
About this episode
Sarah and David discuss Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s opinion in Lindke v. Freed—released last week by the Supreme Court—and the test for state action on social media. Is there a constitutional right to commenting on state officials’ accounts?
The Agenda:
-Predicting SCOTUS votes for Net Choice
-Slime in the ice machine
-Justice Elena Kagan’s compelling reasoning for saying “and” means “or”
-Terrorism distortion and special needs exceptions to the Fourth Amendment
-The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is overwhelmed
-An emergency petition on the Texas A&M drag show case
-Don’t say 'Don’t Say Gay' when referring to this lawsuit
-Justice Stephen Breyer and choosing pragmatism and not textualism
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Get every episode summarized
Each time Advisory Opinions publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.
Email me new episodesFree for 3 shows. No card needed.
No transcript yet
This episode has not been transcribed. Request it and it moves to the front of the queue.
More episodes
More from Advisory Opinions

Justice Alito Stays Ruling on Abortion Pill by Mail
Advisory Opinions
May 5, 20261:18:59pending

Gutting the Voting Rights Act | Interview: Judge Roy K. Altman
Advisory Opinions
Apr 30, 20261:24:21pending

Arguing In Front of SCOTUS | Interview: Lisa Blatt
Advisory Opinions
Apr 28, 20261:15:07pending

Overturning Religious Precedent
Advisory Opinions
Apr 23, 20261:28:11pending