Leah, Melissa, and Kate are joined by Anil Kalhan to break down the Supreme Court’s important immigration habeas case, Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, as well as some DOJ developments.
On June 15, by a vote of 6-3 the Supreme Court released its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County (combined with Altitude Inc. v. Zarda and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc.), the Supreme Court affirmed that the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit was reversed, and the case remanded (and the judgments of the Second Circuit in Altitude Express and the Sixth Circuit in R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes are affirmed). Justice Gorsuch's majority opinion was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Justice Alito dissented, joined by Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh. To discuss the case, we have Curt Levey, President of the Committee for Justice. As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.
Plus, Andrew breaks down (or has a breakdown over) the viral photo of a card that purportedly allows the holder to enter any business without wearing a mask. Is it real or... really stupid?
Then we take a deep dive into DHS. v. Thuraissigiam, the asylum case recently decided by the Supreme Court.
This episode breaks down exactly what happened in the Supreme Court's surprising 6-3 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County holding that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity is discrimination "because of sex" under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It's a great decision, we tell you why, and we give you some additional insights about Neil Gorsuch.
We begin by diving into the case! We tell you exactly what it does (and doesn't) mean, figure out why this case took so long to get to a decision, and how it's exactly the ruling we thought might have been possible ever since the 7th Circuit's en banc decision in Hively v. Ivy Tech that we discussed way back in Episode 60.
In figuring that out, we discuss the narrow differences between "texualism" and "originalism," even though this show tends to lump them together.
As part of the analysis, we take a look into Neil Gorsuch's voting patterns to see if he's a secret liberal. Hint: he isn't.
After all that, it's time for the #T3BE answer on Constitutional law. Can the university fire a professor for her political views? Listen and find out!
None! But if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group (virtually!), please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.
Leah and Melissa are joined by special guest Chase Strangio for a big recap episode of a big week. They cover some developments on the orders list and two major decisions (the Title VII decision and the DACA decision).
Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025!
Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Luis Cortes Romero, the attorney and DACA recipient who was part of the team that prevailed in this week’s DACA ruling. He will restore some of your faith in the American courts. And then Dahlia talks to Professor Pam Karlan about this week’s landmark LGBTQ employment rights case, in which she argued successfully for Title VII protections to apply to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees.
In the Slate Plus segment, Mark Joseph Stern tries to help Dahlia figure out who this new Chief Justice John Roberts is and what that can tell us about the remaining (huge) opinions still to be issued this term.
Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Luis Cortes Romero, the attorney and DACA recipient who was part of the team that prevailed in this week’s DACA ruling. He will restore some of your faith in the American courts. And then Dahlia talks to Professor Pam Karlan about this week’s landmark LGBTQ employment rights case, in which she argued successfully for Title VII protections to apply to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees.
In the Slate Plus segment, Mark Joseph Stern tries to help Dahlia figure out who this new Chief Justice John Roberts is and what that can tell us about the remaining (huge) opinions still to be issued this term.