Bar Task Force CALLS for IMMEDIATE IMPEACHMENT of Trump

[0:00] This is Ray Brescia with Legal AF, part of the Midas Touch Network. If you like and enjoy what [0:08] you hear and see here, please like, subscribe, and share to your heart's content. So it's very, [0:16] it's difficult to sort of keep up with all that's going on in the world, in the law. [0:23] The various court cases were recording on Tuesday, March 31st, before arguments on the [0:31] birthright citizenship case before the Supreme Court. But, you know, and people may get frustrated [0:38] with some acts of the Justice Department and questions about, you know, the extent to which [0:46] they are undermining the rule of law, defying court orders. And so, [0:53] it is sometimes hard to keep up. But there's one organization in the country that is really [1:01] keeping its eye on the ball. And it might be one that, it might surprise Americans to figure, [1:10] to learn who is doing this. So let me tell you a little bit about its history. I want to read [1:18] a passage that was in, that was published in the New York Times. [1:23] Times ago, and worrying about threats to the rule of law and the extent to which lawyers were [1:32] complicit in those threats. And the New York Times wrote, the guilty silence of the lawyers [1:38] as officers of the people's courts, which have brought us to our present pass. It is their [1:45] reawakened public spirit and activity, which must help us back to a better state of things. [1:53] We must [1:54] again proclaim that the bar must lead the way. So that was the then upstart New York Times [2:05] speaking in the 1870s about the need for lawyers of goodwill to come together and defy the corruption [2:19] in a New York City and New York State's legislatures and courts. [2:25] And to form together in a union of sorts to defend the rule of law and to promote the best of the profession. [2:36] And the group that came together then is still in existence today. And that organization, [2:46] it goes by a different name than it did in the 1870s. It is now called City Bar, but then, [2:53] and until very recently, [2:55] it was the Association of the Bar of the City of New York. And I wanted to talk to some of the [3:04] members of a committee of a task force of that association, specifically the Rule of Law Task [3:13] Force, who are former chairs of the task force. Both of them are both retired. One's a retired [3:21] lawyer, one's also a retired lawyer, but retired judge. And they had their hands in the issuance of [3:28] over the last four months, two really hard hitting reports on the presidential abuse of power and [3:39] the Trump administration's abuse of power. So I want to bring them into the conversation. [3:47] Welcome, Stephen Cass. And I will [3:51] always refer to as Judge Marcy Kahn. I'll try to get just Marcy out, but that's quite difficult [3:58] from a former practicing lawyer when talking to even a retired judge. So welcome to the program, [4:06] Stephen and Marcy. So like Tolkien's fictional Ents, it's hard to get lawyers together to even [4:17] agree on what time to meet, let alone [4:21] issue a report, let alone to issue two reports over the course of four months. And when it speaks [4:30] to these reports and this task force speak to presidential abuses of power, I hope that all [4:40] Americans will take notice. So maybe the two of you could tell us a little bit first about the task [4:48] force and then about these reports. [4:49] Thank you. [4:50] Thank you. [4:50] Thank you. [4:50] Thank you. [4:51] Thank you. [4:51] Okay. [4:51] So let's look at these reports and we'll get into the substance of the reports and [4:55] then we'll conclude with some of the recommendations that this task force has made. So maybe you can [5:04] tell us a little bit about the task force and how these two reports came about. [5:09] Thank you, Ray. Let me take that first question. This task force has been in existence since early [5:19] 2019. [5:20] the president of the bar association to look at issues relating to the rule of law [5:27] particularly within the united states the task force grew out of an earlier task force [5:36] that was formed after 9 11 to look at international security and the rule of law [5:42] but by 2019 we realized that most of the rule of law challenges we faced were domestic [5:50] so our task force was formed at that time to look at ways in which the united states [5:56] was no longer honoring the rule of law including particularly at the federal level [6:03] so we put out a call for people to join i i served as the initial chair and thank goodness [6:12] judge khan who was at that point ready to retire signed up along with a number of [6:19] other very experienced [6:21] lawyers many of whom had had experience in the justice system in the initial period [6:27] of the first trump administration we looked at the operation of the department of justice [6:34] under william barr and we were highly critical of many of the comments and actions taken by [6:42] mr barr including interference in pending judicial proceedings after that we continued [6:50] to monitor what was happening [6:52] at the state and federal level and of course it following 9 11 following january [7:00] 6th and the attack on the capital the association issued an immediate report that day [7:08] calling on congress to reconvene and certify the election results and later that month we [7:16] urged congress to pursue impeachment against the president and his aides because of their efforts to [7:23] overturn the election after that we continued to monitor governmental action and during the most [7:32] recent period of the second trump administration we have focused not just on the abuse of power [7:39] reports that you've mentioned but other reports as well relating to interference with judicial [7:45] autonomy improper attacks upon law firms we submitted amicus briefs and the cases [7:53] on behalf of the firms that resisted those efforts the improper firing of inspectors general [8:01] and a whole array of other things that go to the way law is supposed to operate that's the [8:07] background of what we've done and um let me let marcy pick up from there uh to add how we began [8:16] work on the most recent report right um i i was when i was contemplating retirement in uh [8:23] spring of 2019 i knew what i wanted to spend time doing but i there was one one effort i wanted to [8:31] make which was actually prompting my early retirement which was to work on rule of law [8:36] issues and i didn't know how i was going to fill that gap in my day [8:40] but fortunately i saw an ad in the new york law journal placed by steve cass [8:47] looking for people to join the task force and i was thrilled when he said i could come on board we [8:54] did i've been there for about 20 years and in the early days thought that at the end of the trump [9:01] administration maybe we would have less to do and we could you know return to maybe looking at [9:06] international issues uh but even during the biden years uh that was not the case and uh we we were [9:16] very we we're increasingly busy even during the uh biden administration uh because uh efforts were [9:24] still being made to to um uh [9:25] sort of undermine our democratic system and and and attack our republic and and trample the norms [9:32] that really underlay um the rule of law in this country um one uh we had a couple of series of [9:40] programs one of which was on federalism which uh we had leading speakers come uh one in particular [9:49] was on reproductive rights and the federalism issues that were presented by uh uh states uh [9:57] legislating and the federal government uh acting on reproductive rights but anyway this is an [10:03] august body i was uh thrilled that uh steve allowed me to join we have lawyers from every [10:10] walk of the profession lawyers judges law professors public lawyers private lawyers [10:18] etc [10:19] and people in in private business uh and we have had tremendous support from the bar association [10:25] including from our sibling committees task forces and councils who have helped us put out many of [10:31] these reports uh but it's it you know we we've had a lot to do we've been busy and so uh let's [10:40] let's fast forward to uh late in december of 2025 you issue uh you're the first sort of uh [10:50] uh [10:50] significant report i mean you've been you had been issuing you know doing amicus briefs you had [10:55] um uh issuing statements but but you came out with this very powerful report in december 2025 [11:02] and we will link to the show page um on some of the things that that you were focusing on and and [11:10] you you would you had actually flagged in that report uh some of the issues uh this is before [11:18] the the the killings in [11:20] minneapolis uh you had flagged some of the issues around um ice and customer borders [11:27] patrol officers in uh in cities like los angeles and chicago so uh what were some of the the the [11:36] the most egregious concerns in that first report uh that you had identified in december of 2025. [11:45] let me um let me say something about that [11:50] um let me say something about that [11:50] um let me say something about that before giving you the precise answer to your question [11:55] we are a non-profit non-partisan organization we do not take positions [12:03] in political campaigns and we do not operate in a political manner we try and understand [12:09] the legal principles involved and apply them and help the public understand [12:15] what the issues are and what the appropriate remedies are that's what we try to do here [12:21] the second thing that was really apparent is that there were so many different kinds of [12:28] presidential abuses and executive branch abuses over the period of the last um [12:35] well the first year of the second trump administration that we felt it useful to try [12:42] and organize them into a number a smaller number of categories so people could think about them [12:48] appropriately and we did that and um those those these uh uh categories that we did that we did it [12:51] in a way that was logical and we did that and we did that and um those things was very important to us [12:51] Those categories were the following. The president's role as commander-in-chief of the military. We felt he seriously abused that role by deploying federal troops, not then in Minneapolis, but in San Francisco and in Oregon and Washington, D.C. [13:11] Second, the president and his administration broadly undermined constitutional rights belonging to citizens and other residents of our country. And I don't think I need to go through that here with you all, but there's a broad array of which basic fundamental constitutional rights, including right not to be arrested without cause, were abused. [13:35] Thirdly, the president and his administration systematically attacked the Department of Justice. [13:42] And they undermined the integrity of the Department of Justice, an important body, which, as you know, is really sworn to defend the rights of the people, not to represent a given president. [13:57] Fourth, the president and his administration undermined significant international obligations that the United States had, threatening to withdraw from NATO, undermining climate change, undermining the world health system. [14:13] And they undermined the integrity of the United States. [14:14] And so they undermined the integrity of many of the countries that were interested in the organizations and the organization and threatening allies in many ways that were inconsistent with the international order that the United States had helped create after World War Two. [14:25] And finally, the president and his family engaged in a completely unprecedented scheme of corruption to enrich himself and his family through using presidential powers in ways that permitted himself and his family to remain in power. [14:31] Fourth, the president and his administration also undermined the integrity of the Department of Justice. [14:40] And I think that's the basis that we want to bring to our country. [14:42] And I don't know if you read, I have read it, but I don't know if you have read it. [14:43] I'm just going to read it. [14:44] We'll read it anyway. [14:44] members to accrue great wealth. We felt that all of those together, those six categories [14:51] encompass the broad array of things to which citizens were reacting and that together they [14:57] constituted the gross abuse of power and breach of public trust, which underlies the constitutional [15:06] expectations for a president. [15:09] And I think, you know, reading both reports, and thank you for adding that, you know, it is a, [15:16] this New York City Bar is a nonpartisan, a nonprofit entity. And you were very careful [15:24] in both of these reports. You're not engaged in, you know, policy arguments. You're, you know, [15:31] whether it's, you know, deployment of the National Guard or the cuts made by Department of Government [15:38] Efficiency. [15:39] It's all about the law. You know, you're not, you're not making arguments, you know, about what, [15:46] whether, you know, one policy is better than the other. It's a very, both documents are incredibly [15:52] lawyerly. And I, to be incredibly lawyerly, and because I'm in front of a judge, I have to correct [15:59] myself. I said, Customs and Border Patrol, it's the Customs and Border Protection group, and I [16:06] apologize for what CBP stands for. [16:09] But so, so, so that you've, you've classified in these reports, the, you know, some of these [16:16] categories of problematic issues and abuses of power. But then, so, so December 2025 rolls around, [16:25] you issued the first of these reports, but then it's, it's not three months later that the group [16:30] felt compelled to issue yet another report. And, and, and Judge Kahn, maybe you want to tell us, [16:37] you know, why the group, [16:39] felt compelled so, so quickly thereafter to issue such a, such an important follow-up to its, its [16:47] December report? [16:49] Well, we had said in the December report, Ray, that we would keep an eye on this. We, we had [16:55] trouble, actually, here's a little background. We had trouble deciding when to put our pens up [17:01] on the December report, because every time we'd say we had something finalized, there would be [17:07] something else we would feel needed to be in the December report. And so, you know, we had to [17:09] include it, another abuse of power by the executive branch that had to be included in the [17:14] report. So, finally, we said, okay, we have to stop, we have to issue this, and we'll make a promise [17:20] to keep our eyes open and keep following up with future reports. And by, by early, by the, this [17:28] winter, we felt there was plenty to talk about, really, because the, as we have said in our, in [17:36] the title of our March 9th, [17:39] 2026 report, the crisis deepens. These were escalating abuses of executive power, we felt. The [17:47] breadth, the persistence, the escalating nature, the failure even to try to dress things up so they [17:54] didn't look like abuses, was cast aside. And we felt that, that we had to speak out again, because [18:04] if there was ever to be accountability for the president and executive branch for the abuses, [18:10] that, that were going on, we needed to start speaking out further. We said in the December report, [18:19] as you know, that Congress had a whole panoply of remedies it could employ to deal with these. [18:30] They could hold hearings, they could suspend funding, they, they could do many things, but we felt then that [18:40] you know, there had been enough done that they could even start impeachment proceedings. We've [18:48] have said then, and in the March report as well, that it's up to Congress to decide what to do, but [18:56] we made that a, one of the options that Congress, we thought had good grounds to consider. But as things kept [19:06] escalating, and in this 250th year of our Declaration of [19:13] independence, we felt it was important to keep speaking up and keep doing it promptly. [19:19] We felt that Congress should immediately act to curb these abuses. [19:26] And in particular, we were very upset by the particular abuses we outlined in the March [19:34] report. [19:35] Again, we have said we don't consider this our last word on the subject, given how things [19:40] keep progressing. [19:42] But this is what, again, we had to stop writing at some point and let our voice be heard. [19:48] We first wanted to speak up about Minneapolis, of course, because the flooding of the city [19:55] with ICE and CBP agents dressed in military combat gear was horrific. [20:04] They were supposed to be looking for the worst of the worst violators of immigration law, [20:10] but that wasn't what they were doing. [20:12] They illegally entered homes and places of worship, private businesses, schools, seeking [20:19] to detain anyone they thought maybe might conceivably be illegally in the country, regardless [20:27] of their age or physical condition or claim of being U.S. citizens. [20:34] They took children. [20:35] They took U.S. citizens. [20:36] They took disabled people. [20:38] They did not have judicial warrants. [20:41] This was, we thought. [20:43] This was really an outrageous violation of the Fourth Amendment. [20:49] Most of the people, the overwhelming number of people they detained, had no criminal records, [20:56] even if they were immigrants who were in the city in the United States without authorization. [21:03] But even some of those folks had regularly attended their immigration hearings and were [21:09] following the regimen dictated by the courts. [21:10] That's what happened. [21:11] That's what happened. [21:12] That's what happened. [21:13] That's what happened. [21:14] But that was one thing that caused us to speak out. [21:19] And the fact that, you know, the aggression by ICE soon resulted in the killing of Renee [21:27] Goode and Alex Preti set our hair on fire. [21:31] The fact that the Department of Justice decided not to investigate these crimes was an extraordinary [21:39] departure from norms. [21:42] And... [21:43] Just... [21:44] It turned everything upside down. [21:47] All it did was convey... [21:50] And of course, failure to give the Minneapolis authorities access to their information and [21:56] evidence so that the Minneapolis law enforcement people could determine whether or not state [22:03] crimes were committed. [22:05] That's unheard of. [22:07] It even had been unheard of for the Trump administration. [22:11] So... [22:12] These... [22:13] This really gave ICE agents free rein to think they could do anything without any judicial [22:21] or even administrative review of their activities. [22:26] So they were in combat gear, wearing masks, no names, no badge numbers. [22:35] And so we felt we had to speak up. [22:37] That was one thing we were concerned about and caused us to speak. [22:42] And, you know, we laid the responsibility at the foot of the President and the Attorney [22:47] General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, none of whom reacted in what we would consider [22:55] normal ways to the murders of these two U.S. citizens. [23:03] And really, they haven't taken responsibility for it even today. [23:07] Let me just add a footnote. [23:10] Sure. [23:11] Yeah. [23:12] We had been following the ICE abuses for more than a year. [23:18] We issued a report in early 2025 condemning the use of masks and pointing out that using [23:28] masked agents in street gear, that is plain clothes, in unmarked vehicles and whisking [23:34] people off the street was the hallmark of what had been done in Argentina, Chile and [23:41] other dictatorships. [23:41] So that it was... [23:43] Yeah. [23:43] So that it wasn't a new concern we had, but we indeed predicted at the time that this [23:52] technique would be used not only to round people up, but to chill the expression, the [23:57] free expression by citizens. [23:59] And that's exactly what happened. [24:01] And what made it worse was that it wasn't just the Secretary of Homeland Security or [24:07] the Attorney General, as Marcy pointed out, but it was the Vice President and ultimately [24:12] the President. [24:13] Who was encouraging this kind of conduct. [24:15] And that's the reason we brought this around, not to simply to abuse by cabinet officers, [24:22] but by abuse by the President himself in setting this in motion and clearly encouraging it. [24:28] And both the President and Vice President, as we pointed out in our report, claimed [24:35] within 24 hours that Mr. Pretty and Ms. Good were...had to be killed because they were [24:43] terrorists, domestic terrorists, or something on that order, without letting any investigation [24:49] go forward. [24:50] In fact, they precluded any investigation from going forward. [24:53] They just wanted to say something extremely negative about them that had no basis in fact [25:00] whatsoever. [25:01] Another... [25:02] And I think Vice President Vance first said, you know, the ICE officers had absolute [25:09] immunity for what they did. [25:11] And then, you know, when pressed on it. [25:13] I think 24 hours later said, well, of course, no one would say they had absolute immunity. [25:17] Well, you just said that. [25:20] You know, so let's get to...so what I found really, you know, powerful, you know, there's [25:28] a lot that's incredibly powerful in these two reports and as well as the other work [25:32] of the task force, but you get again, in a very, you know, appropriately lawyerly way, [25:43] a lot, I think it's in the December report, you know, what the framers meant when they [25:49] talked about impeachment of federal officials for high crimes and misdemeanors. [25:56] So do either of you want to sort of tell us a little more about what they were talking [26:02] about when they were describing the grounds for impeachment? [26:06] Well, I think that's a very important issue and it is one that we try to explain, [26:13] particularly in the December report. [26:18] The Constitution says that the president or other senior officers may be impeached for [26:26] treason, bribery, or high crimes and misdemeanors. [26:32] It's important to know that that phrase was never intended to mean technical crimes. [26:40] High crimes and misdemeanors does not mean you're convicted of a crime. [26:46] It means, and was clear from the founding fathers on, that it means a grave abuse of [26:55] the powers of the presidency. [26:58] The Constitution, the Constitutional Convention placed great power in a single officer, a [27:05] man at the time, but they did not want him or her, no her at the time, unfortunately, [27:13] to be a king. [27:16] They wanted that person to have liberty. [27:17] They wanted that person to have liberty. [27:17] They wanted that person to have a limited authority, subject to the rule of law. [27:21] And that meant that you could not abuse the power you were being given in a way that would [27:28] significantly undermine the Constitution, breach your oath of office, which was to defend [27:33] the Constitution and defend and take care of it, the laws are properly executed, and [27:39] to protect the American people and its democratic society. [27:44] That is what a gross abuse of power means. [27:47] It does not mean a crime. [27:49] By the way, committing a crime unrelated to the abuse of power, such as tax fraud, [27:55] does not constitute impeachable conduct either. [27:58] So it's not, that phrase does not match up with the criminal law. [28:03] It refers to the abuse of the power that using the office to abuse the power for your own [28:10] benefit or for other improper means that are inconsistent with the welfare of the nation. [28:16] That's what this report focuses on. [28:19] And in our decision. [28:20] December report, as Marcy indicated, we thought that the conduct described met that standard. [28:31] One could quibble about individual components, there were a lot of things that we did not [28:35] put in, such as racist remarks by themselves, by the President, but cumulatively, there [28:42] was no question that because of personal corruption, abuse of the judiciary, abuse of violation [28:49] of constitutional rights, abuse of the military. [28:51] That's what we thought. [28:52] That that represented an overwhelming abuse of presidential power, and that we felt met [28:59] the standards for impeachment. [29:02] We left open the question as to whether lesser remedies might be available at that time. [29:08] As Marcy indicated, legislative restrictions, appointment of a special prosecutor, censure, [29:14] and the like. [29:16] It was in our March report that we turned to that second question more directly. [29:24] But again, nothing strikes [29:48] a chord. [29:49] That's one of the core budgraphs. [29:51] Let's move on. [29:52] We're very couple of minutes. [29:53] Here we go. [29:54] This is Mishal. [29:54] abuse that was accelerating because of the failure of Congress Act led us to issue the [30:01] March report. And that March report comes to the conclusion that the remedy now has to be [30:11] impeachment, it seems. That is correct. That is our judgment. There are other things that Congress [30:19] could do. We hope they will. They certainly should be limiting legislatively the action of ICE as [30:27] they're trying to. There are certainly bases for impeachment proceedings against cabinet officers. [30:35] We pointed out the attorney general is one person who's been violating her obligations. But in the [30:41] final analysis, it is a president who is responsible. And while we hope that Congress [30:48] will act in a variety of ways, we do believe that it is appropriate for them to commence [30:55] the impeachment process at this point. [31:00] Judge Kahn, do you have anything? [31:01] Sure. One reason we feel that way is we don't have a parliamentary system here [31:07] in this country. And in Trump versus United States, the Supreme Court really gave the [31:18] president a blanket grant of immunity for almost anything done well, president. So the well, [31:31] of course, we don't have a parliamentary system here in this country. But we do have a parliamentary [31:32] system here in this country. And in Trump versus United States, the Supreme Court really gave the [31:32] president a blanket grant of immunity for almost anything done well, president. So we do have a [31:33] parliamentary system here in this country. And in Trump versus United States, the Supreme Court really gave the [31:34] president a blanket grant of immunity for almost anything done well, president. So we do have a [31:35] parliamentary system here in this country. And in Trump versus United States, the Supreme Court really gave the [31:36] president a blanket grant of immunity for almost anything done well, president. So we do have a [31:37] parliamentary system here in this country. And in Trump versus United States, the Supreme Court really gave the [31:38] president a blanket grant of immunity for almost anything done well, president. So we do have a [31:39] parliamentary system here in this country. And in Trump versus United States, the Supreme Court really gave the [31:40] president a blanket grant of immunity for almost anything done well, president. So we do have a [31:43] parliamentary system here in this country. And in Trump versus United States, the Supreme Court really gave the [31:44] The institutions of the country that protect our rights and our lives and health and environment and relationships with allies are being threatened. [31:58] And the one remedy we have available is impeachment by the Congress. [32:05] It is the only effective remedy to put a stop to this ever increasing agglomeration of executive power that seems to be the mark of this administration. [32:25] And ironically, in some ways, you mentioned Trump for the United States, right? [32:30] This. [32:30] By the Supreme Court saying that and granting the immunity for official acts and blurring the line between what might be an official act, what might be an unofficial act and erasing any evidence that might be construed as an official act. [32:49] Right. It says, you know, there's the there's the remedy of impeachment. [32:54] And because of those, you know, stripping away of those others. [33:00] Remedies that, you know, the Supreme Court itself left the the the the the main remedy as the backdrop to its immunity decision, that remedy of impeachment, which is something that that your task force has has pointed out and has called for Congress to to initiate. [33:23] And I thought, you know, interestingly, you know, you don't say that it's, you know, this. [33:30] This specific act, you know, calls for impeachment, but it's rather the the accumulated abuses of power in so many different areas. [33:43] And it's and it's, you know, and you point out the threats against Greenland, which are, you know, for some people are probably so far in their rearview mirror. [33:52] You know, it's like we almost forget, right, that, oh, yeah, we were threatening a NATO ally, you know, a few weeks ago. [33:58] You know. [34:00] And most recently, you know, the president is saying, you know, Cuba, you're next. [34:07] I mean, it's just after, you know, attacking Iran, you know, without any authorization from Congress. [34:15] So, you know, your committee has both helped to focus people and keep people, you know, helping people to remember, you know, what's happening. [34:29] Because it's so easy to be distracted by, you know, the things that are happening day in, day out. [34:35] But also, you know, as, you know, establishing the record, if you would, as good lawyers do, of abuses of power. [34:48] And, you know, but also approaching it, as we said, in a very lawyerly way, not in a partisan fashion and not, you know, based on policy. [34:58] But just what the law is. [34:59] What the law says. [35:01] So I want to ask if either of you have any closing thoughts or remarks that you would like to add before we wrap up. [35:13] And I thank you for your participation. [35:16] So, Judge Kahn, go right ahead. [35:18] Yes, I'll go first, if you don't mind. [35:21] Speaking to what you just mentioned, Ray, about how the flooding the zone, to use Steve Bannon's phrase, [35:29] with bad acts, illegal acts, breaking of norms, makes it very difficult for us members of the public to focus, [35:39] even, you know, in January, a month and a half ago, on what they were doing about Greenland. [35:44] We were going to attack Greenland. [35:45] We went in and started a war against Iran without congressional authorization. [35:51] The president, we say in the March report, called for the Republican Party to federalize and take over voting procedures. [35:59] In use in 15 largely Democratic states. [36:04] This is totally unconstitutional. [36:07] This is one reason we feel a need to speak out. [36:09] I, in particular, am very concerned by our forgetting or not speaking out about anti-norm activities. [36:20] If we say, well, the president didn't violate the law when he fired 17 inspectors general early in his tenure. [36:28] Or when he failed to vet or trace or train ICE agents, or when he posts on Truth Social demonizing remarks about judges. [36:44] You know, that's not against the law. [36:45] We can't impeach him for that, some people say. [36:47] Well, if you look at all of these things, you know, that he does, banning books, firing 90 immigration judges when supposedly we have an immigration, [36:58] uh, catastrophe in our courts, cutting off funding for USAID, all these things that he, you know, technically has the power to do. [37:09] But he has violated every norm that every prior president has followed and would follow, just to distract us and keep us from being able to follow and take action about it. [37:27] This is part of, I think, why we're in this situation. [37:29] This is part of, I think, why we're in this situation. [37:30] But it's beyond, like, the, you know, the racist comments that Steve referred to that we, you know, didn't mention in our December report. [37:39] Although we did call out the racist tropes that the president used in posting the cartoons of the Obamas. [37:49] All of this together is of a piece, and it's designed to make people feel there's nothing you can do about it, but you can do something about it. [37:58] You can ask your congressional... [38:00] You can ask your congressional representatives to start impeachment proceedings. [38:03] You can speak out. [38:05] You can go to the No Kings marches. [38:07] You can organize. [38:09] You can help get the vote out. [38:11] We say all of these things without being political, but being concerned about the underpinnings of our system and our institution and our rights being attacked relentlessly. [38:26] And if I can... [38:28] It's always hard to speak after Marcy. [38:30] Because she says, [38:31] She says everything so beautifully and so well. [38:34] But let me just add a couple of thoughts. [38:39] We did not view presidential racist rhetoric as impeachable in our December report. [38:48] But when that rhetoric reaches the bottom, and when it's combined with action, it can't be ignored. [38:56] So for the president to refer to Somali immigrants in the United States or Somali... [39:04] Somali American citizens as garbage, that is not what a president can do. [39:11] That is the language that the Nazis used to dehumanize certain classes of people so they can be discarded and abused or murdered. [39:20] And that's a very slippery slope that no president should be allowed to go down. [39:28] Secondly, let me just mention one lesson from the December and March reports. [39:35] Is that abuses of power, unchecked, will get worse. [39:39] And we have seen that. [39:42] We see it right today in the Iran war. [39:45] We had criticized the president previously for failing to secure approval for any attacks on Venezuela, which we said were illegal. [39:53] We now are engaged in a full-scale war that is unauthorized by Congress, that almost certainly violates the UN Charter, has not been authorized by the Security Council. [40:06] And we are doing nothing about it. [40:08] We are doing nothing about it as a congressional body. [40:11] That is unprecedented in our history. [40:14] And it is a very slippery slope that will get worse and worse. [40:20] And we'll come home to roost here unless we act quickly. [40:24] And my final point simply is to agree with Marcy that we pay Congress to do a job. [40:31] They're elected to do a job. [40:34] Their principal jobs are to impose taxes and watch the president. [40:41] And make sure that he conforms to the Constitution. [40:45] And if there's ever a war, that they have to take responsibility. [40:49] They're not taking responsibility for the war. [40:53] They didn't take responsibility for taxes in the form of tariffs. [40:57] And they are letting a president grossly violate the powers of his office and abuse the nation. [41:05] It's a breach of public trust. [41:07] And that's the reason why the public should be asking Congress to do its job. [41:10] It is the legal method we have for controlling and constraining abusive presidents. [41:18] We don't want civil war. [41:20] We don't have riots in the street to determine who the president is. [41:23] We don't have a parliamentary system. [41:25] We have this process. [41:27] It is time to use it. [41:31] Well, thank you very much. [41:33] This has been a really powerful conversation. [41:36] I want to thank Stephen Cass and Marcy Kahn. [41:41] Who are former chairs of the Rule of Law Task Force of the New York City Bar. [41:49] And co-authors with other members of this task, the Rule of Law Task Force. [41:55] On two very powerful reports which we will supply in the show page. [42:02] And folks should read them. [42:05] And they really are not just a call to action. [42:09] But also time capsules. [42:12] They capture what is happening for the present. [42:17] But also for future generations. [42:19] And I thank you for all the work that you are doing. [42:22] Thanks everyone for joining. [42:24] This has been Ray Brescia with Legal AF. [42:27] Part of the Midas Touch Network. [42:29] Can't get your fill of Legal AF? [42:31] Me neither. [42:32] That's why we formed the Legal AF Substack. [42:34] Every time we mention something in a hot take. [42:36] Whether it's a court filing. [42:38] Or a oral argument. [42:40] Come over to the Substack. [42:41] You'll find the court filing and the oral argument there. [42:43] Including a daily roundup that I do call. [42:46] Wait for it. [42:47] Morning AF. [42:48] What else? [42:49] All the other contributors from Legal AF are there as well. [42:52] We got some new reporting. [42:53] We got interviews. [42:54] We got ad free versions of the podcast. [42:57] And hot takes. [42:58] Where? [42:59] Legal AF on Substack. [43:02] Come over now to free subscribe.