"Lawless: Leah Litman's Critique of the Supreme Court's Conservative Agenda"
Read "Lawless: Leah Litman's Critique of the Supreme Court's Conservative Agenda" on WALY Radio
"Lawless: Leah Litman's Critique of the Supreme Court's Conservative Agenda"
[!CDATA[Leah Litman, cohost of "Strict Scrutiny," is a law professor at the University of Michigan and a former law clerk for Justice Anthony Kennedy. In her book "Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes," Litman criticizes the current Supreme Court for abandoning legal reasoning and facts in favor of a far-right agenda. She highlights cases like Mahmoud v. Taylor, where Justice Alito misinterpreted a children's book to fit his views, showcasing the court's conservative grievance-driven jurisprudence. Litman points out how Justices like Alito and Gorsuch have strayed from basic legal principles, mischaracterizing facts to suit their ideologies. The court's decisions in cases like 303 Creative and Shelby County v. Holder demonstrate a trend of disregarding facts and engaging with far-right conspiracy theories. Litman argues that the court's conservative majority, including Chief Justice Roberts, is aligned with the Republican Party's agenda, despite claims of moderation. In a recent case involving Venezuelan immigrants facing deportation, the court intervened to prevent their expulsion to El Salvador, potentially saving their lives. Litman suggests that the court's actions may have been a response to the administration's defiance of previous court orders. She emphasizes the court's role in checking executive power and ensuring adherence to the law. Litman discusses the court's handling of cases challenging Trump's policies, such as the Affordable Care Act lawsuit and the ongoing tariff dispute. She notes that while the court often aligns with Trump's agenda, there are instances where it rejects his requests, indicating some divergence from his positions. Litman highlights the court's broader commitment to conservative ideals beyond Christian nationalism, particularly in voting rights cases. Despite the Supreme Court's conservative majority and its alignment with a far-right agenda, Litman encourages people not to lose hope. She advises challenging the court's decisions through legislative action and public discourse. Litman finds hope in public opinion polls that show a majority of Americans do not support the court's extreme views, suggesting potential for change in the future.]]