Oral Argument

Oral Argument

By Joe Miller and Christian TurnerSociety & CultureEducationPhilosophy
Download on the App Store

Oral Argument episodes

  • Episode 27: My Favorite Case

    What’s your favorite case? It’s a difficult question, but in this episode Christian answers it: the infamous decision in Plessy v. Ferguson that upheld racial apartheid under the “separate but equal” principle. Joe accuses him of cheating a bit, because Christian’s “favorite” is actually Justice Harlan’s celebrated solo dissent. Its greatness, though, does not lie in any sort of perfection. Severely flawed and yet great, at the same time.

    This show’s links:

    • Plessy v. Ferguson, which you should scan through as bit, as recommended during the show
    • Some background here and here on Homer Plessy and his act of civil disobedience
    • Henry Louis Gates, Jr., Plessy v. Ferguson: Who Was Plessy?
    • Justice Souter’s discussion of Plessy and the role of history in judging (watch from minute one until about minute fourteen) and his Harvard Commencement speech on Plessy
    • United States v. Wong Kim Ark, in which Harlan joined a dissent arguing that those children of Chinese citizens who are born in the United States should not receive citizenship; see here for a summary
    • Gabriel Chin, The Plessy Myth: Justice Harlan and the Chinese Cases
    • 1 hr 29 min
    • Episode 26: Form 700

      We are joined by budding media celebrity, Sonja West, who got her start on Episode 1 of Oral Argument. We again turn to the Hobby Lobby decision and the Supreme Court’s odd epilogue. With Sonja’s expert guidance we try to make sense of the web of religious liberty. Also, war on women or the century of gender equality?

      This show’s links:

      • Sonja West’s faculty profile and writing
      • Oral Argument 1: Send Joe to Prison, guest Sonja West
      • Sonja West’s appearance on MSNBC’s The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell
      • Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores
      • The full but brief text of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
      • Oral Argument 25: Normal Religions, in which we first discussed and set out the basics of the Hobby Lobby decision
      • Wheaton College v. Burwell, granting a temporary injunction pending full appellate review
      • Wheaton College, the one in Illinois, and its Statement of Faith and Educational Purpose
      • Form 700
      • Dahlia Lithwick and Sonja West, Quick Change Justice: While You Were Sleeping, Hobby Lobby Just Got So Much Worse
      • Marty Lederman, What Next in Wheaton College? Is It Also a “Win/Win” Compromise?
      • University of Notre Dame v. Sebelius, Posner’s Seventh Circuit opinion on Notre Dame’s objections to filling out Form 700
      • Michael Dorf, Hobby Lobby Post-Mortem Part 2: The Wheaton College Stay
      • Reprieve, Gitmo Detainees Demand Same Religious Rights as Hobby Lobby
      • Employment Division v. Smith, the case that launched RFRA
      • Boy Scouts of America v. Dale
      • Dahlia Lithwick, After Hobby Lobby, Dahlia’s analysis of the gender divide evident in and exacerbated by the Supreme Court’s end-of-term decisions (posted after we recorded)
      • Special Guest: Sonja West.

        1 hr 24 min
      • Episode 25: Normal Religions

        This is our first annual Supreme Court term roundup. And in our first effort, we manage to discuss, more or less, a single case: Hobby Lobby.

        This show’s links:

        • Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores
        • 1 hr 55 min
        • Episode 24: Vacation from Competition

          We talk technology and law with Kevin Collins and begin with the law of the horse. The Supreme Court has given us decisions about searching cell phones, tiny antennae and broadcast television, and patents on business methods implemented in software. Molecules, hair-drying calculating machines, DNA, and the meaning of knowledge. It’s an IP festival this week.

          This show’s links:

          • Kevin Collins’ faculty profile and writing
          • Edinburgh’s statue of Adam Smith, though not the photo taken by listener Barbara:
          • Riley v. California, the cell phone search case, PDF and HTML
          • Frank Easterbrook, Cyberspace and the Law of the Horse
          • Lawrence Lessig, The Law of the Horse: What Cyberlaw Might Teach
          • Christian Turner, The Information Law Crisis
          • Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., the VCR case
          • American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo, PDF and HTML
          • Mike Masnick, Aereo Fallout Begins: Fox Uses Ruling To Attack Dish's Mobile Streaming Service
          • Summary of the history of cable television in the U.S.
          • Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, PDF and HTML
          • Episode 3: Cut It Off (guest Paul Heald)
          • O’Reilly v. Morse, the telegraph case
          • Nautilus v. Biosig Instruments, PDF and HTML
          • Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics
          • Kevin Collins, The Knowledge/Embodiment Dichotomy
          • Kevin Collins, Bilski and the Ambiguity of 'An Unpatentable Abstract Idea’
          • Michele Boldrin and David Levine, Against Intellectual Monopoly
          • Michele Boldrin and David Levine, The Case Against Patents
          • Special Guest: Kevin Collins.

            1 hr 40 min
          • Episode 23: Rex Sunstein

            We dive into the legal nature of the regulatory state with Ethan Leib of Fordham Law School. In what sense is the making of regulatory policy, whether on the environment or on net neutrality, a legal process? Should regulatory agencies adhere to precedent or otherwise be bound by law-like doctrines? We learn about the White House’s influence over rulemaking through OIRA and question how OIRA should function and what legal principles should govern it.

            This show’s links:

            • Ethan Leib’s faculty profile and articles
            • This Week in Law 263: More Bodies on Blackacre, on which Joe and Christian were guests
            • Nestor Davidson and Ethan Leib, Regleprudence - at OIRA and Beyond
            • Mark Tushnet, Legislative and Executive Stare Decisis
            • The nuclear option
            • About OIRA, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and its resource page
            • The major executive orders concerning federal regulation and the role of OIRA
            • The repository of OIRA return letters
            • Cass Sunstein, The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs: Myths and Realities
            • Catherine Sharkey, State Farm 'with Teeth': Heightened Judicial Review in the Absence of Executive Oversight
            • Julius Cohen, Towards Realism in Legisprudence and Legisprudence: Problems and Agenda
            • Lon Fuller, The Morality of Law
            • Carol Rose, New Models for Local Land Use Decisions
            • Cass Sunstein’s memorandum for agency heads, Disclosure and Simplification as Regulatory Tools
            • Office of Management and Budget, Circular A-4
            • Public comments on the Obama administration’s proposal to revise the basic regulatory executive order (including comments from Martha Nussbaum, Eric Posner, Gillian Metzler, Richard Revesz, Michael Livermore, and Peter Strauss)
            • Ethan Leib and David Ponet, Fiduciary Representation and Deliberative Engagement with Children
            • Evan Criddle, Fiduciary Administration: Rethinking Popular Representation in Agency Rulemaking
            • Special Guest: Ethan Leib.

              1 hr 22 min
            • Episode 22: Nine Brains in a Vat

              We talk about the Supreme Court with writer and reporter, Dahlia Lithwick. How should one report on the Court, at a time when analysis of opinions is expected within hours or even minutes? What is the role of the Court press: middle men, translators, or something else? And come to think of it, what’s the role of the Supreme Court? Oracles, politicians, teachers? Should judges give speeches like politicians do? Politics, policy, religion, guns. And, of course, speed traps.

              This show’s links:

              • Dahlia Lithwick’s latest articles on Slate
              • Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (pdf) and wikipedia summary
              • Slate Plus
              • Derek Muller, The Five Law-Related Podcasts You Should Listen To
              • Jack Shafer, Serving up the Supreme Court Dough Before It’s Baked
              • Tom Goldstein, We’re Getting Wildly Different Assessments (a deep look into what went wrong with the reporting on the Obamacare decision)
              • RonNell Andersen Jones, U.S. Supreme Court Justices and Press Access
              • Jesse Wegman, (Supreme) Court TV and the Magically Disappearing Protest
              • Kenneth Vogel, Defiant Clarence Thomas Fires Back
              • Vikram Amar, Why Did Justice Scalia Decline to Participate in the "One Nation Under God" Case?
              • Jack Balkin, ”High” Politics and Judicial Decisionmaking
              • Justice Scalia’s memo on a recusal motion in Cheney v. United States District Court for the District of Columbia
              • Oral Argument Episode 6: Productive Thoughtlessness, in which we previously discussed Dahlia Lithwick
              • Pew Research Center, Political Polarization in the American Public
              • Eduardo Peñalver, Property as Entrance
              • Town of Greece v. Galloway
              • Dahlia Lithwick, You Don’t See What I See
              • Oral Argument Episode 8: Party All Over the World, for some of our discussion on speed traps
              • Waze app
              • Artist Aaron Fein
              • Statler and Waldorf:
              • Special Guest: Dahlia Lithwick.

                1 hr 33 min
              • Episode 21: Kind of a Hellscape

                We talk about the relatively simple problem of global climate change with Brigham Daniels. Starting with EPA’s just-proposed regulations, we discuss the very odd way that U.S. law has confronted the problem. Why has it become a partisan issue and how do we overcome that? Are economic signals enough or must ethics change and tribal alliances break down? How might that happen? Darcy and a special canine guest make brief appearances.

                This show’s links:

                • Brigham Daniels’ faculty profile and writing
                • Brigham Daniels, Addressing Global Climate Change in an Age of Political Climate Change
                • EPA, Carbon Pollution Standards
                • EPA, Carbon Power Plan Proposed Rule, including links to the proposed rule and numerous fact sheets concerning the EPA’s proposed rule for existing power plants
                • Vox’s Guide to Obama's New Rules to Cut Carbon Emissions from Power Plants
                • Jonathan Cohn, Obama's New Rules for Coal Plants Are a B.F.D. The Ensuing Political Fight May Be Even Bigger
                • The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, website and wikipedia
                • Explanation of the Kyoto Protocol
                • U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014 National Climate Assessment
                • USGCPR, Appendix: Climate Science Supplement
                • About the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC
                • IPCC Assessments
                • Massachusetts v. EPA, holding (among other things) that EPA has authority under some parts of the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions
                • EPA, Section 111(d) Plans mandated after an endangerment finding
                • In re Polar Bear Endangered Species Act Listing, in which the D.C. Circuit upholds U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s listing of the polar bear as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act
                • Justin Gillis and Kenneth Chang, Scientists Warn of Rising Oceans From Polar Melt
                • Ezra Klein, How Politics Makes Us Stupid
                • Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, Climate Change Debate on YouTube
                • Letter from Moynihan to Ehrlichman in the Nixon White House warning that rising carbon dioxide levels were “very clearly” a “problem,” potentially destroying New York and Washington
                • Competitive Enterprise Institute, Energy, YouTube video (“They call it pollution. We call it life.”)
                • Kevin Drum, Sorry, "Daily Show": Anti-Vax Nuts Come From Both Sides of the Aisle
                • Jedediah Purdy, Climate Change Needs the Politics of the Impossible
                • Ezra Klein, 7 Reasons America Will Fail on Climate Change
                • Special Guest: Brigham Daniels.

                  1 hr 23 min
                • Episode 20: Twelve Billion Dollars

                  We start, of course, with speed traps and the suggestion of a radio talk show host that giving speed trap warnings is a religious obligation. Our major topic, though, is the insanity of the textbook market. Christian takes a typically moderate position and argues that all textbooks should be free. Joe takes a typically strident position and argues that it’s more complicated than that. We discuss our respective projects to change the nature and distribution of law school casebooks. Topics include: textbooks as playlists, how their production is like and unlike the production of wikipedia, the traditional model and how much students pay, the weird market for textbooks, Joe’s collaboration with Lydia Loren to become the Radiohead of textbook publishers, and one publisher’s attempt essentially to lease rather than sell textbooks. We close by noting that it’s hot here now (the slight hiss when Joe speaks is the air conditioning) and Christian’s related parenting woes.

                  This show’s links:

                  • Atlanta’s News Radio 106.7 FM and, in particular, The Michael Graham Show
                  • Episode 7: Speed Trap and follow-up on speed-trap law on Episode 8: Party All Over the World
                  • Christian Turner, This Thing I Made, describing HydraText
                  • Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks, from which you can download the book or read it in a browser
                  • The Berkman Center’s H2O Project at Harvard University
                  • eLangdell, CALI’s casebook project
                  • Semaphore Press, Joe’s and Lydia Loren’s casebook company
                  • James Grimmelman, Internet Law: Cases and Materials
                  • Daniel Nazer, Aspen to Students: Your Property Book is Not Your Property
                  • Mike Masnick, Publisher 'DRMs' Physical Legal Textbook About 'Property,' Undermines Property And First Sale Concepts
                  • Josh Blackman, Aspen Casebook Connect Textbooks Must Be Returned At End Of Class, Cannot Be Resold
                  • Josh Blackman, Aspen Issues Revised “Connected Casebook” – Now You Can Choose To Keep Your Book
                  • Ian Chant, Law Profs Revolt after Aspen Casebook Tries to Get Around First Sale Doctrine
                  • 1 hr 41 min
                  • Episode 19: The Prayer Abides

                    Shaking off the rust after a two-week break, we’re back to argue about the Supreme Court’s latest entry in the “Let Us Pray” genre. We are joined by law and religion scholar Nathan Chapman and focus on ancient Greece, where by Greece we mean Greece, New York, and by ancient we mean 1999. That’s when the town began to invite local clergy to its monthly Town Board meetings to deliver short prayers. For almost a decade, these prayers were uniformly Christian and almost always explicitly so. Government and prayer: what to do? We disagree.

                    This show’s links:

                    • Nathan Chapman’s faculty profile and writing
                    • Nathan Chapman, Disentangling Conscience and Religion
                    • This Week in Law, Episode 258, featuring Christina Mulligan and recommending our show
                    • Oral Argument 18: Oral Argument, with Tom Goldstein
                    • Town of Greece v. Galloway, Supreme Court, pdf and html
                    • Town of Greece v. Galloway, Judge Calabresi’s opinion for the Second Circuit
                    • Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU, a creche case that uses the “endorsement” test
                    • Marsh v. Chambers, the principle Supreme Court case on legislative prayer
                    • Lemon v. Kurtzman, origin of the so-called Lemon test for Establishment Clause challenges
                    • Lee v. Weisman, prohibiting prayers at public school graduation ceremonies
                    • McCreary County v. ACLU, finding a predominantly religious purpose in displaying the Ten Commandments in courthouses and holding government must remain neutral between religious and non-religious viewpoints, with O’Connor’s concurrence decisive
                    • Nelson Tebbe and Micah Schwartzman, The Puzzle of Town of Greece v. Galloway
                    • Akhil Amar, The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction
                    • Marie Griffith, The Establishment Clause: An Interview with Judge Guido Calabresi
                    • Guido Calabresi, video of lecture, What about the Establishment Clause? (his remarks begin at 8:50)
                    • The entry gate to New Haven’s Grove Street Cemetery
                    • Special Guest: Nathan Chapman.

                      1 hr 43 min
                    • Episode 18: Oral Argument

                      We finally get around to talking about oral argument on Oral Argument. And, oh do we do so in style. Supreme Court advocate and SCOTUSblog co-founder Tom Goldstein joins us for a portion of the show to talk about what oral arguments are, whether they are worth their costs, what they accomplish, and more. Joe complains about absurd hypotheticals. Christian is unfamiliar with any other kind. Also, we begin with errata, in which we acknowledge Christian’s abuse of the English language.

                      This show’s links:

                      • Tom Goldstein’s profile and law firm
                      • SCOTUSblog and its About page
                      • Oral Argument Episode 17: Flesh List, with Kim Krawiec
                      • Kim’s posts here and here about her appearance and with some follow-up information
                      • Subsume
                      • Oyez, a resource for, among other things, audio of Supreme Court oral arguments dating back at least to the 1950s
                      • The U.S. Supreme Court’s own pages for oral argument transcripts and audio
                      • Barry Sullivan, Other Minds: The Use and Uses of Oral Argument
                      • Epstein, Landes, and Posner, Inferring the Winning Party in the Supreme Court from the Pattern of Questioning at Oral Argument
                      • Wikipedia, collecting sources, on Justice Thomas’ approach to oral argument
                      • The Oyez page for Loving v. Virginia, which links to the audio of the oral argument in the historic case striking down state bans on interracial marriage
                      • Ronald Collins, Hypothetically Speaking: Justice Breyer’s Dialectical Propensities
                      • Joshua Stein, Tentative Oral Opinions: Improving Oral Argument Without Spending a Dime
                      • Oyez page for Kelo v. City of New London
                      • Oral argument transcript in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, just search for “King Tut” within this document
                      • Adam Liptak, A Taxonomy of Supreme Court Humor
                      • Jay Wexler, Laugh Track II - Still Laughin’!
                      • Special Guest: Tom Goldtsein.

                        1 hr 7 min

                      About Oral Argument

                      From the publisher's feed

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