Summary: In his much-anticipated testimony on Capitol Hill this week, former FBI Director James Comey described several uncomfortable interactions with President Trump that preceded his firing. The big question for all watching was: could any of those interactions be considered “obstruction of justice?” On this week’s episode, we put the question to Stanford Law School Professor <a href="https://law.stanford.edu/directory/robert-weisberg/">Robert Weisberg</a>. <br><br>We also discuss the ongoing litigation around President Trump’s executive order on immigration with <a href="https://cardozo.yu.edu/directory/kate-shaw">Kate Shaw</a>, an associate professor at the Cardozo School of Law and a Supreme Court analyst for ABC News. Shaw is the author of <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2981475">a new article</a> in the <em>Texas Law Review</em> that <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-courts-and-president-trumps-words">considers</a> what sorts of presidential speech is and isn’t admissible in a court of law. [Read Shaw’s recent <em>New York Times</em> op-ed on the subject <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/opinion/trump-travel-ban-appeals-court.html?_r=0">here</a>.] <br><br>Transcripts of <em>Amicus </em>are available to <strong>Slate Plus</strong> members, several days after each episode posts. For a limited time, get 90 days of free access to Slate Plus in the new Slate iOS app. Download it today at <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/app/apple-store/id357555242?mt=8">slate.com/app</a>. <br><br>Please let us know what you think of <em>Amicus</em>. Join the discussion of this episode on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/amicuspodcast">Facebook</a>. Our email is <a href="mailto:amicus@slate.com">amicus@slate.com</a>.<br>Podcast production by Tony Field.
