In February, the NCC convened a superb group of legal commentators in Miami to explore the

relationship between the Trump administration and the Roberts Court.

Hello, friends. I'm Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center,

and welcome to We the People, a weekly show of constitutional debate.

The National Constitution Center is a nonpartisan nonprofit, chartered by Congress to increase

awareness and understanding of the Constitution among the American people.

In this episode, Jamel Bowie and David French of the New York Times, Sarah Isker of the Dispatch,

and Melissa Murray of NYU School of Law explore the Supreme Court

and the Second Trump Administration.

They discuss how the court might respond to a range of challenges about the scope of

executive power and preview the most important cases of the term.

Enjoy the show.

Let's jump right in.

David, you have described the legal challenges to the new executive orders as a kind of hydra.

Tell us what that means and give us your sense of as that hydra works its way up to the

Supreme Court, how the Supreme Court ultimately this year is likely to respond to the challenges that it confronts.

Yeah, I use the analogy of a hydra because we had this campaign, I mean, some people have called it shock and awe,

of just a giant number of executive orders just flooding the zone all at once,

and not just executive orders, but also executive actions that were not, you know, written down in the form of executive orders,

but are being enacted throughout the executive branch. And so at first you get this kind of questioning, like, tell me about this order and this order and this order. And you have to go through order by order, obviously, and the courts will do that to evaluate them one by one.

But there's a central theme to all of it.

And you can't miss that forest for the trees.

...