Dan Epps

After all that Trump stuff. So lots to say about that. We can talk about that later, I guess. Anything else excuse-wise or is that, I mean, that's not great. We could probably do better than that.

But yeah, there was no conscious decision to do that. There was actually one point at which we had a recording session on the calendar and something you were like, oh, can we reschedule? And then it kind of fell apart and we did not reschedule.

But yeah, there was no conscious decision to do that. There was actually one point at which we had a recording session on the calendar and something you were like, oh, can we reschedule? And then it kind of fell apart and we did not reschedule.

Yep. And I'm not going to apologize for the delay because we are very clear with people that we make no promises. But we hear you. We know you want more episodes. And I think we will do so more regularly in the spring. And the show's sweet spot has always been that period of time where the court is grinding out the opinions.

Yep. And I'm not going to apologize for the delay because we are very clear with people that we make no promises. But we hear you. We know you want more episodes. And I think we will do so more regularly in the spring. And the show's sweet spot has always been that period of time where the court is grinding out the opinions.

Those are a little bit easier for us to respond to in real time than these kind of amorphous case preview type episodes. Yeah.

Those are a little bit easier for us to respond to in real time than these kind of amorphous case preview type episodes. Yeah.

Friend of the show, Cannon Shamigan. Friend of the show, Steve Ladek, now a law professor at Georgetown, previously at Texas. And Fifth Circuit Judge Edith Jones. Who is, so far as we know, not a friend of the show. I didn't get any indication of friendliness towards the show or really- Anime the show? My guess is she's not really aware that the show exists, which is fine.

Friend of the show, Cannon Shamigan. Friend of the show, Steve Ladek, now a law professor at Georgetown, previously at Texas. And Fifth Circuit Judge Edith Jones. Who is, so far as we know, not a friend of the show. I didn't get any indication of friendliness towards the show or really- Anime the show? My guess is she's not really aware that the show exists, which is fine.

But the panel, I kind of gave a spiel I have done in various places kind of about here's why I think the basic way we divvy up Supreme Court seats is kind of problematic and is causing kind of long-term breakdown of norms and That is ultimately bad for everybody and we should consider reform.

But the panel, I kind of gave a spiel I have done in various places kind of about here's why I think the basic way we divvy up Supreme Court seats is kind of problematic and is causing kind of long-term breakdown of norms and That is ultimately bad for everybody and we should consider reform.

It's the premise of the short article I wrote in the Minnesota Law Review Symposium, which you also had a couple of years ago. And I think it's something similar to what I'm going to say. You and I are both trekking out to Stanford to speak to a class out there about these topics. So not a super fiery pitch. And Cannon gave a version of a speech he gave at Duke about here's why court reform is bad.

It's the premise of the short article I wrote in the Minnesota Law Review Symposium, which you also had a couple of years ago. And I think it's something similar to what I'm going to say. You and I are both trekking out to Stanford to speak to a class out there about these topics. So not a super fiery pitch. And Cannon gave a version of a speech he gave at Duke about here's why court reform is bad.

so forth. And why the bar needs to stand up for the legitimacy of the judges. Yeah. And I like Hannah and I've given comments on that speech and I think it's fine. I don't agree with much of it, but I don't object to it.

so forth. And why the bar needs to stand up for the legitimacy of the judges. Yeah. And I like Hannah and I've given comments on that speech and I think it's fine. I don't agree with much of it, but I don't object to it.

Steve Ladek talked about something I think is important and interesting, basically all the ways in which Congress and the presidency have tools to push back on the court and how they have exercised that power

Steve Ladek talked about something I think is important and interesting, basically all the ways in which Congress and the presidency have tools to push back on the court and how they have exercised that power

in various ways over the courts of American history and that there's a bit more of a dialogue between the political branches and the courts in the Supreme Court in particular than some simplistic conception suggests. I thought that was – his remarks were great. And then Judge Jones kind of took things a little bit off the rails, I would say.

in various ways over the courts of American history and that there's a bit more of a dialogue between the political branches and the courts in the Supreme Court in particular than some simplistic conception suggests. I thought that was – his remarks were great. And then Judge Jones kind of took things a little bit off the rails, I would say.

and you know went on a tirade about how steve's criticism of single judge divisions in federal courts basically steve has criticized these practices because they enable litigants to judge shop right they can file lawsuits in certain divisions in certain judicial districts and know for certain who the judge is going to be and he has argued that this is problematic i agree that it is problematic i think a