David Lat, a legal expert and author of 'Supreme Ambitions,' discusses pivotal Supreme Court trends and his insights into the shadow docket. He explores the court's shifting approval ratings, the implications of its decisions, and the evolving philosophy of originalism. Lat shares advice for law students navigating today's political landscapes and reflects on writing female protagonists as a male author. The conversation also touches on the intersection of legal accuracy in entertainment and the complexities of modern legal thrillers.
The podcast highlights the evolving transparency of the Supreme Court's shadow docket, which increasingly clarifies justices' emergency decision-making processes.
Discussion centers on the Court's responsiveness to public opinion amidst declining approval ratings, emphasizing the need for a perceived bipartisan unity.
Lat shares insights on the intersection of legal fiction and reality, addressing the challenges of writing engaging narratives while maintaining legal accuracy.
Deep dives
The Shadow Docket's Evolution and Transparency
The discussion centers around the evolution of the Supreme Court's shadow docket, which has gained increased attention and significance in recent years. Originally seen as a secretive process for handling emergency requests without full briefings or oral arguments, it has evolved to incorporate more transparency, allowing observers to know how justices vote and the reasoning behind their decisions. Cases discussed include the recent rulings related to Title IX regulations and vaccine mandates, highlighting the shift towards offering some clarity on how justices approach their decisions during emergencies. Critics are still vocal about the shadow docket's existence, questioning whether reforms are sufficient or if the Supreme Court’s current practices can genuinely satisfy all stakeholders.
Emergency Docket: Necessity and Criticism
The podcast examines the necessity of maintaining an active emergency docket, especially in a legal landscape characterized by frequent executive actions and subsequent litigation challenges from various states. Hosts argue that failing to have an active emergency docket could signal the Court's abdication of its responsibilities, as urgent legal issues frequently arise that require immediate attention. The dynamic nature of the political environment helps to justify the ongoing presence of the emergency docket, as it enables the Court to intervene in significant disputes that may impact governance. Critics of the emergency docket are often accused of hypocrisy, as they demand intervention when cases align with their interests but express dissatisfaction when rulings contradict them.
Public Opinion and the Court's Response
The podcast explores how the Supreme Court has become more responsive to public opinion over recent years, especially in light of declining approval ratings. It was noted that the significant drop in approval occurred prior to the Dobbs decision, suggesting a multifaceted relationship between political events and public perception. The implications of this responsiveness are discussed alongside potential strategies for the Court to stabilize its approval, such as emphasizing bipartisan decisions and fostering a perception of unity. The conversation touches on whether the Court should prioritize public perception or operate independent of it, reflecting broader tensions in the interaction between law and public sentiment.
The Future of Law School Campuses
A discussion on the evolving culture of law school campuses highlights the challenges students might face in an increasingly polarized political climate. Both hosts emphasize the importance of open-mindedness and respectful dialogue, suggesting that students should engage with diverse perspectives while navigating the potentially toxic environments around them. The rise of activism on campuses, particularly related to social issues and political debates, illustrates the complexities that new law students may encounter as they begin their educational paths. Optimism for a more stable and open discourse is contrasted with warnings about the fragility of academic environments in the face of rising tensions.
Legal Fiction and its Reflection of Reality
The conversation transitions to the genre of legal fiction, particularly how it can blend with reality while engaging readers. David Lat discusses the challenges of writing legal novels that maintain both fictional elements and authentic legal accuracy, acknowledging the popularity of legal thrillers like those by John Grisham. With the rise of complex characters and gripping narratives in television, there’s speculation on the future of legal thrillers and what that may mean for storytelling in both literature and visual media. By examining how legal themes resonate within broader societal reflections, the potential for revitalizing interest in the genre emerges through character-driven stories that explore deeper human experiences.
Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch’s offerings—including Sarah’s Collision newsletter, weekly livestreams, and other members-only content—click here.
