Strict Scrutiny – “We Need To Talk About Trump’s Maritime Murders”
Podcast: Strict Scrutiny (Crooked Media)
Hosts: Leah Litman, Melissa Murray, Kate Shaw
Guest: Rebecca Ingber (Cardozo Law School)
Release Date: December 8, 2025
Overview
This episode dives into a bombshell legal and moral controversy: the Trump administration's campaign of lethal strikes against suspected drug traffickers at sea, and the damning legal questions surrounding these operations. The hosts—three constitutional law professors—are joined by international law expert Rebecca Ingber to unpack explosive reporting about an incident in which surviving victims were killed in a second strike, raising war crimes allegations and underscoring deep constitutional and moral crises in U.S. military and executive conduct.
The show also recaps several recent Supreme Court arguments and highlights a host of developments in court culture and legal news, all with signature wit, skepticism, and feminist-legal rage.
Main Case: Trump’s Maritime Murders
The Legal and Factual Landscape
[02:37-05:00]
- Background: Since September 2025, the Trump administration has carried out summary executions of suspected drug traffickers at sea, starting in the Caribbean and expanding to the Pacific.
- On Sept 2, the first strike killed 11 people; to date, there have been 87 killed across 22 strikes.
- The administration, including Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (mocked as “Hague Seth” for his disregard for international law), has joked about these killings, emphasizing their intention to continue.
- Quote (Rebecca Ingber, 04:41): “This entire killing campaign is not only just unauthorized, some people have talked about it as unauthorized...but it’s actually quite specifically murder.”
New Revelations: The Second Strike
[05:00-07:38]
- Recent Washington Post reporting details that in a September attack, two survivors left in the water after the initial boat strike were killed by a second strike, after a 40-minute delay, despite evidence they were incapacitated and waving for help.
- Key Point (Ingber): Even in the (false) scenario these victims were “combatants,” under the laws of war, striking shipwrecked, incapacitated people is a war crime.
- Quote (Ingber, 07:10): “If we are in an armed conflict, as the President claims, then this would be a classic war crime. It’s not. It’s murder, because we’re not in an armed conflict.”
Law and Accountability for Soldiers
[07:38-09:41]
- Discussion of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Soldiers must obey lawful orders, but must disobey unlawful ones and can be prosecuted for following “manifestly unlawful” orders.
- Orders to fire on shipwrecked survivors or to “give no quarter” are textbook unlawful orders per DoD guidance.
- Quote (Rebecca Ingber, 08:34): “It is not a defense to say, ‘I was just following orders.’ … An order to fire on the shipwrecked is so textbook [unlawful] it’s used in the DoD law of war manual.”
Administrative and Political Response
[09:41-14:24]
- Secretary Hegseth’s public social media shows apparent glee and shifting blame for the strikes, further muddying accountability.
- Senators have been briefed and have seen video evidence; reactions vary from shock and calls for public release (including one Republican) to defense of administration actions (e.g., Tom Cotton, [11:27]).
- Congress’s powers, per Ingber: hearings, subpoenas, prohibiting force, investigations, impeachment, publicity, and more.
- The public release of video could trigger a political reckoning akin to the Abu Ghraib scandal.
- Quote (Ingber, 13:47): “Getting that video out there, if they are able, is going to only further highlight the gross illegality of the entire campaign… it may well spell the beginning of the end for the administration’s [justification] for this murder campaign.”
Supreme Court Argument Recaps
1. First Choice v. Platkin
[17:33–34:18]
- A case dealing with the ability of a crisis pregnancy center to challenge a state subpoena on First Amendment grounds in federal court.
- The justices appear poised to side with the pregnancy center, with both right and some left-leaning justices sympathetic, potentially due to concerns about abusive state investigations in a politicized enforcement environment.
- Notable discussions center on whether state subpoenas are self-executing and what constitutes a “credible threat.”
- Quote (Leah Litman, 22:05): “Yes, the crisis pregnancy centers are likening themselves today to the NAACP in the 1950s. This is Erin Hawley’s contribution to critical race theory.”
2. Cox Communications v. Sony
[37:34–40:49]
- Focuses on when internet service providers can be held vicariously liable for users’ copyright infringement.
- The justices seem wary of broad ISP liability, concerned about possible consequences like widespread service cutoffs.
- Favorite moment, [40:36]: Kavanaugh targeted with appeals about military bases losing internet access.
3. Yuras Orana v. Bondi (Immigration Case)
[40:52–44:37]
- Concerns federal court review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ “no-persecution” findings.
- The Supreme Court seems likely to defer to the BIA, highlighting inconsistency in enforcement when racial minorities’ interests are at stake.
- Quote (Melissa Murray, 43:44): “When we’re trying to deport people of color… we defer to fact finding; when we want to disenfranchise people of color… we don’t defer.”
4. Olivier v. Brandon (Section 1983/Habeas Doctrine)
[44:37–48:34]
- Concerns whether someone fined for violating a protest-related ordinance can seek prospective relief under §1983, despite a prior conviction.
- The majority seem to want to find a way to allow the claim, despite broad earlier language in Justice Scalia’s “Heck” decision.
Other Legal and Court Culture News
DOJ’s Attempted Re-indictment of Tish James
[16:41–17:33]
- A Missouri grand jury refused a re-indictment against NY Attorney General Tish James, undermining what hosts call a “malicious and vindictive prosecution.”
Federal Bench-Slaps & Court Culture
[51:34–54:34]
- The Eleventh Circuit sanctioned Trump lawyer Alina Habba for frivolous lawsuits, and other courts have challenged the administration’s attempt to install unqualified U.S. Attorneys, including more rebukes for Pamela Jo Bondi’s appointments.
Birthright Citizenship Supreme Court News
[54:34–55:52]
- SCOTUS has granted cert in the challenge to Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship—hosts anticipate Sam Alito’s potential “appendix” of Americans he wants to deport.
The Shadow Docket and Judicial Hypocrisy
[55:52–56:46]
- Chief Justice Roberts stayed a lower-court order affecting what immigration judges can say publicly, highlighting the current shadow docket frenzy.
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
-
Rebecca Ingber, on war crimes:
“Even if you accept every manufactured fact … you still can’t shoot [people] when they are what we call ‘hors de combat’ … Shipwreck is a paradigmatic example…” [06:46] -
Leah Litman, on Supreme Court self-contradiction:
“This is the new face of federalism. Blue states don’t even know their own laws.” [23:16] -
Melissa Murray, on politicized law enforcement:
“But there’s a lot of that Vullo v. NRA energy … where the ACLU was on the side of the NRA … If we could be assured that the justices will neutrally and fairly treat future targets … but that’s bringing principles to a gunfight.” [33:42] -
Hosts on misogyny in Congress:
“Ladies, it was in his name. Mama tried to tell you.” (on Speaker Mike Johnson’s gender views) [61:41]
Timestamp Highlights
- [03:36] Guest introduction: Rebecca Ingber, expert in international law and the law of war.
- [05:38] Legal deep-dive into the implications of the second strike and the ‘hors de combat’ (incapacitated combatant) principle.
- [09:41] Discussion of UCMJ, illegal orders, and the criminal culpability of soldiers.
- [11:27] Congressional reactions to the strikes and the prospect of publicizing damning video.
- [16:41] DOJ’s failed re-indictment of Tish James.
- [17:33] Recap of Supreme Court oral arguments in First Choice v. Platkin.
- [37:34] Tech/copyright liability: Cox Communications v. Sony.
- [51:34] Court culture: Sanctions against Trump’s lawyers and rebukes of DOJ appointments.
- [54:34] SCOTUS grants challenge to birthright citizenship.
- [57:01] Hosts’ “favorite things” lightening round.
Segment: Favorite Things & Recommendations
[57:01–65:21]
- Chris Geidner’s deposition transcripts, Sarah Stillman’s “third country removals” reporting, and petty meme culture moments (Sabrina Carpenter v. Trump propaganda video).
- Sassy hats, cashmere beanies, and fangirling over celebrity interviews and biographies (Jessica Mitford).
- Wry commentary on Republican women’s late realization about patriarchy, Thanksgiving anecdotes, and the humor of city life.
Closing & Upcoming Events
- Strict Scrutiny is taking its live show to California in March 2026—offering deep dives into election law, executive power, reproductive rights, and plenty of “feminist legal rage.”
- Tickets: crooked.com/events
Tone, Style & Takeaway
The episode is incisive, irreverent, and urgent, combining rigorous legal expertise with biting humor and deep moral seriousness. The hosts refuse to sugarcoat the gravity of unlawful state killings, the Supreme Court’s inconsistencies, and the perils of unchecked executive power, while finding moments of levity and solidarity in the struggle.
Listeners are left with a clarion call: what’s at stake isn’t just legal fine points, but the fundamental boundaries of American democracy, the rule of law, and basic human decency.