Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
Legal fans, here it is: quite simply, the best analysis of the recent Supreme Court arguments on the constitutionality of the ObamaCare anywhere. Then, a look at the legal issues surrounding the Trayvon Martin case, and finally, our law professors respond to the Obama administrations claim that the president was "misunderstood because he was speaking shorthand as a law professor." Well, Mr. President, we happen to have two law professors and host Troy Senik) right here. Perhaps they'll be able to translate your complicated thoughts for us.
It's the law: everyone can listen in below, but if you want to listen to Epstein, Yoo, and Senik on your phone or tablet, subscribe to the show in iTunes (click there for the direct link), or listen in on Stitcher, you must be a Ricochet member. Join today!
Thanks, EJ.
- Comment (10)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
I finished listening to the latest Law Talk. I have enjoyed each one thoroughly but I do have a question. Since you have to be a member of Ricochet to hear it, why are there two (2) requests for people to join in the podcast?
Oct '11
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
John Yoo definitely looks best in a wig.
Mar '11
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
I believe non-members can listen directly from the website, but not from other sources such as iTtunes and Stitcher. It's these non-member website listeners who are being asked to join.
Oct '10
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
Precedent for the Epstein/Yoo Write-Off.
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
Mr. Fawlty is correct.
We are experimenting with these in-house ads to get the right mix. Thanks for bearing with us.
Jun '11
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
Excellent podcast! But I must take issue with Prof. Epstein's analysis of the Trayvon Martin case as it pertains to "Stand Your Ground" (SYG) laws.
1) Despite SYG, Zimmerman would still not have been arrested in this case. Based on what he alleged happened (Martin coming up to him from behind and striking him first, then the scuffle the ensued where Martin was beating him) Zimmerman would have had a claim to self-defense in almost any state. At the time when force was imminent, retreat was not possible. This is a case in which there was not probable cause to arrest and hold Zimmerman, SYG or not.
2) SYG laws are morally correct and justified. If I am on public property or private with the owners consent, where I have every right to be, why would the law require me to retreat when I have done nothing unlawful, merely because another individual commits an assault or battery? It is overly coercive that the law would put a duty on an individual to retreat if they have done nothing wrong. This just expands the states monopoly on force, now having a monopoly on justified force as well.
Edited on April 7, 2012 at 4:00pmDec '11
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
I am not willing to live in a country where talking to someone on the street is considered instigating a violent situation.
Feb '12
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
Can you get software to make instant, low-quality, transcripts?
Epstein, especially, has a voice that's very pleasant to listen to (though Yoo does look more like the patrician English judge), but I'm too impatient for audio and need something I can skim.
Sep '10
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
I tend to agree with Richard that it's risky having untrained people serve as so-called peace officers, but I wonder if it's not a red herring deference, given how often we read about officers who've allegedly shot people after not having been provoked. I've read two such stories in the past week (could be because the media wants a different "racist" story to take hold). That neighborhoods feel threatened belies the fact that police power as such is inadequate to deal with crime much less—especially in poorer neighborhoods—to provide a sense of security. But what can be done when cultural, epidermal identity matters much more to people than reality? (Not to everyone, of course, but to most of the folks who march in blind protest toward the abyss, like the lemmings they are.)
Nov '10
Re: Law Talk with Epstein and Yoo #23: The View From The Bench
I'm a bit confused here as to how standing your ground translates to deputizing (as Prof. Epstein calls it) or serving as a peace officer? I don't see not being required to retreat in the face of attack is the same thing.