“I listened to the first two episodes so far and I particularly enjoy that they have managed to infuse wit and humor into otherwise serious legal criticism and commentary, without being crass; and that they have managed to interject point-of-view commentary into their discussions without being overly political. This balance is hard - most fail at it. That these women have been successful here points to their overall sophistication, experience and learnedness. Well done! I look forward to more episodes.
Update:
I am dropping a star because a couple of the hosts show a more overt political slant when the cases under discussion are those that are politically charged among the public. These slips show show in many places- for example, they tend to interpret justices questions and hypotheticals through the lenses of their own sympathies; ‘conservative’ justice’s hypotheticals are cynical or hypocritical; ‘liberal’ justice’s hypotheticals are useful to expose critical flaws in an argument ...
Of course, while I would prefer a more dispassionate discussion of the arguments of politically charged cases, I still think this is one of the best places to listen to SCOTUS commentary and I would still highly recommend it.”
Zot-t via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
11/05/19