Ketanji Brown Jackson prepares to testify at Senate confirmation hearings, and the air is filled with confirmation bromides. It is said that a judicial nominee cannot speak about past cases. Or about cases that might come up. Or about legal theories. Is this true? Some say that all that matters is that the nominee be qualified and admirable. Can the Senate inquire further? How far can a nominee go in committing themselves on anything? Fortunately, we have a leading Senate expert, law school Dean, public intellectual - and, an “Amar” on “Amarica’s Constitution.” No, not Akhil, but Vik Amar, Dean of the Illinois College of Law and the first American of Indian descent to clerk for a Supreme Court Justice, to be a major Law School Dean. Listen to the “brothers-in-law” as they prepare you for the hearings. And - even more important - hear about their forthcoming law review article that may do nothing less than save the country. No kidding.
Immunity versus The Rule of Law
Sense and Nonsense on Immunity
Don't Touch but Do Convict
Crime Means Punishment
Immunity Therapy
No Standing Any Time
History Will Judge
Dissenting in Concurrence
What the Concurrences Should Have Said
Happy Anniversary Mr. Lincoln from the Court
Staking our Claim
What the Oral Argument Should Have Said - Part 2
What the Oral Argument Should Have Said
20 Questions on Section 3 and Insurrection #1 - Special Guest Ted Widmer
A Self-Educating Gaffe
The Amicus Brief - Part Two
Friends of the Court - The Brief
Section Three Goes to Washington
Section Three Punditry: The Good, The Bad, and The Silly
The World Turns to Section Three
Create your
podcast in
minutes
It is Free