Stay Tuned with Preet How SCOTUS Became Your Weird Fringe Theorist Uncle (with Leah Litman)
21 snips
May 8, 2025 
Leah Litman, a constitutional law professor at the University of Michigan and co-host of Strict Scrutiny, dives into the Supreme Court’s conservative leanings and its embrace of fringe legal theories. She critiques how these ideologies shape landmark decisions and discusses the implications of unenumerated rights and the unitary executive theory. The conversation also touches on upcoming Supreme Court cases that could reshape the Voting Rights Act and influence education, all while infusing humor into the serious topic of judicial defiance.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Conservative Grievance Explained
- The Supreme Court's conservative majority often views laws they oppose as personal attacks against them.
- Justice Alito exemplifies this 'conservative grievance' mindset most clearly among the justices.
Fringe Legal Theories on Court
- Fringe legal theories lack broad public or legal support but appear in Supreme Court opinions.
- The independent state legislature theory, linked to the 2020 election crisis, is a prime example of such a theory making it into jurisprudence.
Major Questions Doctrine's Bias
- The major questions doctrine is a fringe theory used to limit administrative agency power on politically controversial issues.
- It selectively hinders regulations like climate rules or student debt relief, reflecting partisan biases within the Court.
