Justice, Justice Thou Shalt Pursue

Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.

By and
27

Amanda Tyler, the Shannon C. Turner Professor of Law at Berkeley, joins Sarah and David for post-SCOTUS term talk. They finally give Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. some love, and also:

-General jurisdiction and interstate commerce

-Graphics in opinions

-Habeas Corpus: Is Lincoln the good guy or the bad guy?

-Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

-Advisory Opinions spinoff?

–Amanda Tyler’s profile at Berkeley

This episode is sponsored by FIRE. FIRE’s mission is to safeguard and uphold the right of all Americans to freedom of speech. Be a part of the front line of a growing movement by joining the FIRE Update.

By and
Comments (27)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Tomjedrz

    IANAL, so I have a question about habeas corpus. Why is there a difference between citizens and non-citizens?

    Collapse
  2. Erobrobbins

    I enjoyed the discussion of the Mallory case in this podcast. This discussion raised a question I was unable to find an answer for in the podcast or the opinion. When a Pennsylvania court takes jurisdiction over a dispute between a foreign plaintiff and a foreign defendant over events that occurred in another state, does it apply substantive Pennsylvania law or the substantive law of the state in which the events actually occurred (assuming there are no relevant contractual provisions)? To state it more concretely, in the hypothetical lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania by a Seattle-based Amazon employee against Amazon, would the Pennsylvania court apply the relevant substantive Pennsylvania law or the relevant substantive Washington law? Thanks!

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Dougherbert

      Ah, you raise a dreaded "conflict of laws" issue, which was the most convoluted course I took in law school. In most states, the answer is "it depends" -- usually it depends on a long multi-factor balancing test. And the courts don't always accept the choice of law specified in the parties' contract.

      Collapse
      1. Erobrobbins

        Thanks, much appreciated! As should be obvious, I did not take this class in law school.

        Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Ceich62

    If the podcast title is from Deuteronomy 16:20, the RSV has “Justice, and only justice, you shall follow, that you may live and inherit the land which the LORD your God gives you.”

    Collapse
    1. Austin from Atlanta

      Indeed. Repetition in the Bible is basically always for emphasis. It's extremely evident in the book of Deuteronomy that Moses is laying out the Israelites' radical need for God. There was no random aside about procedural justice - just an exhortation to do God's will. In that specific context, it's primarily an admonition against partiality and bribery.

      In Leviticus 19:15, we learn that means, "You shall do no injustice in judgment. You shall not be partial to the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty. In righteousness you shall judge your neighbor."

      To venture an analysis of the text, it seems that distorting the law - even with the best of intentions - to assist a select group, even a needy group, is injustice.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Seth B

        In Robert Alter's notes in his translation, he observes,

        "Though much ingenuity has been exercised by exegetes to explain the repetition, its function as a verbal gesture of sheer emphasis is self-evident: justice, and justice alone, shall you pursue."

        Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Stomaino

    The phrase “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts” supposedly comes from the story of the Trojan Horse. But in that story, shouldn’t the phrase be “Beware of gifts bearing Greeks?” - Sam Tomaino

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Andreas Wolf

    Looking at the new AO graphics/logo: Does Lady Justice wear a headphone and is she listening to this podcast? :-)

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Richard Maxton

      Not only that, but she's taken off her blinders as well.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Ben Connelly

      It’s a good logo

      Collapse
  6. Rabbim

    I am not a lawyer but I find these podcasts fascinating. The end of this podcast about RBG and substance and procedure made me wonder if you could do a podcast on the Israeli judicial reform. You could really clarify for listeners what is mostly presented in American media as an attack on democracy but really is about substance and procedure . How about it?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Speidie

      I second the motion regarding Israeli judicial reform.

      I've been fascinated by RBG since her Supreme Court nomination. This segment on her is a real treat.

      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Dougherbert

    It doesn't always come through in my comments (I can be a bit negative), but Advisory Opinions is by far my favorite podcast (not just legal podcast) ever. And this is my favorite episode of my favorite podcast of all time.

    Professor Tyler's students are very lucky. And y'all should have her back on as often as she's willing to appear. Pellucid analysis and funny stories, with her kindness shining through.

    I'm not at all a progressive in my views about judicial philosophy, but I am definitely a fan of hearing views I don't necessarily agree with expressed very well.

    More please.

    Collapse
  8. Acre00

    I strongly disagreed with Justice Ginsburg on basically everything, but I can't think of another liberal justice I'd rather the left idolize

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Matt Sherman

    My question for David is if they caught Soccer Moses while they were at the Nashville SC game?

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    J. Eric

    A truly great podcast! Thank you

    Collapse
Load More