The 2016 Supreme Court term in review, on Amicus.

Who Really Won in the Travel Ban Ruling, and Why Neil Gorsuch Is Worse Than Liberals Feared

Who Really Won in the Travel Ban Ruling, and Why Neil Gorsuch Is Worse Than Liberals Feared

Law and the Supreme Court justices who interpret it.
June 28 2017 9:06 AM

Amicus: Breakfast Table Redux

Dahlia Lithwick, Mark Joseph Stern, and Pamela Karlan chew over the recently completed Supreme Court term.

718x512_Amicus_inlinePromo

Listen to Episode 71 of Slate’s Amicus:

The Supreme Court’s 2016 term may not have contained the usual number of blockbuster cases, but it did have its fair share of drama. Between the stonewalling of Merrick Garland; the filibustered confirmation of Neil Gorsuch; rumors about Anthony Kennedy’s possible retirement; and, in the background, the White House offensive against the federal judiciary, court-watchers had no shortage of things to keep them up at night.

Advertisement

So this week on Amicus, we pour a couple of our favorite court-watchers big cups of coffee and plop some microphones down at Slates annual Breakfast Table. Mark Joseph Stern and Pamela Karlan join us to discuss what we learned about the justices this term and what we can expect from them in the fall.

Transcripts of Amicus are available to Slate Plus members, several days after each episode posts. For a limited time, get 90 days of free access to Slate Plus in the new Slate iOS app. Download it today at slate.com/app.

Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook. Our email is amicus@slate.com.

Podcast production by Tony Field.

Dahlia Lithwick writes about the courts and the law for Slate, and hosts the podcast Amicus.