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

You’re nervous. We’re nervous. As we stop for gas with almost two weeks to go before November 5th, we’re kicking the tires of American democracy to see if it’s roadworthy. On this week’s show, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Matthew Seligman, one of the authors of How to Steal a Presidential Election, to examine the legal avenues available to Donald J Trump and his band of merry lawyers to subvert the presidential election. Seligman answers Amicus listeners’ most common election question: Can MAGA electors refuse to certify the election if they disagree with the outcome?Next, Dahlia talks to retired respected conservative federal judge J Michal Luttig, who is raising the alarm about the Supreme Court’s willful ignorance when it comes to defending democracy from Donald J Trump. Judge Luttig says part of the blame for the January 6th insurrection lies with the Supreme Court, and warns the court’s majority is poised to tip the scale for Trump this time around.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.

Don Knight, a seasoned trial attorney specializing in death penalty cases, discusses his nearly decade-long representation of Richard Glossip, who has faced execution despite significant legal controversies. He reveals shocking allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, including perjury and withheld evidence, that raise fundamental questions about justice and fairness in America. The conversation also touches on systemic issues in the legal process and new evidence that could potentially exonerate Glossip, showcasing the urgent need for reform in the criminal justice system.

Sky Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward, and Barbara Hausman-Smith, an attorney with a storied Supreme Court history, dive deep into the challenges facing democracy and civil rights. They reflect on past Supreme Court rulings and the new term's implications, including gun regulation and healthcare discrepancies. Hausman-Smith plans to revisit the Court in her original argument suit, while Perryman discusses legal strategies to combat the conservative legal landscape. Together, they emphasize civic engagement and the crucial role of women in advocating for democracy.

State Supreme Courts are vital to the functioning of American democracy. They are also where voting rights are enforced or eviscerated. This is especially true of North Carolina’s State Supreme Court, a battleground court in a battleground state. On a special bonus episode of Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Stern (your Amicus Plus dream team) are joined by Justice Allison Riggs of North Carolina’s State Supreme Court for an in-depth interview on what’s at stake in North Carolina this year, and the path forward for progressive priorities and jurists in state courthouses.This episode is member- exclusive.  Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes of Amicus, but you’ll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this engaging discussion, Eric Tirschwell, executive director and chief litigation counsel of Everytown Law, shares his expertise on the explosive topic of ghost guns—untraceable firearms that can be easily assembled at home. He and Mark Joseph Stern delve into the implications of the upcoming Supreme Court case, Garland v. VanDerStok, focusing on public safety concerns and how recent regulations have led to a decline in ghost gun-related crimes. The duo also uncovers the troubling influence of dark money in legal challenges against gun safety laws.

Linda Greenhouse, an influential legal journalist and former New York Times Supreme Court correspondent, joins to discuss Chief Justice John Roberts’ unexpected alignment with executive power in recent rulings. They explore the implications of leaks on public trust in the court and the Chief's struggles with backlash over his decisions. The discussion highlights the court's role in shaping upcoming elections and addresses the troubling consequences of the Dobbs decision, emphasizing the need for judicial integrity amidst growing scrutiny.

Jessica Valenti, a renowned author on abortion advocacy, and Lauren Brenzel, campaign director for the Yes on 4 initiative in Florida, delve into the challenges facing direct democracy in the wake of the Dobbs decision. They discuss the tactics used to stifle ballot initiatives aimed at protecting abortion rights, particularly in Florida. The conversation highlights issues of voter intimidation, misinformation, and a growing trend of undermining civic engagement in the fight for reproductive freedom, showcasing the resilience of grassroots movements.

Lara Trump, RNC co-chair and daughter-in-law of DJT, shares insights into the Republican Party's strategy for the 2024 election amidst ongoing concerns about voter suppression and election integrity. She discusses the shift from "Stop the Steal" to "Protect the Vote" and how lessons from the 2020 election are shaping current tactics. Alongside voting rights expert Ari Berman, they delve into the implications of new voting laws, the historical roots of electoral challenges, and the urgent need for reforms to safeguard democracy.

In the last episode of our series The Law According to Trump, we try to figure out what it all means. In the months since SCOTUS gave Trump even more immunity than he asked for, the people prosecuting the former president are finding themselves in uncharted waters. How are they doing? Slate’s Jurisprudence editor Jeremy Stahl talks with host Andrea Bernstein about how Jack Smith has tweaked the election interference cases, as well as how Trump’s legal approach has changed since the Supreme Court ruled for him in Trump v. U.S..Listen to Andrea Bernstein on We Don’t Talk About Leonard, Trump Inc., and Will Be Wild. Andrea is also the author of American Oligarchs: The Kushners, the Trumps, and the Marriage of Money and Power. This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you’ll also 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.

E. Jean Carroll, a writer known for her defamation cases against Donald Trump, delves into the complexities of holding him accountable through civil courts. She discusses the aftermath of the January 6th insurrection and its legal repercussions. The podcast highlights the use of the KKK Act to address Trump's actions, emphasizing the role of civil rights litigation in seeking justice. Carroll also reflects on the emotional weight of pursuing accountability in a politically charged climate and the ongoing struggles for democratic processes.