Unwritten Law
Unwritten Law
Podcast Description
Unwritten Law is a podcast hosted by Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione, brought to you by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA). This show dives deep into the world of unlawful administrative power, exposing how bureaucrats operate outside the bounds of written law through informal guidance, regulatory “dark matter,” and unconstitutional agency overreach.
Podcast Insights
Content Themes
The podcast focuses on topics related to administrative law, constitutional rights, and legal challenges against government overreach. Episodes cover themes such as the constitutionality of vaccine mandates, the IRS's warrantless searches of financial records, and the implications of a case against the National Park Service’s regulations. Specific episode examples include discussions on Health Freedom Defense Fund v. Carvalho, Harper v. IRS, and the implications of Loper Bright and Relentless rulings on agency power.

Unwritten Law is a podcast hosted by Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione, brought to you by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA). This show dives deep into the world of unlawful administrative power, exposing how bureaucrats operate outside the bounds of written law through informal guidance, regulatory “dark matter,” and unconstitutional agency overreach.
In this episode of Unwritten Law, NCLA President and Chief Legal Officer Mark Chenoweth and Senior Litigation Counsel John Vecchione break down Trump v. Barbara, a closely watched case before the U.S. Supreme Court addressing the scope of birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment.
John shares firsthand insights from attending oral argument, where the Court considered whether the Constitution guarantees citizenship to all children born in the United States or whether limits may apply to the children of illegal immigrants and temporary visitors. The case stems from an executive order directing federal agencies to reinterpret the Citizenship Clause—raising both constitutional and administrative law questions.
The discussion explores the historical understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment, the role of allegiance and jurisdiction, and key precedents such as United States v. Wong Kim Ark. Mark and John also examine competing arguments presented at oral argument, including concerns about retroactivity, congressional authority, and the practical consequences of altering long-standing interpretations of citizenship.
The episode also highlights commentary from legal scholars, including an article by Philip Hamburger, and explains why the Court’s decision—expected later this term—could have major implications for immigration policy, constitutional law, and the separation of powers.
Philip Hamburger’s article in Law & Liberty: Allegiance, Birthright, and Citizenship
https://lawliberty.org/allegiance-birthright-and-citizenship/

Disclaimer
This podcast’s information is provided for general reference and was obtained from publicly accessible sources. The Podcast Collaborative neither produces nor verifies the content, accuracy, or suitability of this podcast. Views and opinions belong solely to the podcast creators and guests.
For a complete disclaimer, please see our Full Disclaimer on the archive page. The Podcast Collaborative bears no responsibility for the podcast’s themes, language, or overall content. Listener discretion is advised. Read our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy for more details.