Main Justice Podcast Summary Episode: Checks and Balances
Release Date: June 4, 2025
Hosts: Andrew Weissmann & Mary McCord
Produced by: MSNBC

1. Introduction and Overview

In the episode titled "Checks and Balances," hosts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord delve into pivotal legal developments surrounding former President Donald Trump’s actions within the Department of Justice (DOJ). They explore recent court decisions on Trump's tariffs, scrutinize the administration's use of presidential pardons, and examine reported changes within the FBI that may impact its integrity and effectiveness.

2. Legal Battle Over Trump's Tariffs

Court of International Trade vs. Federal District Court:

• Jurisdictional Dispute: The episode opens with a discussion on two conflicting court decisions regarding Trump's tariffs. The United States Court of International Trade ruled that it has exclusive jurisdiction over tariff-related cases, citing that the tariffs imposed by Trump stemmed from the International Economic Emergencies Powers Act (IEEPA). Mary McCord explains, “[...] the Court of International Trade held that because the executive orders invoke IPEA to impose tariffs [...] this is a presidential action that imposes tariffs, and that means it arises from a law providing for those measures.” (08:49)

• District Court Ruling: Contrarily, District Judge Contreras in Washington, D.C., asserted jurisdiction by declaring that IPEA does not authorize the imposition of tariffs, effectively nullifying the executive orders. Mary elaborates, “Contreras [...] concluded [...] the President did not have authority to issue tariffs. Full stop. The end.” (09:48)

Quotes Highlighting Jurisdictional Arguments:

• Andrew Weissmann remarks, “Let’s look at the law right here. [...] if he concludes that this law doesn't provide and allow these kinds of tariffs, then I have jurisdiction.” (08:49)
• Mary McCord adds, “The President's executive orders were ultra vires, meaning outside the law, and have to be enjoined.” (19:15)

Implications and Next Steps: Both court decisions address whether the DOJ can extend its jurisdiction over tariffs imposed under IPEA. The Court of International Trade maintains its exclusive stance, while Judge Contreras challenges this by questioning the legal foundation of IPEA itself. The Federal Circuit has temporarily stayed the decision pending further briefing, with a decision expected imminently. Mary notes, “...both appellate courts will have to deal with this issue. [...] the ruling of the district court is not in effect right now.” (11:59)

3. Examination of Presidential Pardons

Trump’s Use of Pardon Power: Andrew and Mary scrutinize the extensive use of presidential pardons by Donald Trump, highlighting that he has issued more pardons and commutations than any previous president. Mary McCord contrasts Trump’s approach with Obama’s structured and procedural pardon process:

• Obama’s Presidential Pardons: Characterized by a “robust process with a lot of requirements,” ensuring fairness and clear standards. Mary states, “Under this process, what President Trump has is what [...] seems like a lot of these cases are without any process at all.” (22:05)

• Trump’s Pardons: Often perceived as transactional, targeting white-collar criminals, associates from his administration, and individuals connected to his political agenda. Examples include the pardoning of Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and others. Mary elaborates, “People may be familiar with the Chrisleys [...] convicted of fraud. They have now been pardoned.” (25:01)

Critical Analysis: Andrew points out the inconsistencies and potential weaponization of the pardon power:

• “This guts the justice system. [...] It is leading to lawlessness in the way that if you tell people, you know, no, MAGA left behind, what is the message to politicians and people who think [...] it just requires a certain amount of money or a certain affiliation with a certain party.” (32:11)

Notable Cases Discussed:

• Chrisley Family: Todd Chrisley and his wife were convicted of fraud and tax evasion but have since been pardoned. Mary highlights, “One of their daughters [...] had been very involved in lobbying the president and people in the president's orbit for this pardon.” (25:48)
• Sheriff Scott Jenkins: Convicted of accepting bribes, he was pardoned with remarks suggesting retaliation against the DOJ’s previous actions. Mary notes, “'Dragged through hell by a corrupt and weaponized Justice Department during the Biden administration.'” (32:50)

Quotes Emphasizing Concerns:

• Mary McCord states, “These are people [...] who have been convicted. [...] these represent lawlessness and undermine trust in government.” (33:51)
• Andrew Weissmann underscores the deviation from established processes: “Normally [...] processes are in place to ensure fairness, but under Trump, it seems like a lot of these cases are without any process at all.” (22:05)

4. Reported Changes Within the FBI

Disbanding of Public Corruption Squad: Mary McCord references a New York Times report by Adam Goldman, revealing that the FBI has disbanded its elite public corruption squad in the Washington field office. This squad was pivotal in investigating Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election and other high-profile corruption cases.

• Impact on Corruption Investigations: The elimination of this squad suggests a deprioritization of public corruption cases, raising concerns about accountability and integrity within the DOJ.

Gender and Diversity Concerns: Andrew and Mary discuss allegations that many of the agents affected by these changes are senior women, pointing to potential discrimination and undermining the FBI’s commitment to diversity.

• Mary explains, “These senior female agents were given an ultimatum [...] it's hard for the victims to pull a case together to know whether they have a potential constitutional claim.” (38:07)

Institutional Memory and Expertise: Andrew emphasizes the loss of seasoned professionals, which could hinder the FBI’s effectiveness in handling complex national security and counterterrorism cases:

• “You’re getting rid of the people who are going to actually be instrumental in getting your agenda accomplished.” (39:27)

Quotes Highlighting Concerns:

• Mary McCord: “They know everyone [...] in governments of our allies [...] but those with just a couple of years of experience have nothing to draw on.” (48:42)
• Andrew Weissmann: “A lot of this gets rid of institutional knowledge and could lead to mistakes and violations of rights.” (45:29)

Implications for National Security: The reduction in experienced personnel could compromise the FBI’s ability to effectively collaborate with other agencies and international partners, potentially weakening national security measures.

5. Case Study: Boulder Hate Crime Incident

Mary and Andrew discuss a recent case in Boulder where an individual was charged with hate crimes for attacking protesters supporting hostages held by Hamas. This case exemplifies the complexities the FBI faces in handling domestic terrorism and hate crimes, especially in the context of the discussed internal changes:

• Investigation Nuances: Determining connections to foreign terrorist organizations, assessing intent, and coordinating between federal and state law enforcement agencies.
• Need for Expertise: Highlights the necessity of experienced agents who understand the intricacies of both criminal and national security law.

Quote Emphasizing Complexity: Mary McCord mentions, “Listeners [...] have well aware that a person threw a couple of Molotov cocktails... these are people [...] and he had [...] intended to die himself and had doused himself with gasoline, but he did not die.” (49:25)

6. Executive Actions and Legal Repercussions

Retaliatory Measures Against Media: Andrew and Mary touch upon recent lawsuits filed by PBS and NPR against executive actions directing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to cut off funding, citing First Amendment and due process violations.

• Legal Challenges: These suits argue against what they perceive as blatant retaliation and viewpoint discrimination, drawing parallels to previous injunctions against Trump’s executive orders targeting law firms.

Quotes Highlighting Judicial Response:

• Mary McCord refers to Judge Leon's strong stance: “[Judge Leon] [...] filled with exclamation points. He feels very strongly this was blatant retaliation, not veiled at all.” (54:29)

7. Conclusion and Future Topics

Andrew and Mary conclude by emphasizing the critical state of checks and balances within the U.S. government, particularly in maintaining the integrity of the judicial and investigative branches. They preview upcoming discussions on ongoing retaliation efforts against educational institutions like Harvard and reiterate the importance of safeguarding democratic institutions against executive overreach.

Final Remarks:

• Andrew Weissmann: “Thank you all for listening [...] Search for Main Justice wherever you get your podcasts and follow the series.” (55:05)
• Mary McCord: “...usailancing a question [...] this podcast is produced by...” (55:29)

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• [01:03] Andrew Weissmann: “Hi, welcome back to Main Justice. We're back to Tuesday mornings.”
• [10:38] Mary McCord: “I don't have time to tell so many anecdotes and stories of it. But that's where you want a clear eyed, truthful assessment by senior people.”
• [32:11] Andrew Weissmann: “This guts the justice system. [...] It is leading to lawlessness in the way that if you tell people, you know, no, MAGA left behind [...]”
• [54:12] Andrew Weissmann: “That's a great teaser. Stay tuned for next week.”

Key Takeaways

1. Judicial Oversight: Conflicting rulings on Trump's tariffs highlight deep jurisdictional and constitutional debates, underscoring the judiciary's role in maintaining checks and balances.
2. Pardon Power Concerns: The extensive and seemingly unstructured use of presidential pardons by Trump raises alarms about potential abuses of executive power and undermining the justice system.
3. FBI's Integrity at Risk: Reported disbanding of critical FBI units and possible discriminatory practices threaten the agency's effectiveness and commitment to diversity.
4. National Security Implications: Loss of seasoned FBI personnel could compromise the U.S.'s ability to address domestic and international security threats effectively.
5. Retaliation Against Media and Institutions: Legal challenges against executive actions suggest ongoing attempts to suppress dissenting voices and academic freedom.

Stay informed and subscribed to Main Justice for in-depth legal analyses and discussions on critical issues affecting the U.S. legal landscape.