Today’s episode takes a deep dive into an 1832 decision, Worcester v. Georgia, to try and answer the question of what happens when the executive and judicial branches come into conflict. Yes, there’s a lesson to be drawn to today’s Supreme Court-vs.-Donald Trump showdown over the citizenship question on the census.
We begin, however, with a pair of updates to previous shows, including “Joey Salads” and his nonsense “complaint” against AOC, and a listener email and update from our friend Seth Barrett Tillman regarding the status of the emoluments clauses litigation in both Maryland and DC. In fact, a late-breaking decision in the DC case led to a Patreon-only bonus extra on the topic!
Then, it’s time for the main event: breaking down the case that led to the famous aphorism, “Justice Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” As is usually the case with these deep dives, there isn’t an easy answer as to what the outcome will be when the executive and judiciary stare each other down, but we can always learn from history.
In the “C” segment, we check out an update from friend of the show Randall Eliason, who taunts us with an Andrew Was Wrong about the future of Bridgegate (from Episode 232). Learn what issue is in fact going before the Supreme Court and why Prof. Eliason thinks the Bridgegate conspirators are going to get off scot-free.
After all that, it’s time for #T3BE #135, in which Thomas once again manages to analyze a question absolutely perfectly… only to pick the wrong answer yet again. You won’t want to miss the full discussion.
Appearances
Andrew was a guest on the latest episode of the Registry Matters podcast discussing the Supreme Court, as well as the most recent episode of Mueller, She Wrote from the live show in Philadelphia talking.. well, pretty much everything!
Show Notes & Links
- We last discussed the Emoluments Clauses litigation in Episode 297. and for more, check out our Patreon-only bonus extra on the topic!
- Here’s the full text of the 1832 Supreme Court decision in Worcester v. Georgia.
- We last discussed Bridgegate in Episode 232, and you can click here to read Prof. Eliason’s latest blog on the topic.
-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
-Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs
-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/, and don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!
-For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed! @oawiki
-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!
One Reply to “OA299: Executive v. Judiciary (Worcester v. Georgia)”