This is a CBS, I in the world. I'm John Bachelor. Welcoming Professor Richard Epstein of the Hoover Institution of Senior Fellow teaches law at NYU, the University of Chicago

to comment on the recent session of the Supreme Court, the Roberts Court, with regard to the

presidency itself in the Constitution and in practice.

Richard, a very good evening to you.

The two cases at hand are Fisher versus the United States and Trump versus the United States turning on the first

Fisher in interpretation of the Sarbanes-Oxley rules of the early part of this century to do with fraud, especially corporate fraud,

in which there's destruction of documents to prevent the correct prosecution or discovery by authority.

That's Fisher.

And then the Trump versus United States

turns on the question of immunity for the serving president of the United States.

And they're linked in that the Smith Special Counsel has brought charges against former President Trump, who is now a candidate for the

presidency again, based upon his conduct and stories of his conduct on January 6th, 2021, the so-called insurrection.

And Mr. Smith, two of the four charges turn on the matter of immunity.

In other words, the Sarbanes-Oxley interpretation

that those at the Capitol interrupted the course of business,

which in fact was a course of the Congress vouchsafeing the electoral college

votes that were already delivered to the Congress by, as do the according to the Constitution's calendar.

So the Fisher case is linked to immunity, only in that they both involve Mr. Trump.

The immunity case, however, has now delayed the sentencing in the prosecution in New York

City by a district attorney brag.

So we've got interlocking matters all turning on Mr. Trump.

At the same time, he is now a leading candidate for the presidency in 2025.

...