DiscoverDivided Argument
Divided Argument
Claim Ownership

Divided Argument

Author: Will Baude, Dan Epps

Subscribed: 39Played: 256
Share

Description

An unscheduled, unpredictable Supreme Court podcast. Hosted by Will Baude and Dan Epps.
8 Episodes
Reverse
Early Wittgenstein

Early Wittgenstein

2021-06-2101:00:12

As October Term 2020 hurtles towards a thrilling conclusion (well, hopefully), Dan and Will break down two of Monday's decisions. They explore the separation of powers and severability in United States v. Arthrex and talk about antitrust law's implications for college sports in NCAA v. Alston. 
Triple Bank Shot

Triple Bank Shot

2021-06-1801:20:46

Will and Dan break down the Court's sudden burst of interesting opinions – California v. Texas, Fulton v. Philadelphia, and Nestle v. Doe.
So What

So What

2021-06-0452:48

Will and Dan break down the Court's fascinating decision yesterday in Van Buren v. United States, which interpreted the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. 
Everybody Procrastinates

Everybody Procrastinates

2021-06-0301:02:10

Dan and Will  discuss the Court's recent run of unanimous cases, paying particular attention to United States v. Cooley; ponder weighty issues like the role of the Hart & Wechsler casebook in defining the field of federal courts; and announce a new way for listeners to engage with the show: our voicemail line, (314) 649-3790‬.
Faith in Princes

Faith in Princes

2021-05-2355:57

Will and Dan ponder what this podcast is about, continue their discussion of good faith in judging, try to game out exactly what the Court is up to in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, and respond to listener feedback. 
Grandma's House of Vice

Grandma's House of Vice

2021-05-1801:03:43

Will and Dan ponder the significance Court's grant of certiorari in an abortion case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, before going on to recap some of the opinions the Court released this week. They discuss Caniglia v. Strom, a Fourth Amendment case, and what it might mean for drug-dealing senior citizens. And they explore the puzzling world of criminal-procedure retroactivity in Edwards v. Vannoy, and in particular Justice Gorsuch's bold concurrence charting a new course for federal habeas corpus law. 
Woke to the Trend

Woke to the Trend

2021-05-1739:40

Will and Dan finish up their conversation about the shadow docket. They discuss the Court’s summary reversal practices, try to get to the bottom of what might be wrong with the shadow docket, and ponder what it means for Supreme Court justices to act in “good faith.”
In the inaugural episode of Divided Argument, Will and Dan have the first part of a two-part discussion of the Supreme Court's "shadow docket." Will explains how he came to coin the now-famous phrase in a 2013 article, and how good advice from a friend helped him avoid a "terrible title" for that piece. Will and Dan also discuss Justice Alito's contribution to the important field of original jurisdiction before closing out the episode with a plea for reviews on your podcast app of choice. 
Comments 
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store