No, Joe Biden Didn’t Poop His Pants. Plus, the Supreme Court’s Fact-Checking Problem
Digest
This episode of "On the Media" delves into the concerning trend of unreliable information being used in amicus briefs submitted to the Supreme Court. The discussion begins with the recent Supreme Court decision lifting the ban on bump stocks, which was heavily influenced by an amicus brief written by a gun rights group. The brief contained factual errors and misleading information, which were then incorporated into Justice Clarence Thomas's majority opinion. The episode then explores the broader phenomenon of right-wing donors funding interest groups that supply the court with unreliable information, citing examples like the West Virginia v. EPA case. The podcast also examines the role of amicus briefs in shaping legal arguments and the potential for confirmation bias among justices. The episode concludes with a discussion of potential solutions to address the issue, including greater transparency about funding sources, earlier submission deadlines for briefs, and stricter rules governing the use of expert testimony in amicus briefs.
Outlines
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
Biden's Mental Fitness Questioned
This Chapter discusses a Wall Street Journal report questioning President Joe Biden's mental fitness, highlighting the media's focus on Biden's age and potential impact on the upcoming election. It also mentions Sinclair Broadcasting Group's practice of requiring local news anchors to read scripts promoting stories about Biden's mental fitness, often originating from Republican National Committee tweets.
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
Sinclair Broadcasting's Influence on Local News
This Chapter delves into the influence of Sinclair Broadcasting Group on local news stations across the country. It reveals how Sinclair's directives shape the content of local news, often promoting narratives that align with conservative viewpoints. The chapter highlights the lack of transparency and the forced reading of scripts from Sinclair HQ, raising concerns about the integrity of local news.
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
Supreme Court Decisions and Factual Errors
This Chapter examines the recent Supreme Court decisions and the presence of factual errors in some of the opinions. It discusses instances where justices have cited misleading information or misinterpreted research, highlighting the potential consequences of these inaccuracies. The chapter focuses on the Garland v. Cargill case, which involved the ban on bump stocks, and the factual errors made by Justice Clarence Thomas in his majority opinion.
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
Amicus Briefs and the Spread of False Facts
This Chapter explores the role of amicus briefs in influencing Supreme Court decisions and the potential for false facts to be incorporated into legal arguments. It discusses the history of amicus briefs and how they have evolved into advocacy tools, particularly in the digital age. The chapter highlights the lack of fact-checking and the potential for confirmation bias in the use of amicus briefs.
Keywords
Amicus Brief
A legal document submitted to a court by a party not directly involved in the case, offering information or arguments that may be relevant to the decision. Amicus briefs are often filed by interest groups, advocacy organizations, or individuals who have a stake in the outcome of the case.
Sinclair Broadcasting Group
A private company that owns and operates a large number of local television stations across the United States. Sinclair has been criticized for its conservative political leanings and its practice of requiring its stations to air segments promoting certain narratives, often at the expense of local news coverage.
Bump Stock
A device that allows a semi-automatic rifle to fire more quickly, essentially mimicking the rate of fire of a fully automatic weapon. Bump stocks were banned by the Trump administration in 2018 after the Las Vegas shooting, but the Supreme Court recently overturned that ban.
Confirmation Bias
The tendency to favor information that confirms pre-existing beliefs or hypotheses, while ignoring or downplaying information that contradicts them. Confirmation bias can lead to biased decision-making and a distorted understanding of reality.
Supreme Court
The highest court in the United States, responsible for interpreting the Constitution and federal laws. The Supreme Court has nine justices, who are appointed for life by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
False Facts
Information that is demonstrably untrue or inaccurate. False facts can be spread intentionally or unintentionally, and they can have significant consequences, particularly in legal proceedings.
Transparency
The quality of being open and honest about information, particularly about funding sources and potential conflicts of interest. Transparency is essential for ensuring accountability and trust in institutions and individuals.
Accountability
The obligation to be answerable for one's actions or decisions. Accountability is essential for ensuring that individuals and institutions are held responsible for their conduct and that they are not allowed to operate with impunity.
Gun Rights
The right to own and use firearms, which is protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Gun rights are a highly contentious issue in American politics, with strong arguments on both sides.
Political Polarization
The increasing division and hostility between opposing political groups. Political polarization can make it difficult to find common ground and compromise, and it can lead to gridlock and dysfunction in government.
Q&A
How do unreliable amicus briefs make their way into Supreme Court decisions?
Amicus briefs are often filled with information that is not vetted, and justices may not be aware of the funding sources or potential biases of the groups submitting them. This can lead to justices citing unreliable information in their opinions, which can then influence the outcome of the case.
What are some potential solutions to address the issue of unreliable information in amicus briefs?
Potential solutions include greater transparency about funding sources, earlier submission deadlines for briefs, and stricter rules governing the use of expert testimony in amicus briefs. These changes would help to ensure that justices have more time to vet the information in briefs and that they are aware of any potential biases.
What are the consequences of factual errors in Supreme Court decisions?
Factual errors in Supreme Court decisions can have far-reaching consequences, as they can influence the interpretation of laws and the development of legal precedent. These errors can also undermine public trust in the court and erode the legitimacy of its decisions.
What is the role of Sinclair Broadcasting Group in shaping local news coverage?
Sinclair Broadcasting Group owns and operates a large number of local television stations across the United States. The company has been criticized for its conservative political leanings and its practice of requiring its stations to air segments promoting certain narratives, often at the expense of local news coverage. This raises concerns about the integrity of local news and the potential for Sinclair to influence public opinion.
What is the significance of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the ban on bump stocks?
The Supreme Court's decision to overturn the ban on bump stocks is significant because it allows for the widespread availability of devices that can make semi-automatic rifles fire more quickly, essentially mimicking the rate of fire of a fully automatic weapon. This decision has been criticized by gun control advocates, who argue that it will make it easier for mass shooters to obtain weapons that can inflict significant damage.
What is confirmation bias and how does it affect Supreme Court decisions?
Confirmation bias is the tendency to favor information that confirms pre-existing beliefs or hypotheses, while ignoring or downplaying information that contradicts them. Confirmation bias can affect Supreme Court decisions by leading justices to give more weight to information that supports their own views, even if that information is unreliable or inaccurate.
What are the stakes involved in addressing the issue of unreliable information in amicus briefs?
The stakes are very high because the law relies on reason and evidence to support its decisions. If the reasons are tainted by unreliable information, then the legitimacy of the law and the judicial system is undermined. This can have a significant impact on public trust in the legal system and the ability of the government to function effectively.
Show Notes
Some of the most outrageous stories about President Biden are originating from a single, unverified source. On this week’s On the Media, hear about the shadowy organization that’s influencing election narratives. Plus, factual errors are at the heart of a recent Supreme Court decision. Learn how we can reform the system.
[01:00 ] Host Brooke Gladstone interviews Judd Legum, author of Popular Information, about how a rightwing outlet is presenting itself as a neutral news source, all the while pushing coordinated messaging about President Biden.
[18:04 ] Host Micah Loewinger speaks to Mark Joseph Stern, senior writer at Slate, about the factual errors in a recent Supreme Court ruling concerning guns.
[35:48 ] Micah interviews Allison Orr Larsen, professor of law at William and Mary, about how so many contested facts reach the highest court via amicus briefs. Plus, how to reform the so-called “amicus machine.”
Further reading:
- “Sinclair floods local news websites with hundreds of deceptive articles about Biden's mental fitness,” by Judd Legum
- “Clarence Thomas’ Opinion Legalizing Bump Stocks Is Indefensible,” by Mark Joseph Stern
- “The Supreme Court Decisions on Guns and Abortion Relied Heavily on History. But Whose History?” by Allison Orr Larsen
- “It’s a Fact: Supreme Court Errors Aren’t Hard to Find,” by Ryan Gabrielson (2017)
On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.