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 2025 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.

  • 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