The nation continues to be abuzz over the Supreme Court’s recent decisions that rounded out the term, particularly in the Dobbs case.  We take a careful look at the dissent in this case; in particular, at the various claims that it makes regarding the majority opinion and its overall approach to evaluating Roe and Casey.  We reflect on the significance of the opinion and its methodology, particularly as we look to analyze the Bruen and Carson cases in forthcoming episodes, and as a big one – the ISL case – looms in the coming year.

The Supreme Court term came to a roaring end, and we couldn’t wait a week - so here we are with an extra episode for you.  At least three huge decisions came down, and we begin to assess them.  The newspapers are ablaze with outrage and shock - but are our listeners equally shocked?  We look at the opinions through the lens of our body of work - particularly appropriate now since this marks the 1 and a half year mark of Amarica’s Constitution.  In addition to the now-final Dobbs opinion, we look at the role of Justice Kavanaugh, and how it compared with expectations and predictions.  Lots more for you in this special additional episode.

In the concluding episode of this series on the bogus ISL theory, we review the relevant cases and precedents. As is our wont, we include the “best” cases for the “other” side, and review all the arguments.  Dean Vik Amar joins us once again.  Note:  we have not ignored the elephants that have emerged from the courthouse in the past week, and a special "Extra Episode" of Amarica’s Constitution will follow later this week in addition to this regular episode.

This episode presents Part 2 of our series on the grave threat that “Independent State Legislature” theory presents to the Republic, and why it is completely, irrefutably wrong.  We welcome Dean Vikram Amar, who co-authored with Akhil their current article, about to be published in Supreme Court Review, which is already widely cited in the media and in forthcoming articles by other scholars.  This article attempts to put to rest ISL theory by showing how it is wrong from every conceivable angle of analysis.  We take up that analysis, beginning with the text, history, and structure of the Constitution, and then through an ingenious analysis of actual practice.  We have been saying that this issue is coming, and by all accounts, it’s here. 

As the January 6th committee’s hearings continue, the nation is treated to recounting of wild, false claims of election fraud, and outrageous schemes which countenanced blocking or surmounting the duly conducted vote in the electoral college.  What was behind those schemes?  A so-called theory of “Independent State Legislatures.”  What’s that?  How would it further the undermining of the electoral process?  Is it still a threat?  And where did it come from?  Here’s one hint that should tell you something about its DNA:  it is in large part the residue from the notorious, noxious, nullity that was Bush v. Gore.  Professor Amar, and his brother, Dean Vikram Amar, have teamed up to head off this danger to the Republic, through a new article which is already widely acclaimed and cited.  Today Akhil and Andy (joined by Vik in subsequent episodes) begin a three-part series that will explain the threat, review the background, and then take it on squarely and decisively. 

As the nation continues to reel after the massacre at Uvalde, we are joined by Professor Adam Winkler, the leading expert on gun policy and gun laws, who takes us through the range of the possible when it comes to gun legislation.  What might Congress do, what are the limitations, political and constitutional, and what is the significance of the upcoming Supreme Court decision in Bruen?  Professor Winkler also offers a primer of sorts on the terminology and landscape of this highly contentious, highly fraught area of law and policy and a crucial time.

The nightmare of gun violence haunts America today. What can be done? So many Americans are aghast at assertions of gun rights in the face of absolute evil. It seems incomprehensible.  Our job it to render this domain legible, navigable, and at least potentially solvable. We begin in this episode with a review of the Constitutional landscape of rights in general, gun rights in particular, and we put an imminent Supreme Court decision on carrying arms in perspective. We also preview our next episode, which will feature an important guest who will do much the same clarification of the legislative world we will soon enter.

***CLE Available*** We’ve spent the last few episodes examining the leaked draft opinion in Dobbs.  But this isn’t yet the opinion of the Court.  We look at past “stolen” decisions, and discuss how and why it could happen again that the Court seemed to be going one way and wound up heading in a surprising direction.  Which Justices might form a different five?  What could bring them together?  Could it make a difference to women, and to the nation?  What can each “side” offer the other?  Listen to this creative and most important legal and political discussion. 

Our recent podcasts, and their discussions of the constitutional landscape that will follow the release of the Dobbs opinion, have been heard, amplified, distorted, echoed, and - of course - tweeted in forms true and unrecognizable.  We were the impetus for a lead op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, the subject of various blogs, and the target of innumerable media posts.  Nevertheless, we carry on, looking at key precedents and their future, analyzing Justice Alito’s framework for evaluating unenumerated rights, and beginning to think about how it might happen that Alito may not have the last word in this case.

As the Dobbs/Supreme Court leak, and its would-be draft opinion, percolate through the public and the media, certain alarms are sounded again and again.  Are these worries realistic?  What does the opinion say; what are the constitutional arguments and questions; where are the justices on these questions?  We look at some of the more prominent pundits saying the more meme-like (and frightening) things, and put them to the test.