Divided Argument Will Baude, Dan Epps
-
- Government
-
An unscheduled, unpredictable Supreme Court podcast. Hosted by Will Baude and Dan Epps.
-
Bootlegging-Adjacent
After discussing a few pending issues at the Court, we look back to analyze several decisions from last month-- FBI v. Fikre, a mootness case with national security implications, and the shadow docket dispute in one of many cases named United States v. Texas (the SB4 case)-- and then turn to last Friday's more recent decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado about the Takings Clause and local land use policies.
-
Dinkus
After grappling with listener feedback ranging from the acoustic to the typographical, we catch up on last month's decisions in Great Lakes v. Raiders Retreat Realty (admiralty) and McElrath v. Georgia (double jeopardy). We then turn to last week's decisions about public officials on social media, Lindke v. Freed and O'Connor-Ratliff v. Garnier, and then finally to the statutory interpretation decision in Pulsifer v. United States. It's a lot of cases in just over an hour!
-
Political Hacks Pretending to be Lawyers
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.
-
Votin' for Lincoln
After quick review of an order about admissions at West Point and two new unanimous opinions, we spend almost all of the episode breaking down last week's oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson. What excuse will the Supreme Court use to keep Colorado from disqualifying Trump from the ballot?
-
Into the Brick Wall
After catching up on a few odds and ends, we decide to give the people what they want and discuss Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment and whether the Supreme Court could possibly declare Donald Trump ineligible for the Presidency. You won't want to miss it.
-
Muppetproof
We discuss the passing of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, then turn to two interesting opinions on the shadow docket (in Griffin v. HM Florida and DuPont v. Abbott), and finally break down the Court's first merits opinion of the term in Acheson Hotels v. Laufer, at the intersection of standing and mootness. Will also expresses skepticism about Dan's latest AI habit.
Customer Reviews
Excellent for Busy Nerds
As someone who is needy enough to want to keep up with SCOTUS news (up to and including esoteric Takings Clause cases) but who does not have the time or a job that allows me to do the legwork myself, this is the perfect podcast for me to get recaps of cases, from the most contentious to the least.
Best Law Podcast Around!
Finally, a podcast centered around legal substance and not slapdash political musings. I absolutely love the back and forth between Baude and Paulsen. This podcast consistently galvanizes me to learn more about the intricacies of the law. Keep it up!
$29.99 an episode doesn’t get you what it used to — 5 stars
I pay good money for this podcast, tuned in to hear your thoughts on the Section 3 argument, and I don’t even get to hear Will’s reaction to Justice Kagan’s sarcastic “Oh then I must be right” when J Mitch brought up the article? For shame.