Leah and Kate recap some February arguments (Brnovich v. DNC and United States v. Arthrex) before pleading with the Biden administration to give them some court culture material. Oh, and, Justice Breyer they have a request for you -- with respect, of course.
Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025!
Leftist publications like Jacobin have been excoriating the Biden administration, and specifically VP Harris, for not simply overruling the Senate Parliamentarian to force the $15 minimum wage through. They argue this is something Republicans definitely would do if the situation were reversed. So... is all that true? Andrew is here to break it down for us!
On February 22, 2021, by a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court denied cert in Repubulican Party of Pennsylvania v. Degraffenreid. There were two questions presented, which the Court decided not to entertain. The first was whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court usurped the Pennsylvania General Assembly’s plenary authority to “direct [the] Manner” for appointing electors for president and vice president under Article II of the Constitution, as well as the assembly’s broad power to prescribe “[t]he Times, Places, and Manner” for congressional elections under Article I, when the court issued a ruling requiring the state to count absentee ballots that arrive up to three days after Election Day as long as they are not clearly postmarked after Election Day. The second question was whether that decision is preempted by federal statutes that establish a uniform nationwide federal Election Day. Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Alito dissented from the cert denial. All three Justices acknowledged that hearing this case would not alter the outcome of the 2020 Presidential election but would be important in the event that similar issues occurred in upcoming elections. Derek Muller, Professor of Law at University of Iowa’s College of Law, joins us today to discuss this cert denial and the three justices’ dissents.
Akhil’s new book, “The Words That Made Us,” will be available in May. This widely anticipated tome has already garnered a starred review from Kirkus Reviews. In this episode Akhil provides a preview, with reading and commentary from Chapter 7 - “Washington.” Although all Americans know that Washington was the first president, they may not know quite why the first American electors elected him unanimously - twice. Akhil provides a reading, and Andy and Akhil discuss.
Hooooo boy, have we got some legal craziness for you fine listeners! Disgraced lawyer who Instagramed his participation in an insurrection has filed a lawsuit that is essentially Latinos for Trump and a few other groups v. EVERYONE. Andrew had way too much fun diving into it! Before that, we have quite the deep-dive on hearsay related to a recent T3BE question. Turns out you can't kill witnesses to get away with stuff? Who knew!
Leah is joined by Josie Duffy Rice, President of the Appeal, and Jay Willis, senior contributor at the Appeal, to discuss some Court related news, preview the upcoming Voting Rights Act case, and chat about some emerging Fourth Amendment issues on the Court’s docket.
Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025!
Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, to try to unpack how the First Amendment has become the answer to everything and yet actually applies to so few of the speech issues we face.
In our Slate Plus segment, Mark Joseph Stern takes a look at Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissent this week that sounded a lot like an endorsement of the Big Lie of 2020: Just because there’s no evidence of voter fraud, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, to try to unpack how the First Amendment has become the answer to everything and yet actually applies to so few of the speech issues we face.
In our Slate Plus segment, Mark Joseph Stern takes a look at Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissent this week that sounded a lot like an endorsement of the Big Lie of 2020: Just because there’s no evidence of voter fraud, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Normally we're bracing ourselves every time there's SCOTUS news, but this time there's actually some good! Cy Vance HAS TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS. Ok that's pretty much the end of the unambiguously good news. But listen in as Andrew gives us the expert analysis on the anti-affirmative action case and the Title X case!
Before that, we talk about what elections actually would have looked like under Lessig's proportional system from last episode. The results are very fascinating! Yay spreadsheets! We finish off with a quick answer to the question, "could the Senate have voted anonymously on impeachment?"
How does Akhil dislike the Presidential Succession Act? Andy tries to count the ways. This Constitutional disaster-in-waiting is definitively dissected. We could have had President Pelosi being sued by would-be President Pompeo, with your 401k turning into a 201F. Show notes on the website include the three incarnations of the Act since the Founding, and some tips on counting from the experts.
