Adam Liptak from The New York Times discusses the impactful Supreme Court rulings on gun laws, abortion rights, and federal agency power. The Court's rightward shift and potential consequences of overruling the Chevron framework are analyzed, highlighting the far-reaching implications on American society.
Supreme Court is reinterpreting gun rights with a conservative stance, broadening the Second Amendment.
Landmark decisions shifting federal regulatory power from agencies to judges, signaling deregulation and limiting enforcement actions.
Deep dives
Supreme Court's Impact on Guns
The Supreme Court issued significant rulings on gun rights, showing a conservative stance. In one case, the court upheld a law disallowing individuals under domestic violence restraining orders from possessing guns. Chief Justice John Roberts led the majority in interpreting the Second Amendment more broadly. Despite Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting, the decision signaled a shift towards regulating guns more effectively. Another case involved the legality of bump stocks, devices that modify semi-automatic weapons. The ruling highlighted a textualist approach by the conservative majority in questioning the legality of banning bump stocks.
Abortion Rights Enhancements
While the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in a previous term, recent decisions enhanced abortion rights subtly. One case centered on emergency rooms and federal law conflicting with strict Idaho abortion regulations. The court tentatively dismissed the case, enabling emergency abortions to continue. Another crucial case focused on the abortion pill, Mifapristone, crucial for abortion rights. The unanimous ruling favored abortion rights by disregarding standing issues without definitively resolving the FDA's authority.
Reshaping Federal Regulatory Powers
The Supreme Court made landmark decisions reshaping federal regulatory authority. By overturning the Chevron precedent, the court shifted interpretive power from expert agencies to federal judges, indicating a move towards deregulation. Another ruling extended the time limit for challenging regulations, potentially leading to increased litigation against federal regulations. Additionally, the court restricted regulatory enforcement actions by stipulating that only courts, not administrative tribunals, can adjudicate such matters, showcasing a consistent hostility towards the administrative state.
When the Supreme Court wrapped up its term last week, much of the focus was one the ruling that gave former President Donald J. Trump sweeping immunity from criminal prosecution. But another set of rulings that generated less attention could have just as big an impact on American government and society.
Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court for The Times, looks back at the Supreme Court term.
Guest: Adam Liptak, , who covers the Supreme Court for The New York Times and writes Sidebar, a column on legal developments.
For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.
Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode