Supreme Court is Back

On this week’s episode, Sarah is back from the Galápagos Islands just in time for ...

By and

On this week’s episode, Sarah is back from the Galápagos Islands just in time for the Supreme Court’s fall term. David and Sarah jump right in, starting with a rather spicy speech from Justice Samuel Alito. Our hosts also discuss a case with conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, a professor who is suing UCLA, and the high court’s upcoming cases.

Show Notes:

–From SCOTUSblog: Alito blasts media for portraying shadow docket in “sinister” terms

–Why I Am Suing UCLA, by Gordon Klein at Common Sense with Bari Weiss

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By and
Comments (116)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. David B.

    Had to come comment, even if late because I think there was a swing and a miss on this one. I didn't hear anything in the professor's response that was sarcastic. Now, knowing that he's touching a powder keg, it would have been wise to include some softening words ("Thank you for your interest and concern. I share your interest in the fair treatment...") But it sounded almost like something you'd have in a legal argument:
    1. What about others that were affected by this situation that are not of African-American race?
    2. How would I then manage the issues with people who are of mixed race including African-American?

    Yes, it's always smart to wait a day before replying to an e-mail. My surprise is that the professor said he was mad when he wrote it. It sounded pretty calm and thoughtful to my reading. Am I being blind? From what I've heard, it sounds like a very logical and well thought out response with no sarcasm at all. (Also would be nice to have a link to the professor's letter in the show notes.)

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    IUMaryLou

    I just listened to this podcast and am going to immediately respond — not even waiting 20 minutes. Students of any race who attend a top-tier university like UCLA (or even a bottom-tier college) should be able to take a little push-back from a professor. This student and those outraged are also adults and need to toughen up and lighten up a little. My kids had a 7th grade English teacher who was incredibly sarcastic and it was so important to their development to learn what sarcasm is and how to handle it. It’s sad these kids got all the way to B School (which is selective at many universities) without being able to take a little heat that they so richly deserve.

    Collapse
  3. Joe Curtis

    I'm looking forward to the analysis of the groundwater case. I hope it gets as much of your time as the Klein case did.

    Collapse
  4. The BFJ

    I wish my college professors had been as cordial. However, one of my favorites was a British linear equations professor who kept making fun of France when he found out he had a French student.

    Collapse
  5. Andrew Smith

    I disagree with our illustrious hosts about the UCLA Professor case. I understand their point that the Professor is an adult and should act as such. I'd counter that the student is also an adult, a technicality that we as a Society need to remember and something we should enforce as an expectation. Also, while the student probably thought that they were asking in good faith and were justified in their inquiry, I found the inquiry itself to be offensive and racist. Such racist beliefs and attitudes should be met with derision and ridicule. Polite responses have only emboldened those pushing such damaging attitudes.

    Collapse
    1. app

      I agree completely.

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Whit Waldo

    As one of the 6 people that was actually interested in the Mississippi vs Tennessee groundwater case, I was just listening to the oral arguments and was both intrigued by the question the Chief Justice asked as well as disappointed in the answer given by counsel. Specifically, he asked if there were some wild horses that happened to cross the territorial borders, could the other state seize the horses, but I don't think that analogy is quite fitting to what happened here. Rather, this seems more like Tennessee put out a bunch of feed in order to lure the horses over to their side before seizing them. Sure, the horses may have wandered over eventually, but they drastically sped up the process.

    I'm no attorney, but this doesn't seem right to me. But, given the justices' apparent reluctance to open up the can of worms of all the states suing each other over their various groundwater seepages, it'll be interesting to see what the court actually does with this one.

    Sarah didn't quite get into how this would work from an oil rights perspective (especially since they specifically drill many horizontal wells) and I'd love to hear more on that.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    BestUsedCarSales

    I'm actually really interested in water rights questions. It's becoming a bigger issue, and as a resident and fan of the desert states, will likely get to be bigger still.
    Getting a Supreme Court case of it is interesting.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    M.E.

    My first thought was, "Hang the license plate upside down to show disapproval," but then I realized that from a distance it would still look like a Confederate flag. So, what about hanging it backwards? Put it in a nice frame so it's not just a blank piece of metal tacked to the wall but rather an intentional piece that people can ask about, allowing you to explain first.

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Luke Sherman

    The UCLA stuff has me wondering how my roommate (a math lecturer at Marquette) would have handled a something like that. I know he has gotten his fair share of ludicrous requests lately and I am not even sure that that would have ranked up there in terms of sheer inanity. Good fodder for thought about how to respond to that stuff though.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Sarah is back… and so is SCOTUS… coincidence? I think not.

    In all seriousness, Sarah, you should bring your husband on the pod as I think he would have an interesting perspective for the AO audience on arguing before the Supreme Court.

    David, who was the guest last week you were going to have? Can you do a new interview with this person and release it as an extra AO episode? 3 in one week is fine by me!

    Sounds like the interdimensional beings have thwarted Alex Jones again…

    Collapse
Load More