Strict Scrutiny - The Uncertain Future of the Indian Child Welfare Act

Rebecca Nagle, host of Crooked Media's This Land, joins Melissa, Leah, and Kate to recap the arguments in Haaland v. Brackeen. The case revolves around the Indian Child Welfare Act, which lays out a set of preferences for where Native American children can be placed for foster care and adoption. The challengers, white foster parents trying to adopt Native American children, are claiming a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. But as Rebecca explains, tribal sovereignty isn't racial-- it's political.

Plus, we take a look at the midterm outcomes and what they mean for the courts.

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

  • 6/12 – NYC
  • 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

Follow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

Amarica's Constitution - The Federalist Society, in Brief – Special Guest Steven Calabresi

The recent brief in the ISL case, Moore v. Harper, was notable in part because it was co-authored not only by our own Professor Amar and his brother, Dean Vik Amar, both well-known Democrats, but also by one of America’s best-known conservatives, Professor Steven Calabresi.  Steve is a co-founder and national chair of the Federalist Society, and importantly, this is not the first time he has crossed the aisle in matters of national import.  He joins our podcast and engages with his close friend, Akhil Amar, on a conversation that spans decades and gives insight in the founding, development, and present of this iconic conservative organization.  Characters from Ed Meese to Guido Calabresi take the stage.  You may be surprised as you learn the inside story from a consummate insider and scholar.

Opening Arguments - OA646: A Comprehensive Guide to Watching the Midterms

Andrew has done exhaustive research on all the key midterm elections to deliver to you a definitive guide on what to look for on election night. How soon will we know if things are good? Or if they are terrible? Which election outcomes should we be surprised about and which should be completely not surprising? Find out! Also, patrons gain access to Andrew's entier notes on this one, which you may want because there is a lot here!

Strict Scrutiny - Affirmative Action Reaction

Leah, Kate, and Melissa recap the many, many hours of oral arguments in the affirmative action cases SCOTUS heard last week.

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

  • 6/12 – NYC
  • 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

Follow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - Affirmative Action on the Chopping Block

Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Professor Cara McClellan, former counsel at NAACP LDF, and founding Director of the Advocacy for Racial and Civil Justice Clinic, at University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Professor McClellan takes us through an extensive trial record largely ignored in oral arguments at SCOTUS this past week. 

Then, Dahlia is joined by David Rothkopf whose book, American Resistance: The inside story of how the deep state saved the nation, details the folks who stuck around and tried to hold the line during the Trump years, and what we can learn from them. 

In this week’s Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Mark Joseph Stern to talk about the judges pushing back in gun cases post Bruen, and the lower courts defying Supreme Court precedent as they seek to curtail LGBTQ rights. 

Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show.

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

SCOTUScast - Delaware v. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin – Post-Argument SCOTUScast

Millions of dollars are at stake in a dispute over whether uncashed MoneyGrams qualify as “a money order, traveler’s check, or other similar written instrument (other than a third party bank check) on which a banking or financial organization or a business association is directly liable,” pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 2503, and therefore whether they should be escheated to the debtor's or creditor's state.

Join us for a discussion with Prof. Donald J. Kochan on the background of the case, takeaways from the oral argument, and the potential impacts the statutory interpretation involved.

Featuring:
Donald J. Kochan, Professor of Law and Deputy Executive Director, Law and Economics Center, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Opening Arguments - OA645: We Badly Underestimated Just How Terrible Elon Musk Is At Business

Hooooo boy. Ok, Elon Musk officially owns Twitter. Does that mean a big "Andrew was wrong?" Well.... kinda but it's complicated. We really just did not fathom how irrational Elon is. His wealth has taken a perhaps unprecedented hit as a result of this terrible deal. Listen for the details! Then, Liz Dye joins us for an update on Jan 6! Links: Shareholder vote twitter, How Elon Musk financed his $44bn Twitter takeover, SC 13D, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, SEC form 4 Elon, SEC filing AMENDMENT NO. 12 to  SCHEDULE 13D, Banks prepare to hold $12.7bn Twitter debt on books until early 2023, U.S. exploring whether it has authority to review Musk’s Twitter deal - The Washington Post, Tesla latest 10-Q, Eastman 9th cir brief, Liz Dye Trump coverage

SCOTUScast - Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency – Post-Argument SCOTUScast

One of the longest-standing environmental law challenges is how to define the scope of waters regulated under the Clean Water Act known as “waters of the United States” (WOTUS). After decades of regulatory uncertainty, the Supreme Court has again taken up a case that may provide clarity. On October 3rd, the Court will hear oral argument in Sackett v. EPA, the first case of this new term and the second time the case will be reviewed by the high court. Perhaps this time the Court will definitively determine what is a WOTUS. Will the Court definitively determine what is a WOTUS?

Join us for a discussion on this important case with Damien Schiff (arguing for petitioners), Tony Francois (represented petitioners in the Ninth Circuit), and William Snape (Director of the American University Washington College of Law’s Program on Environment and Energy Law). The panel will be moderated by Hunton Andrews Kurth partner Matt Leopold, who served previously as EPA general counsel and assisted in drafting the 2020 Navigable Waters Protection Rule defining WOTUS.

Featuring:
Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
Damien Schiff, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
Prof. William Snape, Director of Program on Environmental and Energy Law, Assistant Dean of Adjunct Faculty Affairs, and Fellow in Environmental Law, American University Washington College of Law
Moderator: Matt Leopold, Partner, Hunton Andrews Kurth