Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - Fulton: Bigger Than We Thought?

As the big decisions for the term start to cascade down from the high court, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by one of the nation’s foremost thinkers and writers about the Supreme Court: Dean Erwin Chemerinsky of Berkeley Law School. Together, they unravel the ruling on the Affordable Care Act, try to discern the significance of the unanimous decision in Fulton, and Dean Chemerinsky outlines why he’s calling on Justice Stephen Breyer to step down.  

In our Slate Plus segment, Mark Joseph Stern explains the other big decision in Nestle v Doe, and whether the pessimism around Fulton is warranted. 

Podcast production by Sara Burningham.

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

Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - Fulton: Bigger Than We Thought?

As the big decisions for the term start to cascade down from the high court, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by one of the nation’s foremost thinkers and writers about the Supreme Court: Dean Erwin Chemerinsky of Berkeley Law School. Together, they unravel the ruling on the Affordable Care Act, try to discern the significance of the unanimous decision in Fulton, and Dean Chemerinsky outlines why he’s calling on Justice Stephen Breyer to step down.  

In our Slate Plus segment, Mark Joseph Stern explains the other big decision in Nestle v Doe, and whether the pessimism around Fulton is warranted. 

Podcast production by Sara Burningham.


Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Opening Arguments - OA500: Eminent Domain!

500!!!! WOOOOOOO! It's time for the deep-dive we've been putting off for 5 years. Eminent domain!

Links: Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, Murr v. Wisconsin, 2017, Kelo v. City of New London, Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, Pfizer To Close New London Headquarters

Strict Scrutiny - Amuse Bouche

Kate and Melissa recap two opinions, California v. Texas (the ACA case) and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (Masterpiece Cakeshop redux). For the latter, Katherine Franke joins with historical context and insights.

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

SCOTUScast - California v. Texas – Post-Decision SCOTUScast

On June 17th, 2021 the Supreme Court decided California v. Texas, a case which concerned whether Texas (along with over a dozen States and two individuals) had standing to challenge the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Writing for the majority in the 7-2 decision, Justice Breyer noted that “plaintiffs do not have standing to challenge the minimum essential coverage provision because they have not shown a past or future injury fairly traceable to defendants’ conduct enforcing the specific statutory provision they attack as unconstitutional.” Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion, Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion in which Justice Gorsuch joined. Two experts join us to discuss the ruling and offer their differing views on the constitutional issues involved, including standing and the wider question of severability. They are Professor Jonathan Adler, the Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law, and Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

SCOTUScast - Fulton v. City of Philadelphia – Post-Decision SCOTUScast

On June 17th, 2021 the Supreme Court unanimously decided Fulton v. City of Philadelphia for petitioners. The issue before the court was whether the government violates the First Amendment by conditioning a religious agency’s ability to participate in the foster care system on taking actions and making statements that directly contradict the agency’s religious beliefs. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion of the Court, which held that the refusal of Philadelphia to contract with CSS for the provision of foster care services unless CSS agrees to certify same-sex couples as foster parents violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Joining us today to discuss this decision is Prof. Mark L. Rienzi, President of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and Professor of Law at Catholic University.

SCOTUScast - Nestle USA, Inc. v. Doe – Post-Decision SCOTUScast

On June 17, 2021 the Supreme Court issued its 8-1 decision in Nestle USA, Inc. V. Doe et al and the consolidated case of Cargill, Inc. v. Doe I. In this case, the Court considered the question of whether an aiding and abetting claim against a domestic corporation brought under the Alien Tort Statute can overcome the exterritoriality bar where the claim based is on allegations of general corporate activity in the United States and where the plaintiffs cannot trace the alleged harms, which occurred abroad at the hands of unidentified foreign actors, to that activity.

Discussing this decision today are Julian Ku, Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Faculty Director of International Programs, and Maurice A. Deane Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law, Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University, Professor William S. Dodge, the John D. Ayer Chair in Business Law and MLK Jr. Professor of Law at the UC Davis School of Law and Ilya Shapiro, Vice President and Director at the Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute.

Amarica's Constitution - Princeton Palaver Present

Akhil and Andy move from The College of New Jersey - Princeton in the period of America’s Founding - to the Princeton University of today, and discuss matters of agreement and disagreement between Akhil and some of the Orange and Black’s leading faculty lights.  Topics range from the 1619 project to the Electoral College and some of Andrew Jackson’s most controversial and misunderstood statements.  Finally, everything you never knew you wanted to know about property is revealed.

Opening Arguments - OA499: Mo Brooks Gets Served By Swalwell

... and then goes on unhinged Twitter rant full of bad law! We're here to break down just how obviously spurious his allegations are. Then, we address the tremendous amount of feedback we got on Christian Health Sharing Ministries. Some listeners tried to defend them, or at least claimed they got out ahead. Was Andrew wrong? Are they not a scam? Find out! Links: Institute for Christian Conciliation, Access to ICC Guidelines and Rules of Procedure, Commercial Arbitration Rules, weird handbook, cost of uncovered pregnancy, Rule 5. Serving and Filing Pleadings, return affidavit, Mo Brooks raising campaign funds off wife getting served, Alabama Section 13A-7-2, 6-5-262, Rule 4. Summons

Strict Scrutiny - State Courts Are Where It’s At

Leah, Kate, and Melissa recap an important CVSG, the Court’s opinions (in Gary, Greer, and Terry), and a major Wisconsin Supreme Court case!

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