In this special edition of Law Talk with Epstein & Yoo, Richard Epstein and John Yoo are joined by National Review’s Charles C.W. Cooke to discuss the Supreme Court’s decisions concerning Donald Trump’s claim of presidential immunity in Trump v. United States, as well as Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, and its companion case, Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce, aka the Chevron case established in 1984.

Richard Epstein and John Yoo discuss the last two weeks of Supreme Court rulings covering challenges to Second, Fourteenth, and Sixteenth Amendments. They also preview the upcoming challenge to Chevron Deference and dive into disputes among the originalist thinkers on the court. Finally, they weigh in on criticisms of recent disclosures by Justice Thomas and future plans for a future Trump Administration from groups like Project 2025.

Richard and John get into it over Trump’s many trials, the likelihood that he’ll receive a fair one in New York City, and the windfall he appears to have received as Truth Social’s holding company goes public. They discuss the likelihood that John Eastman loses his license to practice law and they make predictions about the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity in Trump’s cases involving Special Prosecutor Jack Smith. Finally, they preview a climate change case that could end up in front of the Supreme Court.

The faculty lounge is invaded by a guest host who pits Richard and John against one another, starting with their differences in opinion over when the government should regulate social media companies. While they predict the same Supreme Court ruling, they disagree on what constitutes government involvement in key dominated industries. Next Richard and John point to the natural consequence of Dobbs on the nation’s abortion laws, as they handle the recent Alabama IVF ruling that has the left-wing preparing fundraising and election materials for November. Finally, they turn to former President Trump’s legal woes, first with the Supreme Court’s possible ruling on his immunity for the January 6th case and ending with some agreement on the civil fraud penalty handed down in the Empire State.

It’s a lively session in the faculty lounge, as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are both coming to us from California and … let’s just say that Richard seems to be enjoying life in the sun. First up, a guided tour through Donald Trump’s legal travails: the questions about whether he’ll be allowed on the ballot, the controversy over presidential immunity, and the debate over whether a second Trump Administration will pose a unique threat to the rule of law. Then we delve into a controversy over executive power regarding Joe Biden: is the president overstepping the limits of his office with attacks on the Houthis in Yemen? Some senators think so. Finally, we stop off at the Supreme Court to examine the case that might upend the administrative state — and we also examine why former Supreme Court clerks are getting half-million dollar signing bonuses. All that, plus wisdom from Richard’s Uncle Albert, an In-N-Out update from John (would it be the California episode without it?), and a (mean-spirited and factually inaccurate) discussion of why Senik didn’t go to law school.

The faculty lounge reopens for a holiday session and we start on a somber note as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo react to the breaking news of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s death. Then, we get their analysis on the latest in the Israel-Hamas war, consider whether the courts have gone too far in imposing gag orders on former President Trump, and take a look at a Supreme Court case on gun rights … that just might result in a unanimous decision. All that, plus the analysis you really care about: the professors weigh in on the least valuable dish on the Thanksgiving table.

It’s a jam-packed session in the faculty lounge as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo go around the horn for a comprehensive look at the issues of the day: What does “international law” mean in the context of the war in Gaza? Should student activists be punished for their support of Hamas? Will the Supreme Court rule on whether Donald Trump can be on the 2024 ballot? What upcoming SCOTUS case inspired the first (non-podcast) Epstein and Yoo collaboration? And should the Supreme Court knuckle under to pressure to adopt a code of ethics? All that, plus we debate the finer points of ancient latin and do a quick tour of archaic American currency.

It’s an interactive session in the faculty lounge, as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo submit to the annual tradition of answering listener questions. There’s some serious legal analysis — can Donald Trump become president from behind bars? Can the 14th Amendment keep him off the ballot? What powers does Congress have to regulate abortion in the aftermath of the Dobbs case? But then we go to the deep cuts: Who are the greatest writers in the history of the Supreme Court? What’s it really like behind closed doors in Washington? Will the populist swing in the Republican Party reshape the Supreme Court? And then, of course, someone had to ask Richard about Roman Law. Be careful what you wish for.

Is Donald Trump toast? Are the walls closing in on Hunter Biden? Those are questions that can’t adequately be answered by two minutes of cable news. Luckily, Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are here with one of the all-time deep-dive Law Talk episodes: a thorough look at the cases facing Donald Trump in Georgia, Florida, D.C., and Manhattan as well as the increasingly inscrutable case of Hunter Biden. Which case is most likely to take Trump down? What kinds of questions are raised by the DOJ’s bobbling of the Biden charges? And who’s going to be left standing when the dust clears? All that and more  — plus a chance to submit your questions for the professors — on this episode.

The Supreme Court ended its most recent term with a bang, and that’s also how Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are starting this review of the biggest decisions. There’s a split in the faculty lounge over the wisdom of the Court’s affirmative action ruling and we’ll let you decide who gets the better of the argument. Then we move on to the Court’s smackdown of the Biden Administration’s student loan relief plan and the latest in a long string of cases regarding how and whether free speech rights apply in an anti-discrimination context (yes, it’s Colorado … again). Finally, because we don’t want you to think Law Talk has lost its edge we tee up the most important legal question of 2023: Can a bear violate your Fourth Amendment rights?

It’s graduation season in the faculty lounge, but Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are still hard at work. In this month’s installment: What does the Durham report say about the future of the FBI? Should Daniel Penny stand trial for the headlock that ended Jordan Neely’s life? What explains the bizarre alliances behind the Supreme Court’s decision to let California control how the nation’s pigs are raised? And can Baltimore really sue automakers for making cars too easy to steal? Plus Epstein visits South America, Yoo ruins a graduation ceremony, and Senik gracelessly declines into middle age.

We’re breaking out birthday candles as one of the professors celebrates a milestone birthday. Once the festivities (which somehow devolve into a conversation about medical innovation) conclude, Professors Epstein and Yoo are on to the topics at hand: Was Fox News right to settle with Dominion? Does America need tougher defamation laws? Is Clarence Thomas’s relationship with Harlan Crow a troubling indiscretion on behalf of a Supreme Court justice or a case of activist journalism run amok? What will happen with the controversial rulings about abortion drugs? And did Disney outsmart Ron DeSantis — and why does the answer to that question involve King Charles? All that and more in a jam-packed hour in the faculty lounge.

The indictment of Donald J. Trump was unsealed to an almost universally negative reaction—even those who want to see him behind bars. How likely is the case to be dropped before going to trial? What jurisdiction does the DA claim to have? To what standard should an indictment of a former president be held? And has Donald Trump forfeited his right to argue the justice system has been politicized?

We may be nearing spring break, but Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are still focused on the campus. First, there’s the matter of President Biden’s student loan plan: will a Supreme Court challenge to the policy falter on standing grounds? And is the Court’s newfound skepticism towards executive power as cynical as the media suggests? Then, there’s the issue of reforming higher ed. What’s to be done with disruptive students like the ones who shut down a recent Federalist Society event at Stanford? And is it time to rethink tenure for professors? Several states think so. All that, plus the professors dive into the controversy over Silicon Valley Bank and weigh in (some with more enthusiasm than others) on America’s finest regional cuisine.

The faculty lounge has reopened for 2023 and Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are ringing in the new year in style. On the docket: What’s the potential fallout from President Biden’s mishandling of classified information? And how does it compare to former President Trump’s? What happens if the Supreme Court never gets to the bottom of the leak of the Dobbs opinion? Is there a sudden epidemic of incivility on the Court? And — the analysis you’re all really here for — will Alec Baldwin be convicted for his role in an accidental shooting on a New Mexico film set? All that plus Yoo reviews movies, Epstein takes a left turn into the JFK assassination, and we review some of the sickest burns in Supreme Court history.