Advisory Opinions

The discussion kicks off with a humorous take on Supreme Court developments, including a notable Texas nuclear case and a controversial death penalty appeal. They dive into Mexico's lawsuit against American gun manufacturers, tackling gun trafficking issues and liability challenges. Discrimination in employment comes into play, reflecting dissonances across legal standards. There's also a fascinating look at the implications of transgender youth rights and parental authority. Lastly, they ponder character in politics, laying bare the tensions of today's polarized landscape.

Kannon Shanmugam, head of Paul-Weiss' Supreme Court practice, passionately defends the judiciary's legitimacy amidst rising criticism. He argues that questioning the Court's role can undermine trust in key institutions. The conversation delves into the dangers of court packing and the allure of term limits, emphasizing the need for constructive dialogue on judicial nominations. Shanmugam also highlights the importance of ethical considerations and the implications of public perception on the court's integrity in today's polarized environment.

The discussion kicks off with humorous anecdotes about spilled milk while previewing the Supreme Court's October term. Key topics include the implications of judicial appointments on gender-affirming care and minors' rights. They delve into contentious cases like Glossop v. Oklahoma, exploring the complexities of mental health in death penalty trials. The controversial removal of books from libraries sparks a debate on censorship and free speech. Finally, they tackle the indictment of Mayor Eric Adams, examining the murky waters of political ethics and campaign financing.

Controversy brews around the execution of Marcellus Williams as questions of justice versus murder arise. The case highlights troubling discrepancies between confessions and evidence, prompting a critical look at the complexities of the death penalty. Discussions delve into the broader challenges within the justice system, including the disparity between high-profile cases and those that fade from public interest. The need for reform in sentencing practices and police training also emerges, underscoring America's unique struggles with crime and incarceration.

Sherif Girgis, a Notre Dame law professor and expert on originalism, joins the discussion to unpack his latest findings on legal interpretations. They dive into Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s remarks on international law and the complexities of Israel's military tactics, particularly regarding the ethical implications of cyber warfare. Girgis critiques the inadequacies of traditional judicial approaches while exploring the role of judges in constitutional interpretation. The conversation also touches on recent controversies at Princeton, highlighting challenges in navigating institutional policies.

The hosts dive into their controversial experience near Princeton, including an unexpected speaking ban. They discuss the impact of Trump-appointed judges on the judiciary and the shifting legal landscape. A compelling case of due process violations unfolds, highlighting the struggles of a nursing student wrongfully convicted. They tackle complex civil rights issues for prisoners and explore free speech implications in social issues, along with the contentious nature of academic expression, raising essential questions about justice and rights.

The hosts discuss the irony of elite universities trying to stay politically neutral, especially after an event at Princeton was banned. They dive into the controversial TikTok ban, examining its implications for free speech and national security. A leaked Supreme Court memo reveals concerns about judicial integrity, prompting discussions on transparency. The transformative role of AI in law is highlighted, emphasizing efficiency while advocating for human oversight. The podcast also scrutinizes the evolving dynamics in hiring practices within the legal profession and higher education.

Adam Feldman, an expert in Supreme Court statistics and analysis affiliated with Empirical SCOTUS, joins to discuss the intriguing concept of a 3-3-3 court and the complexities of measuring judicial ideology. He dives into the vital role of Chief Justice John Roberts and the dynamics of power within the Court. The conversation also explores the distinctions between political and judicial conservatism and the significant trends in unanimous decisions despite increasing ideological divisions. Feldman sheds light on the implications of these shifts for the legal landscape.

A recent school shooting in Georgia sparks a conversation about parental responsibility and the potential legal consequences for parents of young perpetrators. The discussion dives into legal concepts like felony murder and the complexities of holding parents accountable. Additionally, the hosts unravel the tangled web of campaign finance reform, analyzing landmark Supreme Court cases that continue to shape political spending. They also touch on the intricate legal issues surrounding body cam footage and the Second Amendment, probing the evolving landscape of constitutional law.

The discussion starts with a humorous take on a chaotic fantasy football draft. It shifts gears to serious issues in criminal justice reform, emphasizing the need for compassion and better funding for public defenders. The hosts tackle the complexities of Section 230 and its impact on free speech, highlighting the dangers posed by social media algorithms, particularly TikTok. They also delve into a legal case regarding the Oregon Bar Association and its First Amendment implications, questioning the role of political expression in legal structures.