Approach the Bench
WEEK 29: Sarah Isgur on the War Fracturing the Legal Right Welcome back to Approach the Bench. This week we sit down with Sarah Isgur — SCOTUSblog editor, Advisory Opinions co-host, ABC News legal analyst, and author of Last Branch Standing. Before all of that: Harvard Law '08, Federalist Society president, veteran of three presidential campaigns, DOJ spokesperson during the Mueller investigation, and the subject of one of the more memorable hiring sagas in recent media history. We open near Harvard Law, where Sarah led the Federalist Society under then-Dean Elena Kagan. What is it actually like holding conservative convictions in an environment that mostly doesn't share them? Sarah walks us through Kagan's reputation for genuine even-handedness, shares a memorable story about Kagan as Attorney General and later as Justice, and reflects on what it means to be openly on the right in the most elite corners of the legal academy. From there, we get into the core of Sarah's new book and the central fight now consuming the legal right: process vs. outcome. Why does Sarah call the Court the "last branch standing"? We use the recent Alien Enemies Act rulings as a live case study — including Matt Walsh's call for Trump to ignore the Court and the remarkable moment when deportation flights to El Salvador continued after Judge Boasberg's order, met only by the Salvadoran president's "Oopsie — too late." We press Sarah on the strongest version of the outcome-first argument, what process is actually for, and whether a coherent defense of the Court requires accepting results you hate. We also ask her to help two originalists effectively counter Common Good Constitutionalism on campus — Adrian Vermeule's rising alternative to originalism that asks judges to incorporate a Catholic vision of the common good into their reasoning. Then we shift to our politics. Does it matter if a political leader is decent? Has the discounting of character produced a grifter class on the right, and fueled the rise of figures like Nick Fuentes and the culture of "vice signaling"? We wrestle with whether a kind "heretic" is more dangerous than an indecent ally, what a decency framework offers young people who've only ever known an indecent style of politics, and whether Sarah fears for the future of the GOP. We close, of course, with Girl Problems. We ask about that date with Ben Shapiro. And we settle a longstanding debate from a Dispatch "Not Worth Your Time" segment: manual transmission — green flag, deal breaker, or doesn't matter? Email approachthebenchquestions@gmail.com with your questions/comments or submit a voice memo at https://www.speakpipe.com/approachthebench [https://www.speakpipe.com/approachthebench] for a chance to be featured on the show! You can also submit anonymous comments through this Google Form: https://forms.gle/9Zjxzkpwajivx19z8 [https://forms.gle/9Zjxzkpwajivx19z8] 00:00 Introduction 04:35 Two Harvard Laws 14:54 Attorney General Prediction? 16:24 Sarah’s New Book!24:09 Process v. Outcome (A Split in the Legal Right) 51:54 Decency in Politics 01:02:40 Girl Problems
35 episodios
Comentarios
0Sé la primera persona en comentar
¡Regístrate ahora y únete a la comunidad de Approach the Bench!