33 episodes

5-4 is a podcast about how much the Supreme Court sucks. It's a progressive and occasionally profane take on the ideological battles at the heart of the Court's most important landmark cases, and an irreverent tour of all the ways in which the law is shaped by politics. Listen each week as hosts Peter, Michael, and Rhiannon dismantle the Justices’ legal reasoning on hot-button issues like affirmative action, gun rights, and campaign finance, and use dark humor to reveal the high court's biases. Presented by Slow Burn co-creator Leon Neyfakh, 5-4 is a production of Prologue Projects in partnership with Westwood One Podcast Network. 

5-4 Westwood One

    • Government
    • 4.8 • 22 Ratings

5-4 is a podcast about how much the Supreme Court sucks. It's a progressive and occasionally profane take on the ideological battles at the heart of the Court's most important landmark cases, and an irreverent tour of all the ways in which the law is shaped by politics. Listen each week as hosts Peter, Michael, and Rhiannon dismantle the Justices’ legal reasoning on hot-button issues like affirmative action, gun rights, and campaign finance, and use dark humor to reveal the high court's biases. Presented by Slow Burn co-creator Leon Neyfakh, 5-4 is a production of Prologue Projects in partnership with Westwood One Podcast Network. 

    What RBG Didn't Understand

    What RBG Didn't Understand

    On this week's episode of 5-4, Peter, Rhiannon, and Michael are discussing the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Specifically, the hosts talk about the consequences of RBG's decision not to step down from the Court during Barack Obama's presidency, what that decision tells us about her, and what lies ahead.
     
    Follow Peter (@The_Law_Boy), Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon), and Michael (@_FleerUltra) on Twitter.

    • 45 min
    LA v. Lyons

    LA v. Lyons

    On this week’s episode of 5-4, Peter, Rhiannon, and Michael are talking about police use of chokeholds. In 1983, the Supreme Court held in City of Los Angeles v. Lyons that a man who had been injured by a brutal police chokehold did not have standing to sue for an injunction—in other words, he could not ask the Court to order the police to stop using chokeholds. The Court’s decision allowed the practice to continue, and chokeholds have been a focus of police reform efforts and protests since then, particularly after the 2014 death of Eric Garner.
     
    Follow Peter (@The_Law_Boy), Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon), and Michael (@_FleerUltra) on Twitter. 
     
    Please support our sponsors: 
     
    keeps.com/fivefour

    • 41 min
    Voting Rights

    Voting Rights

    On this week’s episode of 5-4, Peter, Rhiannon, and Michael are discussing the right to vote. As the 2020 presidential election draws near, the Trump campaign has already started suing states over the use of mail-in ballots. The hosts talk through the basics of election law history and explain how individual citizens' right to vote is only sort of provided for in the Constitution.
     
    Follow Peter (@The_Law_Boy), Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon), and Michael (@_FleerUltra) on Twitter. 
     
    Please support our sponsors: 
     
    buyraycon.com/fivefour

    • 50 min
    Flood v. Kuhn

    Flood v. Kuhn

    On this week’s episode of 5-4, Peter (@The_Law_Boy) and Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon) are joined by their friend Adam to discuss the 1972 case that exempted professional baseball from antitrust law.
    Please support our sponsors:
    Helix
    Raycon
      

    • 45 min
    Nielsen v. Preap

    Nielsen v. Preap

    On this week’s episode of 5-4, Peter (@The_Law_Boy), Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon), and Michael (@_FleerUltra) talk about the 2019 case that denied immigrants who have committed certain crimes the right to a bond hearing, and illustrated the futility of objectively interpreting the law.  
     
    Please support our sponsors: 
    magicspoon.com/FIVEFOUR 
    HelixSleep.com/FIVEFOUR  
    jordanharbinger.com/subscribe 

    • 49 min
    Boy Scouts of America v. Dale

    Boy Scouts of America v. Dale

    On this week’s episode of 5-4, Peter (@The_Law_Boy), Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon), and Michael (@_FleerUltra) talk about the 2000 case that allowed Boy Scouts to discriminate against gay scout leaders.

    • 40 min

Customer Reviews

4.8 out of 5
22 Ratings

22 Ratings

Troy Steel ,

ACAB

I’d like to thank the many incredibly fragile police officers out there for making me subscribe to this podcast through their reviews.

LCARM711 ,

Rhiannon’s laugh is life sustaining

That’s all. Thanks for existing.

AngelyneRA ,

The Supreme Court Sucks, but This Podcast Doesn’t.

This podcast is fantastic! It literally brightens by day. I love the hosts, they’re funny, they don’t take themselves too seriously, and they’re intelligent. I’m not a lawyer, a legal scholar, or even an American, but the hosts explain the intricacies of the US justice system in detail and yet plainly enough to be easily understood. I also really appreciate how this podcast actually acknowledges how the supreme court is not apolitical, but rather partisan and the justices vote based on their social, economic, and racial biases. Plus, let’s be honest, the hosts are taking a deep dive into how dumb and illogical the reasoning of the SCOTUS is in every episode. As an aside, I nearly spit out my drink when, “that’s why I’m not up there with the big boys on the bench” was uttered by Peter.

Thank you Rhiannon, Peter, and Michael! I can’t wait for more episodes.

P.S. I binged listened to the first four episodes, and I’m not even ashamed because it was (technically) educational!

Top Podcasts In Government

Listeners Also Subscribed To

More by Westwood One