The Intelligence from The Economist Bench marks: weighing recent SCOTUS rulings
Jun 24, 2021
Stephen Mazey, The Economist's Supreme Court correspondent, shares insights on how recent rulings reflect the ideological shift in the court, especially with Justice Amy Coney Barrett's influence. Kenley Salmon, the Africa correspondent, discusses Mauritania's struggles against corruption and societal divides, touching on historical injustices and prospects for reform under new leadership. The conversation also hints at the philosophical legacy of Ludwig Wittgenstein, exploring his thoughts on language and their lasting impact.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Supreme Court Rulings Less Extreme
- The Supreme Court's recent rulings have been less extreme than anticipated.
- Justice Barrett's votes haven't drastically altered outcomes compared to Justice Ginsburg's.
Fulton v. Philadelphia
- In Fulton v. Philadelphia, the court unanimously ruled in favor of a Catholic agency refusing to approve same-sex foster parents.
- However, the ruling had narrow grounds, focusing on Philadelphia's violation of religious liberty, not broader restrictions.
Sidestepping Controversy
- The Supreme Court has often sidestepped controversial issues by focusing on technicalities.
- In the Obamacare ruling, they dismissed the case based on standing, not the constitutional challenge itself.
