Advisory Opinions Blaming the Judiciary
8 snips
Feb 3, 2026 Benjamin Valentino, Associate Dean for the Social Sciences at Dartmouth and longtime law event moderator, steers a lively conversation. They unpack how the Supreme Court’s alignments defy simple counts. They debate the rise of Federalist strategies, shifts from process to outcome, unitary executive theory, executive whiplash, and when courts end up deciding who decides.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Court Is Not A Uniform 6-3 Bloc
- The Supreme Court functions far less as a monolithic 6-3 ideological block than the public assumes.
- Many cases are unanimous or split in unexpected ways, so counting appointees misleads about outcomes.
Philosophy And Temperament Matter
- Justices differ by judicial philosophy and temperament, which both shape decisions.
- Faithfulness to a coherent philosophy counts as integrity even when outcomes vary.
Listener Realizes Misplaced Blame
- A listener realized that blaming the judiciary often masks Congress's and the president's failures.
- The judiciary becomes the scapegoat because other branches let problems land there.
