Category: 3-LawSometimeCommentary

Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Mark Joseph Stern for an emergency reading of the jurisprudential tea leaves in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decisions regarding Texas’ abortion ban, under SB8. 

Podcast production by Sara Burningham.

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

Commander Vladeck returns to break down what the Supreme Court’s decision in the SB8 case does and doesn’t mean. (Spoiler alert: Nothing good!)

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

In what seems to be an unprecedented but perhaps bold and necessary move, the parents of the Oxford shooter have been charged with involuntary manslaughter. Andrew has the breakdown of what happened and if the charges are likely to stick. Is it a slippery slope to... anyone being charged for everything ever? Nah. Before that, we've got an update about the Amazon unionization effort. A new election has been ordered, which is good news! Find out what Amazon is guilty of. Links: Amazon new election order, Michigan Penal Code Section 750.321, jury instructions

We’ve been waiting for months to bring you this one: we can finally talk about the President’s Supreme Court Commission, which just finalized its report this week. We also briefly talk about the recent argument in Dobbs and try to predict what the Court might do.

On November 1, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson on whether a state can insulate from federal-court review a law that may prohibit the exercise of a constitutional right by delegating to the public the authority to enforce that prohibition; and in United States v. Texas on the authority of the federal government to bring suit and obtain injunctive or declaratory relief against a state, state court judges, and other states officials or all private parties to prohibit SB 8, a Texas abortion regulation, from being enforced.

A distinguished pair of scholars joined us to discuss the cases, their history, the legal issues involved, and the implications going forward.

Featuring:
Prof. Stephen Sachs, Antonin Scalia Professor of Law, Harvard Law School
Prof. Howard Wasserman, Professor of Law, Florida International University College of Law

On November 8th, the Court heard argument in Unicolors, Inc. V. H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P. Joining today to discuss this case is Professor Zvi Rosen of Southern Illinois University School of Law.

On November 30, the Court heard argument in American Hospital Association v. Becerra, a case which asked: "Whether deference under Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council permits the Department of Health and Human Services to set reimbursement rates based on acquisition cost and vary such rates by hospital group if it has not collected adequate hospital acquisition cost survey data; and (2) whether petitioners’ suit challenging HHS’s adjustments is precluded by 42 U.S.C. § 1395l(t)(12)." Joining today to discuss this case is Ilya Shapiro, Vice President and Director of the Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute.

On October 6th, the Court heard oral argument in United States v. Zubaydah, a case which concerned "whether the 9th circuit erred when it rejected the United States’ assertion of the state secrets privilege based on the court’s own assessment of potential harms to national security, and required discovery to proceed further under 28 U.S.C 1782(a) against former CIA contractors on matters concerning alleged clandestine CIA activities." Joining today to discuss this case in two parts is Kate Comerford Todd, managing partner at Ellis George Cipollone in Washington, DC.

The oral argument is complete in the Mississippi abortion case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. In our previous two episodes, Professor Amar prepared our audience with a remarkable menu of constitutional theory, a recap of the relevant cases and the orientation of the justices.  We now look at the actual argument and find where it cohered with Akhil’s notions.  We critique the arguments, the advocates, and the arbiters, and discuss arguments that might have been made.  Was precedent ("Stare Decisis") the theme, and did it have to be?  The voices of the justices, inserted in our podcast, put you right there, with Professor Amar as your guide.

Baseball law! This season is in jeopardy because some crusty, probably racist, billionaires don't want to give up any money. The OA message on sports law has always been loud and clear: side with labor over the owners! Listen in and find out why. Before that, we've got some delightful updates on the kraken idiots having to pay legal bills!

Links: Kraken order, A letter to baseball fans, List of Major League Baseball replacement players