
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


We discuss an op-ed Jack published in the New York Times this morning in which he argued that much of the aggressive action Trump 2.0 is taking stems from similar, but less extreme, actions in prior presidencies. He contended that the Supreme Court and Congress have some capacity to limit the dangers of “presidencies run amok,” but that a constitutional amendment might be necessary to impose sufficient constraints.
By Bob Bauer and Jack Goldsmith4.4
77 ratings
We discuss an op-ed Jack published in the New York Times this morning in which he argued that much of the aggressive action Trump 2.0 is taking stems from similar, but less extreme, actions in prior presidencies. He contended that the Supreme Court and Congress have some capacity to limit the dangers of “presidencies run amok,” but that a constitutional amendment might be necessary to impose sufficient constraints.

4,074 Listeners

1,365 Listeners

1,108 Listeners

2,029 Listeners

6,317 Listeners

7,230 Listeners

4,644 Listeners

5,820 Listeners

3,920 Listeners

16,229 Listeners

402 Listeners

744 Listeners

338 Listeners

432 Listeners

782 Listeners