On today’s episode of Hear Me Out: blaze it.

Ahead of the honorary stoner holiday that is 4/20, we’re taking a look at the marijuana landscape. Public opinion has warmed considerably to legal weed in the past few decades – both medicinal and recreational – even though it remains a Schedule 1 drug on the federal level.

But some public health experts are still sounding the alarm, because this has all happened very quickly… and though hard-line illegality was harmful, what we’re doing now might be causing harm, too.

Dr. Keith Humphreys, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford University, joins us.

If you have thoughts you want to share, or an idea for a topic we should tackle, you can email the show: [email protected]

Podcast production by Maura Currie.

Want more Hear Me Out? Subscribe to Slate Plus to 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/hearmeoutplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Donald Trump is appearing in court today as a criminal defendant. Why did this case take so long to go to trial, and what’s at stake for the former president? 

Guest: Jeremy Stahl, jurisprudence editor at Slate.

Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How the semi-legalization of marijuana has drawn a road map for legalizing psychedelics—and also provided a list of pitfalls to be avoided. 

Guest: Jane C. Hu, science journalist and author of the newsletter The Microdose.

Want more What Next TBD? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Get your tickets for Amicus Live in Washington DC on May 14th here.

We shouldn’t be surprised that we have to keep saying it, but here we are: the Supreme Court (notably trained as lawyers) will soon make decisions about how doctors (notably trained as doctors) can treat pregnant patients in the emergency room. Moyle v. United States - consolidated with Idaho v. United States - is the result of an Idaho lawsuit challenging EMTALA, a federal law requiring hospitals to do whatever they can to stabilize whoever comes through their ER doors with a medical emergency. Sometimes this requires abortion care, and for a faction of conservative advocates, this cannot stand.

Ahead of oral arguments the week after next, we wanted to get a sense of what healthcare looks like for pregnant women experiencing medical emergencies now, and how this case threatens to undermine that care in the future. This week, Dahlia Lithwick speaks with Dr. Dara Kass, an emergency medicine physician, about what EMTALA was built to do, what ER physicians are being asked to do, and what will happen should Idaho prevail in this case.

Later in the show, Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern joins to discuss the hullabaloo over when, if, and how Justice Sotomayor should be made to retire and the very gendered work of keeping SCOTUS from going off the rails (any more than it already has).

In today’s bonus episode only for Slate Plus members Dahlia and Mark discuss the outrageous ruling that creates (but really, revives) a de facto total ban on abortions in Arizona. They also explain why the EMTALA case from the show isn’t being talked about as much as the recent mifepristone case was. 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.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss the revival of Arizona’s 1864 abortion ban; the end of No Labels; and the past and future of presidential debates. 

Here are some notes and references from this week’s show:

Mary Jo Pitzl and Reagan Priest for The Arizona Republic: Arizona House GOP halt Democrats’ effort to overturn Civil War era law in chaotic session

Dan Balz for The Washington Post: The Arizona Supreme Court just upended Trump’s gambit on abortion

Jamelle Bouie for The New York Times: The Man Who Snuffed Out Abortion Rights Is Here to Tell You He Is a Moderate

Ramtin Arablouei and Rund Abdelfatah for NPR’s All Things Considered: Abortion was once common practice in America. A small group of doctors changed that

A.O. Sulzberger Jr. for The New York Times: Reagan Says Ban On Abortion May Not Be Needed

David Faris for Slate: Why No Labels Didn’t Stick

Slate’s Political Gabfest: The “No Mugshot” Edition

Thomas B. Edsall for The New York Times: Has No Labels Become a Stalking Horse for Trump?

Michael H. Brown for The Washington Post: Joseph Lieberman, senator and vice-presidential nominee, dies at 82

Here are this week’s chatters: 

Emily: Dartmouth’s Leslie Center for the Humanities: People, Place, Podcasts: Emily Bazelon and Erica Heilman in Conversation and the Rumble Strip podcast 

John: Slate’s Navel Gazing podcast and Rachel Wolfe for The Wall Street Journal: The Calls for Help Coming From Above the Poverty Line

David: Hannah Seo for The New York Times: Is It Better to Brush Your Teeth Before Breakfast or After?

Listener chatter from Mark Phillips in Baltimore, Maryland: Ben Crair for The New Yorker: The Magic of Bird Brains

For this week’s Slate Plus bonus segment, David, John, and Emily discuss AI communications with loved ones after they die. See Walter Marsh for The Guardian: Laurie Anderson on making an AI chatbot of Lou Reed: ‘I’m totally, 100%, sadly addicted’ and Ira Glass for This American Life: The Ghost in the Machine. See also Niamn Ancell for Cybernews: These apps could resurrect your relatives using artificial intelligence; Rebecca Carballo for The New York Times: Using A.I. to Talk to the Dead; and Tamara Kneese for Wired: Using Generative AI to Resurrect the Dead Will Create a Burden for the Living.

In the latest Gabfest Reads, Emily talks with Tana French about her book, The Hunter: A Novel.

Email your chatters, questions, and comments to [email protected]. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)

Podcast production by Cheyna Roth

Research by Julie Huygen

Hosts

Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How Florida Judge Aileen Cannon is delaying Donald Trump’s trial over classified documents taken to Mar-a-Lago—and what special prosecutor Jack Smith can do to get things moving.

Guest: Lee Kovarsky, professor of law at University of Texas, co-director of the UT Capital Punishment Center

Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

After weeks of the Trump trials (and the run-up to the Trump trials) becoming ever more engrossing spectator sports, both the public and the media may have lost sight of some of the stakes. They also may have lost sight of the truth of what the legal system can actually deliver in terms of protecting democracy from Donald J Trump. 

On this week’s Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Juliette Kayyem to dissect Trump's impact on legal, national security, and ideological fronts. Kayyem brings her national security expertise to discuss the evolution of Trump's tactics from stochastic terror to direct incitement. Together, they explore the implications for democracy of a presidential campaign where one candidate issues violent threats and tries to intimidate judges. Kayyem lays out in stark terms the kinds of focus and planning needed in the coming months.

Juliette Kayyem is a national security expert, Harvard lecturer, CNN analyst, Atlantic contributor, and author of 'The Devil Never Sleeps: Learning to Live in an Age of Disasters.' Avowedly not a lawyer, she approaches America’s political predicament using counter-terrorism approaches to Trump’s movement and preparations for the 2024 elections. 

Want more Amicus? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you’ll 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.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A young Black man, wrongfully accused of sexual assault, is convicted nonetheless. Evidence that could’ve exonerated him is withheld or covered up, and he spends much of his youth in prison. It sounds like a movie-of-the-week, but it was the real life nightmare of Jarrett Adams. Throughout his incarceration, he fought for his freedom and eventually won. Now, he’s a defense attorney who helps other wrongfully convicted people find justice, and build better lives on the outside through his organization Life After Justice. On today’s episode of A Word, Jarrett Adams joins host Jason Johnson to talk about his experience with the criminal justice system, and why the punishment may continue long after a conviction is overturned. 

Guest: Jarrett Adams, co-founder of the non-profit organization Life After Justice 

Podcast production by Kristie Taiwo-Makanjuola

Want more A Word? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately 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/awordplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The group that brought the case that overturned Roe v. Wade is back before the Supreme Court arguing for more restrictions on mifepristone, the “abortion pill.” Who are Alliance Defending Freedom, and what are their goals?

Guest: David Kirkpatrick, staff writer for The New Yorker.

Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s not quite red-yarn-on-a-corkboard, but given how often we’ve been thinking about the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA) over the years, it may as well be. The group has become a vital component of the conservative legal movement, with pay-to-play access afforded to corporate donors to boot. Despite all the money changing hands and obvious conflicts of interest, few have heard of them - and that’s very intentional.

This week we’re joined by Lisa Graves of True North Research to talk about how an organization representing the chief legal officers in half the states in the union has become a national policy juggernaut, pushing legislation and litigation to assist polluters, harm women and LGBTQ families, torment immigrants and even steal elections, all absent any significant oversight or consequences. 

In this week’s bonus plus segment, Slate’s very own Mark Joseph Stern joins to discuss coverage of the oral arguments in the mifepristone case (including the hugely significant takeaway most of the analysis missed), and the reasons Neil Gorsuch hates nationwide injunctions. 

And finally, following on from last week, thinking about the language we use to describe first trimester abortions.

Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices