
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Aughie and Nia discuss the SCOTUS rulings concerning access to President Donald Trump's tax records, and whether U.S. Presidents can claim absolute immunity from the state criminal process. In the instance of Vance, the SCOTUS ruled that the President does not have immunity from a state criminal subpoena. In the instance of Mazars, the SCOTUS ruled that the Congress must present a compelling case to a judge (and outlined questions that should be asked) to justify their subpoenas.
By Nia Rodgers and Dr. John Aughenbaugh4.7
2727 ratings
Aughie and Nia discuss the SCOTUS rulings concerning access to President Donald Trump's tax records, and whether U.S. Presidents can claim absolute immunity from the state criminal process. In the instance of Vance, the SCOTUS ruled that the President does not have immunity from a state criminal subpoena. In the instance of Mazars, the SCOTUS ruled that the Congress must present a compelling case to a judge (and outlined questions that should be asked) to justify their subpoenas.

3,530 Listeners

9,724 Listeners

113,121 Listeners

32,354 Listeners

8,562 Listeners

4,669 Listeners