
1.8M
Downloads
268
Episodes
Professor Akhil Reed Amar, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science at Yale University and one of the nation's leading authorities on the Constitution, offers weekly in-depth discussions on the most urgent and fascinating constitutional issues of our day. He is joined by co-host Andy Lipka and guests drawn from other top experts including Bob Woodward, Nina Totenberg, Neal Katyal, Lawrence Lessig, Michael Gerhardt, and many more.
Professor Akhil Reed Amar, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science at Yale University and one of the nation's leading authorities on the Constitution, offers weekly in-depth discussions on the most urgent and fascinating constitutional issues of our day. He is joined by co-host Andy Lipka and guests drawn from other top experts including Bob Woodward, Nina Totenberg, Neal Katyal, Lawrence Lessig, Michael Gerhardt, and many more.
Episodes

Wednesday Jan 07, 2026
Venezuelan Frisbie
Wednesday Jan 07, 2026
Wednesday Jan 07, 2026
The military capture of the Venezuelan leader, Maduro, is an event with giant international strategic, moral, economic, political, and other considerations. It also raises fascinating constitutional questions, and Professor Amar is ready to discuss some matters that probably did not come to your mind right away. Much of this stems from the fact that Maduro will be tried in a U.S. civilian, not a military court, so constitutional protections are implicated. Whatever your thoughts about the policy matters, it behooves you to join us in this exploration of how this escapade reveals a strain in constitutional doctrine that remains unresolved. Meanwhile, you will learn of cases with names like “Frisbie,” hence our title. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges at podcast.njsba.com.

2 months ago
Civil suits are futile as deterrents to unconstitutional searches. In Mapp the Court found that more than half the states had adopted the exclusionary rule because “other remedies [including civil suits for damages] have completely failed to secure compliance with the constitutional provisions”. Juries rarely rule in favor of convicted criminals over police officers. The Court cited not only deterrence in support of the exclusionary rule, but also the principle of judicial integrity --courts should not be complicit in violations of the 4th amendment.