75 episodes

An unscheduled, unpredictable Supreme Court podcast. Hosted by Will Baude and Dan Epps.

Divided Argument Will Baude, Dan Epps

    • Government
    • 4.8 • 646 Ratings

An unscheduled, unpredictable Supreme Court podcast. Hosted by Will Baude and Dan Epps.

    Evil Batman

    Evil Batman

    After a vacation-related hiatus, we're back to discuss Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (overruling Chevron) and Corner Post v. Board of Governors (time limits for challenges to regulations). We try to figure out just how disruptive these decisions will be for the administrative state and somehow manage not to waste half the episode debating Supreme Court ethics.

    • 1 hr 25 min
    Back on the Island

    Back on the Island

    Will makes Dan interrupt his vacation to talk about the case you've all been clamoring for: Trump v. United States.

    • 1 hr 15 min
    Hope Springs Eternal

    Hope Springs Eternal

    We break down SEC v. Jarkesy and City of Grants Pass v. Johnson.

    • 1 hr 34 min
    Felony-Adjacent

    Felony-Adjacent

    We cut to the chase with extended discussions of two of last week's cases: United States v. Rahimi, which upheld a federal gun law against Second Amendment challenge and produced six concurring and dissenting opinions; and Erlinger v. United States, a case about the jury's role in sentencing that continues a line of cases starting 25 years ago in Apprendi v. New Jersey.

    • 1 hr 8 min
    Small Victories

    Small Victories

    After another discussion of Supreme Court ethics and legitimacy (hopefully our last for a long time), we discuss three of last week's decisions. We cover issues of statutory interpretation in Garland v. Cargill (the bump stock case), of standing in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (the mifepristone case), and of constitutional remedies in US Trustee v. John Q Hammons (a bankruptcy case).

    • 1 hr 28 min
    Vexillology

    Vexillology

    Unpredictably, we take a new approach and record immediately after the Court drops new opinions. We dig into Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (voting rights) and NRA v. Vullo (free speech). Before that, we engage with listener feedback and talk about the latest developments in the endless Alito flag saga.

    • 1 hr 37 min

Customer Reviews

4.8 out of 5
646 Ratings

646 Ratings

naishsirilla ,

Great if you can't follow the Court 24/7 but want informed commentary

An excellent legal podcast that has kept me entertained through long car rides and made me look like slightly less of an idiot when discussing Supreme Court cases with my law school friends. The unscheduled and unpredictable nature of the podcast is great for people (like me) who don't have the time or energy to dedicate hours of their time to a regularly scheduled podcast but also want intelligent and even-keeled commentary. Will and Dan self-consciously balance each other out, and taken together, deliver objective, insightful analysis of major SCOTUS cases. Keep up the good work!

Heinrich W. ,

Not the full picture

While smart, Will is pathetically unable to acknowledge how his views legitimize partisan actors who only care about their own policy goals—including the Republicans on the Court. He is shocked or confused when an “originalist” abandons the methodology because it would not result in those policy ends. He is so caught up in his own illusion that he can’t admit what the Court is actually doing.

Dan, on the other hand, is not a serious legal thinker, and he is incapable of providing coherent counterpoints to Will. As a result, his primary role on the podcast is to get Will talking and fill time with jokes. You could replace him with any curious 1L and the substance of the podcast would be the same.

Together, the podcast fails to give an accurate picture of what the Court is doing or its impact on the real world. If you are looking for a thoughtful analysis of the Court’s decisions and their effects, move on. But if you want to play word games in fantasyland, maybe this is for you.

CGW14159265 ,

Expert takes on law and Star Wars.

This is the premier supreme court podcast on the whole planet, in my opinion. Somehow even better than Dan’s old show that seemingly must not be named. It is always deeply informative, even when discussing subjects that I think I’m familiar with.

Also, Will’s take on the Star Wars sequel trilogy (namely, that they are three fan films with surprisingly high production values) has restored my ability to enjoy Star Wars as I once did as a kid playing Star Wars RPG. For that reason alone, five stars.

Top Podcasts In Government

Strict Scrutiny
Crooked Media
5-4
Prologue Projects
The Lawfare Podcast
The Lawfare Institute
Here I Am With Shai Davidai
Shai Davidai
The Young Turks
TYT Network
The Chris Plante Show
WMAL | Cumulus Podcast Network | Cumulus Media Washington

You Might Also Like

Amarica's Constitution
Akhil Reed Amar
U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments
Oyez
Advisory Opinions
The Dispatch
We the People
National Constitution Center
The National Security Law Podcast
Bobby Chesney and Steve Vladeck
Strict Scrutiny
Crooked Media