This week’s episode recaps the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett, discussing what the hearings revealed about Judge Barrett’s career, her judicial philosophy, and her approach to stare decisis and constitutional interpretation including her views on originalism, and how, if confirmed, Justice Barrett might rule on legal questions including: the recent challenge to the Affordable Care Act, reproductive rights, presidential power, any disputes arising from the 2020 election, the Second Amendment, religious liberty, race and criminal justice, and more. Kate Shaw, Professor at Cardozo Law School and co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny, and Michael Moreland, University Professor of Law and Religion at Villanova Law, join host Jeffrey Rosen.

Terms that will be helpful to know for this week:

• Stare decisis: Latin for “to stand by things decided”; the doctrine of precedent—adhering to prior judicial rulings.
• Originalism: a judicial philosophy of constitutional interpretation holding that the words in the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted as they were understood at the time they were written.
• “Super precedents”: Landmark Supreme Court decisions whose correctness, according to many, is no longer a viable issue for courts to decide and so are unlikely to be overturned.
• Severability: a principle by which a court might strike down one portion of a law but the remaining provisions, or the remaining applications of those provisions, will continue to remain in effect.

Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.