Ever found yourself lost in legal jargon? Fear not! Our mission is to decode complex legal concepts into everyday language, making them accessible to all.
Meet...
The Fight for a Third Trump Term: Can It Really Happen?
Just a month into Donald Trump’s second term as president, some of his supporters are already pushing a constitutional amendment to allow him a third term in office.
Even Trump, himself, is talking about the possibility of a third term being mandated by his MAGA supporters.
The day after Trump’s inauguration, Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives to amend the U.S. Constitution to allow Trump to run and be elected for a third term.
Currently, the 22nd Amendment which was ratified in 1951 prohibits a person from being elected more than twice as President.
The 22nd Amendment was passed after President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) failed to complete his fourth term in office. He was elected four times from 1932-1944.
This episode of Next Witness…Please, examines how constitutional amendments are ratified and the dangers to our democracy that may appear on the horizon.
Retired judges Gayle Williams-Byers and Thomas Hodson discuss the route for an amendment that starts with Congress, and they explain a second option in which the states call for a national Constitutional Convention.
They outline the processes to be followed to enact an amendment and how amending the federal constitution differs from amending most state constitutions.
Retired judges Byers and Hodson also discuss ways that Trump could grab a third presidential term without passing a constitutional amendment.
He could spawn a movement to repeal the 22nd Amendment; he could run for vice president and then have the titular president resign, or he could just
ignore the constitution altogether by refusing to leave office despite current constitutional language.
--------
1:00:07
Trump and Musk Declare War on Bureaucracy—But Americans Trust Civil Servants More
As President Donald Trump and his cohort Elon Musk target huge cuts in the federal bureaucracy, the public trusts bureaucrats more than politicians.
In an interesting 2024 survey by the Partnership for Public Service, 63 percent of Americans said they did not trust the federal government while only 31 percent said the federal government had a positive impact on the United States.
However, 91 percent believe competent civil servants are important to a strong democracy and 95 percent believe civil servants should be hired based upon merit rather than politics.
On this edition of Next Witness…Please, Dr. Stephen A. Goldman, psychiatrist, author, and historian, delves into the reasons for this dichotomy.
He discusses the importance of federal regulation and the non-partisan civil service in the wake of Trump’s executive orders targeting thousands of federal workers.
He explains the regulatory process in simple, understandable terms.
Dr. Goldman spent several years at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a medical product safety and risk management expert and regulator and speaks from first-hand knowledge about the importance of regulations.
He also explains the importance of the oath that federal workers take pledging their allegiance to the U.S. Constitution and not to any one political leader. This independence is vital for the neutral functioning of government and has served our country well, he says.
Dr. Goldman warns that getting rid of a non-political civil service has been the target of authoritarians and fascists throughout history. He fears that, if left unprotected, ridding the government of so many trained professionals will do irreparable harm to the United States and the damage may be irreversible.
--------
59:18
Trump's War on DEI: Executive Orders Spark Legal Battles And Voluntary Rollbacks
Amid President Donald Trump’s early slew of executive orders, at least four seek to eliminate Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives started as long ago as the presidency of Lyndon Johnson.
This edition of Next Witness…Please examines the concept of executive orders, charts some voluntary compliance and delves into current and upcoming litigations challenging the constitutionality of the orders.
The executive orders seek to eliminate DEI initiatives in government, the military, the private sector and higher education. There is a fourth one directed at K-12 education that was promulgated but that will be a subject of a separate Next Witness…Please episode.
Our retired judges Gayle Williams-Byers and Thomas Hodson explain that an executive order can take steps that are withing the scope of constitutional authority of the Executive Branch of Government. An executive order cannot override existing federal laws or statutes passed by Congress.
On Jan. 20, Trump issued an order to eliminate all DEI hiring within the federal government under the title of “Restoring the Federal Hiring Process and Restoring Merit to Government Service.”
The next day he issued an order “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit Based Opportunity” calling DEI programs “dangerous, demeaning, and immoral race and sex-based preferences.”
On Jan. 22, he signed an order, “Restoring America’s Fighting Force”, abolishing all DEI offices and initiatives in the military.
These orders have sparked voluntary compliance within the federal government and the private sector with many corporations and academic institutions announcing elimination of DEI initiatives.
On February 3, one lawsuit was filed in federal court in Maryland asking for a preliminary and permanent injunction against the all-encompassing order saying it is unconstitutional on multiple levels.
--------
1:04:52
Trump’s Felony Sentencing: Why It Still Matters Amid the Chaos of His PresidencyTrump’s Felony Sentencing: Why It Still Matters Amid the Chaos of His Presidency
As the first weeks of President Donald J. Trump’s presidency devolve into chaos within the federal government, the Next Witness…Please podcast takes a retrospective look at Trump’s felony sentencing in New York and why it is still important.
Retired judges Gayle Williams-Byers and Thomas Hodson talk about the reasoning used by Judge Juan Merchan for his sentence, the sentencing proceeding itself and the Supreme Court decision leading up to the sentencing.
Our hosts define, in understandable terms, what an “unconditional discharge” is and explain the importance of a “final appealable order” in the 34 felony convictions.
A sentencing of Trump had to take place before Trump’s legal team could appeal the case to the next level court of appeals in New York.
Our retired judges also examine the 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that allowed the sentencing to proceed just days before Trump’s inauguration.
The Court ruling against Trump was a surprise to many observers who expected the super conservative majority to side with President Trump.
Our hosts also discuss how President Trump cannot pardon himself for state committed felonies and why that matters.
Finally, they delve into how Trump, even at a state court level, got special treatment that other criminal defendants would never receive.
--------
1:03:48
TikTok’s Future in America Hangs by a ThreadTikTok’s Future in America Hangs by a ThreadTikTok’s Future in America Hangs by a Thread
As TikTok, the video app, skyrockets in popularity, a legal battle rages to see if a Congressional ban to shut it down takes effect on Jan.19.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard 2.5 hours of oral arguments in a lawsuit filed by ByteDance, the parent company who owns TikTok, along with some creators, against legislation passed last April by Congress.
The Congressional action said that TikTok either had to cease operations in the United States by Sunday, Jan. 19 or sell ByteDance to an American owner.
The plaintiffs are trying to have the Court find the Congressional ban unconstitutional based upon the First Amendment.
Congress passed the ban based upon security concerns saying that ByteDance was controlled by the Chinese government and that TikTok has been gathering data on Americans and that process breaches national security.
The government has argued that this is not a First Amendment issue but an issue of national security that Congress has the right to protect.
As of Jan. 16, the Supreme Court has not yet issued its ruling. Meanwhile, President elect Donald Trump is trying to devise ways to halt the ban for 60 to 90 days to see if he can broker a deal between China and Congress.
On this episode of Next Witness…Please, retired judges Thomas Hodson and Gayle Williams-Byers explain the legal questions raised in the litigation and look at what other options might be available to save TikTok.
They also look ahead at what will happen is TikTok is shut down.
Ever found yourself lost in legal jargon? Fear not! Our mission is to decode complex legal concepts into everyday language, making them accessible to all.
Meet your hosts, the dynamic duo known as the Judicial Twins!
Retired judge Tom Hodson brings over 50 years of legal expertise as a trial judge, defense attorney, and former Judicial Fellow at the Supreme Court of the United States.
Retired judge Gayle William-Byers, with more than two decades of public service as a prosecutor and judge, is now sharing her knowledge as a Judicial Fellow for The National Judicial College and a legal analyst.
Join us as we embark on a quest to demystify the legal system and increase your understanding of its complexities.
Tune in to "Next Witness... Please" for enlightening discussions, insightful perspectives, and a deeper understanding of the law. Don't miss out – subscribe now and let's unravel the mysteries of the legal world together!
USA