Tanya Mosley

Estal's new book, Bad Law, Ten Popular Laws That Are Ruining America, mixes humor with deep analysis to argue that our laws on immigration, religious freedom, abortion, and voting rights are actually making life worse than better. They've caused, he argues, massive social and political harm and don't reflect the will of most Americans.

Estal's new book, Bad Law, Ten Popular Laws That Are Ruining America, mixes humor with deep analysis to argue that our laws on immigration, religious freedom, abortion, and voting rights are actually making life worse than better. They've caused, he argues, massive social and political harm and don't reflect the will of most Americans.

Ellie Mistal is a legal analyst and justice correspondent for The Nation and the legal editor of the More Perfect podcast on the Supreme Court for Radiolab. He's also an Alfred Knobler Fellow at Type Media Center and the author of Allow Me to Retort, A Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution. And Ellie Mistal, as you always seem to do, you've made this subject both funny and informational.

Ellie Mistal is a legal analyst and justice correspondent for The Nation and the legal editor of the More Perfect podcast on the Supreme Court for Radiolab. He's also an Alfred Knobler Fellow at Type Media Center and the author of Allow Me to Retort, A Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution. And Ellie Mistal, as you always seem to do, you've made this subject both funny and informational.

Ellie Mistal is a legal analyst and justice correspondent for The Nation and the legal editor of the More Perfect podcast on the Supreme Court for Radiolab. He's also an Alfred Knobler Fellow at Type Media Center and the author of Allow Me to Retort, A Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution. And Ellie Mistal, as you always seem to do, you've made this subject both funny and informational.

So we'll be laughing today to keep from crying. Thank you so much for this book and welcome to Fresh Air.

So we'll be laughing today to keep from crying. Thank you so much for this book and welcome to Fresh Air.

So we'll be laughing today to keep from crying. Thank you so much for this book and welcome to Fresh Air.

Okay, so in each chapter of the book, you give an analysis of a law that you say is ruining America. There are 10 of them. How did you go about choosing which laws to focus on?

Okay, so in each chapter of the book, you give an analysis of a law that you say is ruining America. There are 10 of them. How did you go about choosing which laws to focus on?

Okay, so in each chapter of the book, you give an analysis of a law that you say is ruining America. There are 10 of them. How did you go about choosing which laws to focus on?

You are saying that these laws aren't basically imperfect, like the other types of laws that you mentioned. you're arguing that their very function is to harm.

You are saying that these laws aren't basically imperfect, like the other types of laws that you mentioned. you're arguing that their very function is to harm.

You are saying that these laws aren't basically imperfect, like the other types of laws that you mentioned. you're arguing that their very function is to harm.

I want to get to something I said when I introduced you, that you feel like before 1965, really all laws before 1965 should be abolished by and large. The United States legal system relies so heavily, though, on judicial precedent. So almost everything goes back to what happened before it.

I want to get to something I said when I introduced you, that you feel like before 1965, really all laws before 1965 should be abolished by and large. The United States legal system relies so heavily, though, on judicial precedent. So almost everything goes back to what happened before it.

I want to get to something I said when I introduced you, that you feel like before 1965, really all laws before 1965 should be abolished by and large. The United States legal system relies so heavily, though, on judicial precedent. So almost everything goes back to what happened before it.

So your feelings that everything before 1965 is kind of in direct opposition to what America is most proud of. Can you explain that argument a little bit more?

So your feelings that everything before 1965 is kind of in direct opposition to what America is most proud of. Can you explain that argument a little bit more?

So your feelings that everything before 1965 is kind of in direct opposition to what America is most proud of. Can you explain that argument a little bit more?