Advisory Opinions

They break down Pam Bondi’s ouster and what it means for the next attorney general. The Supreme Court’s GVR decisions in high-profile political cases get close attention. A major free-speech ruling on conversion therapy and the viewpoint vs content distinction is unpacked. They also debate war law limits on targeting infrastructure and even judicial punctuation and tone.

Akhil Amar, Yale Law professor and constitutional originalist, and Amanda Tyler, legal scholar and former clerk, join to unpack oral arguments about birthright citizenship. They discuss historical texts and Wong Kim Ark, the Court’s questioning dynamics, possible statutory vs constitutional paths, and how justices’ reactions could shape remedies and political fallout.

Chris Christie, former New Jersey governor and ex-U.S. Attorney, shares courtroom tales and DOJ war stories. He recalls a heated confrontation with Robert Mueller and a quirky John Ashcroft Christmas-carol moment. Conversation centers on the Justice Department’s reputation, partisan purges, rebuilding credibility, and whether law school still pays off.

They break down two Supreme Court oral arguments: one over whether ballots received days after Election Day count, and one about turning away asylum seekers before they reach the border. They parse statutory text, justices' reactions, and potential rulings. They also touch on qualified immunity rulings and preview a major internet liability case.

Judge Rebecca Taibleson, a Seventh Circuit jurist who once clerked for Judge Kavanaugh and Justice Scalia, discusses her path to the bench and life on the federal court. She recounts meeting her husband on an Everest trek, clerking experiences, confirmation and chambers stories, hiring clerks, and imaginative what-if legal history. The conversation highlights judicial process, mentorship, and courtroom culture.

Stefanos Bibas, a Third Circuit judge and former legal scholar, joins to tackle Temporary Protected Status and the Supreme Court’s handling of TPS for Haiti and Syria. He explores the idea of a federal defender general and how repeat-player advantages shape litigation. The conversation digs into judicial humility, black robe syndrome, and counterfactual Supreme Court “what ifs.”

A spirited dive into two Ninth Circuit rulings: one on Washington's public accommodation law and a controversial spa practice, the other on a first grader punished for a classroom-inspired drawing. They unpack blunt judicial rhetoric, circuit dynamics, and the clash between anti-discrimination rules and free speech. The conversation highlights judicial decorum, immigration context, and whether the cases warrant Supreme Court review.

They dig into polling that shows a steep decline in public trust for the Supreme Court. They discuss a public clash between Justices Kavanaugh and Jackson and whether public sparring helps or harms the institution. They cover a takings case about home seizure over small tax debts and the debate over auction price versus fair market value. They also touch on limits to coached witness testimony.

Dan Epps, law professor and co-host of Divided Argument, offers doctrinal analysis. Will Baude, legal scholar and co-host of Divided Argument, breaks down procedural puzzles. Andy Lipka, producer and interlocutor from America’s Constitution, frames the debate. Akhil Amar, constitutional historian, supplies historical perspective. They discuss substantive due process, Mirabelli v. Bonta, the emergency/interim docket, and tensions among recent Supreme Court rulings.

A legal deep dive into whether marijuana use can constitutionally bar someone from owning guns. They tease how historical analogies and doctrinal line-drawing shape Second Amendment disputes. The conversation also covers emergency Supreme Court moves on parental rights in schools and a New York redistricting stay. The episode ends with a look at the practical reach of the War Powers Resolution.