
BONUS: Supreme Court Justice – DENIED!
11/23/22 • 16 min
In this bonus episode, the ladies tell the sad tale of John Rutledge, the first Supreme Court nominee rejected by the Senate. It’s a cautionary tale that demonstrates why justices should hold their fire for their dissents rather than political speeches.
Follow us on Twitter @ehslattery @anastasia_esq @pacificlegal #DissedPod
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In this bonus episode, the ladies tell the sad tale of John Rutledge, the first Supreme Court nominee rejected by the Senate. It’s a cautionary tale that demonstrates why justices should hold their fire for their dissents rather than political speeches.
Follow us on Twitter @ehslattery @anastasia_esq @pacificlegal #DissedPod
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Previous Episode

Total Swine
Dairy and apples and whiskey and wine. Many of our favorite things have turned in up cases involving the Commerce Clause at the Supreme Court. This term, the Court will consider whether a California law regulating the sale of pork violates that Clause. Some think the Court will strike California's pork ban down. Others wonder, based on recent dissents, whether the justices will use this opportunity to get rid of the "dormant Commerce Clause" doctrine altogether. Join the ladies as they take a romp from the 1780s to present day in search of the "dormant Commerce Clause," a phrase frequently invoked but not actually found anywhere in the Constitution.
Thanks to our guests Barry Friedman, Carter Phillips, and Adi Dynar, and to Jenni Etimos for her rendition of "Free Market Favorite Things."
Check out the full version of Gyu-Ho Lee's rock cover of "My Favorite Things": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdRwBNkbLXs
Follow us on Twitter @ehslattery @anastasia_esq @pacificlegal #DissedPod
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Next Episode

Korematsu and the Court of History
In 1944, the Supreme Court upheld the wartime internment of Japanese-Americans. It’s the first time the court applied strict scrutiny to racial discrimination by government. Over the protests of three justices, the Court held in Korematsu v. United States that the Roosevelt Administration met that exacting standard. One of the dissenters lamented, “Racial discrimination ... has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life.” Nearly 75 years later, the court would explain that ruling “was gravely wrong the day it was decided” and “has been overruled in the court of history.” What is Korematsu’s legacy and how is it casting an influence on the court today?
Thanks to our guests John Q. Barrett and John Yoo.
To learn more, check out KOREMATSU VERSUS US, a documentary short produced by the Federalist Society that explores the facts, conviction, and following cases surrounding Fred Korematsu and the other 120,000 "relocated" immigrants and citizens during World War II at https://fedsoc.org/commentary/videos/korematsu-versus-us
Follow us on Twitter @ehslattery @anastasia_esq @pacificlegal #DissedPod
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
If you like this episode you’ll love
Episode Comments
Generate a badge
Get a badge for your website that links back to this episode
<a href="https://goodpods.com/podcasts/dissed-270603/bonus-supreme-court-justice-denied-32461935"> <img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/goodpods-images-bucket/badges/generic-badge-1.svg" alt="listen to bonus: supreme court justice – denied! on goodpods" style="width: 225px" /> </a>
Copy