Strict Scrutiny - How SCOTUS is Making Project 2025 a Reality

Our fearless hosts continue to slog through this sh*tty shadow docket summer, covering an order from the Court okaying racial profiling by ICE officers, some ominous administrative stays, Amy Coney Barrett’s ongoing press tour through right wing media, and the lower courts’ continuing frustrations with this Supreme Court. Then, Leah and Kate speak with special guest Symone Sanders Townsend, co-host of MSNBC’s The Weeknight, about how the Supreme Court is carrying out key parts of Project 2025, and enabling and facilitating other parts of the government to do the same. 

Hosts’ favorite things:

Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 

  • 10/4 – Chicago

Learn more: http://crooked.com/events

Order your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes

Get tickets to CROOKED CON November 6-7 in Washington, D.C at http://crookedcon.com

Follow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - Dear Justice Kavanaugh, “I’m American, Bro”

In this week’s episode of Amicus, we delve into the recent Supreme Court shadow docket order in Noem v. Vasquez-Perdomo, which in essence legalized racial profiling by roving ICE patrols, and in practice may have ushered in America’s “show your papers” era for Americans with brown skin, who speak Spanish, and/or go to Home Depot in work clothes. Join Dahlia Lithwick and Ahilan Arulanantham, a longstanding human rights lawyer and law professor, as they unpack what this unargued, unreasoned, unsigned and (in Kavanaugh’s case) uncited decision means for both immigrants and U.S. citizens, for 4th amendment doctrine, and for the lower courts expected to parse SCOTUS’ tea leaves. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you’ll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Opening Arguments - It’s Still the Shadow Docket, Despite Kavanaugh’s Pathetic Rebrand Attempt

OA1189 - The Supreme Court’s next term may not start until October, but their infamous shadow--sorry, “interim”--docket is in rare form as they issue snap decisions on everything from exactly where one 14-year-old boy can pee to just how openly racist ICE gets to be. Matt and Jenessa review which major precedents the conservative majority is ignoring to enable Trump’s worst policies this week before getting on to some Epstein-related legal updates and a radical new development from the Board of Immigration Appeals with massive implications for Trump’s mass deportation plans. 

Finally, Matt drops a footnote to address one of our nation’s least pressing legal questions: is it really true that a wedding in Kentucky can be legally officiated by a dead bear once described as “filled to the brim with cocaine”?

  1. SCOTUS order in Trump v. Slaughter  (9/8/2025) 

  2. SCOTUS order (with Kavanaugh concurrence and Sotomayor dissent) in Noem v. Vasquez-Perdomo (9/8/25)

  3. Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 21 I&N 216 (BIA 2025)

  4. Kentucky Revised Statute 402.070 

P.S. Matt messed up his audio and is very sorry about it!

Opening Arguments - LAM1009: My Cousin Vinny

Just because everything else is terrible out there right now, we treated ourselves to our second consecutive Law’d Awesome Movie. By popular patron demand: it’s My Cousin Vinny! We had a great time talking about this one. Actual New York Italian-American Jenessa Seymour joins to provide dead-ass balls accurate cultural context for one of the greatest Brooklyn couples ever put to film, and Matt shares his perspective as both an actual practicing courtroom lawyer and a guy who is weirdly obsessed with end credits songs that tell you about the movie you just watched. 

Thanks again to patrons for this one!

  1. My Cousin Vinny, Dale Launer (1992)(full script)(PDF)

  2. “‘What is a Yute?’ An Oral History of ‘My Cousin Vinny,’” Andy Greene, Rolling Stone (3/7/22)

Amarica's Constitution - The Big Equal

With the imminent publication of Born Equal, we explore Lincoln’s grand vision of equality as it played out during and after his life.  The new book goes further still, offering an expansive though still relentlessly originalist view of this constitutional vision.  And now Professor Amar sees this vision through with even greater implications for the 160 years since his death and into the future.  The new book introduces, and this podcast and those to follow explore, a new unifying thread that gives even greater coherence to the Constitution, as amended and as understood through this momentous scholarly effort.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Strict Scrutiny - The Lower Courts Punch Up

Kate, Leah, and Melissa break down how the lower courts are challenging the Trump administration and expressing their frustration with SCOTUS. Then, they check in with two members of the supermajority: Brett Kavanaugh, who’s touting a shiny new shadow docket rebrand, and Amy Coney Barrett as she commences her cursèd book tour. Finally, the hosts speak with Yale Law professor Justin Driver about his book, The Fall of Affirmative Action: Race, the Supreme Court, and the Future of Higher Education.

Hosts’ and guests’ favorite things:

Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 

  • 10/4 – Chicago

Learn more: http://crooked.com/events

Order your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes

Get tickets to CROOKED CON November 6-7 in Washington, D.C at http://crookedcon.com

Follow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

Opening Arguments - Do You Swear You’re Not A Subversive Person?

Continuing their "Good Law" series, Matt and Jenessa talk about Baggett v. Bullitt. This case held that "a State cannot require an employee to take an unduly vague oath containing a promise of future conduct at the risk of prosecution for perjury or loss of employment, particularly where the exercise of First Amendment freedoms may thereby be deterred." Jenessa gives a fascinating science breakdown on cognitive dissonance and what the effect of these vague oaths actually is. It's counter-intuitive and very interesting!

Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - How To Fix Our Broken Constitution

There is a “stuckness” to American political life right now, which has become a seemingly inexorable centrifuge of polarization, victimization and power grabbing. The constitution is brandished as sword and shield, and also as though it is the word of God. Americans, it seems, have lost the ability to think creatively and expansively about the constitution, and our ability to amend it. On this week’s Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is in conversation with Jill Lepore, whose new book “We The People: A History of The U.S. The Constitution is a thorough and bold excavation of a central, but utterly neglected part of America’s constitutional scheme: the amendment process. In her book, and in this interview, Lepore challenges Americans to rekindle their constitutional imaginations and really think about what the act of mending, repairing, or amending has meant through the nation’s history, and could mean for a country on the brink. 


Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you’ll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Opening Arguments - BREAKING: Federal Courts Correctly Notice Color of Sky, Pope’s Religious Affiliation

For this week’s Rapid Response Friday we take up three major judicial rulings pushing back against executive overreach on three completely different topics: removals under the Alien Enemies Act, the use of the National Guard to conduct domestic law enforcement, and the  imposition of tariffs as an executive action under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Also: it turns out a DC grand jury really can't indict a ham sandwich, and why Brazil is so much better at prosecuting insurrectionists than the US is.

  1. Fifth Circuit's decision in W.M.M. et al (9/2/25)

  2. Judge Charles Breyer’s decision in Newson v. Trump (9/2/25)

  3. Federal Circuit’s decision in V.O.S. Selections v. Trump (8/29/25)