If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.
my private podcast channel
If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.
Our very own Melissa Murray has a new book out with co-author Andrew Weissmann-- The Trump Indictments: The Historic Charging Documents with Commentary-- and it was an instant New York Times bestseller. Melissa and Andrew talk with Kate and Leah about the book and what they hope readers take from it. Plus, for a special court culture segment, Leah talks with Barb McQuade about her book, Attack from Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America.
Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025!
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
It’s not just the justices on the Supreme Court who can’t seem to agree with each other anymore. As we slide into Trump v. Biden 2 (The Second One), it seems like voters can’t seem to come to a consensus on just about anything either, including the facts they are arguing over. Author and superstar litigator Barbara McQuade argues in her new book Attack From Within: How Disinformation is Sabotaging America the information we consume is crucial to the health of our democracy. She speaks with Dahlia Lithwick about America’s problems with dis- and mis-information, and how we can solve them.
In this week’s Amicus Plus members-only segment, Dahlia is joined by her co-pilot in the jurisprudence news cockpit, Mark Joseph Stern to talk about President Biden's SOTU SCOTUS FU, why Alabama's legislative quick fix for its theocratic state supreme court's IVF decision is unlikely to hold, and the meta story of the meta data in the liberal justices’ concurrence in Monday’s Supreme Court decision to restore former President Trump to the Colorado primary ballot.
This segment is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes of Amicus, but you’ll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.
The Court has ruled in Trump v. Anderson, and a strange day it was. An announcement on a Sunday of opinion on Monday; no justices present; metadata weirdness, and worst of all, a unanimous opinion that is unanimously wrong. Concurrences that are dissents. A nearly 250 year old electoral college system that somehow escaped the Justices. Notorious cases cited with approval. The opinion is a veritable patchwork of error. The autopsy begins.
If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.
We (of course) break down the Court's opinions in Trump v. Anderson, the Section Three case from Colorado. We also discuss the Court's cert. grant on Trump's immunity from criminal prosecution, and several other opinions on the orders list, dealing with rent control, magnet school admissions, and campus speech.
The Supreme Court released its opinion in Trump v. Anderson, saying Colorado and other states can't disqualify Trump from the ballot under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Kate, Melissa, and Leah break down the (expected) outcome, the (heinous) reasoning and what it means going forward. One guess as to which justice has BDUE (big Dolores Umbridge energy).
Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025!
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
This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and extended episodes of Amicus, but you’ll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.
ROTATING RED LIGHT!!! The Supreme Court ruled early Monday that alleged insurrectionist Donald Trump can remain on the Colorado republican primary ballot, and that no state may remove him, even if they want to. That’s Congress’ job. The 9-0 decision wasn’t unexpected, but the broad reasoning used by five of the court’s conservative justices certainly was, to the chagrin of the liberals and Amy Coney Barrett.
In this special emergency episode, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate’s very own pocket justice league, Mark Joseph Stern and Jeremy Stahl, to discuss what this blockbuster result in Anderson says about the court’s consolidation of power and how it has helped Trump in so many ways.
Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
For the time being, any profit over and above the costs of operating the show, will go towards repair and accountability.