Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts

This is part of ⁠Opinionpalooza⁠, Slate’s coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. The best way to support our work is by joining ⁠Slate Plus⁠. (If you are already a member, consider a ⁠donation⁠ or ⁠merch⁠!)Also! Sign up for ⁠Slate’s Legal Brief:⁠ the latest coverage of the courts and the law straight to your inbox. Delivered every Tuesday.Dahlia Lithwick hosts an 'Opinionpalooza' special of Amicus, covering Thursday’s decisions from the Supreme Court. She and Mark Joseph Stern dive into Ames vs. Ohio Youth Department, discussing Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s opinion on reverse discrimination, Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s refreshing nod to the establishment clause in the Catholic Charities case, and Justice Kagan’s narrow decision in Mexico’s lawsuit against US gun sellers; a decision that was not the win the gun lobby hoped for. Together, they reveal the strategy emerging from the court’s liberals this term. The episode wraps up with a deep dive into an uptick in dismissed cases and its potential link to audacious former Supreme Court clerks.Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you’ll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jed Shugerman, a Professor of Law at Boston University, dives into the unprecedented turmoil at the Supreme Court. He and Mark Joseph Stern discuss the rise of shadow docket cases and their implications for democracy. The conversation highlights the troubling embrace of unitary executive theory, allowing unprecedented presidential power, particularly during Trump’s influence. They critique the current Court’s decisions affecting critical issues like gender-affirming care and reproductive rights, underscoring the urgent need for judicial accountability and transparency.

Aziz Huq, a law professor at the University of Chicago, delves into the concept of a 'dual state,' revealing how legal systems can evolve to allow for authoritarianism without the public noticing. He discusses the implications of recent Supreme Court decisions that favor executive power and weaken judicial independence. The conversation highlights the struggles for marginalized communities under these legal frameworks and draws parallels between historical injustices faced in Nazi Germany and current challenges in the U.S., illuminating the complex dynamics of justice today.

The Supreme Court debates birthright citizenship, revealing deep divides among justices. While four justices question the motives behind Trump's actions, the male justices appear more accepting. The tension revolves around nationwide injunctions issued against executive orders, raising concerns about judicial authority. This clash underscores the judiciary's role in upholding fundamental rights amidst unprecedented challenges. The discussions also touch on the implications for democracy and the balance of power, highlighting the critical dynamics within the court.

Kara Swisher, a renowned tech journalist, discusses the perilous influence of tech billionaires like Elon Musk on U.S. governance, especially concerning privacy and deregulation. Accompanying her is Mary-Rose Papandrea, a constitutional law expert and former clerk for Justice Souter, who honors Souter’s legacy of humility and judicial thoughtfulness. They delve into how big tech's disregard for law raises serious societal implications while reflecting on the intricate power dynamics in democracy and the judiciary's role in addressing them.

Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia and author of 'You Are Not American,' dives into the implications of current immigration policies. She discusses the alarming trend of redefining birthright citizenship and its potential impact on millions of American children. The conversation also explores a landmark ruling from a Trump-appointed judge that challenges the Alien Enemies Act, showcasing judicial pushback against unconstitutional immigration actions. Frost emphasizes the historical significance of citizenship rights and the ongoing battle against disenfranchisement.

Skye Perryman, President of Democracy Forward, leads vital legal challenges against Trump’s actions, discussing how recent court victories are reshaping the administration's perceived power. Mark Joseph Stern from Slate joins to analyze the Supreme Court's significant halt on deportations to El Salvador. They delve into issues of judicial resistance, accountability, and the critical role of ongoing advocacy in safeguarding democracy, emphasizing the importance of protecting individual rights in the face of government overreach.

Ever since March 15, when three flights carrying hundreds of men who had been afforded zero due process left United States airspace and landed in El Salvador, American democracy has been hurtling toward an internal conflict that the federal judiciary would very much prefer to avoid, but just keeps getting more unavoidable. On this week’s Amicus podcast, Mark Joseph Stern is joined by Leah Litman for the first half of the show. They discuss how, faced with a Trump administration that claims the ability to rewrite the Constitution on the fly, denies the ability to follow court orders, and dangles the possibility of extending its lawlessness to renditioning American citizens to a foreign prison, the federal judiciary this week did what the Supreme Court failed to do last week: explicitly call out the regime’s lawless actions. Aptly, Leah’s new book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes, comes out on May 13 and they discuss how the highest court’s enabling of Trump and MAGA more broadly has brought us to the constitutional precipice. Next: In the six months since the re-election of Donald Trump, abortion and reproductive rights have been squished way below the fold, news-wise, obscured by an ever-mounting pile of terrifying headlines. But outside of the public glare, the legal landscape of reproductive rights has been shifting. Dahlia Lithwick talks to Mary Ziegler about her book Personhood: The New Civil War Over Reproduction.   Together, they examine how notions of fetal and embryonic personhood are fueling punitive actions against women, physicians, and those who provide or seek healthcare related to reproduction.Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you’ll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jesse Weber, managing partner at Brown Goldstein and Levy, is a litigator focused on securing equal access for people with disabilities. In this discussion, she dives into the implications of the Supreme Court's ruling on Gilmar Abrego Garcia's wrongful deportation and its relationship with executive power. Jesse also addresses the ethical dilemmas law firms face under political pressure, emphasizing the critical role of integrity in law and the necessity for attorneys to engage in pro bono work to champion social justice.

Here’s a question for you. If you are scooped up by ICE (masked, covering badge numbers), then moved from one detention center to another in quick succession, before being hastily forced onto a flight to El Salvador where you are imprisoned in a “terrorism confinement center” beyond the jurisdiction of the United States –– at what point in that process could you access some kind of adjudicatory review? In this bonus episode of Amicus for Slate Plus members,  Dahlia Lithwick tackles the Supreme Court’s shadow docket decisions in two overlapping but distinct cases stemming from the Trump administration’s renditioning of detainees to an El Salvadorean mega-prison which also happens to be a legal black hole. Joined by Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern, they explore the legal and procedural concerns, the consequences for due process, and why five justices saw fit to reward the Trump administration for some very out-of-bounds behavior in the lower courts.    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.