Search a title or topic

Over 20 million podcasts, powered by 

Player FM logo

Libby Seguin Podcasts

show episodes
 
Artwork
 
Welcome to Dissenting Opinions, a new podcast by the Constitutional Law Institute at the University of Chicago Law School. Hosted by Will Baude, each episode will have top legal minds discuss a Supreme Court case they believe is misunderstood -- with special episodes of a "deep dive" into a legal topic.
  continue reading
 
Loading …
show series
 
Will is joined by New York University law professor Maggie Blackhawk to discuss federal Indian law and cases including Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta and the upcoming case Brackeen v. Haaland. Will and Maggie discuss the legacy of colonialism and the Constitution, the separation of powers in Indian Country, and the government's broader constitutional du…
  continue reading
 
In episode 5 of Deep Dive into Critical Race Theory, Will and Khiara discuss the implications of critical race theory interacts on education. They start with critical race theory and K-12 education, including some surprising arguments about Brown v. Board of Education. Then they graduate to affirmative action in college admissions. They also discus…
  continue reading
 
Will is joined by UC Berkeley Law professor Khiara M. Bridges to kick off Season 2 of Deep Dive into Critical Race Theory. In the first episode, Will and Khiara discuss: what IS critical race theory? What makes it “critical”? What distinguishes it from other work on race? What unites it as a theory? Will and Khiara further discuss how optimistic or…
  continue reading
 
In our final episode of Season 1, Will is joined by the newest UChicago Law professor, Curt Bradley, to discuss INS v. Chadha a transformative case that invalidated the "legislative" veto almost forty years ago. They discuss the formal and functional separation of powers, and the surprising possibility that it wasn't really so transformative after …
  continue reading
 
Will is joined by University of Wisconsin law professor Nina Varsava, where they discuss how to make sense of fractured Supreme Court opinions in light of Marks v. United States. They also discuss the applications of Marks's "narrowest grounds" test in the recent jury-trial decision of Ramos v. Louisiana, with plenty of Dworkin along the way. Later…
  continue reading
 
Will is joined by University of Virginia law professor Caleb Nelson to discuss Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp. They get deep into the weeds of the technicalities of standing and causes of action, and discuss how a misunderstanding of Justice Douglas’s opinion has transformed our understanding of administrative la…
  continue reading
 
Will is joined by University of Richmond law professor Kevin Walsh to discuss the doctrine of severability, applied by Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, its formalist alternatives, and the deep dilemma judges face when Congress won't respond to constitutional problems. Case audio is from Oyez.org…
  continue reading
 
In the final episode of Deep Dive, Will and Adam discuss the partisan politics of originalism. They discuss hot-button topics like: academic freedom, gun rights and the Second Amendment, marijuana regulation, same-sex marriage, and once again the Affordable Care Act. Recorded February 22, 2021By Libby Seguin
  continue reading
 
In Episode 6 of Deep Dive, Will and Adam discuss the oath judges and public officials take, whether or not it’s still relevant today, and what the oath has to do with originalism. They also argue about an analogy reminiscent of the SAT: Is it constitution:United States, or is it protect and defend:United States? Recorded February 15, 2021…
  continue reading
 
In Episode 1 of Deep Dive, Will and Adam discuss the rise of originalism up to about 2013, including the three main arguments for originalism: the linguistic argument, two consequentialist arguments, and they ponder: What's the difference between a fried chicken recipe and a Constitution? How important are state constitutions compared to the US Con…
  continue reading
 
Will is joined by Duke law professor Stephen Sachs to discuss what is wrong with Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, how judicial decisions are like poker games and the fashion industry, and whether it is naïve to think that judges don't make law. Justice Scalia audio is from CSPAN "The Role of the Judiciary" Nov. 22, 2008 Case audio is from Oyez.org…
  continue reading
 
Will is joined by UChicago law professor Genevieve Lakier to discuss what she likes about Virginia State Board v. Virginia Consumer Council as a First Amendment case, whether money is speech, and how we could regulate political speech and lies. Audio clips from the case argument and opinion are from Oyez.org (https://www.oyez.org/cases/1975/74-895)…
  continue reading
 
Loading …
Copyright 2026 | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | | Copyright
Listen to this show while you explore
Play