Leah Litman

I mean, Chevron was originally this Republican supported doctrine because it was announced in a case involving the Reagan's EPA. And guess who was the head of the EPA at the time? Neil Gorsuch's mom. Oh, really? And Gorsuch Burford. Miss Gorsuch.

I mean, Chevron was originally this Republican supported doctrine because it was announced in a case involving the Reagan's EPA. And guess who was the head of the EPA at the time? Neil Gorsuch's mom. Oh, really? And Gorsuch Burford. Miss Gorsuch.

I mean, Chevron was originally this Republican supported doctrine because it was announced in a case involving the Reagan's EPA. And guess who was the head of the EPA at the time? Neil Gorsuch's mom. Oh, really? And Gorsuch Burford. Miss Gorsuch.

I didn't know that. Yeah. And so I kind of write about this in the book as like part of Neil's villain origin story. Like his mom got chased out of the EPA and this apparently has given him a complex against the administrative state, which he's been out to get ever since. It was really wild in the oral argument about overruling Chevron.

I didn't know that. Yeah. And so I kind of write about this in the book as like part of Neil's villain origin story. Like his mom got chased out of the EPA and this apparently has given him a complex against the administrative state, which he's been out to get ever since. It was really wild in the oral argument about overruling Chevron.

I didn't know that. Yeah. And so I kind of write about this in the book as like part of Neil's villain origin story. Like his mom got chased out of the EPA and this apparently has given him a complex against the administrative state, which he's been out to get ever since. It was really wild in the oral argument about overruling Chevron.

The lawyer who is challenging Chevron was asked, you know, do you want to keep the result in the Chevron case? And he literally said, well, with respect to Justice Gorsuch's mother's EPA, I think she got she got it right. Basically, it's just it's so wild, like how messy that entire scene is.

The lawyer who is challenging Chevron was asked, you know, do you want to keep the result in the Chevron case? And he literally said, well, with respect to Justice Gorsuch's mother's EPA, I think she got she got it right. Basically, it's just it's so wild, like how messy that entire scene is.

The lawyer who is challenging Chevron was asked, you know, do you want to keep the result in the Chevron case? And he literally said, well, with respect to Justice Gorsuch's mother's EPA, I think she got she got it right. Basically, it's just it's so wild, like how messy that entire scene is.

Well, so yeah, she was deciding basically when power plants needed permits in order to construct new pollution-emitting devices under the statute. The statute has rules that's like, okay, if you make a new device, new stationary source, you need a permit.

Well, so yeah, she was deciding basically when power plants needed permits in order to construct new pollution-emitting devices under the statute. The statute has rules that's like, okay, if you make a new device, new stationary source, you need a permit.

Well, so yeah, she was deciding basically when power plants needed permits in order to construct new pollution-emitting devices under the statute. The statute has rules that's like, okay, if you make a new device, new stationary source, you need a permit.

And she said that doesn't include when an existing power plant makes new pollution-emitting devices within the power plant, as opposed to making an entirely new power plant. Yeah.

And she said that doesn't include when an existing power plant makes new pollution-emitting devices within the power plant, as opposed to making an entirely new power plant. Yeah.

And she said that doesn't include when an existing power plant makes new pollution-emitting devices within the power plant, as opposed to making an entirely new power plant. Yeah.

So the first chapter in the book is partially about the rise of originalism. And I'm definitely sympathetic to the idea that for some people, originalism was this kind of pure, on its own, inherently correct method of interpreting the Constitution.

So the first chapter in the book is partially about the rise of originalism. And I'm definitely sympathetic to the idea that for some people, originalism was this kind of pure, on its own, inherently correct method of interpreting the Constitution.

So the first chapter in the book is partially about the rise of originalism. And I'm definitely sympathetic to the idea that for some people, originalism was this kind of pure, on its own, inherently correct method of interpreting the Constitution.

But originalism to other people was also this intuitive way of explaining why certain decisions of the Warren court, as well as Roe versus Wade, was wrong. Right. Like they knew they had an intuition that, of course, these things cannot be correct. And originalism was an easy way of explaining why that was so. And then for other people, originalism was a way of advancing an ideological agenda.

But originalism to other people was also this intuitive way of explaining why certain decisions of the Warren court, as well as Roe versus Wade, was wrong. Right. Like they knew they had an intuition that, of course, these things cannot be correct. And originalism was an easy way of explaining why that was so. And then for other people, originalism was a way of advancing an ideological agenda.