The Daily The Liberal Justices Aren’t as United as You Might Think
264 snips
Dec 10, 2025 
Jodi Kantor, a New York Times reporter renowned for her investigative prowess, dives into the simmering tensions among the Supreme Court's liberal justices. She highlights Elena Kagan's diplomatic approach, aiming for narrow compromises, contrasted with Ketanji Brown Jackson's bold, public dissenting strategy. Kantor unpacks the implications of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's passing and how Amy Coney Barrett's unexpected independence creates further complexity within the court's dynamics. The clash between Kagan's and Jackson's methods showcases a divided bench grappling with major ideological shifts.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Kagan's Diplomatic Playbook
- Elena Kagan built a consensus-focused playbook to influence a narrowly divided court by cultivating relationships and compromising.
- Her approach aimed to win smaller gains and make losing outcomes less harmful through narrow opinions.
Notes On Colleagues And Softening A Dissent
- Kagan tracked colleagues closely, even jokingly noting what Justice Kennedy had for breakfast to gauge persuadability.
- She once softened a strenuous dissent before publication to preserve relationships and future influence.
The Court's Pivotal Rightward Shift
- The court shifted decisively after Justice Ginsburg's death and Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation, producing a 6-3 conservative supermajority.
- That shift made Kagan's consensus strategy far less likely to win on game-changing cases like Roe v. Wade.