 of yesterday's decision in the Trump case. I mean, I think Justice Barrett is exactly right in her concurrent opinion when she says not only was there no reason for the majority to reach this point about evidence and what evidence could be used to prosecute a former president for acts that are otherwise not immunized, but I also think that she's right that this is a terrible idea. I mean, I think the notion that a former president who commits crimes that, Hugh, the Supreme Court believes are subject to prosecution