Amid an unrelenting news cycle, one story really hit hard for both Mary and Andrew this week: the passing of former FBI Director Robert Mueller. Both hosts worked with him: Mary in the DC US Attorney’s Office; Andrew as FBI Special Counsel, General Counsel, and ultimately, as a top prosecutor in Mueller’s 2016 Special Counsel investigation into Russian election interference. They reflect on Mueller’s life and legacy being one dedicated topublic service, which, in Andrew’s accounting, “wasn't just a calling, it was a privilege.” Next, they move to a win for journalism and freedom of the press: Judge Paul Friedman’s decision in the case brought by the New York Times against the Pentagon regarding press access. And lastly, Mary and Andrew reviewMonday’s Supreme Court oral arguments in a case centered on whether mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day should be counted. The co-hosts read the tea leaves on the merits the justices seem to be eyeing and what it could mean for midterm voting this fall.

And, a big thank you to listeners as Main Justice celebrates it’s 3-year anniversary. Starting today, you can also find us on YouTube at ms.now/mainjustice.

Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows.

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Last week, Judge James Boasberg checked in the Justice Department by quashing two subpoenas against Federal Reserve Board Chair Jerome Powell, intended to pressure him into "voting for lower interest rates or resigning.” Finding “essentially zero evidence” of criminal behavior, Mary and Andrew explain how these subpoenas were issued as retribution and retaliation against Powell, as Boasberg cited over 100 statements that the president and his deputies made attacking him. Next, the co-hosts dig into the disciplinary proceedings against President Trump’s pardon attorney Ed Martin, who, while serving as DC’s interim U.S. Attorney, pressured Georgetown Law School to change its curriculum. Last on the agenda, Mary and Andrew highlight the case that AI firm Anthropic filed against the Defense Department over being essentially blacklisted. The case is centered around the Pentagon labeling the AI firm a “supply chain risk” after they asked the Pentagon not to use their “Claude” AI technology to do two things: “deploy lethal autonomous warfare without human oversight” and use it for “mass surveillance of Americans.”

Further reading:

• Here is the complaint Anthropic filed against the government: Complaint For Declaratory And Injunctive Relief
• Here once again is the Federal Register if you’d like to enter public comment: Review of State Bar Complaints and Allegations Against Department of Justice Attorneys

Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows.

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Today's episode begins with a breakdown of the Justice Department’s about-face on four cases brought after Trump targeted several law firms through executive action. As Mary and Andrew discussed last week – they initially dropped their appeal of the decisions against sanctioning these firms, only to reverse course the next day, topped off with a new court filing Friday appealing the rulings. Next, the co-hosts review a pair of decisions: one out of Minnesota's district court concerning the state’s immigration surge, which determined the stopping and subsequent arrests of the case’s plaintiffs was a result of racial profiling. The second decision comes from U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, who ruled Kari Lake’s oversight of Voice of America unlawful and illegitimate. Last up, Mary and Andrew detail Attorney General Pam’s Bondi’s proposed rule that would put any state complaint against a justice department lawyer on hold while the DOJ reviews it, essentially giving the department the power to hold these indefinitely if they so choose.

Further reading:

• Here is Mary’s recent piece on MS Now detailing the DOJ’s shift on appealing several law firm decisions: What’s exposed by the Justice Department’s reversal on Trump’s campaign against law firms. Every lawyer knows that the federal court rulings were correct and that the president's executive orders are legally indefensible.
• Here is the Federal Resister: Review of State Bar Complaints and Allegations Against Department of Justice Attorneys

Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows.

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.