Dan Epps

We don't have a lot of time.

I have one other brief history about this.

Yeah, that's the whole thing we should talk about.

I don't think we have time on this episode, but the judiciary just did create this new office that is going to help represent criminal defendants before the Supreme Court where they're seen as an asymmetry and

in kind of litigation expertise, has a lot of resemblances to a proposal I and Will Ortman put forward a few years ago, although there was a news article about it where they were insisting it was not the same thing, which was a little strange.

But we will do a whole half episode on that.

All right.

Well, we have a tight schedule, so I think you're going to need to lead us out, Will.

And thanks to you all for coming to hear us.

And please, if you have your podcast apps, please subscribe, rate, and review.

If there's a long delay between this and our next episode, it'll be because Will got in trouble with his dean at UChicago for helping persuade all of you to come to WashU.

Take a magnet.

Welcome to Divided Argument, an unscheduled, unpredictable Supreme Court podcast.

I'm Dan Epps.

And I'm Will Bode.

We are live, one of our rare live shows.

And we are in your home city of Chicago, where we are at Northwestern Law School, being hosted by the student chapter of the Federalist Society.

We did one of these, was it just last year?

It was.

Okay.