In an alternate studio, with alternate equipment and chairs, striving to get back in the groove, blowing out the rust, we make our return to the interweb-waves. (Please forgive some of the audio dips and quiet portions.) No particular agenda, but we wind up responding to some long-ago feedback about the stagecraft of judicial proceedings.

This show’s links:


First Mondays
Oral Argument 79: He Said It Peabody Well
The Supreme Court of the UK
Jay Wexler’s SCOTUS Humor
Oral Argument 31: Knee Defender
Plato, The Republic and, yep, r/plato
Texas v. Johnson


Episode 119: Consistently Inconsistent

A podcast about law, law school, legal theory, and other nerdy things that interest us.

Society & Culture

Personal Journals

History

Philosophy

Places & Travel

Education

Training

Language Courses

Higher Education

K-12

Educational Technology

We discuss the morality of concurring and dissenting. And the usual nonsense.

Episode 217: Except as to Part I(A) Yada Yada

Joe and Christian talk about the pandemic and, then, some nonsense.

Episode 216: Mac-a-tizer

We discuss the march on the Capitol and... all this.

Episode 215: Whirlpool of Garbage

In this holiday spectacular, we talk about small claims. In particular, would a court for small copyright claims be a good or bad thing? You can probably guess what we each say. In exploring this, we consider the nature of dogs, hunters, and children.

Episode 214: Small Claims

Joe lowers the boom, and we start talking. In the 213th episode of this very serious podcast, we discuss: scams, flight simulators, flight, K2, Joe's blue cheese odyssey, olives, the nature of expertise, nihilism, and the adversary system. And other things as well.

Episode 119: Consistently Inconsistent

Download our free app to listen on your phone