Judicial Philosophies Are Way Overrated with Mark Tushnet - Episode 192
Kathryn Rubino chats with Harvard Law’s Prof. Mark Tushnet, exploring his new book, “Who Am I to Judge?” Tushnet critiques the Supreme Court’s originalism and questions the narrow experience of justices. A must-listen to rethink judicial norms and hear Tushnet’s engaging perspectives on ideal court nominations and even the question of favorite books!
Highlights
- The genesis of a legal career: from political science to law school.
- Critique of judicial review’s evolution since the 1970s.
- Democrats rely on courts against the Trump administration.
- Background of the book “Who Am I to Judge?”
- Insight on Supreme Court composition change over generations.
- Judges’ uniformity influencing mediocre decisions.
- Originalism in academic vs judicial contexts.
- Evaluating Supreme Court nominees on broader life experiences.
- Predictions for Trump’s potential future nominees.
Episode Sponsored By
https://www.lexisnexis.com/lexisplus
Links and Resources
https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300277029/who-am-i-to-judge/
Subscribe, Share and Review
To get the next episode subscribe with your favorite podcast player.
