Listen Live
Donate
 on air
    Schedule

    KCRW

    Read & Explore

    • News
    • Entertainment
    • Food
    • Culture
    • Events

    Listen

    • Live Radio
    • Music
    • Podcasts
    • Full Schedule

    Information

    • About
    • Careers
    • Help / FAQ
    • Newsletters
    • Contact

    Support

    • Become a Member
    • Become a VIP
    • Ways to Give
    • Shop
    • Member Perks

    Become a Member

    Donate to KCRW to support this cultural hub for music discovery, in-depth journalism, community storytelling, and free events. You'll become a KCRW Member and get a year of exclusive benefits.

    DonateGive Monthly

    Copyright 2026 KCRW. All rights reserved.

    Report a Bug|Privacy Policy|Terms of Service|
    Cookie Policy
    |FCC Public Files|

    Back to All the Presidents' Lawyers

    All the Presidents' Lawyers

    Hot en banc action

    Josh and Ken talk about NDAs, DNA and two major issues before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals: the charges against Michael Flynn and whether Congress can sue to force former White House Counsel Don McGahn to comply with a subpoena.

    • rss
    • apple-podcasts
    • spotify
    • Share
    By Josh Barro • Aug 12, 2020 • 35m Listen

    On Tuesday, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals held its en banc hearing to reconsider whether Judge Emmet Sullivan should be forced to dismiss the charges against former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who already pleaded guilty and was awaiting sentencing. The hearing was long: four hours, which was a stretch even for a legal nerds, Ken White says. How did it go for Flynn?

    Also from the DC Circuit in the last week: the court ruled 7-2 that the House of Representatives does have standing to sue to enforce its subpoena for former White House counsel Don McGahn to appear and testify. We’re far from that now, though, and maybe even in weirder territory as a result of the Trump administration probably pushing its argument against complying with subpoenas too far.

    Attorneys for President Trump said Manhattan District Attorney’s inquiry into the president’s financial records is a fishing expedition and constitutes illegal “harassment.” Is it? They’ve asked for the DA’s office to give a justification for everything piece of information they’re seeking in a subpoena. Is a judge likely to go for this? And if a judge does go for this, would it be in the president’s interest?

    Plus: a former Trump campaign employee pursues a class action suit that seeks to void all nondisclosure agreements, a judge allows E. Jean Carroll’s defamation suit against President Trump to proceed (in which she seeks his DNA), and Michael Cohen wants to accept a job with a political action committee.

    • https://images.ctfassets.net/2658fe8gbo8o/AvYox6VuEgcxpd20Xo9d3/769bca4fbf97bf022190f4813812c1e2/new-default.jpg?h=250

      Josh Barro

      Former host of Left, Right & Center

    • https://images.ctfassets.net/2658fe8gbo8o/AvYox6VuEgcxpd20Xo9d3/769bca4fbf97bf022190f4813812c1e2/new-default.jpg?h=250

      Ken White

      Brown, White & Osborn / Popehat

    • KCRW placeholder

      Sara Fay

      Former producer of Left, Right and Center

      NewsPoliticsNational
    Back to All the Presidents' Lawyers