A Dubious Expediency
Listen now
Description
The Court is back, and this week it heard oral arguments in two high-profile cases against Google and Twitter that will decide the extent of the protection they can claim when their users support terrorism. It also issued opinions in a bankruptcy case, a capital-murder case, and a fair-wage case. After covering those developments, GianCarlo interviews Professor Gail Heriot of the University of San Diego School of Law. The two talk about her research on racial preferences and what it means for the Harvard and UNC cases and the future of racial preferences after those cases are decided. Lastly, GianCarlo hits Zack with some cinematic SCOTUS trivia. You can find a copy of Professor Heriot's book here: A Dubious Expediency. Follow us on Twitter @scotus101 and @tzsmith. And please send questions, comments, or ideas for future episodes to [email protected]. Don't forget to leave a 5-star rating. Stay caffeinated and opinionated with a SCOTUS 101 mug. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
More Episodes
The end of the terms is a month away, and the opinions are coming fast. This week, your hosts discuss the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau case, a racial redistricting case, and the National Rifle Association's free-speech victory. After that, Zack interviews John Eastman about the lawfare...
Published 05/31/24
Published 05/31/24
It's the end of oral arguments, and this week the Court heard two big ones. Your hosts discuss Grants Pass, where the Court will decide whether it's "cruel and unusual punishment" to enforce anti-camping laws, and they discuss the Trump immunity case, which has big implications not only for the...
Published 04/26/24