The act of governing is an exercise of power. Part of the genius of the United States Constitution is that it does not place all the power in a single ruler, but distributes it across three branches – the legislative, which is Congress, the executive, which is the President and federal departments and agencies, and the judicial, which is the federal courts. This is what we call the separation of powers, a fundamental principle of American constitutionalism. And when we talk about checks and balances, we often are talking about how each branch, when necessary, exercises its own power to limit the power of the other two.

The last few years in American politics have given us an advanced course in these basic principles. We’ve seen the House of Representatives exert its impeachment power over the President, only to be stymied by the Senate’s unwillingness to convict. We’ve seen Presidents attempt to circumvent the power of Congress by issuing executive orders to accomplish what Congress was unwilling to do. And we’ve seen the courts exert their power over those Presidents by striking down executive orders that they believed exceeded the Presidents’ authority.

Ultimately, the United States Supreme Court is entrusted with the power to determine whether the legislative or executive branches and even the lower federal courts have exceeded the bounds of their Constitutional powers. In its last term, the Court issued several decisions that have arguably resulted in significant shifts in the balance of power among the three branches. A number of those decisions concern the allocation of power between administrative agencies on the one hand and the federal courts on the other. Another decision which is still making major headlines was the court’s decision in Trump v. United States. There, the Court, for the first time in American history, immunized a former President from criminal prosecution for official acts the former President engaged in during his Presidency.

Last year, Suffolk University Law Professor Renee Landers joined me as my guest on Higher Callings to unpack some of the major decisions from the Court’s 2022 Term. I’m pleased and honored to have Professor Landers back this year to discuss some of these cases from the Court’s most recent term, their implications for the separation of powers, and what they may portend as we enter a new era of single-party control over the federal government.

If you have enjoyed the Higher Callings podcast, you might also enjoy Don's Substack Newsletter, Reflections of a Boston Lawyer, which you can find here: https://donaldfrederico.substack.com/

When you hear the word “lawyer,” what adjectives come to mind? Obnoxious? Over-priced? Untrustworthy? Or maybe skillful? Smart? Respectable? How often when you think of lawyers do you think “loveable?”

Danny Karon is a Cleveland-based lawyer who has branded himself as “Your Loveable Lawyer.” To know Danny is to know that that description works. More familiar to some of us as an accomplished class action lawyer who for years ably led the American Bar Association’s national institute on class actions, Danny has also been teaching class actions and complex litigation to the next generation of lawyers at some of the country’s finest law schools and serving as a television news commentator discussing high profile legal cases.

As “Your Loveable Lawyer,” Danny Karon arms consumers with the knowledge they need to navigate the confusing web of laws that can affect their everyday lives, what Danny calls their “legal wellness.” He does so by packaging complex and often tedious material into short video vignettes that are both accessible and entertaining. And he is working on a book that will draw from his real-life experiences to inform and educate consumers about the same types of issues that are the subject of his helpful videos. What could be more loveable than that?

In this episode of Higher Callings, I talk with Danny about his career as a lawyer, his leadership of the National Institute on Class Actions, his experience as a law school professor, his foray into news commentary, and his “Higher Calling” as “Your Loveable Lawyer.” We also share some thoughts about the practice of law and Danny offers his advice to law students and young lawyers. As always, Danny’s insights reflect his wisdom and his sparkling personality.

Danny's law practice website can be found here, and his "Lovable Lawyer" website can be found here.

As a bonus, here is a link to a live version of "Emotional Weather Report" by Tom Waits, mentioned early in the episode.

If you have enjoyed the Higher Callings podcast, you might also enjoy Don's Substack Newsletter, Reflections of a Boston Lawyer, which you can find here: https://donaldfrederico.substack.com/

In some courts, when a judge retires, their law clerks or others get together and pay an artist to paint the judge's official portrait. When the portrait is ready, there is a ceremony at the courthouse attended by the judge and the judge’s family, the judge’s clerks, other courthouse staff, and the judge’s friends and colleagues. After a number of speeches honoring the judge, the portrait is unveiled and guests stay to get a close up look at it, congratulate the honoree, and indulge in light refreshments. After the event, the portrait is hung in one of the courtrooms where it will remain for many years to come.

A year or so ago I attended just such a ceremony for retired federal bankruptcy court judge Frank Bailey. I’d gotten to know Frank a bit through American Bar Association meetings we’ve attended in recent years, and monthly luncheons of a small group of active and retired Massachusetts lawyers and judges who enjoy each other’s company and lively conversation. Although it was easy for me as a relatively recent acquaintance to discover what a likeable person Frank is, I learned at the unveiling ceremony just how much he is loved and revered by those who have known him much longer and better than I.

At one of our luncheons, Frank told me about some of the work he now leads as President of the Pioneer Public Interest Law Center. The Center is a nonprofit and nonpartisan law firm that, as described in its mission statement, “defends and promotes educational options, accountable government and economic opportunity across the Northeast and around the country.” It does that, in part, by filing lawsuits and friend-of-the-court briefs in cases where Pioneer believes its participation would advance these values the organization was formed to promote. The Law Center is selective in the cases it takes, and only takes cases that it views as important to its public service mission.

A few weeks ago I asked Frank if he’d be willing to appear on the Higher Callings podcast, and he graciously agreed. The conversation you are about to hear gave me an opportunity to learn more about Frank’s background and career, including his work on the United States Bankruptcy Court, his significant roles with the American Bar Association, and the important efforts he now leads as President of the Law Center.

I’m pleased to share with you the delightful conversation I had with this exceptional role model and public servant, retired Judge Frank Bailey.

If you have enjoyed the Higher Callings podcast, you might also enjoy Don's Substack Newsletter, Reflections of a Boston Lawyer, which you can find here: https://donaldfrederico.substack.com/