Amarica's Constitution

Lawyer of the Century

Walter Dellinger and Charles Black are hard acts to follow, but our concluding role model is up to the task.  Telford Taylor was legislator, war hero, Nuremberg prosecutor, international law pioneer, law firm founder, tenured professor and scholar extraordinaire, public intellectual, and always a principled, skilled lawyer.  Professor Amar admired his work from afar, and that admiration led to a personal meeting, to Akhil’s first major law review article in the Harvard Law Review, and ultimately, to the opening scene of his latest book.  Meanwhile, in the news, we also take time to look at the latest developments, statements, and misstatements filling the air on the notorious Texas abortion law, SB8.

The Music of the Law

Continuing our exploration of inspirational models in the law that deeply influenced Professor Amar’s career, today we learn of a predecessor of last week’s model - the newly passed Walter Dellinger - as we hear of the life of Charles Black.  A son of the deep South, Black made an enormous mark as he was a vital part of the team that won Brown vs. Board of Education, and in the aftermath, we see his genius as he defends the decision, and separately reflects on how he came to his principled positions.  We see this as he picks up pen and paper and leaves these notes for the ages.  You will now hear these writings and Akhil’s reaction to them, and ultimately they will lead us back to considering the emerging picture of Ketanji Brown Jackson, nominee to the Supreme Court, in these lights.

Dellinger Departs, Jackson Arrives

The great Walter Dellinger, one of Professor Amar’s role models in the law and one of the great lawyers of the past century, moves Professor Amar to present and review his role models and why they matter to all of us.  Dellinger’s career was so enormous in its scope, so impactful in its action, that it forms a scaffolding for considering topics as varied as the most important SCOTUS footnote ever written; other momentous careers such as Earl Warren, Charles Black, and Telford Taylor; the lighter side of working for President Clinton; the last public statements of Benjamin Franklin and now Dellinger himself - and much more.  Fittingly, Dellinger’s last writing has impact beyond his demise, as he provided background and perspective for the momentous nomination by President Biden of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Associate Justice of the Supreme Court - and so we consider that.

Your Turn; Our Take

We deliver a long-promised episode, as the audience guides the discussion this week with their penetrating questions.  Was Akhil too easy on Mitch McConnell?  How about bringing on expert X or Y?  Should SB8 prompt a new exception to Younger abstention?  Oh, and by the way - what is "Younger abstention?" Can judges be ousted without impeachment?  As you see, we have a very educated audience.  Indeed, once you have completed the podcast, you will find yourselves that much more informed, as these sometimes complex concepts are explained in Akhil’s usual approachable if inimitable way.

Now Now Now - Guest Jesse Wegman (Part 2)

We continue our discussion of the Equal Rights Amendment.  Is it the proposed ERA, the adopted ERA, or the dead ERA?  Some say we already have an ERA in the 14th and 19th Amendments; Akhil and Jesse explore what some women, such as Elizabeth Lady Stanton, had to say about the 14th Amendment and equal rights back in the day.  The SCOTUS was asked to weigh in on amendment adoption dates back in the 1930’s - they punted.  Would that happen again, should this reach them?  And - would it be better to have an ERA “Now Now Now,” as many insist, or is there a better way? Finally, Professor Amar is about to do something he hasn’t done in 22 years.  What is so important that it prompted this?

A New ERA - Special Guest Jesse Wegman

The Archivist of the United States is in the news, and if that’s happening, you know some esoteric constitutional question is up.  Fortunately, “Amarica’s Constitution,” is on the case.  We have New York Times Editorial Board member, Jesse Wegman, who wrote for the Times on this subject recently, raising all sorts of issues - which Akhil is happy to answer for Jesse and for all of us.  Meanwhile, this is all about the Equal Rights Amendment, and Amendments in general, and Article V of the Constitution, and what about ERA anyway - what would it do?  All this and more - with feeling.  There’s a lot here, so this is part one of two.

Gary and Gorby - Special Guest Gary Hart

We continue our mining of Gary Hart’s wisdom, as the former Senator, and Presidential candidate weighs in on the sort of questions a public and political intellectual confronts over a lifetime.  How can we think about Ukraine and Russia in light of our past?  Would tensions between the US and Russia today be particularly different if Gary Hart had won the presidency in 1988, given the story he tells about his prospective inauguration?  The richness of a conversation with Gary Hart is such that even a passing reference produces a new insight on how the Cold War might have taken a different path.  We hear inside references on what it’s like to run for President from a principal player in 3 presidential races:  1974, 1984, and 1988. Inevitably, stories never before heard emerge, and they are here for you to savor.

Debate Debate

Amidst a host of state-level voting law initiatives, the Senate considers voting rights bills.  Without 60 votes on hand, the Democrats have proposed extending the “nuclear option” to some or all legislation; this past week, they debated and voted on it.  We have digested the 13 hours of debate and play for you relevant clips, with Professor Amar weighing in on who has the history and/or the Constitution right, and who is playing with facts and founders.  A potpourri of Senators, from Leaders McConnell and Schumer, to recent Presidential candidate Klobuchar, and numerous others, weigh in and debate on whether or not the Senate shall, in fact, debate.  

Heart to Hart: Filibuster Finis - Special Guest Gary Hart

Exactly 10 years to the day prior to the January 6 outrages, Professor Amar and former Senator Gary Hart teamed up for a history-changing article explaining how the filibuster could become a thing of the past. In ensuing years, the “nuclear option” they outlined was invoked on presidential appointments, then Supreme Court nominations, and now it is so close to being gone for good.  But this is just one episode in an epic American life served in the public sphere, and we go afield to begin to tap the endless insights of this man who was nearly President, and wound up doing, and knowing, more than you can imagine - and he begins to share it with us.  Part one of two special episodes.

The Year and The Questions, Part 2

As year 2 of “Amarica’s Constitution” begins, we complete our year 1 recap with remarkable clips, some from outstanding guests: Neal Katyal on preparing and executing Supreme Court advocacy (including the specifics of a recent case he argued); Nadine Strossen (on how this ACLU leader has some surprisingly nuanced positions that the ACLU might not love); and Linda Greenhouse (on sources - who has them, and who doesn’t). We also hear from the SCOTUS Justices in oral argument clips from one of our most popular episodes, on abortion, unsurprisingly. We update our thoughts on the Biden commission. Finally, your questions are getting better, prompting Akhil to give respectful (!) and nuanced answers.