I'm CNN tech reporter Claire Duffy.

I cover artificial intelligence and other new technologies for a living.

And even I sometimes get overwhelmed trying to keep up with it all and stay safe in the process.

On the podcast, Terms of Service, we can explore how to experiment with these new tools

without getting played by them. Listen to CNN's Terms of Service wherever you get your podcasts.

President Trump likes to do things nobody has ever done before, and he certainly made history recently when he became the first sitting president to attend oral arguments before the Supreme Court, watching attorneys who contended that his executive order ending birthright citizenship should be allowed to take effect. The other side argued that order violates the Constitution,

although the president left before those lawyers made their case before justices.

From KERA in Dallas, this is think. I'm Chris Boyd. Defenders of birthright citizenship, of mail-in

voting, and other targets of Trump's executive orders are also paying close attention to

Supreme Court proceedings, hoping justices will rule against the president's single-handed

changes. But even if opponents sometimes get the decision they hope for, my guest says the best venue for arguments over which laws we have and how they're applied is not the judicial branch, but the legislative one.

Duncan Hosey is a fellow at Stanford Law School. His essay for the New York Times recently was headlined, The Courts Cannot Save Us from Trump.

Duncan, welcome back to think.

It's great to be back. Thank you, Chris. I believe you wrote this before President Trump attended Supreme Court proceedings. How surprising was it to you that a sitting president took time out of what

has to be a very busy schedule to physically attend a session of the high court?

I would say it was both predictable and unpredictable. It was predictable in the sense that this is a

president who is seeking to intimidate his enemies and that enemies includes independent courts

and judges who rule against him. And so it was predictable that he would push his behavior in

unusual ways and attending oral argument as you discussed is an example of that. I would say it was also

a little bit unsurprising just based on what we know about the president overall. He doesn't seem to

be someone who is particularly interested in the details of

legal procedures. So even though he didn't stay for the whole time, it was interesting. I think

...