Law Talk with Epstein, Yoo & Cooke

What does a Democratic midterm wave mean for the Supreme Court? Charles C. W. Cooke, Richard Epstein, and John Yoo debate judicial nominations, possible retirements, and the prospect of court packing before turning to a property rights dispute over compensation for pipeline construction. Then, as completely expected, John Yoo mounts a passionate defense of the McRib against a false advertising lawsuit. Finally, Trump’s proposed triumphal arch sparks a debate over judicial power, presidential motives, and who gets to shape Washington’s skyline.

Can the federal government ban you from making whiskey in your own home? Richard Epstein, John Yoo, and Charles C.W. Cooke  tackle the constitutional limits of federal power, a double–Dan Sullivan ballot controversy in Alaska, and the blurry line between prediction markets and gambling. Then it’s on to a Supreme Court sidelined by recusals—and whether the justices need a bench of substitutes.

Can the city of Boulder set climate policy for the world? Can Colorado make Catholic preschools choose between their faith and public funding? And can a six-pack of beer cost you an airplane? Richard Epstein and John Yoo join Charles C. W. Cooke to preview the Supreme Court’s coming term, tackling climate lawsuits, religious liberty, AR-15 bans, and the Eighth Amendment—with plenty of constitutional sparring and a surprising amount of agreement.

Can the government track your car, can the president show reporters the door, and can you blame a chatbot for someone’s crimes? Charles C. W. Cooke, Richard Epstein, and John Yoo tackle Flock surveillance cameras and the Fourth Amendment, the fight over White House press access, and the limits of AI liability—before taking on Meta’s social media settlement and asking when settling a lawsuit became a license to write everyone else’s rules.

Charles C. W. Cooke, John Yoo, and Richard Epstein debate whether Meta can really be held responsible for the harms of social media, whether Texas can put the Ten Commandments in public-school classrooms, and whether the enormous defamation judgments against Donald Trump can survive Supreme Court scrutiny. They conduct a intense debate over Trump’s White House ballroom, including questions of standing, congressional authority, private funding, and just how far a president can go in remaking the executive mansion. Across all four disputes, the conversation keeps returning to the same fault lines: runaway damages, judicial power, constitutional limits, and whether co...

This week, the Law Talk crew tackles Trump’s White House ballroom fight, the latest battle over birthright citizenship, Anthony Fauci’s decision to plead the Fifth, and the controversial pardons issued by Joe Biden. They debate the limits of executive power, the authority of the courts and Congress, and whether America’s expansive presidential pardon power has finally gone too far.

Can a U.S. mayor enforce an International Criminal Court warrant? Has President Trump found a new legal path to tariffs after earlier setbacks? And can the government really seize a $95,000 airplane over a six-pack of beer? Richard Epstein, John Yoo, and Charles C. W. Cooke unpack these legal controversies before closing with a spirited debate over which Supreme Court justices deserve a place on the judicial Mount Rushmore.

Charles C. W. Cooke, John Yoo, and Richard Epstein break down three major Supreme Court decisions from the end of the term: Trump v. Barbara, the birthright citizenship case that left the status quo intact while sparking a debate over originalism, birth tourism, and Wong Kim Ark; West Virginia v. BPJ, the transgender-athletes case addressing Title IX, equal protection, women’s sports, and federalism; and National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC, the campaign-finance ruling that further limits restrictions on coordinated party spending and raises big questions about money, speech, corruption, and the future strength of political parties.

In part one of our Supreme Court decisions coverage, Charles C. W. Cooke, Richard Epstein, and John Yoo break down the decisions handed down today, beginning with the Court’s treatment of presidential removal power in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook (no relation) —the first apparently overruling Humphrey’s Executor for ordinary agencies, the second preserving a major carveout for the Federal Reserve. They also debate Chatrie v. United States, a Fourth Amendment case involving law enforcement’s use of geofencing warrants and cellphone location data, and close with Watson v. Republican National Committee, in which Justice Amy Coney Ba...

The Supreme Court drops a bombshell voting-rights ruling, Richard Epstein declares the republic is heading for the rocks, John Yoo says everybody needs to calm down because politicians have always behaved terribly, and Charlie Cooke tries to referee the whole thing before the podcast devolves into anarchy. Along the way: racial gerrymandering, constitutional originalism, the mysterious “Republican Form of Government Clause,” whether Trump can legally settle a lawsuit with… himself, and why both parties suddenly love slush funds when they’re the ones holding the hose. It’s a cheerful little conversation about whether America’s political system is fundamentally broken — and...

In this episode of Law Talk Live—recorded at the University of Texas at Austin and hosted by the Civitas Institute—Charles C. W. Cooke, John Yoo, and Richard Epstein debate  some of the most contentious constitutional questions of the moment. The panel examines the future of birthright citizenship in light of recent Supreme Court arguments, the tension between free speech and professional regulation in a major First Amendment case, and the legal and moral framework governing modern warfare, including what counts as a war crime. Blending sharp disagreement, historical insight, and a dose of humor, the conversation explores how prece...

John Yoo, Richard Epstein, and Charles C.W. Cooke dive into the legal firestorm surrounding U.S. actions in Iran—debating “imminence,” anticipatory self-defense, and whether international law has any real teeth. Then, they tackle a major 2nd Amendment case testing whether drug use can justify a permanent gun ban—and whether courts or legislatures should draw that line. Finally, a heated clash over parental rights, the Constitution, and California’s school policies raises a deeper question: where do these rights actually come from?

Recent Supreme Court rulings have put new limits on the president’s ability to impose sweeping tariffs under claims of national emergency. The Law Talk crew breaks down what the Court actually decided, why Trump’s emergency-tariff theory failed, and how trade law, constitutional structure, and basic economics collided in the case.  They also explore who really controls tariff power under the Constitution, why trade deficits don’t qualify as emergencies, and how doctrines like non-delegation and “major questions” are quietly reshaping executive authority.

Can a U.S. president buy — or even invade — Greenland? Can he tear up treaties, fire a member of the Federal Reserve, and still stay within the Constitution? And who actually decides what “fairness” means in women’s sports?In this wide-ranging Law Talk episode, Richard Epstein, John Yoo, and Charles C.W. Cooke debate Trump’s Greenland gambit, the limits of presidential war powers, treaty termination, NATO, transgender athletes and Title IX, Hawaii’s attempt to criminalize gun carry on private property, and whether the Supreme Court is about to blink when it comes to the independence of the Federal Reserve...

Is the United States already at war with Venezuela—and if so, who authorized it? The Law Talk crew reconvenes for a wide-ranging debate over presidential war powers, congressional passivity, and how far modern practice has drifted from constitutional text. The conversation then pivots to Netflix's attempt to buy Warner Bros antitrust and whether or not in these big mergers consumer welfare still matters at all. The episode closes with a sharp examination of the most feverish legal question of the moment: could a president really serve a third term—or is that pure constitutional fantasy?

The long-awaited originalism debate is here! Charles C.W. Cooke, Richard Epstein, and John Yoo argue the meaning and limits of originalism, how constitutional text should be interpreted, whether long-standing practices can override original meaning, and where modern doctrines—from Article I courts to immigration policy—fit within the founding framework. It's a spirited, clear, and tightly argued conversation about how the Constitution should function today.

The Supreme Court’s new term is loaded with big questions and Law Talk is on the cases: transgender athletes and Title IX, presidential power to fire officials (even at the Fed), race-based redistricting, free speech and “conversion therapy,” and Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose tariffs. From constitutional originalism to modern political realities, the trio debate what’s at stake for the Court — and for the country.

Richard Epstein, John Yoo, and host Charles C.W. Cook dive into Trump’s decision to blow up a Venezuelan drug boat (was it legal? was it war?), the Supreme Court’s green light for immigration profiling in Los Angeles, and the growing showdown between lower courts and SCOTUS. They finish with Trump trying to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook and ponder whether or not the president can take control of the Federal Reserve.

Charles C.W. Cooke moderates a spirited debate between John Yoo and Richard Epstein on the constitutional meaning and historical origins of birthright citizenship. Drawing on legal precedent, originalist interpretation, and Reconstruction-era history, the two scholars explore whether Wong Kim Ark was rightly decided, how “subject to the jurisdiction” should be understood, and what the policy implications are for modern immigration.

Richard Epstein, John Yoo, and Charles C.W. Cooke unpack one of the most consequential Supreme Court terms in recent memory. From nationwide injunctions and the scope of presidential power, to parental rights, transgender medicine, and age verification laws, the trio dives deep into the constitutional, structural, and political implications of the Court’s major decisions and what it all means for American governance.

What do Charles Barkley, the National Guard, and the Posse Comitatus Act have in common? In this episode, of Law Talk with Epstein & Yoo, Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo, joined by Charles C.W. Cooke, dive into the legal chaos surrounding the use of federal troops during civil unrest, whether Gavin Newsom could be overruled by the president, and what exactly the Constitution says about militias, insurrections, and executive power. They also weigh in on birthright citizenship, Supreme Court politics, and a game of HORSE on the Supreme Court basketball court (yes, it has one).

Law Talk returns and in this excursion,  Charles C.W. Cooke, Richard Epstein, and John Yoo tackle a grab bag of constitutional issues with their usual mix of legal scholarship and exasperation (typically with each other). First up: the state of Maine, apparently auditioning for a role in a dystopian novel, bans a legislator from speaking because her views on gender in sports offend the ruling party. Epstein and Yoo are, unsurprisingly, not impressed. Then it’s on to Trump’s latest target—Harvard—where he wants to yank their tax-exempt status for what he sees as race-based admissions sins. Yoo says...

Welcome to the new and improved Law Talk podcast, featuring host Charles C.W. Cooke! He joins legal heavyweights Richard Epstein and John Yoo for yet another spirited discussion of the latest legal controversies. They begin with the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants, debating the constitutional limits of executive power and the justiciability of national emergencies. They then tackle Trump’s lawsuits against law firms and the implications for the right to counsel and legal free speech. Later, they explore the administration’s aggressive tariff strategy u...

In this special edition of Law Talk with Epstein & Yoo, Richard Epstein and John Yoo are joined by National Review’s Charles C.W. Cooke to discuss the Supreme Court’s decisions concerning Donald Trump’s claim of presidential immunity in Trump v. United States, as well as Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, aka the Chevron case established in 1984.

Richard Epstein and John Yoo discuss the last two weeks of Supreme Court rulings covering challenges to Second, Fourteenth, and Sixteenth Amendments. They also preview the upcoming challenge to Chevron Deference and dive into disputes among the originalist thinkers on the court. Finally, they weigh in on criticisms of recent disclosures by Justice Thomas and future plans for a future Trump Administration from groups like Project 2025.

Richard and John respond to the clearing of student protests at major universities and judge their claims to the validity of their encampments. They also discuss the likelihood that the International Criminal Court issues arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and whether President Biden will continue the pressure that his predecessor did on the court. Finally, they make predictions about the Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling on Trump’s insistence that presidents have absolute immunity – during and after their terms.

Richard and John get into it over Trump’s many trials, the likelihood that he’ll receive a fair one in New York City, and the windfall he appears to have received as Truth Social’s holding company goes public. They discuss the likelihood that John Eastman loses his license to practice law and they make predictions about the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity in Trump’s cases involving Special Prosecutor Jack Smith. Finally, they preview a climate change case that could end up in front of the Supreme Court.

The faculty lounge is invaded by a guest host who pits Richard and John against one another, starting with their differences in opinion over when the government should regulate social media companies. While they predict the same Supreme Court ruling, they disagree on what constitutes government involvement in key dominated industries. Next Richard and John point to the natural consequence of Dobbs on the nation’s abortion laws, as they handle the recent Alabama IVF ruling that has the left-wing preparing fundraising and election materials for November. Finally, they turn to Mr. Trump’s legal woes, first with the Supreme Cour...

It’s a lively session in the faculty lounge, as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are both coming to us from California and … let’s just say that Richard seems to be enjoying life in the sun. First up, a guided tour through Donald Trump’s legal travails: the questions about whether he’ll be allowed on the ballot, the controversy over presidential immunity, and the debate over whether a second Trump Administration will pose a unique threat to the rule of law. Then we delve into a controversy over executive power regarding Joe Biden: is the president overstepping the limits...

The faculty lounge reopens for a holiday session and we start on a somber note as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo react to the breaking news of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s death. Then, we get their analysis on the latest in the Israel-Hamas war, consider whether the courts have gone too far in imposing gag orders on former President Trump, and take a look at a Supreme Court case on gun rights … that just might result in a unanimous decision. All that, plus the analysis you really care about: the professors weigh in on the least valuable dish o...

It’s a jam-packed session in the faculty lounge as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo go around the horn for a comprehensive look at the issues of the day: What does “international law” mean in the context of the war in Gaza? Should student activists be punished for their support of Hamas? Will the Supreme Court rule on whether Donald Trump can be on the 2024 ballot? What upcoming SCOTUS case inspired the first (non-podcast) Epstein and Yoo collaboration? And should the Supreme Court knuckle under to pressure to adopt a code of ethics? All that, plus we debate the finer...

It’s an interactive session in the faculty lounge, as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo submit to the annual tradition of answering listener questions. There’s some serious legal analysis — can Donald Trump become president from behind bars? Can the 14th Amendment keep him off the ballot? What powers does Congress have to regulate abortion in the aftermath of the Dobbs case? But then we go to the deep cuts: Who are the greatest writers in the history of the Supreme Court? What’s it really like behind closed doors in Washington? Will the populist swing in the Republican Party resh...

Is Donald Trump toast? Are the walls closing in on Hunter Biden? Those are questions that can’t adequately be answered by two minutes of cable news. Luckily, Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are here with one of the all-time deep-dive Law Talk episodes: a thorough look at the cases facing Donald Trump in Georgia, Florida, D.C., and Manhattan as well as the increasingly inscrutable case of Hunter Biden. Which case is most likely to take Trump down? What kinds of questions are raised by the DOJ’s bobbling of the Biden charges? And who’s going to be lef...

The Supreme Court ended its most recent term with a bang, and that’s also how Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are starting this review of the biggest decisions. There’s a split in the faculty lounge over the wisdom of the Court’s affirmative action ruling and we’ll let you decide who gets the better of the argument. Then we move on to the Court’s smackdown of the Biden Administration’s student loan relief plan and the latest in a long string of cases regarding how and whether free speech rights apply in an anti-discrimination context (yes, it’s Co...

It’s graduation season in the faculty lounge, but Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are still hard at work. In this month’s installment: What does the Durham report say about the future of the FBI? Should Daniel Penny stand trial for the headlock that ended Jordan Neely’s life? What explains the bizarre alliances behind the Supreme Court’s decision to let California control how the nation’s pigs are raised? And can Baltimore really sue automakers for making cars too easy to steal? Plus Epstein visits South America, Yoo ruins a graduation ceremony, and Senik gracelessly declines into middl

We’re breaking out birthday candles as one of the professors celebrates a milestone birthday. Once the festivities (which somehow devolve into a conversation about medical innovation) conclude, Professors Epstein and Yoo are on to the topics at hand: Was Fox News right to settle with Dominion? Does America need tougher defamation laws? Is Clarence Thomas’s relationship with Harlan Crow a troubling indiscretion on behalf of a Supreme Court justice or a case of activist journalism run amok? What will happen with the controversial rulings about abortion drugs? And did Disney outsmart Ron DeSantis — and why does the answer to tha...

The indictment of Donald J. Trump was unsealed to an almost universally negative reaction—even those who want to see him behind bars. How likely is the case to be dropped before going to trial? What jurisdiction does the DA claim to have? To what standard should an indictment of a former president be held? And has Donald Trump forfeited his right to argue the justice system has been politicized?

We may be nearing spring break, but Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are still focused on the campus. First, there’s the matter of President Biden’s student loan plan: will a Supreme Court challenge to the policy falter on standing grounds? And is the Court’s newfound skepticism towards executive power as cynical as the media suggests? Then, there’s the issue of reforming higher ed. What’s to be done with disruptive students like the ones who shut down a recent Federalist Society event at Stanford? And is it time to rethink tenure for professors? Several states think so...

The faculty lounge reopens for a special Presidents’ Day session in which Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo kick things off by revealing their picks for the most under- and overrated presidents. Then we’re on to current controversies: will a talkative juror foul the case against Donald Trump in Georgia? Why is Mike Pence employing a novel legal argument to avoid a subpoena in the DOJ’s investigation of the former president? And will Ron DeSantis’ attempt to overhaul American defamation law get its day in the Supreme Court? All that plus the biggest question bedeviling America: what on earth is...

The faculty lounge has reopened for 2023 and Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are ringing in the new year in style. On the docket: What’s the potential fallout from President Biden’s mishandling of classified information? And how does it compare to former President Trump’s? What happens if the Supreme Court never gets to the bottom of the leak of the Dobbs opinion? Is there a sudden epidemic of incivility on the Court? And — the analysis you’re all really here for — will Alec Baldwin be convicted for his role in an accidental shooting on a New Mexico film set? All t...