SCOTUScast - Carney v. Adams – Post-Argument SCOTUScast

On October 5, 2020, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding Carney v. Adams, a First Amendment case involving a longstanding Delaware state constitutional provision that limits judges affiliated with any one political party to no more than a “bare majority” on the state’s three highest courts. The leftover seats are reserved for the “other major party”, in effect barring members of minor parties and politically unaffiliated persons from joining the state’s three highest courts.
Michael Dimino joins us to discuss this case's oral arguments.

Opening Arguments - OA430: Amy Coney Barrett Is Terrible

Andrew watched the hearings so you don't have to! What is super-precedent? And did ACB really rule that an employer using the n-word wasn't hostile or racist? We've got the full breakdown! Before that, we have an excellent listener question on potential federal laws on things like Roe V Wade after the Handmaid's Tale Court takes away reproductive rights

Links: McGahn petition, Article 1 sec 8, OA309 Stormy Daniels, CA v Texas, gov't opposition, Sinclair George Mason Law Review Article, Richmond Medical Center v. Gilmore, Smith v Illinois Dep't of Transportation, ACB questionnaire, 42 US Code § 2000e–2 - Unlawful employment practices.

Strict Scrutiny - Not A Mystery

Leah and Kate recap the first three days of the confirmation hearings so you don’t have to actually listen to them.

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

Opening Arguments - OA429: This Court Will End Marriage Equality

As we say often... there's no sugar coating this one. Alito and Thomas shouted their pathetic homophobia from the bench in a concurrence recently. What was the ruling, you ask? No ruling. It was a concurrence on a denial of cert for a case involving - wait for it - Kim Davis. Yes, that Kim Davis. The case was so stupid that not even Alito and Thomas could get behind it, but they went out of their way to yell the quiet part as loudly as they could. Andrew has the full breakdown of what happened. Oh, uh, apropos of nothing... WE NEED TO WIN THE PRESIDENCY AND THE SENATE BACK.

In happier news, Naomi Andrews is here to tell us all about the Access for All Conference Andrew will be speaking in! (Use code: openargs)

Links: Obergefell, Kim Davis's Idiot Case, Zablocki v. Redhail (1978).

Opening Arguments - OA429: This Court Will End Marriage Equality

As we say often... there's no sugar coating this one. Alito and Thomas shouted their pathetic homophobia from the bench in a concurrence recently. What was the ruling, you ask? No ruling. It was a concurrence on a denial of cert for a case involving - wait for it - Kim Davis. Yes, that Kim Davis. The case was so stupid that not even Alito and Thomas could get behind it, but they went out of their way to yell the quiet part as loudly as they could. Andrew has the full breakdown of what happened. Oh, uh, apropos of nothing... WE NEED TO WIN THE PRESIDENCY AND THE SENATE BACK.

In happier news, Naomi Andrews is here to tell us all about the Access for All Conference Andrew will be speaking in! (Use code: openargs)

Links: Obergefell, Kim Davis's Idiot Case, Zablocki v. Redhail (1978).

Strict Scrutiny - The Red Death

Leah and Melissa recap the first week of the October sitting, as well as all of the beginning of term developments on the Court’s docket, orders list, and so much more.

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 - What Progressives Got Wrong About the Judiciary

Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Robert Raben, a former senior Hill staffer, former assistant attorney general in Bill Clinton’s Department of Justice, and founder of the Raben Group, for some real talk about next week’s Senate confirmation hearings. Next, Brian Kalt, Michigan State University College of Law professor and author of Unable: The Law, Politics, and Limits of Section 4 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, joins Dahlia to clarify what’s really on the table as Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Jamie Raskin introduce a bill that would form a commission to rule on the president’s fitness for office. 

In our Slate Plus segment, Mark Joseph Stern on what you may have missed from the the start of the Supreme Court’s new term, the signal to LGBTQ people from Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito this week, and the worrying federal court decision about voting in Wisconsin. 

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

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

Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - What Progressives Got Wrong About the Judiciary

Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Robert Raben, a former senior Hill staffer, former assistant attorney general in Bill Clinton’s Department of Justice, and founder of the Raben Group, for some real talk about next week’s Senate confirmation hearings. Next, Brian Kalt, Michigan State University College of Law professor and author of Unable: The Law, Politics, and Limits of Section 4 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, joins Dahlia to clarify what’s really on the table as Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Jamie Raskin introduce a bill that would form a commission to rule on the president’s fitness for office. 

In our Slate Plus segment, Mark Joseph Stern on what you may have missed from the the start of the Supreme Court’s new term, the signal to LGBTQ people from Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito this week, and the worrying federal court decision about voting in Wisconsin. 

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


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

Opening Arguments - OA428: Govt. Caught Lying for Flynn

The government has been caught doing some really absurd things to the benefit of Michael Flynn, including sneaking in post-it notes and lying on Brady material. Andrew's got the full breakdown for us. After that, we talk about Trump losing again in court in Trump v. Vance!

Links: Access for All Conference, code: openargs, Whitmer kidnapping complaint, Goelman and gov lying on notes, more lying on McCabe, sticky notes, lying on Brady material, exhibit, yes tweets are official, DC cir en banc ruling, Trump v. Vance 2nd cir, Mazar's briefing schedule, US v R Enterprises.