You havent known the Inflation Reduction Act for you know what it is 25 yoyears, and you have known me. So ill take it. L im just thrilled to have this handoff with you every four days a week, chris. It is the thing that brings me joy, my friend. Happy anniversary. Thanks, buddy. Ha thanks for a great show as always. And thanks to you at home for joining me this hour once again. We now haveur a date. March 4, 2024. That is the day Fulton County district Attorneyon Fani Willis proposed her case against trump and his 18 codefendants match that is the date shed like it to go to trial. That would put this trial in georgia two months after the date Special Counsel jack smith proposed for the attempts to overturn the 2020 election and three weeks before the Hush Money Case set to start in new york and two months before the maralago classified documents cased which is may 20th and it would be just one day before super tuesday. That means just 200 days from tomorrow trump and his codefendants
support. i m michael smerconish in philadelphia. monday america celebrates the third ever federal holiday of juneteenth, commemorating the emancipation of enslaved african americans. as we do, the consensus among legal scholars is the supreme court will soon be ending affirmative action, at least in the context of college admissions. does that mean it achieved its purpose or we re abandoning the underlying premise? a pair of cases have been argued. we ll soon know the results. one involves harvard, the other the university of north carolina. the conventional wisdom is that race-conscious admissions will end. currently race is permitted to be a factor, meaning one factor among many to be considered as schools seek to create a diverse student body. kwoet quote teas, however, are unconstitutional. that s the bottom line after the supreme court has taken up several cases involve ing affirmative action over time. justice sandra day o connor wrote we expect 25 years from now the us
juneteenth, commemorating the emancipation of enslaved african americans, and as we do, the consensus among legal scholars is that the supreme court will soon be ending affirmative action, at least in the context of college administrations. does that mean that it achieved its purpose or that we re abandoning the underlying premise? a pair of cases have been argued. we will soon know the results. one involves harvard, the other the university of north carolina. the conventional wisdom is that race conscious administrations will end. currently race is permitted to be a factor in the administrations calculus, meaning one factor among many to be considered as schools seek to create a diverse student body for everybody s benefit. quotas on the other hand, are unconstitutional. that s the bottom line after the supreme court has taken up several major cases involving affirmative action over the years. and one of those cases was in 2003, it was grutter versus bollinger, involved the
for thesese reasons, they may start thinking twice as so many more caseswi are piling up on h. andrew, mary makes a point about whoma is actually working for donald trump in terms of counsel. and maybe because he s such a difficult client or a notoriously tightfisted client who doesn t pay his bills, we re not talking about big law firms here. john lauro his website says they have four lawyers and a paralegal. todd blanch at blanche law there are two lawyers. you re talking about cases where the discovery in the federal case 11.6 million i believe documents, i know this is one of the excuses trump s legal team has said, we can t get to all this in the c allotted time. well, the reason for part of that is there s two people in theth shop. right, what can you tell me about the bare bones nature of his counsel given the mountain
there is precedent down there to delay at trial for quite a period of time when it is complicated. is this as complicated as a medicare fraud case? insurance is very complicated. but does that give you some cover? it might, but what doesn t are some of the excuses trump s team have made, we re a small law firm, we can t use contract attorneys. the department of justice made very clear that s not an excuse. you need to hire people on a part-time or interim basis, we ll give them the security clearance they need. you have some time here and this isn t that complicated. given the scope of this you would think he would have the most amount of legal firepower you could bring. he s the former president. you would think top-notch law firms. a team of people in navy and