far from an expert on. But when it comes to military life, I am an expert on what one might call the "home front." I have been the wife of a Navy sailor for nearly 18 years. And I can assure you, that while your advice may have been quite accurate for the individual who wrote in to ask if they should go to law school, you missed a very important person in the equation - the writer stated he was engaged. And the military is far from being opportunity expanding for spouses. According to an article by Katie Lange, published on the DOD's website on Oct. 16, 2023, the unemployment rate for military spouses is 21% (https://www.defense.gov/News/Feature-Stories/Story/Article/3558394/military-spouses-to-gain-more-job-ops-thanks-to-growing-employment-partnership/#:~:text=Currently%2C%20the%20unemployment%20rate%20for,see%20that%20number%20go%20down.&text=Two%20men%20talk%20to%20each,27%2C%202022). And per data put out by Military One Source, 84% of military spouses have some college, 25% have a bachelor's, 10% have an advanced degree, and on the average earn 25% less than their non military-spouse peers (https://download.militaryonesource.mil/12038/MOS/Factsheets/SECO/MSEP-Factsheet-Corporate.pdf). It's not hard to see why - moving every 2-5 years, deployments, the "needs of the Navy" (or Army, or Air Force, etc.) puts a strain on the trailing spouse's career. Further, the military expects things of spouses - even if it's not written down as a rule. From Family Readiness Groups, to Ombudsmen (I served as an Ombudsman at one my husband's commands), to volunteer positions with relief societies and uniform thrift shops - military bases and commands often function well because of the volunteer contributions of military spouses and family members. I am proud of my husband's service and I am very proud of being a Navy spouse. I would do it all over again in a heartbeat. But military spouse life has been very far from "opportunity expanding" for me in a career sense. But my husband was already poised to enter the military when we started dating, so it was something I had to consider (and very much did consider) and decide if I was on board with from day 1. The email writer is already engaged. Please make sure, before telling someone to consider the military because it is "opportunity expanding" that you encourage that person to discuss such a life-changing decision with their significant other. They will need and want their partner, fiance, or spouse to be fully on board because being a military spouse is not easy and very rarely "expands opportunities" for the spouse's/partner's career.

    Collapse
    1. MathewA

      Not to mention all the other marital problems a spouse being in the military causes. In particular the much higher rates of infidelity,

      Not seeing your spouse for 6 months to a year at a time is brutal

      Collapse
      1. Desiree Colvin

        I've never looked up the difference in rates of infidelity in military marriages vs. the general population. I can say, anecdotally, that the majority of families we knew at the beginning of my husband's service nearly 20 years ago are still married today and seem to have pretty fantastic marriages. I also think my marriage is pretty fantastic. But rates of infidelity aside and marital satisfaction aside, yes, deployments and long separations can take their toll. Homecoming photos and videos look great on social media - but the struggles of reintegration once the cameras are put away are real. And it's hard to be in a marriage where so often the spouse feels more like the "mistress" because the Navy (or Army, or Air Force, etc.) is the one who really owns your spouse. But like I said, I'd do it all again in a heart beat, so it isn't all bad - in fact, a lot of it was really great. We've had some amazing adventures, gotten to live overseas, met some remarkable people, and seen remarkable things. My point wasn't so much that the young man who wrote in should NOT join the military. My point was that David encouraged him to talk to his father and uncle about it and completely neglected to recommend having some good, long conversations with his future life partner about what he wants to be and do, because it is she that will be by his side for better or worse, in sickness and in health. And if the military is what he wants, she deserves a say in whether she's on board with a lifestyle that can be fantastic and bring you amazing community (the military spouse community is like no other I've ever experienced) but also a lot of trial and hardship and loneliness and often feeling like you're second place to the needs of the military.
        Being a military spouse isn't easy. I know, for someone who says she'd do it all over again, I'm really selling it LOL! I just think the fiance deserves the respect of being asked how she feels about it and if she's cool with it, going in with eyes fully open to the benefits, but also the challenges she and they will face together.

        Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Michael Berkowitz

    Thanks. I was driving home with the missus and listening to AO. When you started the immunity discussion and explained that it's not talking about all crimes, like if the President hit his wife, I gave it a couple of beats before wondering aloud, "Wait, that's illegal??"

    Collapse
    1. Jackrabbit McQuivers

      Well don't leave us hanging. How did your wife respond? Hoping her wit is quick

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Michael Berkowitz

        I'm sure her expression would have been worth a look, but I was driving... 😊

        Collapse
Load More