Are those who spoke at Trump's January 6 rally guilty of inciting the violence that occurred afterward? John Vile, Dean and Professor of Political Science at Middle Tennessee State University joins me to discuss the 200 years of case law that make it difficult to hold someone criminally responsible for what they say, whether Trump and his allies crossed the line, and whether civil suits offer a way to fill the gap left by the Constitution.

Political theorist, Ben Studebaker, discusses how America's political parties have used the culture wars to distract from an inability to improve the lives of voters, how the attack on the Capitol was a logical byproduct of its escalation, and the real economic drivers behind this problem.

A short holiday message from your host and a sneak preview into next year. That's it.

A short holiday message from your host and a sneak preview into next year. That's it.

In this episode, originally released in January of 2020, Ben Studebaker discusses the impact Great Britain's effort to reduce its national debt in the 1800s had on the nation. In this conversation, Studebaker shares his insights into how societies respond to economic change that seem oddly prescient in light of the events that would follow this episode.

In this rerelease of the 8th episode of YDHTY, originally published October of 2019, we explore Ireland's effective and confusing method of proportional representation, the impact it has on politics, and how it results in happier voters and fewer angry mobs storming government buildings (NOTE: Published well before the attack on the Capitol, so the part about mobs storming buildings was pure editorializing).

Polling shows the majority of Americans approve of term limits for Supreme Court justices, but some experts say the unintended consequences would be disastrous. Arjun and Dan discuss polling on the subject from The Factual, how liberal and conservative justices often rule alike, and Dan's journey from being a firm yes to a hard no on the idea.

Americans expect the Supreme Court to be above partisanship, but was this always the case? Rachel Shelden of Penn State discusses how Lincoln appointed his campaign manager to the Supreme Court, how he expanded it to make room for an additional pro-Union justice, and how the desire for a non-partisan court came as the court and political parties gained more power.

Term limits on Supreme Court Justices have been proposed as a way to reduce some of the issues of partisanship plaguing the nomination process. Suzanna Sherry of Vanderbilt University explains how this would only make the problem worse.

While much attention is paid to the partisan makeup of the Supreme Court, there's little focus on the loosely enforced code of ethics surrounding the behavior of justices and those serving on the lower courts. Gabe Roth of Fix the Court discusses his organization's efforts to change that.