Trump is arguing for immunity in his criminal case. Will the Supreme Court agree?

One of Richard Nixon’s most famous quotes…right up there with “I am not a crook”… had to do with presidential immunity.

“When the president does it” he said “that means that it is not illegal.” That idea – that you can’t prosecute someone for actions taken as president – the Supreme Court has never actually ruled on it.

On Thursday, the Justices will take a crack, with the federal election interference case against former president Donald Trump hanging in the balance.

We preview how things might go.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

How voters from different economic sectors see the 2024 election

Americans often rank the economy as a number one voting issue. As part of NPR’s “We the Voters” series we check back in with four Americans we’ve been following since the pandemic.

They share how they’re faring in a the current economy, and how that might influence the positions they take in the 2024 presidential election.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

Breaking down the legal case at the center of the political universe

The broad outlines of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case have been known for months.

Hush money payments to a former porn star made in 2016, when Trump was a presidential candidate. Bragg alleges Trump was involved in a scheme to cover up those payments, one that amounted to criminal fraud.

Now we’re getting a more detailed outline of their arguments – and Trump’s defense.

We break down the legal case at the center of the political universe.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

The push to deliver high-speed rail to Texas

For the last 60 years a transportation revolution has largely passed America by.

Bullet trains were invented in Japan in the early 1960s. Since then, countries all over the world have adopted the technology and constructed sprawling networks of high speed rail lines.

Despite spending billions of dollars in federal funding, he U.S. lags far behind. But a recent visit from Japan’s Prime minister has revived interest in bullet train projects around the country.

One of those projects is in Texas – a proposed high-speed rail line between Houston and Dallas.

NPR’s Andrew Limbong speaks with Dallas Morning News mobility and transportation reporter Amber Gaudet about what it will take to get Texas’ high-speed rail project completed, and what it could mean for high-speed rail in America.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

Is this fictitious civil war closer to reality than we think?

Civil War, the new A24 film from British director Alex Garland, imagines a scenario that might not seem so far-fetched to some; a contemporary civil war breaking out in the United States.

And while the film has taken heat for little mention of politics, the question of an actual civil war has everything to do with it.

Amy Cooter is a director of research at the Center on Terrorism, Extremism, and Counterterrorism at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies. Her work has led her to the question that Garland’s movie has put in the minds of both moviegoers and political pundits: Could a second civil war really happen here?

Cooter joins host Andrew Limbong to discuss the actual threat of current political movements in the U.S., outside of the movie theaters.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

Trump’s anti-abortion stance helped him win in 2016. Will it hurt him in 2024?

Back in 1999 when Donald Trump was flirting with a presidential run, he was pro-abortion rights. In an interview on Meet the Press with NBC’s Tim Russert, the New York real estate developer said he didn’t like abortion, but he wouldn’t ban it.

Fast forward almost two decades, and Trump was running for the republican presidential nomination, and he had a very different stance on abortion, even suggesting in an MSNBC town hall meeting that women should be punished for seeking abortions.

Trump ultimately won the presidency with the support of white Evangelical voters, many of whom wanted to see Roe v. Wade overturned. Six years after he won, the Supreme Court justices Trump appointed helped deliver exactly that.

Now as Trump mounts another run for the White House, abortion rights are on the ballot and winning. And Trump has once again evolved his stance on abortion. Is it a political calculation?

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

What happened when the threat of danger became Salman Rushdie’s reality?

Salman Rushdie is probably most closely associated with his 1988 novel The Satanic Verses, a book inspired by the life of the prophet Muhummad. The book was notorious not just for its contents but because of the intense backlash, and the threat it posed to his safety and wellbeing.

While Rushdie saw it as an exploration of Islamic culture, some Muslims saw it as blasphemous. The year after it published, Iran’s supreme leader issued a fatwa, ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie.

Rushdie moved to New York in 2000, and was able to resume the public life of a popular author, but that all changed on August 12th, 2022 when a young man charged at Rushdie while he was on stage at an event, stabbing him at least a dozen times.

After two years, he has chronicled his brush with death, and the aftermath in his new memoir ‘KNIFE’.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

The man who inspired ‘Hotel Rwanda’ is still taking risks for his country

In 1994, the world watched as genocide unfolded in Rwanda. Nearly one million people died as neighbors brutally killed their neighbors. Paul Rusesabagina is credited for keeping more than 1,200 people safe in his hotel through weeks of violence. His life and story inspired the 2004 film Hotel Rwanda.

In 2021, Rusesabagina says he was kidnapped, tried and imprisoned in Rwanda for two years and seven months over his ties to the Rwanda Movement for Democratic Change (MRCD), a group that opposes President Paul Kagame’s rule.

After intervention from the U.S. and other countries, Rusesabagina was eventually released from prison. At the time he was released, he says he electronically signed a letter promising not to criticize the government. Ultimately, he decided to disregard that promise.

Many allies of President Kagame would argue that he has been responsible for shepherding an era of what they say is relative peace in the country. His critics say he leads an oppressive government that leaves no space for dissent. We hear from Paul Rusesabagina and his daughter Anaïse Kanimba, who are still speaking out against the Rwandan government.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

Iran’s attack on Israel is a major escalation. What comes next for the region?

Iran launched a barrage of more than 300 drones and missiles at Israel over the weekend, saying it was in response to an airstrike earlier this month that hit Iran’s consulate in Syria and killed seven Iranian military officials, including two generals.

Israel neither confirmed nor denied responsibility for the Syria strike, though the Pentagon said Israel was responsible.

Sima Shine is a former senior Israeli intelligence official. She now runs the Iran desk at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv. She says this attack is “crossing the Rubicon” from the point of view of Iran, and explains what Israel’s retaliation could be.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

How do you select an impartial jury when your client is famous?

On Monday, former President Donald Trump will enter a Manhattan courtroom for his first criminal trial. But before a verdict can be rendered a jury must be selected. And for Trump’s legal team that is going to be a challenge.

A small number of attorneys have faced a similar challenge — how do you select an impartial jury when your client is famous?

Host Scott Detrow speaks with attorney Camille Vasquez for insight into the art of jury selection in such a case. She represented Johnny Depp in his defamation suit against his ex-wife Amber Heard.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy