On a new episode of the Insider podcast, Preet Bharara and Joyce Vance discuss:
– The Supreme Court’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor, which affords parents of elementary school children a religious exemption to school lessons on LGBTQ+ storybooks;
– A federal judge’s ruling that stops President Trump from limiting who can apply for asylum in the U.S.;
– The Supreme Court’s order that cleared the way for the Trump administration to deport a group of immigrants to South Sudan; and
– The blowback against Attorney General Pam Bondi following DOJ’s disclosure that Jeffrey Epstein didn’t have a “client list” and wasn’t murdered.
A NOTE FROM THE PRODUCER
is a lawyer and Supervising Producer at Stay Tuned with Preet.
What qualifies as an “invasion” at the U.S.-Mexico border? And who determines whether the current circumstances meet that definition?
These novel questions are at the heart of several disputes related to President Trump’s immigration agenda. Preet Bharara and Joyce Vance discuss one of those cases on a new episode of the Insider podcast.
In this case, a federal judge has blocked Trump’s attempt to restrict who can seek asylum in the United States. On Inauguration Day, Trump issued a proclamation suspending access to asylum at the southern border, invoking Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution to declare that the U.S. was facing an “invasion.”
In his opinion, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss wrote, “Nothing in the [Immigration and Nationality Act] or the Constitution grants the President…the sweeping authority” to unilaterally curb asylum eligibility. Moss also rejected the Trump administration’s position that its invocation of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution is not reviewable by courts. Preet and Joyce analyze the judge’s ruling and Trump’s position in the case.
Joyce: “One of the administration’s defenses of this policy is: you can’t review our decision about when there’s an invasion...If Trump decides there's an invasion, game over.”
Preet: “It is the M.O. of this executive branch to find ways to take words out of their ordinary meaning, [and] expand them for the purpose of expanding [Trump’s] power and authority.”
Thank you for being a member of our community here on Substack. If you’re not yet a paying subscriber, you can now listen to a free excerpt from the show. For access to the full analysis, upgrade your subscription.
Stay Informed,
Jake
