Digest

This podcast delves into the history and evolution of the Supreme Court, focusing on the rise of originalism as a dominant legal philosophy. The host, along with guest Mackenzie Joy Brennan, a constitutional scholar, examines the origins of originalism, tracing its roots back to Robert Bork and its subsequent influence on the court's decisions. They discuss the politicization of the court, the impact of originalism on individual rights, and the implications of recent decisions, including the overturning of Roe v. Wade. The podcast also explores the Supreme Court's procedure, the power of precedent, and the influence of Justice Scalia on the court's jurisprudence. The episode concludes with a discussion of potential solutions to address the current state of the Supreme Court, including holding Chief Justice Roberts accountable for ethical violations, advocating for term limits, and eliminating the filibuster.

Outlines

00:00:00

The Supreme Court and Originalism: A Critical Examination

This episode examines the Supreme Court's history, its reliance on originalism, and the implications of recent decisions for American society. The host expresses frustration with the current state of the court and its reliance on originalism, a concept that claims to interpret the desires of the founding fathers. The episode aims to explore the Supreme Court's history, its powers, and whether its current form is inevitable.

00:02:13

Introducing Mackenzie Joy Brennan: A Constitutional Scholar

The host introduces Mackenzie Joy Brennan, an attorney and constitutional scholar, as the guest for the episode. They discuss the current state of the Supreme Court and the challenges of navigating legal terminology.

00:04:10

The Politicization of the Court and the Rise of Originalism

Mackenzie explains that the politicization of the court began with Robert Bork and the introduction of originalism. They discuss the history of originalism and its impact on the court's decisions.

00:07:11

The Origins and Evolution of Originalism

The host and Mackenzie delve into the origins of originalism, revealing that it gained popularity in the 1980s, not as an ancient principle, but as a political strategy. They discuss Robert Bork's role in promoting originalism and his controversial past.

00:14:30

The Constitution, the Supreme Court, and the Debate Over Rights

Mackenzie explains the Constitution's role as a foundational document and the Supreme Court's power to interpret it. They discuss the debate surrounding the enumeration of rights and the importance of the Ninth Amendment.

00:18:34

The Supreme Court's Appellate Role and the Expansion of Defendant's Rights

Mackenzie explains the Supreme Court's appellate role and how it resolves conflicts between lower courts. They discuss the expansion of defendant's rights in the 1960s under the Warren Court and the subsequent backlash.

00:23:15

Recent Decisions and the Rise of Theocracy

The host and Mackenzie discuss the Supreme Court's recent decisions, highlighting the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the court's increasing reliance on originalism. They explore the implications of these decisions for American society and the potential for a theocratic shift.

00:29:18

The Supreme Court's Procedure and the Power of Precedent

Mackenzie explains the Supreme Court's procedure for reviewing cases, including the decision to grant certiorari and the power of precedent. They discuss the court's recent tendency to overturn precedent and the implications for agency authority.

00:33:30

The Influence of Scalia and the Absurdity of Originalism

Mackenzie discusses the influence of Justice Scalia on the Supreme Court and his role in promoting originalism. They analyze the case of DC v. Heller and how Scalia's interpretation of the Second Amendment exemplifies the absurdity of originalism.

00:49:03

The Rise of Originalism as a Legal Doctrine

Mackenzie explores the origins and rise of originalism as a legal doctrine, highlighting the role of political money and the conservative movement. They discuss the insidious nature of originalism and its impact on American society.

00:53:55

Action Items for Change: Holding the Court Accountable

Mackenzie offers suggestions for action items to address the current state of the Supreme Court. They emphasize the importance of holding Chief Justice Roberts accountable for ethical violations and advocating for term limits and the elimination of the filibuster.

Keywords

Q&A

• What is originalism and how has it impacted the Supreme Court?

  Originalism is a legal philosophy that interprets the Constitution based on the original intent of the Founding Fathers. It has become a dominant force in the Supreme Court, leading to conservative rulings that overturn precedent and restrict individual rights.

• How has the Supreme Court's composition changed in recent years and what are the implications?

  The Supreme Court has become increasingly conservative, with a majority of justices appointed by Republican presidents. This shift has led to a more ideological court that is less likely to uphold precedent and more likely to advance conservative agendas.

• What are some of the recent decisions made by the Supreme Court that have been controversial?

  The Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to abortion, and weakened agency authority by overturning Chevron deference. These decisions have sparked widespread protests and concerns about the court's power and direction.

• What can be done to address the current state of the Supreme Court?

  There are several potential solutions, including holding Chief Justice Roberts accountable for ethical violations, advocating for term limits for justices, and eliminating the filibuster to facilitate changes to the court's composition.

• What is the significance of the Ninth Amendment and how does it relate to the debate over originalism?

  The Ninth Amendment states that the enumeration of specific rights in the Constitution does not mean that other rights are not protected. This amendment is often cited by those who argue that the Constitution should be interpreted broadly to protect evolving notions of individual liberty, challenging the narrow focus of originalism.

Show Notes