June 28, 2017
In this episode, Dr. John C. Eastman, Founding Director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence will be joined by three of our own John Marshall Fellows to discuss cases from the 2016-17 Supreme Court term.
To discuss Murr v. Wisconsin, Dr. Eastman is joined by Anastasia Boden, a 2015 John Marshall Fellow. Ms. Boden is an attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation, working on the Economic Liberty Project where she challenges anti-competitive occupational licensing laws, and laws that restrict the freedom of speech. In this case, the Murr family is challenging a broad reading of the already-erroneous legal precedent established in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York in 1978, which made it nearly impossible for property owners to win compensation when state regulations take their property. This case was decided June 23, 2017.
Next, to discuss Matal v. Tam and Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, we are joined by Michael Huston, a 2014 John Marshall Fellow, who is an associate at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher. Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Huston served as a law clerk to Chief Justice John Roberts. Matal v. Tam involves the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s denial of the trademark application of the Asian rock music group, “The Slants,” because their name was found to be disparaging. In Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, merchants were forbidden to truthfully notify customers that use of a debit or credit card would result in a “surcharge.” The Court addressed whether the the First Amendment protects these types of speech.
And to discuss Trinity Lutheran Church v. Pauley, Dr. John Eastman is joined by Dr. Sohan Dasgupta, a 2016 John Marshall Fellow who is currently clerking for Judge David Faber of the the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia and who will clerk for Judge Consuelo Callahan of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Dr. Dasgupta served as executive editor for the Berkeley Journal of International Law. In this case, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources denied a state grant to resurface a playground at a child learning center in Missouri solely because the center is operated by a church. In 2014 the district court ruled against Trinity Lutheran, as did the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Eighth Circuit. The case was argued before the Supreme Court on April 19, 2017.
June 26, 2017
On June 25th, Claremont CCJ Founding Director Dr. John Eastman joined Liberty Watch to discuss recent important Supreme Court cases. Dr. Eastman's segment begins at the 24:28 minute mark.
June 13, 2017
What is the Constitution's emoluments clause, and what is the argument that President Trump violated it? On June 12th, Claremont CCJ Founding Director Dr. John Eastman joined The Larry Elder Show to discuss DC and Maryland suing President Trump based on the emoluments clause of the Constitution, and more.
May 17, 2017
On May 16th, Claremont CCJ Founding Director Dr. John Eastman joined The Larry Elder Show to discuss Trump's recent immigration executive order, the Comey memo, and sanctuary cities.
May 17, 2017
Following H. R. McMaster's White House Press Briefing, Claremont Senior Fellow Dr. Charles Kesler joined AirTalk on May 16th to discuss the fallout from Trump's reported sharing of sensitive intelligence with Russian officials. (Skip to the 24:28 mark to begin Dr. Kesler's portion.)
April 20, 2017
In this episode Dr. John C. Eastman, Founding Director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, and his guest Joseph Tartakovsky, Nevada Deputy Solicitor General and the Claremont Institute's James Wilson Fellow in Constitutional Law, discuss religious discrimination issues within Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer.
This case was argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on April 19th. The issue before the Court involves the Missouri Department of Natural Resources denial of a state grant to resurface a playground at a child-learning center in Missouri solely because a church operates the center. The church argued that its exclusion from a state run program, whose purpose is to assist non-profit organizations with obtaining rubber playground surfaces, is a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause by discriminating against religious institutions. Meanwhile, the state argued that there is no constitutional violation because the church can still run its learning center, and the state constitution forbids government aid to educational institutions that have a religious affiliation.
Additionally, Dr. Eastman was joined by Professor Anthony T. Caso to take a look at what Justice Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the Supreme Court may mean for our efforts to roll back the administrative state and restore the constitution’s limitations on executive power. Professor Caso is the Director of our Constitutional Jurisprudence Clinic at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law.
April 13, 2017
On April 7th, Claremont Review of Books Senior Editor William Voegeli joined Deutsche Welle's Ben Bathke to discuss his latest CRB piece, entitled "The Democratic Party’s Identity Crisis."
April 10, 2017
After Democrats successfully blocked Judge Neil Gorsuch's Supreme Court nomination from advancing in the Senate, Dr. John C. Eastman, Founding Director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, joined "McIntyre in the Morning" to discuss the Republicans' vow to use the nuclear option.
March 31, 2017
During the Obama administration we watched the government's willingness to enforce its preferences in the lives of citizens increase exponentially in almost every arena. In this podcast Dr. John C. Eastman, Founding Director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, and his guests will take up two cases arguing against this unconstitutional interference: Murr v. Wisconsin, a property rights case; and Gloucester County School Board v. G.G., a transgender bathroom case.
John Groen, lead counsel for the Murr family in Murr v. Wisconsin, and General Counsel and Senior Attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation joins us in this town hall. The Murrs challenge a legal precedent instituted in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York (1978), which made it nearly impossible for property owners to win compensation when state regulations take their property. The Center filed a brief supporting the Murrs' argument that regulations that effectively hold private property hostage require just compensation under the Constitution.
On March 6 the Supreme Court vacated and remanded our second case back to the 4th Circuit after President Trump rescinded the guidance that added protections for transgender students to Title IX. Dr. Eastman is joined by Stephanie Taub, Counsel with First Liberty Institute, to discuss Gloucester County School Board v. G.G., and its return to the 4th Circuit. In 2015 a transgender student in Virginia sued the school district for access to the men's bathroom. The 4th Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision granting access, and the School Board appealed to the Supreme Court, asking whether the federal statute's reinterpretation by a low-level bureaucrat was entitled to deference, and whether the Department's reinterpretation of Title IX should be given effect. The Center filed a brief on behalf of the National Organization of Marriage in support of the school board.