It's a breakdown I've been begging Andrew to do for months and it's finally here! The case for why the House should start impeachment proceedings for Clarence Thomas.
Kate, Melissa, and Leah recap the remaining arguments from the April session: Nance v. Ward [1:38] and Biden v. Texas [18:04]. They also get into a unanimous opinion about religious speech [43:28], and of course, break down some court culture before continuing their investigation into the leaked draft opinion [52:30].
It is absurd to say "point to where in the Constitution it says you have a right to an abortion." Legally speaking, there's something a lot deeper and more basic going on. As we all already know, this leaked decision makes a mockery of the law. Andrew has some further deep-diving for us on how the court, a mere 20 years ago, ruled in the opposite direction on similar legal questions. Many of the same Justices were a part of that ruling. Listen and learn!
In a special live panel discussion in partnership with the Crosscut Festival, this week’s Amicus tackles the post-leak landscape and potential post-Roe fallout from Justice Samuel Alito’s draft opinion in Dobbs. An all-star panel, featuring law professor and podcast host Melissa Murray, journalist and bestselling author Jessica Bruder, and Slate’s news director Susan Matthews—host of the upcoming Season 7 of Slow Burn focusing on the road to Roe v Wade—get together to discuss the past, present, and future of reproductive liberty.
We're back to talk about the big news: the draft of Justice Alito's opinion in Dobbs, and the questions that surround it -- how and why this might have happened, what it means for the Court, and what the Court can do about it.
In a special episode for Slate Plus members, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern for in-depth analysis of the stunning leaked draft opinion from Justice Samuel Alito in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, the abortion case that is poised to overturn 50 years of jurisprudence and Roe v Wade.
***CLE Available*** The bombshell news this week was the leak of a purported majority opinion of the Court in the Dobbs case - the Mississippi abortion 15 week law. Needless to say, the media were breathless in short order, and apocalyptic articles began to appear everywhere. For our part, we read the draft opinion and have a dissection and analysis of it start to finish for you. We also discuss some previous Supreme Court leaks, and ask what arguments Justice Alito may have missed, which may be a preview of dissents to come. Continuing Legal Education credit is available after listening by visiting podcast.njsba.com.
Kate, Leah and Melissa get together for an emergency episode to discuss a leaked draft Supreme Court opinion that indicates the justices are prepared to overrule the decisions protecting and reaffirming the constitutional right to an abortion.
Just stunning. Despite OA warning you about this for years, it still is, and should be, utterly shocking to see in print. Andrew has somehow already read the opinion and has a preliminary breakdown. This is an emergency, unfiltered, unedited, uncensored episode.
Andrew Seidel joins us to commiserate over both how much the Supreme Court is butchering State-Church Separation, and also how irresponsibly The Daily podcast covered the case involved. The NYT decided to devote an entire episode to a man who a Bush-appointed federal judge called out for being dishonest in his presentation of facts. Please yell at them with us, because this is garbage and we should expect better.