
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


The oral argument in Moore v. Harper lasted approximately three hours. In our last podcast, we began an analysis by tracing some of the advocates’ arguments and justices’ responses. This time, we go to the key questions that lay at the basis of all the back and forth. We answer them, but more than that, we look at their underpinnings and construct a framework in which, we believe, all elements of the case fit together. For your trouble, audience, you will receive a master class in the law of “Fed Courts,” you will hear excerpts from a debate with Professor Amar, and even hear from the dictator of San Marcos.
By Akhil Reed Amar4.5
376376 ratings
The oral argument in Moore v. Harper lasted approximately three hours. In our last podcast, we began an analysis by tracing some of the advocates’ arguments and justices’ responses. This time, we go to the key questions that lay at the basis of all the back and forth. We answer them, but more than that, we look at their underpinnings and construct a framework in which, we believe, all elements of the case fit together. For your trouble, audience, you will receive a master class in the law of “Fed Courts,” you will hear excerpts from a debate with Professor Amar, and even hear from the dictator of San Marcos.

3,530 Listeners

2,267 Listeners

1,110 Listeners

2,031 Listeners

6,304 Listeners

6,623 Listeners

7,244 Listeners

5,832 Listeners

617 Listeners

3,946 Listeners

3,357 Listeners

818 Listeners

16,525 Listeners

746 Listeners

8,447 Listeners