The podcast discusses the worst moments of the US Supreme Court in 2023, including Chief Justice John Roberts' lack of seriousness in a stalking case and Justice Samuel Alito's lack of substance in his opinions. They also criticize Roberts for disrespecting the Senate Judiciary Committee and explore the declining tradition of Congress regulating the court. Additionally, they discuss how justices are adjusting under media scrutiny and anticipation for future discussions.
56:13
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
auto_awesome
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
Increased critical reporting on the Supreme Court has shed light on its partisan politics, manufactured cases, and lack of accountability.
The skeptical press coverage has influenced some justices to be more cautious and responsive to public opinion and accountability.
Deep dives
The rise of critical Supreme Court reporting
One positive development in the past year has been the emergence of critical and investigative reporting on the Supreme Court. Outlets like ProPublica and the New York Times have taken a deeper look into the court's decisions, ethics, and power. This shift in reporting has shed light on the court's partisan politics, manufactured cases, and lack of accountability. The increased scrutiny has contributed to a decline in the court's public opinion and is changing the way the court is viewed and understood.
Shifts in justices' behavior influenced by press coverage
The skeptical and demanding press coverage of the Supreme Court has had an impact on the behavior of some justices. Justices like Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Chief Justice John Roberts have shown some softening in response to the critical reporting. This change is tied to a shift away from the court's perception as an untouchable authority and towards a recognition of public opinion and accountability. The press coverage has led to some justices reconsidering their positions and being more cautious in their approach, especially in regard to issues like the shadow docket.
Increased awareness of the court's actions
The critical press coverage has brought attention to the Supreme Court's actions and decisions, making more people aware of its power and how it affects their lives. The reporting has exposed the court's manipulation of the shadow docket, its ethical concerns, and its far-right leanings. This increased awareness has sparked conversations and debates about the role of the court in American democracy and has pushed for more scrutiny and accountability.
Shifting Supreme Court landscape
The critical reporting on the Supreme Court has contributed to a shifting landscape and a reevaluation of its status as an unquestionable institution. The emergence of investigative journalism has challenged its authority and forced the court to confront its flaws and biases. This shift is hopeful as it encourages a more transparent, accountable, and democratic approach to the work of the court, ultimately leading to a stronger and more legitimate judiciary.
From the Chief Justice seeing the funny side of stalking and harassment, to Justice Samuel Alito’s tiny violin, to fighting in the footnotes and a bench dissent snapback, to THAT painting, it’s been quite a year at One, First Street. Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Stern are back with their bottom 10 picks for the Supreme Court’s worst moments of 2023. But don’t despair, there is a glimmer of hope, one part of the SCOTUS beat sucked less this past year… Stay tuned to hear Dahlia and Mark reveal what facet of the Supreme Court multiverse actually improved in 2023.