Podcasts about veteran supreme court

On Friday, the most consequential Supreme Court decision in decades came down, a 6-3 ruling overturning Roe v Wade. For nearly half a century women have had a Constitutional right to abortion, now they don't. Because, as Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion, Roe was, "egregiously wrong from the start." Informed by what he called, "exceptionally weak reasoning." The new ruling from the court ditching what seemed like well settled precedent is certainly to inflame passion. And as Biden insisted, the fight is not over. His administration, with the backing of virtually every Demacrat in Congress, will seek to pass a Federal Law codifying the right to an abortion. But even if such legislation could overcome a near certain filibuster from Senate Republicans and actually pass, would that supersede the actions of more than a dozen State legislatures that now seemed poised to ban abortion outright? Veteran Supreme Court watcher and author David Kaplan as well as former Deputy Attorney General Donald Ayer, a former Supreme Court Clerk himself, join to discuss this alongside the extraordinary testimony in front of the January 6th Committee this week. GUESTS:David Kaplan, (@dkaplan007), Author, Adjunct NYU Professor, Fmr. Newsweek Legal Affairs Editor Donald Ayer, (@DonaldAyer6), US Deputy Attorney General under President George H. W. BushHOSTS:Michael Isikoff (@Isikoff), Chief Investigative Correspondent, Yahoo NewsDaniel Klaidman (@dklaidman), Editor in Chief, Yahoo NewsVictoria Bassetti (@VBass), fellow, Brennan Center for Justice (contributing co-host)RESOURCES:Yahoo News' story on SCOTUS overturning Roe v Wade - Here.Yahoo News' story on the reactions to overturning Roe v Wade - Here.Follow us on Twitter: @SkullduggeryPodListen and subscribe to "Skullduggery" on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.Email us with feedback, questions or tips: SkullduggeryPod@yahoo.com. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Veteran Supreme Court watcher & legal analyst Kenneth Jost -- "Jost on Justice" blog -- Author, The SUPREME COURT, A--Z and The SUPREME COURT YEARBOOK; Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown University, talks to WDEL's Allan Loudell from Washington

Veteran Supreme Court watcher & legal analyst Kenneth Jost -- "Jost on Justice" blog -- Author, The SUPREME COURT, A--Z and The SUPREME COURT YEARBOOK; Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown University, talks to WDEL's Allan Loudell from Washington

Veteran Supreme Court watcher & legal observer Kenneth Jost -- "Jost on Justice" blog -- Author, The SUPREME COURT YEARBOOK and The SUPREME COURT, A--Z; Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown University, talks to WDEL's Allan Loudell from Washington

Veteran Supreme Court watcher & legal observer Kenneth Jost -- "Jost on Justice" blog -- Author, The SUPREME COURT YEARBOOK and The SUPREME COURT, A--Z; Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown University, talks to WDEL's Allan Loudell from Washington

Veteran Supreme Court watcher Kenneth Jost -- "Jost on Justice" blog; Author -- The SUPREME COURT YEARBOOK and The SUPREME COURT, A--Z; Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown University, talks to WDEL's Allan Loudell from Washington

We’re inside the chamber for the high-profile case involving a death row inmate from Louisiana who’s asking for a new trial after his lawyer told the jury his client was guilty, despite the client’s insistence that he was innocent. Jay Schweikert, a policy analyst with the Cato Institute’s Project on Criminal Justice and co-author of an amicus brief filed in this case, joins Dahlia Lithwick to sift through the arguments and legal principles at play. Veteran Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse talks about shifting positions from the solicitor General’s office, tees up a key case at the intersection of abortion and free speech that will be heard by the high court this term, and gives her take on the status of the truth in the courts and the country in the age of Trump. Transcripts of Amicus are available to Slate Plus members several days after each episode posts. To learn more about Slate Plus, go to slate.com/amicusplus. Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook. Our email is amicus@slate.com. Podcast production by Sara Burningham. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We’re inside the chamber for the high-profile case involving a death row inmate from Louisiana who’s asking for a new trial after his lawyer told the jury his client was guilty, despite the client’s insistence that he was innocent. Jay Schwikert, a policy analyst with the Cato Institute’s Project on Criminal Justice and co-author of an amicus brief filed in this case, joins Dahlia Lithwick to sift through the arguments and legal principles at play. Veteran Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse talks about shifting positions from the solicitor General’s office, tees up a key case at the intersection of abortion and free speech that will be heard by the high court this term, and gives her take on the status of the truth in the courts and the country in the age of Trump. Transcripts of Amicus are available to Slate Plus members several days after each episode posts. To learn more about Slate Plus, go to slate.com/amicusplus. Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook. Our email is amicus@slate.com. Podcast production by Sara Burningham. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices