Are There Limits on Emergency Powers? With John Yoo and Richard Epstein
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 июн 2024
- Recorded on January 17, 2019.
Can a sitting president be indicted? What emergency powers does President Trump have to build a border wall and stop the government shutdown? Richard Epstein and John Yoo sit down with Peter Robinson to answer these legal questions and more regarding the constitutional powers of the presidency, the state of the Supreme Court, the Mueller investigation, and the legality (or lack thereof) of indicting a sitting president.
As the country continues to deal with a partial government shutdown, Epstein and Yoo address the shutdown, the likelihood of its coming to a timely end, and what kind of bipartisan compromise could end it. Yoo suggests that one potential outcome would be that Democrats require the legalized status of DREAMers in exchange for border-wall funding. Epstein argues that President Trump will have to cave if services like TSA screening begin to shut down from lack of funding. They both agree that the longer the shutdown goes on, the more likely citizens are to get increasingly frustrated with both parties, regardless of the moral stances the party leaders are taking.
For what and when can a president declare a national emergency? Epstein and Yoo dive into the history of national emergencies and presidential emergency powers. They discuss which presidents have declared national emergencies in the past and for what reasons, who has the standing to stop a national emergency, and the fact that no court has ever reversed a national emergency. (In 1952, during the Korean War, President Truman issued Executive Order 10340, which ordered US steel mills to operate despite a nationwide strike because Truman wanted to keep materiel flowing to the front. The court concluded that seizing the mills was a legislative act that could only be authorized by Congress.)
Epstein and Yoo discuss William Barr, President Trump’s newly appointed attorney general, and his congressional-hearing questions about the Mueller investigation. They discuss Barr’s legal background, his personal relationship with Mueller, and the likelihood that he would fire Mueller if asked to. Yoo argues that the best course of action for the Mueller investigation is to allow Mueller to clear Trump of any wrongdoing, which would put a stop to any Democrats’ arguments to the contrary.
Additional information concerning national emergencies
www.washingtonexaminer.com/op... - Davenport
www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed... - Yoo
ricochet.com/podcast/law-talk... - Epstein and Yoo
Interested in exclusive Uncommon Knowledge content? Check out Uncommon Knowledge on social media!
Facebook: / uncknowledge
Twitter: / uncknowledge
Instagram: / uncommon_knowledge_show
![Roddy Ricch - Survivors Remorse [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/J5IeFzr2GgE/mqdefault.jpg)
Best channel on RUclips. Criminally under-subscribed.
BIG FACTS
but no quorum... 2 Jews, one Asian... tsk tsk... need one black lesbian and a trans latino before this conversation will be FACTUAL
Deep intellectual stuff like this will always be criminally under-subscribed.
I'm so happy...the alt news is really declining in brain cells
Why is Peter always so time-conscious? This is RUclips, give us 2 hour interviews, we won’t mind.
His guests are likely to have hard stops
John and Richard have such great banter, love watching or listening to them. You can also get them on the podcast "Law Talk".
Cheers from Tokyo!
I absolutely love Uncommon Knowledge and I am a 22 year old university student, WE'RE NOT ALL BAD!
These interviews are always very interesting and informative, but this was the most fun of any I've listened to yet. Great banter.
A very insightful conversation. Both professors are respectful. The last Q&A were amazing in terms of consensus.
Very insightful and interesting, I wish more people would sit down and watch this rather than watching biased soundbites from various news outlets.
Great talk. Humorous, educational, direct, honest. This is what CBS 60 minutes should be like and not the nausea-inducing Ocasio-Cortez propaganda fest .
Prediction on Amy Coney Barrett from a year ago 43:03
Spoke on this matter during lecture, this is great insight... thank you!
Outstanding and informative. Thank you.
Is this the Yoo who counseled G.W. Bush about limits to torture and extraordinary rendition? That one?
Wonderful debate. Thank you.
43:08
He called the nominee and the reaction!
Not surprising I guess, considering how predictable liberals can be.
how does he know the issue is "less acute now as it was 20 years ago"? is there someone counting illegals on the border?
Why did they change the music? It's too bombastic.
The U.S. Supreme Court, however, refused to accept that argument in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, voting 6-3 that neither Commander in Chief powers nor any claimed emergency powers gave the president the authority to unilaterally seize private property without Congressional legislation.[51]
I knew it was John Woo and Epstein. I'm 31 and an opiate addict loser making 28k per year. I'm not sure how to fix it, but I wish I was in politics.
You need to say to yourself "I'm finished", and mean it. Never go back. Get help, leave every friend that uses, move away if you have to. Then fight for your life, it may take 5, 10 years to overcome because the damage is already done, you identify as a loser. You are not, you a human being with value and worth beyond measure, it just needs to be cultivated. Also MAGA, trump 2020 and all that lol
slappy happy , I’m 34 and I wrecked the last 19 years of my life similarly. The internet lets us be involved in politics if we are willing to offer our views selflessly. Hope you stop calling yourself harsh names.
You are not a loser by virtue of being an addict. You are a loser if you give up. If you are smart enough to understand and appreciate complex legal issues such as the current discussion then you are smart enough to find solutions to your problems.
? NATIONAL EMERGENCY?....you can see the European experience....over run by, essentialy, lawless military age young men.......the experience makes you want to arm yourself to protect your family.....more, if they vote....they do not have the allegience to moving to a more productive society....do we need a police state
Bravo. Great minds.
Anyone notice that the air ports with private TSA security just kept ticking along with no problems,?
Kind of tells you a lot doesn't it?
great episode, though too short...would have been better if it was 3 hours. bring them back a couple more times. cool to see two great minds dueling over some points.
this was one of my favorite Uncommon Knowledge episodes.
"The" Richard Epstein! :)
Is Rbg alive? We have a right to know.
That was Justice Jacksons concurring opionion in Youngstown talking about the Presidents "ebb."
Amy Barrett on SC? blah.. Why not someone like Amar?
Professor Yoo's over-interpretation of presidential powers has a very worrying track record.
I agree this is a severely underrated RUclips channel. Uncommon Knowledge is one of the most informative podcasts out there. Peter Robinson should do meme reviews on pewdiepie like Ben Shapiro to get more subs.
God no.
Good info, good discussion. Basically, I gather it will come down to SCOTUS. Where it will hopefully be upheld.
So are you going to chortle in ivory towers while the community burns with chaos?
How long will the lofty kick a matter towards detonation.I respect jurisprudence, it’s supposed to be a solemn consideration for good reason.
Jon yoo is the guy who wrote the torture papers saying it was okay
@feelings Are Not Arguments two wrongs don't make a right.
Statute doesn't say what could be declared national emergency. Its up to the President. BUT even if President declare national emergencies his power is limited by Statute and building wall is one of those limited powers. DEM can't use national emergencies to limited guns because constitution trumps statute
How Can this be emergency when you Wait two months before declaring it Doesn’t sound like an emergency to me under any jurisdiction
Thank You Very Much for sharing this interview. It exemplifies friendly discussion with common ground and civil disagreements buoyed with expertise and high intelligence. A good investment of time. Compared to other superfluous videos on RUclips, those of HooverInstitution stand out.
Wow... timing of the release of this video couldn’t have disproven, and made a mockery of this entire episode more than yesterday.
How so?
Epstein and Scalia for the win. Fuck yes. At 31:30. Beautiful minds.
30:20 Antonin Scalia quote. Very good.
Very good!
my god the antisemitism in the comment section would make any muslim proud.(i am an ex muslim). its so sad that people see things that way
Truly uncommon knowledge
This should be great :)
Yoo quoting Breitbart at 51:00 -- downstream
The older guest is being cut off and interrupted so much by both the host and the other guest,its irritating. I can't follow the older gentleman's train of thought. This is not only rude,but violates one of the cardinal rules in interviewing. Listening. Why invite the guy on your show if your not going to listen to what he has to say????