About this episode
David takes the first ten minutes to respond to Twitter trolls over his latest New York Times article before he and Sarah revisit their arguments over the Supreme Court’s per curium ruling on the Trump-Colorado case.
The Agenda:
—Defending the Supreme Court
—Erasing the Constitution
—Confusion over the Trump ruling
—Consequentialism vs. originalism
—Judicial restraint and originalism
—Erasing Chevron
—SCOTUS hears bump stock case
—Explaining the string cheese factors
Show Notes:
-Kevin Williamson: Slate Publishes Gun-Control Fiction
-Advisory Opinions Episode with Professor Amanda Tyler
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