POPULARITY
35 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
15 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
3 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
3 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
4 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
3 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
3 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
2 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
2 episodes with Stephen Vladeck
In today's short clip, constitutional scholar Stephen Vladeck explains why the Supreme Court's use of unsigned, unexplained decisions—known as the “shadow docket”—is so dangerous. He shares why this judicial behavior, even when done in good faith, undermines public trust and the Court's ability to function in our constitutional system.
Constitutional scholars Ilya Shapiro, Stephen Vladeck, and Adam White join NCC President and CEO Jeffrey Rosen to debate whether the Trump administration has overreached on executive power, analyze the relationship between the federal courts and the president, and put the present moment in historical context. This conversation was originally recorded on May 21, 2025, at George Washington's Mount Vernon. Resources J. Michael Luttig, “The End of Rule of Law in America,” The Atlantic (May 14, 2025) Stephen Vladeck, “What the Courts Can Still Do to Constrain Trump,” The Atlantic (April 15, 2025) Ilya Shapiro, “Don't Throw My Executive Power in That Briar Patch!,” Shapiro's Gavel Substack (April 24, 2025) Adam White, “WTH Is Going On with Birthright Citizenship? Adam White Explains” WTH Is Going On podcast (Jan. 30, 2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
Friday, May 12th, 2023Today, in the Hot Notes: E. Jean Carroll is weighing suing Donald Trump for defamation again after his appearance on the CNN Town Hall Wednesday night; Merrick Garland gives the green light to transfer forfeited Russian funds to Ukraine; a three-judge panel is poised to uphold January 6th obstruction cases; the FDA ends the ban on blood donations from gay and bisexual men; plus AG and Dana deliver your Good News.Our GuestSteve VladeckOne Firsthttps://substack.com/@stephenvladeckhttps://twitter.com/steve_vladeckThe Shadow DocketHow the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republichttps://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/stephen-vladeck/the-shadow-docket/9781541602632/ Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewrote , Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote,Dana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts
Know Your Enemy’s Sam Adler-Bell examines Trump’s weaponization of law enforcement.The Shadow Docket author Stephen Vladeck details the courts’ pushback against Trump’s agenda.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
We reflect on Pope Francis and his legacy with John Allen, longtime Vatican reporter and Crux editor. And, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting a group of Venezuelan migrants over the weekend. Georgetown University law professor Stephen Vladeck explains more about the ruling. Then, as Colorado River water levels dwindle, some cities are looking for alternative ways to curb water shortages. Some are turning wastewater into drinkable water with advanced water purification technology. Here & Now's Peter O'Dowd reports.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
From May 16, 2023: In recent years, the Supreme Court's non-merits “shadow docket” has become a topic of contestation and controversy, especially the Court's emergency orders rulings on issues ranging from immigration to abortion to Covid-19 restrictions.To discuss these issues, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Stephen Vladeck, the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law, who is the author of a new book entitled, “The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic.” They discussed the origins of the contemporary shadow docket in some 1973 emergency orders related to the bombing of Cambodia, why the Court's shadow docket has grown in prominence in recent years, what's wrong with the shadow docket, and how to fix it.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
The US Supreme Court's attempt to avoid a confrontation with President Donald Trump has real world costs, said Georgetown Law professor Stephen Vladeck. Vladeck spoke with Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr about the flurry of recent rulings from the justices in emergency requests involving the administration's policies. The majority of the justices have been careful not to be overly critical of the president and have at times granted him "modest procedural wins," Vladeck said. But those efforts have real world costs, he added. Vladeck pointed to the court's recent action, lifting a temporary pause on the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members. "The question is, how long can the justices get away with walking this tightrope before they're actually sacrificing too much in the name of not unduly provoking the confrontation with Trump," Vladeck said. Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases and Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.
A week after the announcement of the reorganization and staff cuts ordered by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the scope of the reductions is only starting to crystallize. Across such agencies as the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and FDA, entire divisions have been wiped out, and it is unclear who will be left to enforce hundreds of laws and regulate millions of products. Meanwhile, legislators in a growing number of states are introducing abortion bans that would punish women as well as abortion providers. Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico, Sandhya Raman of CQ Roll Call, and Victoria Knight of Axios join KFF Health News' Julie Rovner to discuss this enormous breaking story and more. Also this week, Rovner interviews Georgetown Law School professor Stephen Vladeck about the limits of presidential power. Plus, for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read (or wrote) this week that they think you should read, too: Julie Rovner: The New York Times' “Why the Right Still Embraces Ivermectin,” by Richard Fausset. Victoria Knight: Wired's “Dr. Oz Pushed for AI Health Care in First Medicare Agency Town Hall,” by Leah Feiger and Steven Levy. Alice Miranda Ollstein: The Guardian's “‘We Are Failing': Doctors and Students in the US Look to Mexico for Basic Abortion Training,” by Carter Sherman. Sandhya Raman: CQ Roll Call's “In Sweden, a Focus on Smokeless Tobacco,” by Sandhya Raman. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Why is the Supreme Court making some of its most impactful decisions behind closed doors? In this episode, Robin Frazer Clark and Lester Tate welcome Professor Stephen Vladeck, author of the bestselling book The Shadow Docket, to discuss the rise of stealth rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court. Learn why unsigned and unexplained decisions—affecting everything from immigration to abortion—are becoming more common and why every American should be paying attention.
Charlie Sykes examines Pete Hegseth’s little group chat problem. The Shadow Docket author Stephen Vladeck details the dynamics of when the Supreme Court rules against Trump.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
This week, Dan discusses: What would happen if Elon Musk tried to defy court orders? President Donald Trump called a federal judge's ruling "a disgrace." VP J.D. Vance said judges have no authority to limit a president's "legitimate power." Stephen Vladeck, professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, joins Dan. Vladeck is a nationally-syndicated expert on the federal courts, the Supreme Courts, national security law, and military justice. He is also the editor and author of the "One First" newsletter.
Stephen Vladeck, professor of federal courts at Georgetown University Law Center, talks about some of the legal challenges to early actions by the Trump administration.
In this episode, CII General Counsel Jeff Mahoney interviews Stephen I. Vladeck, the Agnes Williams Sesquicentennial Professor of Federal Courts at Georgetown University Law Center. Professor Vladeck is a leading researcher and expert on "judge shopping," a hotly-debated topic in the federal court system.
Mona interviews Georgetown law professor Stephen Vladeck on executive orders, birthright citizenship, Congress not doing its job, and whether Trump will defy the Supreme Court. Referenced Cases: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952) – Commonly referred to as the "Steel Seizure Case," it involved President Truman's attempt to take control of steel mills during the Korean War. Korematsu v. United States (1944) – Upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II; later criticized but not formally overturned until its repudiation in Trump v. Hawaii. Ex Parte Endo (1944) – A companion case to Korematsu, ruling the detention of a loyal Japanese American citizen was unauthorized by statute. Trump v. Hawaii (2018) – Upheld the Trump administration's travel ban but included the repudiation of Korematsu as part of the decision. United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) – Affirmed the principle of birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. INS v. Chadha (1983) – Declared legislative vetoes unconstitutional, affecting the National Emergencies Act. TikTok-related Executive Orders and Litigation – Mentioned in the context of national security and executive overreach. Referenced Works: The U.S. Constitution: Article II: Presidential powers. 14th Amendment: Citizenship clause.
The Mary Trump Show's Mary Trump stops by to discuss the incoming vision of Trump 2.0. The Shadow Docket author Stephen Vladeck examines the Supreme Court’s upcoming decision on corporate transparency.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
On The Tape Podcast's Dan Nathan examines the economic message of the election, and CNN's Stephen Vladeck discusses how the courts could actually keep Trump in check.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson examines J.D. Vance and discussions of his relationship with home furniture. Former Mayor Michael Tubbs details his run for lieutenant governor of California. The Shadow Docket author Stephen Vladeck examines the further erosion of trust in the Supreme Court.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Townhall Review - July 6, 2024 Dan Proft talks with Randy Barnett of Georgetown Law about the monumental 6-3 Supreme Court ruling, which aims to prevent the prosecution of outgoing presidents by incoming administrations John Solomon turns to Pennsylvania Congressman Scott Perry for a more in-depth analysis of the Trump v. United States case. Legal experts Stephen Vladeck from the University of Texas School of Law and Jonathan Adler from Case Western Reserve University discuss the significant ruling in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, which marks the end of the Chevron doctrine. Hugh Hewitt engages with Matthew Spalding, Dean of Hillsdale College, to appreciate the uniqueness of America's experiment in liberty. They discuss the importance of renewing our understanding and appreciation of the principles enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, especially during the 4th of July weekend.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Stephen Vladeck is professor of law at Georgetown University. He is the author of a New York Times bestselling book, The Shadow Docket. He publishes a widely-read newsletter on the Supreme Court, One First.
The far-right made gains in European Union parliamentary elections this past weekend. The Washington Post's Emily Rauhala analyzes what the results mean. Then, the Supreme Court still has more than a dozen major cases outstanding with less than three weeks before its typical July 1 deadline for announcing decisions. Law professor Stephen Vladeck explains why the court is saving the biggest opinions until the end. And, the empire that hip-hop mogul Diddy, or Sean Combs, has built since the 1990s is crumbling. "Vibe Check" hosts Sam Sanders, Zach Stafford and Saeed Jones, talk about the allegations surrounding Combs.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
The on-again, off-again hold on Texas’ controversial SB 4 immigration law is now back on, hours after the Supreme Court’s temporary green light. Stephen Vladeck of UT Law joins with the latest.The Supreme Court will hear arguments today in a Texas case that has its roots in small-town petty politics. But it could have implications […] The post The latest on Senate Bill 4, which puts immigration enforcement in the state's hands appeared first on KUT & KUTX Studios -- Podcasts.
The University of Texas's Stephen Vladeck joins us to unpack the Supreme Court's ruling that no state can disqualify a candidate running for national office. And, Art Castro from Los Angeles' Department of Water and Power, explains how sponge city infrastructure is repurposing rainwater. Then, reporter Mark Olalde talks about a ProPublica investigation into abandoned oil and gas wells that are leaking methane.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
Last week Supreme Court justices heard arguments about whether the state of Colorado could ban Donald Trump from the ballot. This week, Trump petitioned the justices to temporarily block a decision by a federal appeals court regarding his claim of presidential immunity. “The real question to me is how do these two cases, the Colorado case and the January 6th prosecution, end up fitting together,” says Stephen Vladeck, professor at the University of Texas School of Law and author of the New York Times bestseller “The Shadow Docket.” Vladeck joined Diane on this episode of On My Mind to explain these cases and why, together, they highlight the role today's Supreme Court plays in the country's democracy. For more from Stephen Vladeck, you can read his newsletter, One First.
The federal government has jurisdiction over immigration matters. In Eagle Pass, the state of Texas has taken over. But what Texas is doing is illegal and could lead to a Constitutional crisis. Rep. Eddie Morales and Stephen Vladeck join Meghna Chakrabarti. Editor's note: On Point reached out to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the White House, Governor Greg Abbott's office, the Texas Department of Public Safety, the Texas Military Department, and the Texas Attorney General's Office. All of them either declined our request for an interview or did not respond. About: Hosted by Meghna Chakrabarti, On Point is WBUR's award-winning, daily public radio show and podcast. Its unique combination of original reporting, first-person stories, and in-depth analysis creates an experience that makes the world more intelligible and humane. Deep dives. Original stories. Fresh takes. We'd appreciate your help to better understand On Point's podcast listeners and get your feedback — it'll take you about 10 minutes or less! Take our survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/onpointpodcast
This week, the Supreme Court sided with federal agents to remove razor wire put in place by Texas along the Rio Grande. The state is using wire and state agents to block Border Patrol from accessing a section of the border in Eagle Pass. Homeland Security is demanding access to the area by Friday, but Gov. Greg Abbott is doubling down. Laura Barrón-López discussed the dispute with Stephen Vladeck. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders
This week, the Supreme Court sided with federal agents to remove razor wire put in place by Texas along the Rio Grande. The state is using wire and state agents to block Border Patrol from accessing a section of the border in Eagle Pass. Homeland Security is demanding access to the area by Friday, but Gov. Greg Abbott is doubling down. Laura Barrón-López discussed the dispute with Stephen Vladeck. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders
This week, the Supreme Court sided with federal agents to remove razor wire put in place by Texas along the Rio Grande. The state is using wire and state agents to block Border Patrol from accessing a section of the border in Eagle Pass. Homeland Security is demanding access to the area by Friday, but Gov. Greg Abbott is doubling down. Laura Barrón-López discussed the dispute with Stephen Vladeck. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders
This Day in Legal History: Watergate Burglary Trial BeginsOn January 8, 1973, a trial commenced that would eventually etch its name into the annals of American legal history. Seven men stood accused in a Washington DC courtroom, all linked to the now-infamous break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters, located in the Watergate Hotel. This event, which unfolded on June 17, 1972, sparked a series of revelations that would have profound implications for American politics and the legal system.The trial, led by Judge John J. Sirica, uncovered a complex web of political espionage and sabotage. Evidence presented during the proceedings pointed to the involvement of high-ranking officials in the Nixon administration. This raised alarming questions about the abuse of political power at the highest levels of government.The defendants, including operatives of the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CRP), faced charges ranging from burglary to conspiracy and wiretapping. The prosecution's case was bolstered by the discovery of a secret taping system in the White House, which provided crucial evidence. These tapes would later play a central role in unraveling the cover-up efforts by Nixon's aides.The trial set in motion a chain of events that led to extensive investigations by the media and a Senate committee. These investigations eventually unearthed a pattern of illegal activities sanctioned and covered up by the administration. The revelations from the trial and subsequent inquiries brought to light the vulnerabilities in the American democratic system, especially regarding the checks and balances intended to prevent such abuses of power.The impact of this trial extended beyond the immediate legal consequences for the accused. It prompted a nationwide introspection on the integrity of political processes and the accountability of elected officials. The Watergate scandal, as it came to be known, ultimately led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon on August 8, 1974, marking the first time a sitting U.S. President resigned from office.This trial, more than just a legal proceeding, became a symbol of the struggle for transparency and ethical governance. It underscored the importance of an independent judicial system and a free press in upholding democratic principles. The events of January 8, 1973, and their aftermath, thus remain a crucial chapter in the history of American jurisprudence and governance.The current term of the US Supreme Court is shaping up to be historically significant with the addition of a case determining former President Donald Trump's eligibility for the 2024 presidential ballot in Colorado. The docket includes high-profile cases challenging the power of federal regulators and expanding gun rights, alongside another significant case on abortion access.Experts like Lisa Blatt and Stephen Vladeck express their astonishment at the gravity and unprecedented nature of the cases before the Court. The term initially focused on the administrative state, but the rapid addition of cases involving Trump and abortion has amplified its importance. The Court will consider overturning the Chevron doctrine, which gives federal agencies leeway to interpret ambiguous laws, impacting a wide range of regulatory areas.The Trump-related case, Trump v. Anderson, stems from a Colorado Supreme Court ruling about his alleged incitement of the January 6 Capitol attack, raising both legal and political stakes. Additionally, the Court will address whether federal prosecutors can charge January 6 defendants under an Enron-era statute in Fischer v. United States, indirectly affecting Trump.In the realm of abortion, the Court's docket includes a case on the FDA's rescinding of safety measures for medication abortion in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, potentially limiting access to the most common abortion method. Another case, Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States, concerns whether hospitals can perform abortions in emergencies, with Idaho's prohibition currently in effect.The Court's agenda also covers gun rights, with cases like United States v. Rahimi, which could temper gun rights expansions regarding domestic violence restraining orders. Additionally, the Trump administration's bump stock ban, enacted after the 2017 Las Vegas shooting, will be reviewed.Other significant matters include disputes over social media regulation, a major opioid settlement, and a corporate tax overhaul law from 2017. With such a diverse and controversial docket, Chief Justice Roberts faces the challenge of managing these pivotal cases, each potentially reshaping major legal and societal landscapes.Big Supreme Court Term Now Historic with Trump, Abortion CasesLaw enforcement and court administrators are intensifying their focus on courtroom security following a series of violent incidents and threats across the US. These events include a shooting at the Colorado Supreme Court, an attack on a Nevada judge, and a string of bomb threats that led to the closure of judicial buildings nationwide, all occurring within a single week.Sheriff James Brown, chair of the National Sheriff's Association's committee on court security, emphasizes the importance of resource allocation and strategic placement of officers in courtrooms to prevent hostility and ensure safety. However, the effectiveness of these measures often hinges on the availability of sufficient staffing. Courts across the US, from New York to Texas and Florida to Illinois, are consistently preparing for threats, but the recent surge in violent incidents has heightened concerns and the sense of vulnerability within the court community.Nathan Hall, a consultant specializing in courthouse planning and security, notes that while court security is a long-standing concern, the recent incidents have escalated the urgency to strengthen protective measures. In response, court leaders are seeking additional safeguards against potential violence. For instance, in Ohio's Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, Judge Brendan J. Sheehan has initiated discussions with the local sheriff to review courtroom security protocols.This increase in violence against judges is part of a broader trend of threats against government officials, as public trust in institutions wanes. Attorney General Merrick Garland highlighted a "deeply disturbing spike" in such threats. In New York, for example, there was a 66% increase in judicial threats and related incidents in 2023 compared to the previous year. This rise has led to a significant recruitment of court officers, with plans for further expansion in 2024.Court personnel across the country are feeling the impact of these increased threats. As political tensions rise in the lead-up to the 2024 elections, court administrators may seek more funding from state legislatures for enhanced security measures and additional personnel. Kevin Taylor, Marshal for the First District Court of Appeal in Florida, emphasizes the importance of communication and strategy among court security officers, using recent incidents as case studies to improve preparedness and response.‘Shell-shocked' Courts Review Security After Threats, ViolenceFisherBroyles, a prominent virtual law firm, is facing a significant exodus of partners due to dissatisfaction with leadership over expense handling and a tax accounting error. The firm's corporate and litigation chairs, Michael Pierson and Joel Ferdinand, left to start their own firm, Pierson Ferdinand, potentially taking up to 130 former FisherBroyles partners with them. This move could represent nearly half of FisherBroyles' workforce and be among the largest law firm spinoffs in recent history.The departures underscore the economic challenges faced by virtual law firms, which operate with minimal overhead but need to provide sufficient resources to partners. FisherBroyles' model, where partners keep 80% of the revenue they generate, has led to grievances about bearing costs like legal research and marketing, which some believe should be covered by the 20% revenue share returned to the firm.A significant issue contributing to the discontent was a firmwide tax problem related to California, discovered by a new accounting firm. Partners in other states were informed they would need to pay taxes to California, leading to widespread frustration and sparking the exodus.In response to these issues, Pierson Ferdinand is implementing changes, such as a profit-sharing plan and substantial investments in technology, contrasting with FisherBroyles' approach. FisherBroyles itself is also planning a profit-sharing plan this year. This isn't the first tax-related problem for FisherBroyles; in 2014, they acknowledged failing to file timely taxes in Georgia and offered to reimburse partners for any resulting penalties.Despite these challenges, FisherBroyles' founders express confidence in their firm's future and plan to continue providing world-class legal services. The recent upheaval points to the evolving nature of virtual law firms and the balance they must strike between operational efficiency and partner satisfaction.FisherBroyles Exodus Shows Rift Over Virtual Firm Profits, TaxesThe corruption trial of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and its former leader Wayne LaPierre is set to begin in a Manhattan courtroom. This follows LaPierre's recent resignation as the NRA's chief executive, citing health reasons. The trial, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, accuses the NRA and LaPierre of misusing millions of dollars for luxuries and other improper practices, including unapproved conflicts of interest and no-show contracts.James asserts that these actions violated state laws governing nonprofits. The NRA, however, denies any wrongdoing, claiming political targeting by James and arguing that the lawsuit violates their First Amendment rights.Jury selection for the trial began on January 2, with LaPierre in attendance, and opening statements may also start on the day the trial begins. The NRA is currently facing financial challenges, with a significant drop in revenue and membership in recent years.LaPierre, who has led the NRA since 1991 and transformed it into a major political force advocating for gun rights, is expected to testify. Other defendants include John Frazer, the secretary and general counsel, and former finance chief Wilson Phillips. Joshua Powell, a former high-ranking NRA official, settled separately, agreeing to reimburse $100,000 and admitting to misuse of NRA assets.The trial, expected to last six weeks, will be presided over by Justice Joel Cohen. It will focus on the financial misconduct of the individual defendants and determine any repayments to the NRA. The jury will also make recommendations on Frazer's position, while the judge will decide on any removals. The case was allowed to proceed to trial after an appeals court found substantial evidence of mismanagement within the NRA, despite their resistance to leadership changes.NRA, Wayne LaPierre head for New York graft trial after his resignation | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
Looking back on the year's 50 episodes, we discuss some of our best guests, including our 9th Circuit correspondent, Cory Webster, our legal-writing correspondent, Ryan McCarl, our legal-movie correspondent, Gary Wax, and our inspirational public-interest appellate lawyers Chris Schandevel and Carl Cecere. There's our legal-citation-parenthetical maverick Jack Metzler. And then there are our legal scholars and authors Stephen Vladeck, Jeff Kosseff, and Eugene Volokh.After talking about some great guests, we talk about some bad cases. Why don't we talk about good cases? We discuss that, too.We also talk about some of our takeaways from our interviews about other states' appellate rules. We grumble about some of the rules in California, but we have some things to recommend to other states. But also some things we could learn.Then we turn to some of the legal tech we can't do without. Topping the list: ClearBrief (via Jackie Schafer), followed by CoCounsel.Hope to have you along in 2024!Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal's weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext's newest technology, CoCounsel, the world's first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.Other items discussed in the episode:The Coming Changes to Med-Mal Caps, with Ben IkutaUsing ChatGPT responsibly, with Jayne WoodsShould AI Replace Law Clerks? Yes, says Adam UnikowskyFrom BigLaw to Solo: Carl Cecere on the freedom to take significant casesRacking Up Appellate Argument Experience with Chris SchandevelCory Webster's 9th Circuit Dispatches See other Items at the KowalLawGroup.com blog here: https://bit.ly/3viYwJrVideos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal's YouTube channel.
What is the Shadow Docket? Why has it become a hot topic of late? And what do Shadow Docket orders tell us about the Court and how it picks and decides issues? Professor Stephen Vladeck of The University of Texas at Austin School of Law joined Robert to discuss his new book, The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic. Professor Vladeck is the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law and is a nationally recognized expert on the federal courts, constitutional law, national security law, and military justice. Summarily is supported by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A.Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues. Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com. Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast's advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast's creator is prohibited.
On today's episode of Here's Where It Gets Interesting, Sharon welcomes law professor Stephen Vladeck to nerd out about all things The Supreme Court. Stephen dives into the elusive behind-the-scenes “shadow docket,” and how 99% of what the court does is in the shadows – without public hearings, and without explanation. With approval ratings of the The Supreme Court at a historic low, what can Congress and the average American citizen do to hold the court accountable, and foster transparency? Special thanks to our guest, Stephen Vladeck, for joining us today. Hosted by: Sharon McMahonGuest: Stephen VladeckExecutive Producer: Heather JacksonAudio Producer: Jenny Snyder Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Today, we're sharing an episode of the podcast Lever Time with David Sirota from our friends at the investigative news site The Lever. On this week's episode of Lever Time, David Sirota is joined by law professor Stephen Vladeck, author of the new book, "The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic."The Supreme Court has received a lot of attention in the last several years for its extreme rulings on matters such as abortion rights, environmental regulations, and affirmative action. But there's another very important court procedure that doesn't receive nearly as much attention: the aptly named “shadow docket.”These are the cases that occur outside of the court's regular docket and usually involve urgent matters, such as requests for emergency stays, injunctions, and other types of temporary relief. These cases are often decided through brief orders, meaning without oral arguments, full written opinions, or even disclosing how the justices voted. But in recent years, the court has increasingly used the shadow docket to effectively leapfrog over the appeals court system on major decisions, sometimes with devastating effects.David and Stephen dive deep into the shadow docket's history, how it continues to undermine the Supreme Court's credibility, and how most of these decisions are not based on any kind of legal rationale or precedent. A transcript of this episode is available here.Links:The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic (Hachette Book Group, 2023)Supreme Court “Shadow Docket” Under Review by U.S. House of Representatives (American Bar Association, 2021)If you like Deconstructed, be sure to search for Lever Time with David Sirota on your podcast player to subscribe.For a special discount on a full subscription to The Lever's investigative reporting and news, go to Levernews.com/Deconstructed Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
On this week's episode of Lever Time, David Sirota is joined by law professor Stephen Vladeck, author of the new book, The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic. The Supreme Court has received a lot of attention in the last several years for its extreme rulings on matters such as abortion rights, environmental regulations, and affirmative action. But there's another very important court procedure that doesn't receive nearly as much attention: the aptly named “shadow docket.”These are the cases that occur outside of the court's regular docket and usually involve urgent matters, such as requests for emergency stays, injunctions, and other types of temporary relief. These cases are often decided through brief orders, meaning without oral arguments, full written opinions, or even disclosing how the justices voted. But in recent years, the court has increasingly used the shadow docket to effectively leapfrog over the appeals court system on major decisions, sometimes with devastating effects.David and Stephen dive deep into the shadow docket's history, how it continues to undermine the Supreme Court's credibility, and how most of these decisions are not based on any kind of legal rationale or precedent. A transcript of this episode is available here.Links: The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic (Hachette Book Group, 2023) Supreme Court “Shadow Docket” Under Review by U.S. House of Representatives (American Bar Association, 2021) BONUS: This past Monday's bonus episode of Lever Time Premium, exclusively for The Lever's supporting subscribers, featured David's interview with media critic Norman Solomon about his new book, War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine.If you'd like access to Lever Time Premium, which includes extended interviews and bonus content, head over to LeverNews.com to become a supporting subscriber.If you'd like to leave a tip for The Lever, click the following link. It helps us do this kind of independent journalism. levernews.com/tipjar
Shannon is joined by Professor at the University of Texas School of Law and NYT bestselling author Stephen Vladeck to discuss his latest book, The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic. Stephen explains the concept of the 'shadow docket,' a term used to describe when the Supreme Court utilizes emergency actions to decide a case without full briefings, schedules, and arguments. He discusses the reasons why the Supreme Court is taking up fewer cases on merits and examines the impact of doing so. Follow Shannon on Twitter: @ShannonBream Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Hugh discusses recent SCOTUS rulings with Jonathan Adler, professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, and Stephen Vladeck, the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law. Also on the program today is Byron York, Chief Political Correspondent for Washington Examiner, former Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman, Republican Jewish Coalition National Chairman, and Salena Zito, NY Post Columnist.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Sam interviews Stephen Vladeck, law professor and author of the NY Times bestseller, The Shadow Docket, How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic. Follow Steve on Twitter at @steve_vladeck and sign up for his Substack here: stevevladeck.substack.com. Then, we talk to Julian Gonzalez, senior legislative counsel Earth Justice about the recent ruling that undermines the Clean Water Act and related attacks on the environment coming from the Supreme Court. Learn more about the work of Earth Justice at earthjustice.org. Next weekend, join us in the streets of DC on the one year anniversary of the Dobbs decision which overturned abortion rights demanding legal abortion nationwide: https://riseup4abortionrights.org/june-24-2023-one-year-without-roe-take-your-fury-back-into-the-streets/ Starting June 29 - July 2 the fascist anti-LGBTQ group "Moms for Liberty" will be holding their summit in Philly. Stay tuned for details on how to mobilize to defend people targeted for attack by this group, particularly the trans community. Refuse Fascism is more than a podcast! You can get involved at RefuseFascism.org. We're still on Twitter (@RefuseFascism) and other social platforms including the newest addition: mastodon.world/@refusefascism Send your comments to samanthagoldman@refusefascism.org or @SamBGoldman. Record a voice message for the show here. Connect with the movement at RefuseFascism.org and support: · paypal.me/refusefascism · donate.refusefascism.org · patreon.com/refusefascism Music for this episode: Penny the Snitch by Ikebe Shakedown --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/refuse-fascism/message
Evidence That it Was Ukraine, Not Russia Behind the Sabotage of the Nord Stream Gas Pipelines | Is the Merger Between the PGA and LIV Golf Tournaments a Way For the Saudis to Pay Off Donald Trump? | The Supreme Court's Shadow Docket Where 99% of Unseen, Unsigned and Unexplained Cases are Decided backgroundbriefing.org/donate twitter.com/ianmastersmedia facebook.com/ianmastersmedia
It's that time of year when the Supreme Court issues a bunch of important decisions on high-profile cases before its summer recess. But it turns out there's a whole other docket of decisions that usually fly under the radar. It's called the emergency docket, or “shadow docket.” And the use of this lesser-known docket is changing the way the Supreme Court engages with wide-reaching, often divisive issues, and shaping law on the ground. “We’re seeing every big fight in contemporary American public policy getting to the Supreme Court faster through these emergency applications, and provoking the justices to take a position sooner because of these emergency applications,” said Stephen Vladeck, law professor at the University of Texas and author of the new book “The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic.” On the show today, Vladeck explains what the shadow docket is, why emergency decisions by the Supreme Court have become more common over the past decade, and what this all means for the credibility of the court in the eyes of the American public. In the News Fix: Speaking of the Supreme Court, we'll get into how its upcoming decision on affirmative action could muddle diversity efforts at colleges across the country. And we’ll explain why pharmaceutical companies are pushing back against the new Medicare drug price negotiation program. Later, listeners weigh in on local dog bars and virtual reality headsets. Plus, this week's answer to the Make Me Smart question comes from singer, songwriter and condiment lover, Priska Neely. Here’s everything we talked about today: “Book Review: ‘The Shadow Docket,' by Stephen Vladeck” from The New York Times “The Supreme Court and ‘The Shadow Docket'” from NPR “What you need to know about the Supreme Court's ‘shadow docket'” from Poynter “Justice Alito Calls Criticism of the Shadow Docket ‘Silly’ and ‘Misleading” from NPR “Merck sues US government to halt Medicare drug price negotiation” from Reuters “As Supreme Court considers affirmative action, colleges see few other ways to diversity goals” from AP News Priska Neely’s “Ode to Condiments” on YouTube We love to hear from you. Send us your questions and comments to makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.
It's that time of year when the Supreme Court issues a bunch of important decisions on high-profile cases before its summer recess. But it turns out there's a whole other docket of decisions that usually fly under the radar. It's called the emergency docket, or “shadow docket.” And the use of this lesser-known docket is changing the way the Supreme Court engages with wide-reaching, often divisive issues, and shaping law on the ground. “We’re seeing every big fight in contemporary American public policy getting to the Supreme Court faster through these emergency applications, and provoking the justices to take a position sooner because of these emergency applications,” said Stephen Vladeck, law professor at the University of Texas and author of the new book “The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic.” On the show today, Vladeck explains what the shadow docket is, why emergency decisions by the Supreme Court have become more common over the past decade, and what this all means for the credibility of the court in the eyes of the American public. In the News Fix: Speaking of the Supreme Court, we'll get into how its upcoming decision on affirmative action could muddle diversity efforts at colleges across the country. And we’ll explain why pharmaceutical companies are pushing back against the new Medicare drug price negotiation program. Later, listeners weigh in on local dog bars and virtual reality headsets. Plus, this week's answer to the Make Me Smart question comes from singer, songwriter and condiment lover, Priska Neely. Here’s everything we talked about today: “Book Review: ‘The Shadow Docket,' by Stephen Vladeck” from The New York Times “The Supreme Court and ‘The Shadow Docket'” from NPR “What you need to know about the Supreme Court's ‘shadow docket'” from Poynter “Justice Alito Calls Criticism of the Shadow Docket ‘Silly’ and ‘Misleading” from NPR “Merck sues US government to halt Medicare drug price negotiation” from Reuters “As Supreme Court considers affirmative action, colleges see few other ways to diversity goals” from AP News Priska Neely’s “Ode to Condiments” on YouTube We love to hear from you. Send us your questions and comments to makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.
University of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck has written a new book that outlines how since 2017, the Court has dramatically expanded its use of the out-of-the-public-eye “shadow docket,” to regularly make rulings that affect millions of Americans without public hearings and without explanation. Conservatives on the Court have used the shadow docket to green-light restrictive voting laws and bans on abortion, and to curtail immigration and COVID vaccine mandates. The book is The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic. You can buy a copy here. Today Bill features the work of The Project on Government Oversight. Not to be confused with the Republican-controlled House Committee on Government Oversight. The Project on Government Oversight is doing the real work of watching and reporting on the government and the Supreme Court. More information at POGO.org.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
The Supreme Court's “shadow docket”—cases in which the Court issues emergency orders and summary decisions without oral argument—has been subject to growing scrutiny. Supreme Court reporter Adam Liptak of The New York Times and Jennifer Mascott of the George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School join Stephen Vladeck of The University of Texas School of Law for a conversation on Vladeck's new book, The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic, exploring the history and role of the shadow docket and the current debates surrounding the Court's emergency rulings. Host Jeffrey Rosen moderates. Additional Resources Stephen Vladeck, The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic Stephen Vladeck, “Texas's Unconstitutional Abortion Ban and the Role of the Shadow Docket,” Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee National Constitution Center, “The Supreme Court's ‘Shadow Docket',” We the People podcast Jennifer Mascott, “Jurisdiction and the Supreme Court's Orders Docket,” George Mason Legal Studies Research Paper Adam Liptak, “Alito Responds to Critics of the Supreme Court's ‘Shadow Docket,” The New York Times Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.
Three of our favorite segments from the week, in case you missed them. U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issues a warning about the lack of data on social media's effects on developing brains (First) | Ken Burns and Michael Kimmelman celebrate the iconic Brooklyn Bridge, which opened to the public 140 years ago (Starts at 21:45) | Stephen Vladeck, author of The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic (Basic Books, 2023) (Starts at 38:15) If you don't subscribe to the Brian Lehrer Show on iTunes, you can do that here.
Stephen Vladeck talks Supreme Court legitimacy as well as the so called "Shadow Docket," which is the name of his book subtitled "How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic." Plus, The Desantis fail whale. And the sentencing of seditionists. Produced by Joel Patterson and Corey Wara Email us at thegist@mikepesca.com To advertise on the show, visit: https://advertisecast.com/TheGist Subscribe to The Gist Subscribe: https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/ Follow Mikes Substack at: Pesca Profundities | Mike Pesca | Substack Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
The Supreme Court has increasingly made decisions by way of the "shadow docket," emergency rulings that remain outside the public view. Stephen Vladeck, University of Texas School of Law professor and the author of The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic (Basic Books, 2023), digs deeper into the implications.
Mark and Gary are joined by University of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck to discuss the contents of his new book 'The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic' Watch Beyond A Reasonable Doubt and all Reasonable Doubt video content on YouTube exclusively at YouTube.com/ReasonableDoubtPodcast and subscribe while you're there.
The U.S. Supreme Court is known for its public docket of consequential cases, with scheduled oral arguments and lengthy decisions often released in the month of June. But the Court's conservative majority has been making more use of the so-called “shadow docket” for controversial cases, issuing perfunctory unsigned orders with little to no legal analysis. University of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck argues it's urgent that Supreme Court curtail its growing use of the shadow docket, and he joins us to explain why. His new book is “The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic.” Guests: Stephen Vladeck, professor, University of Texas School of Law; author, "The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic"; co-host, the National Security Law podcast; Supreme Court analyst, CNN
A new book explores the Supreme Court's growing influence on the country through emergency actions on cases not on the official docket. For the past decade or so, the court has gotten involved in cases concerning big issues, often setting new principles without hearing arguments and without explaining their reasoning. John Yang discussed that with Stephen Vladeck, writer of "Shadow Docket." PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders
Recent allegations of ethical violations have reignited a debate about establishing an enforceable code of conduct for Supreme Court justices. University of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck argues the latest revelations concerning several justices speak to a much larger breakdown in the way the court operates today. He writes about this in his new book, The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic. Vladeck spoke with Apple News In Conversation host Shumita Basu about the absence of accountability on the court — and how reforming it could lead to a stronger, more trusted institution. This is a preview of that conversation.
In recent years, the Supreme Court's non-merits “shadow docket” has become a topic of contestation and controversy, especially the Court's emergency orders rulings on issues ranging from immigration to abortion to Covid-19 restrictions.To discuss these issues, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Stephen Vladeck, the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law, who is the author of a new book entitled, “The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic.” They discussed the origins of the contemporary shadow docket in some 1973 emergency orders related to the bombing of Cambodia, why the Court's shadow docket has grown in prominence in recent years, what's wrong with the shadow docket, and how to fix it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Friday, May 12th, 2023 Today, in the Hot Notes: E. Jean Carroll is weighing suing Donald Trump for defamation again after his appearance on the CNN Town Hall Wednesday night; Merrick Garland gives the green light to transfer forfeited Russian funds to Ukraine; a three-judge panel is poised to uphold January 6th obstruction cases; the FDA ends the ban on blood donations from gay and bisexual men; plus AG and Dana deliver your Good News.Our GuestSteve Vladeckhttps://twitter.com/steve_vladeckThe Shadow DocketHow the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republichttps://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/stephen-vladeck/the-shadow-docket/9781541602632/Want some sweet Daily Beans Merchhttps://shop.dailybeanspod.com/Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Follow AG and Dana on Twitter:Dr. Allison Gill https://twitter.com/allisongillhttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://twitter.com/dailybeanspodDana Goldberghttps://twitter.com/DGComedyPromo Codes:meetmaev.com/DAILYBEANS to get $40 off your first order Google Doc of current legislation threatening trans people and their families:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fTxHLjBa86GA7WCT-V6AbEMGRFPMJndnaVGoZZX4PMw/edit?usp=sharing Have some good news; a confession; or a correction?https://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/Links in the Good Newshttps://www.sheltermovers.com/waterloo/Mybitofwonder.comListener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=short Follow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://dailybeans.supercast.techOrhttps://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcastshttps://apple.co/3UKzKt0
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
