Clancy’s hung jury, California’s Slayer Statute, the legal history of the kiss and much more

All right, Rich, let's start with Trump Watch.

Rich, a Trump coin or maybe $5,000 for your thoughts on the president's actions and comments this week.

I mean, you know, went crazy on the Supreme Court again that he had a huge hand in appointing.

He apparently is not happy with some of the majorities recently.

Tina, they clawed back his attempts to throw his name on the Kennedy Center.

um they said that that basically had to go through congress which is not a surprise to anyone and also when it came to his efforts to restrict mail-in voting in the upcoming election the supreme court said no that is a state issue and uh at least for the next election state uh you know states have the right to allow mail-in voting so you know two big blows to his attempts to control these two issues um know uh he said that they are now shutting down the kennedy center because you know how could this facility proceed without his name on it uh it is crumbling and it is not popular and they are not selling tickets simply because his name is not on there so um i i just think that for all the criticism leveled against the supreme court we have been prominent in criticizing them I will admit that it is heartening to see that even his appointees, who generally are in the bag for Trump, are doing the right thing when it comes to some obvious decisions.

Now, I will say that it's easy to make these decisions when it's painfully unconstitutional to do what he's trying to do.

So I don't give them that much credit, but I do give them a little credit, much as I give, for example, the The new Fed chair for raising interest rates instead of doing what Trump expressly put him on there to do, which is do his bidding and lower.

So maybe for once on legal face off, we could sigh a sigh of relief and say the system is working.

Yeah, Rich, it'll be interesting to see if we, you know, as time goes on, whether these Supreme Court decisions are just blips against the backdrop of what are tend to be decisions that go in Trump's way.

I do think that these cases, not that the others that went Trump's way weren't necessarily obvious, but I think these were on the side of the Supreme Court, really, if they're going to have any credibility, at least with respect to certain folks that they needed to decide the way they did to maintain credibility.

I don't know.

I don't know if Trump's doing any favors for himself by being so critical of a court that on balance has been so supportive of him.

So those are my thoughts on this one.

Jason, what are your thoughts?

Well, I think I agree with everything that you guys have mentioned.

It's positive.

The fact that it was still a 7-2 vote and it wasn't it wasn't unanimous is kind of still crazy when, as you kind of pointed out, how wrong it actually was.

So I think from that standpoint, it's still a joke.

But again, you know what? You got to look at the upside.

So I'll take it as that.

and as far as the the coins i mean i haven't seen the rendering of them yet but does it say like in donald we trust

yeah yeah they're also they're both heads strangely enough so you can win every every coin toss but um yeah i mean you're never gonna get alito and thomas i mean there's no way those um but what do you what are your thoughts

on this You know, it's interesting.

You said that the court cares about its credibility.