Runaway Country with Alex Wagner

Episode: Will the Supreme Court Finally Stand Up to Trump in 2026? (with Melissa Murray)
Date: December 18, 2025
Guests: Melissa Murray (NYU Professor, Strict Scrutiny co-host), Rebecca Slaughter (former FTC Commissioner), Rick Waldenberg (Learning Resources CEO)

Main Theme

This episode examines the Supreme Court’s imminent decisions about the scope of presidential power, particularly in the face of Trump’s increasingly unchecked executive rule during his second term. Alex Wagner explores how the Court may (or may not) serve as a check on Trump and what is at stake for democracy, the administrative state, consumer protections, and basic civil rights. She talks with direct participants in high-profile cases—Rebecca Slaughter (ousted FTC commissioner suing the administration) and Rick Waldenberg (challenging Trump’s tariffs)—as well as legal scholar Melissa Murray, for context on judicial trends and the possible future of American government.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The State of the Nation & the Supreme Court’s Docket

(03:46-04:24, 26:30-29:36)

• 2025 has been marked by extreme executive actions, dismantling of agencies, mass deportations, controversial policies, and increasingly autocratic tendencies from President Trump.
• Wagner frames the Supreme Court as the "last meaningful check" on presidential excesses, but notes its conservative 6:3 majority seems invested in entrenching executive power.
• The Court is set to rule on issues that could redefine:
  • Voting rights
  • Birthright citizenship
  • LGBTQ+ protections
  • Independence of federal agencies (FTC, FCC, Fed, etc.)
  • Trump's damaging tariffs

“The court's 6:3 conservative majority is populated by men who fly insurrectionist flags over their summer homes and take luxury vacations with right wing activists. So, yeah, the high Court has done a great deal to cement Trump's power and send this country way back in time. And those justices ain't done yet, not by a long shot.” _{—Alex Wagner (03:19-03:46)}

Inside the Storm: Plaintiffs in Trump’s America

(04:50-17:29)

Rick Waldenberg and the Tariffs Case

(04:50-07:35, 56:05-61:06)

• Waldenberg, CEO of Learning Resources, immediately sued over Trump’s new "fentanyl tariffs" that made doing business near-impossible for manufacturers reliant on imports.
• Lower courts ruled in his favor, finding the tariffs “asphyxiating.”
• The case is now before the Supreme Court:
  • Waldenberg frames his fight as an act of citizenship and a defense of constitutional government, rather than partisan resistance.

“We think we're standing up for what America means... Imagine if in your lifetime, you get the opportunity to stand up and defend what James Madison did in 1787... It's the American system on display. It should work this way.”
_{—Rick Waldenberg (06:34-07:35)}

Rebecca Slaughter and the Fight for Independent Agencies

(07:35-18:46, 28:07-35:27)

• Slaughter, a Democrat at the FTC, was abruptly fired by President Trump, violating longstanding precedent (Humphrey’s Executor case) limiting presidential removal of independent agency commissioners.
• Her case at the Supreme Court is pivotal: if decided for Trump, it would allow presidents to purge all independent agency heads, converting them into extensions of the White House.
• Slaughter emphasizes the bipartisanship built into such agencies and the democratic accountability they’re meant to offer.

"Our obligation is to do our job, to uphold the oath that we've taken, and not to live and act out of fear."
_{—Rebecca Slaughter (11:30-13:53)}

• She recounts the personal turmoil of being fired (while volunteering at her daughter’s school play):
  • The firing was sudden, disruptive, and historically unprecedented.
  • She highlights the “human level” impact—public servants swept up in political purges being regular Americans with families.

“These people can try to take my job, but they cannot take drama, drama club and the joy of performance from me and these elementary school kids.”
_{—Rebecca Slaughter (15:35-16:38)}

Why This Fight Matters

• Slaughter frames her lawsuit and media advocacy as a reluctant but necessary stand for the system’s integrity, using her privilege to fight when others cannot.
• The stakes: Once lost, agency independence is hard to restore, opening the door to overt oligarchy.
• She links the legal structure (multi-member, bipartisan, term-limited commissions) directly to protecting the public from White House whims and billionaire influence.

"It's technically about me, but it's very, very much not about me. It is about the organization of the federal government as Congress designed it for a reason and whether one president is going to be able to upend that."
_{—Rebecca Slaughter (18:46-21:16)}

The Supreme Court’s Ideological (and Personal) Conflicts

(37:36-61:46)

Enter Melissa Murray: Systemic Legal Context

(37:36-50:38)

• With expert, sometimes wry clarity, Murray walks through the evolution and structure of agencies like the FTC:
  • Set up deliberately by Congress to insulate certain regulators from partisan politics and ensure expertise-based, stable governance.
  • The current challenge: Trump’s firing of Slaughter and others is a direct assault on this insulation.
  • Murray underscores that precedent (Humphrey’s Executor, 1935) is on the plaintiffs' side—but this Court’s conservative majority has repeatedly shown willingness to overturn precedent for ideological aims.

"The problem, of course, with precedent is that this court... the emperor is butt naked."
_{—Alex Wagner (43:23-44:06)}

• The conservative “unitary executive theory”—that all executive branch authority ultimately flows from the President—functions as legal monarchy and is at odds with American constitutional design.

The Unwinding of the Administrative State

• Murray notes justices like Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are openly suspicious of agency power, often for personal and ideological reasons.
• The Court is likely to take cases that:
  • Give an appearance of independence by sometimes ruling against Trump (e.g., tariffs, birthright citizenship).
  • But quietly, consistently undercut federal protections, deregulate business, and undermine civil rights gains.

The Tariffs "Win"—Judicial Politics at Work

(56:05-61:06)

• Murray argues the Supreme Court may rule against Trump’s tariffs not out of principle but to protect its own legitimacy and show it’s not his “lapdog.”
• The effect: Offering the illusion of judicial independence while enabling broader project of dismantling American government protections.

"It saves this president from his worst impulses, saves the country and their pocketbooks... and it saves this court from looking like the lapdog of this administration."
_{—Melissa Murray (60:36-61:06)}

The Future of Civil Rights & The Reconstruction Amendments

(61:06-73:27)

Birthright Citizenship: A Constitutional Line in the Sand?

• Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship directly contradicts the text of the 14th Amendment.
• Murray predicts the Court will likely rule for birthright citizenship—not to uphold principle but to appear reasonable, given the clarity of the constitutional language.

"If this court can read, they will make clear that the 14th Amendment reads what it says and they will invalidate this EO and they will look like heroes."
_{—Melissa Murray (63:46-64:55)}

Voting Rights: The Assault on the VRA

(65:49-73:27)

• The Supreme Court is poised to further gut section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (Louisiana v. Calais/Kelly).
• Dismantling of VRA protections is part of a century-long struggle over Reconstruction Amendments—one this court is weaponizing to restrict, not expand, democracy.
• The episode draws a direct line from contemporary decisions back to original post-Civil War attempts to ensure equal rights—showing how precedent and progress are being unraveled.

“They've taken a very dim view about what the Reconstruction Amendments were meant to do… Instead we actually see the Reconstruction Amendments being weaponized against the actual goals of Reconstruction.”
_{—Melissa Murray (66:44–66:54)}

The Corruption (and Vulnerability) of the Supreme Court

(73:27-79:53)

• Wagner and Murray address the public’s eroding trust in the Court after a series of scandals, conflicts of interest, and blatantly partisan rulings.
• The Court’s majority is unbothered by overturning precedent when it’s politically inconvenient—a fundamental threat to the legitimacy of U.S. governance.
• Murray cautions that fleeting media focus masks enduring problems: “It's literally like being at a zoo where chimpanzees are flinging feces at each other.”

“I just think there's so much going on that it's hard to focus on the court when we're literally watching a monarch autocrat take shape.”
_{—Melissa Murray (76:14-76:38)}

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “The American system depends on someone raising their hand... I think after 250 years, sometimes we forget what makes this place special. This is an example of it.”
  —Rick Waldenberg (06:34–07:35)

• “These people can try to take my job, but they cannot take drama, drama club and the joy of performance from me and these elementary school kids.”
  —Rebecca Slaughter (16:07–16:38)

• “You may try to dismantle the independence of federal agencies, but you will not take Beauty and the Beast from me.”
  —Alex Wagner, with laughter (16:07–16:14)

• “The emperor is butt naked.”
  —Alex Wagner, quoting Dahlia Lithwick (43:23–44:06)

• “The conservative legal movement... is very much on this theory [the unitary executive] because so much of its authority then gets vested in a president. And usually when the court is interested in really prosecuting the unitary executive theory to its utmost, it's when a Republican president.”
  —Melissa Murray (45:40–46:25)

• “It gives them an opportunity to... save this court from looking like the lapdog of this administration.”
  —Melissa Murray (60:51–61:06)

• “If this court can read, they will make clear that the 14th Amendment reads what it says, and they will invalidate this EO and they will look like heroes... The Supreme Court can read because that's all this is.”
  —Melissa Murray (63:46–64:55)

• “They've taken a very dim view about what the Reconstruction Amendments were meant to do and how they were supposed to work. Instead, we actually see the Reconstruction Amendments being weaponized against the actual goals of Reconstruction.”
  —Melissa Murray (66:44–66:54)

• “I just think there's so much going on that it's hard to focus on the court when we're literally watching a monarch autocrat take shape. So that might be part of the problem. It seems like the attention on the court is diminished, but that's because there's just so much other stuff. It's literally like being at a zoo where chimpanzees are flinging feces at each other.”
  —Melissa Murray (76:14–76:38; echoed also at 04:24–04:50)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 03:19 – Wagner sets the stakes and introduces the Supreme Court’s current docket.
• 04:50 – Rick Waldenberg describes the impact of Trump’s tariffs and his decision to sue.
• 07:35 – Rebecca Slaughter explains her firing and the stakes of her Supreme Court case.
• 16:38 – Slaughter and Wagner explore the personal (and political) toll of Trump’s attacks on independent agencies.
• 28:07 – Slaughter addresses the "unitary executive" theory favored by Justice Kavanaugh and others, and details why she’s fighting.
• 37:36 – Melissa Murray dissects the legal, historical, and political dimensions of cases before the Court.
• 56:05 – Analysis of why the Court might rule against Trump on tariffs.
• 61:06 – Birthright citizenship cases outlined; anti-immigrant executive order explained.
• 65:49 – The systematic weakening of the Voting Rights Act.
• 76:14 – Discussion about the public’s relationship to the Supreme Court amid corruption and distraction.

Tone & Style

The episode is candid, sharp, and at times darkly humorous, with Wagner, Murray, and Slaughter all maintaining a tone that combines legal precision with incredulity and emotional honesty. Wagner's narration grounds complex issues with references to everyday stakes and lived experiences, while both Murray and Slaughter offer accessible explanations for abstract legal concepts.

For Listeners Who Missed the Episode

This discussion reveals the real stakes—legal, personal, and societal—of current and upcoming Supreme Court decisions. Case studies of agency independence (FTC), economic survival (tariffs), and civil rights (voting, citizenship) are illustrated through personal stories, legal history, and clear-eyed analysis of the conservative Court’s political project. The episode provides vital context for understanding how the judiciary may shape (or fail to protect) American democracy in the age of Trump II and beyond.