DiscoverContempt of Court with Elie Mystal
Contempt of Court with Elie Mystal
Claim Ownership

Contempt of Court with Elie Mystal

Author: The Nation Magazine

Subscribed: 240Played: 1,897
Share

Description

Contempt of Court is an original podcast series from The Nation about how to reform the Supreme Court. Hosted by The Nation's Justice Correspondent, Elie Mystal, each episode delves into distinct avenues for change, featuring historical insights, fresh analysis of the latest SCOTUS news, and conversations with experts and change-makers who are actively working to shape the future of the judiciary.

10 Episodes
Reverse
Listen to an excerpt of the new podcast series Blindspot: The Plague in the Shadows, which revisits the early years of the HIV epidemic in New York City and how the virus tore through some of our most vulnerable communities while the wider world looked away. A co-production of The HISTORY® Channel and WNYC Studios. You can listen to more of Blindspot: The Plague in the Shadows here.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
Delegitimize The Court

Delegitimize The Court

2023-08-2201:06:271

This is the eighth and final episode of Contempt of Court, our podcast series about reforming the Supreme Court. On this episode, we’re going to talk about the court’s only true form of power: legitimacy.To discuss potential paths toward delegitimizing the Court, my first guest on this episode is Harvard Law School professor, Nikolas Bowie. He makes a compelling case that the people, through their representatives, should be the ones in charge, not the Supreme Court.Afterward, Rhiannon Hamam, host of the fantastic Supreme Court podcast 5-4, has some thoughts on what’s happening on the ground, as people try to take back power from the Court through direct action.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
Instead of reforming how the Supreme Court uses its power, what if we took its power away?Harvard Law School professor, Ryan Doerfler, and Michigan Law School Professor Leah Litman join the podcast to discuss their perspectives on jurisdiction stripping. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
The Supreme Court has a serious ethics problem—actually, ethics problems. The justices have been dogged by allegations of corruption. They’ve been peppered with questions about how they make money. And then, of course, there’s the long career of Clarence Thomas, who, along with his wife Ginni Thomas, appears so brazenly corrupt that his scandalous behavior has made the very idea of Supreme Court ethics seen like a complete joke. I have long argued that Supreme Court ethics reform is as critical to fixing the Supreme Court as any of the more structural changes that reformers want to make—like increasing the number of justices or decreasing the length of time those justices serve.On this episode of Contempt of Court, we’re going to talk about what can be done to stop these people from wallowing in the slop of their own graft. First up, we talk to New York Times Magazine writer and Yale Law professor, Emily Bazelon about what corruption looks like when it comes in the form of a Supreme Court justice. Then, we talk to Georgia Congressman Hank Johnson, who is one of the few lawmakers who is doing something about it.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
Finding the Balance

Finding the Balance

2023-08-0132:351

Beyond raw court expansion, or the (probably unconstitutional) big stick of forced term-limits, there are a number of other ways one might go about balancing the Supreme Court.On this episode of Contempt of Court, Elie Mystal speaks with legal experts Dan Epps and Steve Vladeck about potential ways we might find that balance.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
Reform the Media

Reform the Media

2023-07-2529:00

The court ended its most recent term completely off the chain. Having already killed reproductive rights, it accomplished another longstanding conservative goal: banning affirmative action in college admissions. That's not even the half of it.And yet, a lot of the mainstream media coverage suggested that the Court turned *moderate* and worked hard to achieve a mainstream consensus.Why does the media keep feeding us this bullshit? Let’s talk about it.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
Term limits are by far the most popular form of Supreme Court reform. According to a recent poll from the Associated Press, two-thirds of Americans favor term limits for Supreme Court justices.On this episode of Contempt of Court, Elie Mystal is joined by Leah Litman and Aaron Belkin, to discuss what's wrong with everybody's favorite reform option.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
When most people talk about expanding the Supreme Court, they're talking about adding a few justices. Two or four to the bench. But I am not most people. I do not think we should add a few justices to get into an endless tit for tat. With Mitch McConnell and his federal Society forces, I think we should blow the lid, clear off this incremental, institutionalized motherfucker, and add 20 justices. Here's why.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
Packing The Court!

Packing The Court!

2023-07-0328:031

On this episode, we start with the most powerful reform available: court expansion. As a matter of Constitutional structure, Court expansion has always been the constitutionally preferred way of handling a court that has overstepped its bounds. But as a political matter: court expansion has been treated like it is a radical solution. But It’s not. It is the way a President and Congress can check the Supreme Court, and it’s the easiest and most simple method of court reform. Chris Kang and Congressman Jamaal Bowman join Contempt of Court to explore what court expansion actually is, and how attitudes around it are finally changing. CREDITS: Host: Elie MystalProducer: Babette ThomasExecutive Producer: Ludwig HurtadoAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
If you have a problem with how the Supreme Court operates and how much power it is allowed to hold over the rest of us: welcome! On this show, we'll look at ways to make the Supreme Court stop hurting us. In each episode, The Nation's Justice Correspondent Elie Mystal will talk to experts and advocates who are doing the work to reform the Supreme Court and salvage American democracy from the court’s greedy jaws.Subscribe for new episodes each Tuesday! Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
Comments (11)

Emily_Carter1

Discussions about trust in institutions benefit from clear facts and open access to records. When people can review filings, schedules, and outcomes themselves, conversations become more grounded and constructive. Resources like the https://andersoncountycourts.org can help readers check details and better understand how processes actually work. That kind of transparency goes a long way toward informed debate rather than assumptions.

Jan 6th
Reply

Liam King

This podcast really sheds light on how the court system works behind the scenes. For anyone looking to explore more about local legal proceedings, resources like https://starkcountycourts.org can be really helpful for understanding ongoing matters in the area. The historical context and expert insights shared here make it easier to grasp the challenges in reforming the judiciary today.

Jan 5th
Reply

Emma_Grace1

Interesting perspective on how trust in institutions is shaped by transparency and accountability over time. Public access to accurate records often plays a quiet but important role in restoring confidence, especially when discussions become heated. Resources that explain data clearly, such as https://gadsdencountypropertyappraiser.org help people verify facts on their own. Open information and informed dialogue can go a long way toward constructive outcomes.

Jan 5th
Reply

Adrew Lewis

While criticism can raise valid concerns, it’s important to rely on accurate information and verified records. Reviewing official case activity through resources like https://hennepincountycourts.org can help ground the discussion in facts. Transparency, context, and lawful process matter when evaluating any judicial system. Constructive dialogue backed by reliable sources is far more effective than broad dismissal.

Jan 5th
Reply

Nicole Foster

This discussion offers a thoughtful perspective on how contempt of court issues shape public trust and legal accountability. The way complex legal dynamics are broken down here makes it easier to understand their broader impact. I also find it useful to stay informed through reliable sources on https://cuyahogacountycourts.org when following similar legal matters. Conversations like this encourage deeper awareness of how the justice system functions in real-world situations.

Jan 5th
Reply

Jessica Brown

Constructive discussion around the justice system should focus on transparency, accountability, and public awareness rather than dismissal. Sharing verified records and procedural details can help people form informed opinions. Resources like https://marioncountycourts.org provide organized insights into proceedings, filings, and schedules. When information is accessible, trust is built through understanding, not rhetoric.

Jan 5th
Reply

Paul Edward

Really appreciated this discussion with Elie Mystal—his perspective on contempt and judicial accountability was insightful and engaging. These conversations often encourage me to look beyond commentary and explore real case activity, especially when reviewing https://alleghenycountycourts.org to better understand how issues play out in practice. It adds useful context to the broader legal debates being discussed. Definitely a worthwhile watch for anyone following justice reform closely.

Jan 5th
Reply

Joe Kane

Really engaging discussion—Elie Mystal always brings sharp insight into how contempt of court is applied and debated. Conversations like this highlight why public understanding of legal processes matters so much. I often find it helpful to cross-check real-world examples through resources like https://seminolecountycourts.org to see how these issues play out locally. Overall, this was a thought-provoking take that encourages deeper awareness of courtroom accountability.

Jan 4th
Reply

ncooty

Although I agree with some of the proposals in this series, the host made a very weak, poorly reasoned case with little apparent regard for implications (e.g., tyranny of the majority). Overall, the series seemed childish and poorly argued. Disappointing.

Feb 23rd
Reply

ncooty

Lots of flippant, gratuitous, cursory racial accusations in this series. Without more discussion of them, the flippancy detracts from the show's credibility.

Feb 20th
Reply

ncooty

You lost me with Leah. She's insufferable in personality, reasoning, and intonation.

Feb 18th
Reply
loading