1
00:00:01,440 --> 00:00:04,240
Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff You Should Know, a production of I

2
00:00:04,360 --> 00:00:13,200
Speaker 1: Heart Radio. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh,

3
00:00:13,200 --> 00:00:16,520
Speaker 1: and there's Chuck and Jerry's here too, and this is

4
00:00:16,600 --> 00:00:20,239
Speaker 1: stuff you should know. And boy do we mean it.

5
00:00:20,360 --> 00:00:23,079
Speaker 1: This is stuff you should know. Even though I have

6
00:00:23,160 --> 00:00:26,240
Speaker 1: to admit, Chuck, I don't think I've ever gotten sleepier

7
00:00:26,840 --> 00:00:29,760
Speaker 1: than I was when I was researching this this episode.

8
00:00:31,160 --> 00:00:34,400
Speaker 1: You know, I've learned more about the law since we

9
00:00:34,520 --> 00:00:38,159
Speaker 1: got this job than I ever wanted to or intended

10
00:00:38,200 --> 00:00:42,280
Speaker 1: to write. Uh, some of like, you know, just because

11
00:00:42,280 --> 00:00:44,159
Speaker 1: we have work contracts for the first time. So some

12
00:00:44,240 --> 00:00:47,239
Speaker 1: of it's because of that, some of it because of

13
00:00:47,240 --> 00:00:49,720
Speaker 1: all the trouble we get in, all the trouble we've

14
00:00:49,720 --> 00:00:53,159
Speaker 1: gotten in over the years. And then we just kind

15
00:00:53,159 --> 00:00:57,320
Speaker 1: of covered a lot of stuff legally speaking. And it's

16
00:00:57,360 --> 00:01:01,200
Speaker 1: interesting the law it is it is. And this one

17
00:01:01,360 --> 00:01:04,400
Speaker 1: was like it was kind of tough because Olivia helped

18
00:01:04,440 --> 00:01:07,440
Speaker 1: us out with this, and it was like it's a

19
00:01:07,600 --> 00:01:12,000
Speaker 1: really unless you're in the legal profession one way or another,

20
00:01:13,000 --> 00:01:17,880
Speaker 1: Like it's really dry, like incredibly dry. But if you

21
00:01:17,920 --> 00:01:22,920
Speaker 1: can just chip past that crusty dryness, and it takes

22
00:01:22,920 --> 00:01:25,399
Speaker 1: a lot, Yeah, it gets a little moisture the further

23
00:01:25,440 --> 00:01:27,160
Speaker 1: you get in, But finally you get to the rich

24
00:01:27,240 --> 00:01:31,240
Speaker 1: new Gute center and there you realize, WHOA, this is

25
00:01:31,280 --> 00:01:35,520
Speaker 1: actually super important because what we're talking about legal precedents

26
00:01:35,600 --> 00:01:39,160
Speaker 1: um kind of guides our society and a lot of

27
00:01:39,319 --> 00:01:41,840
Speaker 1: a lot of ways beyond just this is law. This

28
00:01:41,920 --> 00:01:44,560
Speaker 1: is not law, UM, this is illegal. You can do

29
00:01:44,600 --> 00:01:48,520
Speaker 1: this like that. We actually organize our lives in surprising

30
00:01:48,520 --> 00:01:52,120
Speaker 1: ways according to what's legal and what's not. And as

31
00:01:52,280 --> 00:01:55,120
Speaker 1: if the law is steady and stable, which is the

32
00:01:55,160 --> 00:01:58,120
Speaker 1: point of you know, relying on legal precedence, as we'll find,

33
00:01:58,440 --> 00:02:00,840
Speaker 1: then you know, society and he can kind of grow

34
00:02:00,880 --> 00:02:03,160
Speaker 1: and experiment and try new things because the law part

35
00:02:03,280 --> 00:02:05,880
Speaker 1: is covered. But if the law is going to change

36
00:02:05,920 --> 00:02:09,640
Speaker 1: every couple of years, it makes it really hard to um,

37
00:02:09,720 --> 00:02:13,320
Speaker 1: be in a gay marriage, or start a business or

38
00:02:13,520 --> 00:02:16,880
Speaker 1: invest in a like kind of a risky new technology,

39
00:02:16,919 --> 00:02:19,720
Speaker 1: because there's you can't rely on the law being stable.

40
00:02:19,760 --> 00:02:22,840
Speaker 1: So it makes life for us unstable. And I didn't

41
00:02:22,840 --> 00:02:26,560
Speaker 1: really realize just how much of a just an effect

42
00:02:26,639 --> 00:02:29,360
Speaker 1: that that law has, like an unseen effect on just

43
00:02:29,400 --> 00:02:31,360
Speaker 1: our day to day lives, because you don't think about

44
00:02:31,400 --> 00:02:34,160
Speaker 1: that kind of thing. But until you start researching something

45
00:02:34,200 --> 00:02:37,880
Speaker 1: like this, right, and or until you get slapped with

46
00:02:37,919 --> 00:02:41,120
Speaker 1: that lawsuit, and all of a sudden you're like, what, uh,

47
00:02:41,280 --> 00:02:48,720
Speaker 1: so much about the law too, is uh attorney's love words? Yes? Um,

48
00:02:48,840 --> 00:02:51,200
Speaker 1: that the simple I mean, anyone who's ever even if

49
00:02:51,200 --> 00:02:54,679
Speaker 1: you've never dealt with an attorney, great congratulations. I'm not

50
00:02:54,680 --> 00:02:57,000
Speaker 1: saying attorneys are bad, but that means you, you know,

51
00:02:57,400 --> 00:03:00,840
Speaker 1: you have a blissfully simplistic way of living that is

52
00:03:01,240 --> 00:03:04,560
Speaker 1: to be admired. But uh, you've probably clicked on in

53
00:03:04,680 --> 00:03:07,560
Speaker 1: terms of service or something, and you know that's all

54
00:03:07,639 --> 00:03:11,680
Speaker 1: legal words. It's all legal wording, like those you know,

55
00:03:12,040 --> 00:03:14,799
Speaker 1: nine hundred thousand words to sign up for a website

56
00:03:14,880 --> 00:03:18,440
Speaker 1: or whatever, or to download an app. Those are words

57
00:03:18,560 --> 00:03:23,200
Speaker 1: written by attorneys. And so much of law is so

58
00:03:23,320 --> 00:03:29,000
Speaker 1: specific to it can hinge on the wrong couple of

59
00:03:29,000 --> 00:03:34,320
Speaker 1: words that a well meaning jurists typed up in their decision.

60
00:03:34,440 --> 00:03:36,400
Speaker 1: Just a couple of things can really change things. A

61
00:03:36,400 --> 00:03:39,960
Speaker 1: couple of words, because it's all about those words and

62
00:03:40,000 --> 00:03:44,200
Speaker 1: how those words are interpreted by others. And um, I

63
00:03:44,200 --> 00:03:46,040
Speaker 1: just I don't know that part about it. I find

64
00:03:46,080 --> 00:03:49,400
Speaker 1: pretty fascinating and I think every attorney I know really

65
00:03:49,520 --> 00:03:55,560
Speaker 1: like UM values words. Let's just say that, and not like,

66
00:03:55,600 --> 00:03:57,720
Speaker 1: oh because it could charge to it. I mean, you know,

67
00:03:57,760 --> 00:04:00,520
Speaker 1: they value like boy, you better be careful about how

68
00:04:00,560 --> 00:04:03,280
Speaker 1: you say something. You know. Yeah, it's true, which really

69
00:04:03,320 --> 00:04:06,760
Speaker 1: doesn't jibe with me because I'm pretty hyperbolic, and I

70
00:04:06,840 --> 00:04:09,920
Speaker 1: just assume everybody's going to understand that I'm being hyperbolic.

71
00:04:10,000 --> 00:04:13,200
Speaker 1: But that's not always the case. Especially, I guess now

72
00:04:13,400 --> 00:04:15,200
Speaker 1: that I think about it, it's when I'm talking to

73
00:04:15,360 --> 00:04:19,360
Speaker 1: lawyers that it really gets lost. Uh. So I guess

74
00:04:19,400 --> 00:04:24,400
Speaker 1: we should go back to the early eleven hundreds, uh,

75
00:04:24,440 --> 00:04:29,080
Speaker 1: specifically eleven fifty four, when Henry the second Um kind

76
00:04:29,080 --> 00:04:32,320
Speaker 1: of codified the fact that they were going to be

77
00:04:32,360 --> 00:04:35,200
Speaker 1: in England was going to be working on something called

78
00:04:35,279 --> 00:04:38,360
Speaker 1: common law, or at least towards something called common law,

79
00:04:38,400 --> 00:04:41,120
Speaker 1: because you'll see, it takes precedent and common law and

80
00:04:41,200 --> 00:04:43,040
Speaker 1: this kind of thing takes a long time to really

81
00:04:43,040 --> 00:04:46,000
Speaker 1: take hold, uh for a lot of reasons we'll get to.

82
00:04:46,120 --> 00:04:49,839
Speaker 1: But it was common law because they said, hey, right now,

83
00:04:49,880 --> 00:04:54,239
Speaker 1: we're deciding these cases all over the land and everyone

84
00:04:54,279 --> 00:04:56,200
Speaker 1: has their own opinion, and it's a bit of a mess.

85
00:04:56,240 --> 00:04:59,400
Speaker 1: So maybe if we had one sort of common law

86
00:04:59,480 --> 00:05:02,919
Speaker 1: for all the kingdom and there were you know, we

87
00:05:02,920 --> 00:05:05,880
Speaker 1: could refer to that law and these decisions to make

88
00:05:06,440 --> 00:05:09,279
Speaker 1: decisions on down the line, that might be a pretty

89
00:05:09,320 --> 00:05:12,520
Speaker 1: smart thing. And it was and it is yeah, because

90
00:05:12,520 --> 00:05:14,720
Speaker 1: I mean the stuff that they were doing locally was like,

91
00:05:14,760 --> 00:05:17,279
Speaker 1: if you couldn't tell the truth between you know, a

92
00:05:17,320 --> 00:05:20,320
Speaker 1: plane iff and a defendant, you had them both snatch

93
00:05:20,360 --> 00:05:23,360
Speaker 1: a rock out of a pot of boiling water. I'm

94
00:05:23,360 --> 00:05:27,200
Speaker 1: not kidding, and then whoever whoever healed fastest was telling

95
00:05:27,200 --> 00:05:30,200
Speaker 1: the truth, and then you would execute the one who

96
00:05:30,240 --> 00:05:33,240
Speaker 1: healed slower. Like that was the kind of legal stuff

97
00:05:33,279 --> 00:05:35,719
Speaker 1: you would face like at this time. So Henry the

98
00:05:35,760 --> 00:05:38,120
Speaker 1: second the idea that he came up with common law

99
00:05:38,120 --> 00:05:39,839
Speaker 1: and said, all this is nuts, We're just gonna have

100
00:05:39,880 --> 00:05:42,720
Speaker 1: one law for all of England. Um. It was really

101
00:05:42,760 --> 00:05:45,479
Speaker 1: forward thinking. And when you dig into it a little more,

102
00:05:45,560 --> 00:05:49,320
Speaker 1: he established trial by jury um the concept of circuit

103
00:05:49,400 --> 00:05:53,720
Speaker 1: courts um. That that comes from this time when judges

104
00:05:53,760 --> 00:05:57,000
Speaker 1: would travel around and and go to like different localities

105
00:05:57,040 --> 00:05:59,719
Speaker 1: to hear cases, and the fact that they weren't rooted

106
00:05:59,720 --> 00:06:04,120
Speaker 1: to one specific locale meant that that was much more

107
00:06:04,160 --> 00:06:07,000
Speaker 1: difficult to corrupt them. There's a lot of really forward

108
00:06:07,000 --> 00:06:10,520
Speaker 1: thinking stuff and the basis of it, Chuck. The common

109
00:06:10,600 --> 00:06:14,200
Speaker 1: law formed the foundation of not just England's law, but

110
00:06:14,240 --> 00:06:18,159
Speaker 1: basically every country that was colonized by England, including the

111
00:06:18,279 --> 00:06:22,840
Speaker 1: United States. We have a common law system, which is um,

112
00:06:24,040 --> 00:06:25,919
Speaker 1: I don't want to see the opposite, but it's the

113
00:06:26,320 --> 00:06:30,120
Speaker 1: It's one of two basic ways that you can conduct

114
00:06:30,120 --> 00:06:33,520
Speaker 1: your society legally, and the other one is civil law. Right,

115
00:06:33,960 --> 00:06:36,480
Speaker 1: even though Henry the Second was still like it's still

116
00:06:36,480 --> 00:06:40,159
Speaker 1: like to bob for apples and bats of acid because

117
00:06:40,200 --> 00:06:44,279
Speaker 1: that's just fun. Sure, Yes, civil law is not the

118
00:06:44,320 --> 00:06:47,400
Speaker 1: way we went Um. That was you know, it was

119
00:06:47,480 --> 00:06:50,440
Speaker 1: kind of developed around the same time and Europe back

120
00:06:50,480 --> 00:06:53,359
Speaker 1: in the day. But that's uh. Common law was the

121
00:06:53,400 --> 00:06:56,360
Speaker 1: smarter approach. And what we got out, what we realized

122
00:06:56,400 --> 00:06:59,200
Speaker 1: early on with common laws was what we needed to

123
00:06:59,240 --> 00:07:01,640
Speaker 1: adhereby was a principle that you've heard a lot kind

124
00:07:01,640 --> 00:07:05,120
Speaker 1: of lately. It's a Latin term meaning let the decision stand,

125
00:07:05,680 --> 00:07:10,920
Speaker 1: uh star a decisive right. And that's that big deal. Yeah,

126
00:07:10,960 --> 00:07:13,560
Speaker 1: And that's I mean, it's not like Henry the Second

127
00:07:13,600 --> 00:07:15,600
Speaker 1: came up with common law, and said and also it's

128
00:07:15,680 --> 00:07:17,559
Speaker 1: it's going to be based on this concept of starry

129
00:07:17,600 --> 00:07:21,720
Speaker 1: decisives that actually evolved over time. And the idea behind

130
00:07:21,760 --> 00:07:26,840
Speaker 1: starry decisives is if there's a good decision made by

131
00:07:26,600 --> 00:07:32,480
Speaker 1: a judge, um, then later judgments about cases that have

132
00:07:32,920 --> 00:07:36,360
Speaker 1: some similarities are a lot in common with that case

133
00:07:36,480 --> 00:07:39,480
Speaker 1: that the original decision was made on have to follow

134
00:07:39,560 --> 00:07:44,239
Speaker 1: that same precedent. It's a legal kid necessarily say again,

135
00:07:44,520 --> 00:07:46,760
Speaker 1: I don't even know that I would agree that it's

136
00:07:46,880 --> 00:07:50,440
Speaker 1: based on a good decision, because originally it was like

137
00:07:50,480 --> 00:07:53,360
Speaker 1: they even said it was as long as it wasn't

138
00:07:53,400 --> 00:07:57,440
Speaker 1: flatly absurd or unjust. And they have said later on

139
00:07:57,600 --> 00:08:00,120
Speaker 1: that like and well we'll get to it. But know,

140
00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:04,640
Speaker 1: the decisions don't have to be perfect, right right, the

141
00:08:04,960 --> 00:08:07,360
Speaker 1: I guess what I meant by good was good meaning

142
00:08:07,440 --> 00:08:11,320
Speaker 1: like not like the judge wasn't wearing a tinfoil hat

143
00:08:11,400 --> 00:08:13,600
Speaker 1: and sentenced the person to like eat their own poop.

144
00:08:13,840 --> 00:08:17,600
Speaker 1: I mean good like they like, it was reasonable, it

145
00:08:17,680 --> 00:08:20,400
Speaker 1: was thought out, it was you know, deliberative, like it

146
00:08:20,440 --> 00:08:23,880
Speaker 1: was a sound judicial opinion, whether it actually was good

147
00:08:23,960 --> 00:08:28,480
Speaker 1: or not. Right, Okay, I'll buy that. But here's the deal.

148
00:08:28,520 --> 00:08:31,840
Speaker 1: Like I said earlier, like applying common law and applying

149
00:08:31,880 --> 00:08:35,079
Speaker 1: precedent is something that takes a long long time because

150
00:08:35,200 --> 00:08:37,200
Speaker 1: early on, I mean for a lot of reasons, but

151
00:08:37,240 --> 00:08:39,720
Speaker 1: one of the main reasons is early on the courts

152
00:08:39,720 --> 00:08:43,240
Speaker 1: were such a mess. They didn't even start recording, really,

153
00:08:43,880 --> 00:08:48,000
Speaker 1: um their decisions in a really meaningful way until like

154
00:08:48,480 --> 00:08:51,800
Speaker 1: the mid eighteen hundreds in England the early eighteen hundreds

155
00:08:51,800 --> 00:08:54,320
Speaker 1: in the US, so they may not have even known

156
00:08:54,400 --> 00:08:57,160
Speaker 1: there might have been precedent in any given case. But

157
00:08:57,360 --> 00:09:00,600
Speaker 1: starting like I said, early eighteen hundreds, in mid eight

158
00:09:00,800 --> 00:09:03,800
Speaker 1: hundreds in England, we started to have a real sort

159
00:09:03,840 --> 00:09:08,160
Speaker 1: of president. Yes, I guess, yeah for sure. And we

160
00:09:08,200 --> 00:09:10,760
Speaker 1: talked about that in our Unsung Heroes of the Court,

161
00:09:10,840 --> 00:09:15,040
Speaker 1: with our I think our transcriptionist segment, right, I think so,

162
00:09:15,480 --> 00:09:18,520
Speaker 1: I think so too. But the reason that, um, that

163
00:09:18,600 --> 00:09:21,720
Speaker 1: you have this this emphasis on precedence is because in

164
00:09:21,760 --> 00:09:26,280
Speaker 1: a common law system, law kind of builds on judgment

165
00:09:26,320 --> 00:09:28,800
Speaker 1: after judgment, and the more judgments you have about like

166
00:09:28,840 --> 00:09:33,199
Speaker 1: a particular um the topic or or you know, case

167
00:09:33,320 --> 00:09:37,880
Speaker 1: or something, the more well rounded and in robust the

168
00:09:38,000 --> 00:09:42,160
Speaker 1: idea of the law concerning that goes. Like in a

169
00:09:42,280 --> 00:09:46,560
Speaker 1: civil or in a common law society, the legislature makes

170
00:09:46,559 --> 00:09:49,200
Speaker 1: a law, but it's not you know, they don't try

171
00:09:49,200 --> 00:09:52,720
Speaker 1: to lay out every single law with every single possible

172
00:09:52,760 --> 00:09:54,880
Speaker 1: outcome that they can think of. That's what civil law

173
00:09:54,960 --> 00:09:57,520
Speaker 1: is based on. In common law, it's like they lay

174
00:09:57,559 --> 00:09:59,520
Speaker 1: it out, it kind of makes sense, it's open to

175
00:09:59,640 --> 00:10:01,960
Speaker 1: interpret cation. And then people start suing each other, and

176
00:10:02,000 --> 00:10:04,040
Speaker 1: then over the years the judges figure it out. But

177
00:10:04,080 --> 00:10:07,800
Speaker 1: they figured it out by basing their assumptions on the

178
00:10:07,880 --> 00:10:13,040
Speaker 1: previous rulings of other judges. Right, that sounds like a

179
00:10:13,080 --> 00:10:15,600
Speaker 1: good breaking point. I think so too. I'm at my

180
00:10:15,679 --> 00:10:19,719
Speaker 1: breaking point. No, not already. Ye, all right, Josh is

181
00:10:19,760 --> 00:10:22,120
Speaker 1: out in the first third, but we'll press on and

182
00:10:22,280 --> 00:10:24,040
Speaker 1: we'll talk about the U S system right after this

183
00:10:37,840 --> 00:10:56,200
Speaker 1: stopt Alright, so Josh is gone, everybody, I'm gonna do

184
00:10:56,280 --> 00:10:59,079
Speaker 1: the rest of this one solo. So we're just gonna

185
00:10:59,120 --> 00:11:05,480
Speaker 1: talk talk about car tunes and breakfast cereals. Josh, I'm

186
00:11:05,520 --> 00:11:08,760
Speaker 1: back up. I couldn't leave you, Chuck. Uh. So, if

187
00:11:08,800 --> 00:11:11,160
Speaker 1: we're gonna talk about the the U S system, as

188
00:11:11,160 --> 00:11:13,040
Speaker 1: far as legal precedent goes, we need to talk a

189
00:11:13,080 --> 00:11:17,080
Speaker 1: little bit obviously about the constitution. Uh, the Constitution of

190
00:11:17,120 --> 00:11:20,520
Speaker 1: the US doesn't really talk a lot about how the

191
00:11:20,520 --> 00:11:23,880
Speaker 1: court system should operate. Uh, they don't talk about precedent.

192
00:11:24,000 --> 00:11:27,760
Speaker 1: This is something that the United States. Uh you know,

193
00:11:28,160 --> 00:11:30,440
Speaker 1: it goes from the top down here in the US,

194
00:11:30,520 --> 00:11:33,640
Speaker 1: and we'll talk about it gets really confusing at some

195
00:11:33,679 --> 00:11:36,600
Speaker 1: point as far as which courts bind with other courts

196
00:11:36,600 --> 00:11:40,000
Speaker 1: so that that mess will follow. But it goes top down.

197
00:11:40,040 --> 00:11:44,600
Speaker 1: So the Supreme Court is is really what ultimately matters

198
00:11:44,640 --> 00:11:47,480
Speaker 1: and what they decide about the really important cases because

199
00:11:47,679 --> 00:11:52,200
Speaker 1: everything binds upwards to them. But they didn't really like

200
00:11:52,720 --> 00:11:54,560
Speaker 1: they kind of made it up as they went. And

201
00:11:54,600 --> 00:11:57,400
Speaker 1: that's not to like knock the Supreme Court. It just

202
00:11:57,679 --> 00:11:59,800
Speaker 1: is to say there weren't any real rules in place

203
00:12:00,320 --> 00:12:02,800
Speaker 1: as far as this goes. But they realize early on,

204
00:12:03,360 --> 00:12:05,120
Speaker 1: and I think in nineteen thirty two is when it

205
00:12:05,160 --> 00:12:10,079
Speaker 1: really became serious when a justice named Lewis Brandeis of

206
00:12:10,160 --> 00:12:15,520
Speaker 1: Brandeis University fame. Oh yeah, yeah, of course, I wrote

207
00:12:15,520 --> 00:12:19,160
Speaker 1: in a descent in a case Burnett versus UH Coronado

208
00:12:19,440 --> 00:12:25,040
Speaker 1: Oil and Gas Company, UM, basically laid out what started

209
00:12:25,080 --> 00:12:28,080
Speaker 1: to decisive is all about for everyone to look back

210
00:12:28,160 --> 00:12:31,360
Speaker 1: on from then on and they have when he wrote,

211
00:12:31,400 --> 00:12:34,720
Speaker 1: in most matters, it is more important that the applicable

212
00:12:34,800 --> 00:12:37,720
Speaker 1: rule of law be settled than it be settled, right,

213
00:12:39,360 --> 00:12:41,560
Speaker 1: And that was what I was kind of referring to earlier.

214
00:12:41,600 --> 00:12:45,680
Speaker 1: He's he's basically basically saying, listen, courts aren't perfect, laws

215
00:12:45,679 --> 00:12:49,720
Speaker 1: aren't perfect. But what's really important, unless it's a really terrible,

216
00:12:49,840 --> 00:12:53,360
Speaker 1: terrible decision, is that we kind of come together and

217
00:12:53,400 --> 00:12:56,440
Speaker 1: agree that this is how it is. Uh. And then

218
00:12:56,480 --> 00:13:00,079
Speaker 1: he went on to kind of say, ultimately, like it,

219
00:13:00,320 --> 00:13:04,040
Speaker 1: you can't overturn precedent if it is really really bad. Yeah,

220
00:13:04,080 --> 00:13:07,800
Speaker 1: because if you didn't, if you just blindly followed precedent,

221
00:13:07,920 --> 00:13:11,080
Speaker 1: then you have the potential for a bad judgment, a

222
00:13:11,080 --> 00:13:16,160
Speaker 1: bad decision, infecting your society and your legal system. And

223
00:13:16,200 --> 00:13:18,160
Speaker 1: if you just have to follow it blindly even though

224
00:13:18,160 --> 00:13:21,080
Speaker 1: it's a really bad ruling, that's not good. So you

225
00:13:21,120 --> 00:13:25,120
Speaker 1: need to have an outlet to overturn those bad decisions.

226
00:13:25,760 --> 00:13:28,240
Speaker 1: But what Brandis was saying is, for the most part,

227
00:13:28,320 --> 00:13:30,400
Speaker 1: you want to just leave it alone. If it's even

228
00:13:30,520 --> 00:13:34,480
Speaker 1: remotely good, leave it alone. Let it But yeah, and

229
00:13:34,520 --> 00:13:37,120
Speaker 1: that's really to me. If you like middle of the

230
00:13:37,200 --> 00:13:41,160
Speaker 1: road stuff, started to cease. This is exactly what you want,

231
00:13:41,280 --> 00:13:44,959
Speaker 1: because it's like it's the it's the full crum between

232
00:13:45,800 --> 00:13:48,760
Speaker 1: going one direction where you just have like a whiplash

233
00:13:48,800 --> 00:13:51,200
Speaker 1: going on because law is changing all the time, and

234
00:13:51,240 --> 00:13:53,960
Speaker 1: then the other direction on the other end of the spectrum,

235
00:13:53,960 --> 00:13:56,800
Speaker 1: where the law just does not change, it is just

236
00:13:56,960 --> 00:14:00,600
Speaker 1: set in stone. And that's that. This is like, Okay,

237
00:14:00,640 --> 00:14:03,000
Speaker 1: you want to follow tradition, you want to observe custom

238
00:14:03,080 --> 00:14:05,400
Speaker 1: to have some stability, but at the same time, you

239
00:14:05,440 --> 00:14:08,280
Speaker 1: want to be able to let society evolve by having

240
00:14:08,520 --> 00:14:12,720
Speaker 1: the laws evolve as new ideas and concepts come around. Yeah,

241
00:14:12,760 --> 00:14:15,160
Speaker 1: it's it reminds me of one of my favorite I'm

242
00:14:15,160 --> 00:14:17,920
Speaker 1: not a big axiom guy, but there's a handful that

243
00:14:17,960 --> 00:14:21,120
Speaker 1: I really kind of informed my way of thinking, and

244
00:14:21,440 --> 00:14:23,840
Speaker 1: one is don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

245
00:14:24,600 --> 00:14:28,359
Speaker 1: That's that's always been as a sort of an underachiever

246
00:14:28,440 --> 00:14:31,920
Speaker 1: in life. It's always been one I really stood on,

247
00:14:32,080 --> 00:14:34,240
Speaker 1: And that's kind of what they're saying here. It's like, listen,

248
00:14:35,000 --> 00:14:37,600
Speaker 1: if we go for perfect, you're just gonna because law

249
00:14:37,640 --> 00:14:41,200
Speaker 1: is subjective to like, these justices are deciding things based

250
00:14:41,240 --> 00:14:44,120
Speaker 1: on what they think, based on other things. But ultimately

251
00:14:44,120 --> 00:14:47,120
Speaker 1: it's the subjective thing. So we can't just go back

252
00:14:47,120 --> 00:14:50,840
Speaker 1: and forth forever trying to get a perfect ruling on something. Right,

253
00:14:51,600 --> 00:14:54,080
Speaker 1: My favorite axiom is it has to be perfect or

254
00:14:54,080 --> 00:14:59,000
Speaker 1: else I'm a completely useless human. Oh no, oh yes,

255
00:15:00,120 --> 00:15:04,840
Speaker 1: So over time that concept of starry decisive when when

256
00:15:04,920 --> 00:15:07,760
Speaker 1: was it? It was like the I guess ninety two

257
00:15:07,760 --> 00:15:10,040
Speaker 1: with brand Ice. Yeah, that's when he kind of laid

258
00:15:10,040 --> 00:15:12,440
Speaker 1: the gauntlet down, and think about how meta that is.

259
00:15:12,480 --> 00:15:18,000
Speaker 1: He was establishing precedent about when to follow or overturned precedent.

260
00:15:18,960 --> 00:15:24,280
Speaker 1: Pretty amazing stuff that guy deserves, like a sure university

261
00:15:24,360 --> 00:15:27,600
Speaker 1: named after there's a statue there, but over there better

262
00:15:27,640 --> 00:15:31,640
Speaker 1: be um. But over time, after brand Ice, you know,

263
00:15:31,720 --> 00:15:34,160
Speaker 1: said that, they were like, okay, well you know exactly

264
00:15:34,160 --> 00:15:37,240
Speaker 1: when is it okay to overturn the decision? And they've

265
00:15:37,240 --> 00:15:40,440
Speaker 1: actually come up with a handful of kind of guiding

266
00:15:40,520 --> 00:15:44,280
Speaker 1: bullet points that are appropriately laid out in bullet points

267
00:15:44,280 --> 00:15:47,560
Speaker 1: for us UM that just kind of say like, okay,

268
00:15:47,600 --> 00:15:49,520
Speaker 1: does it check this box? Is check that box? And

269
00:15:49,560 --> 00:15:53,200
Speaker 1: it's not like a perfect Scantron sheet where everything every

270
00:15:53,200 --> 00:15:55,120
Speaker 1: box is going to be filled out and you calculate

271
00:15:55,160 --> 00:15:57,120
Speaker 1: them all and you say, yes, it should be overturned. Like,

272
00:15:57,160 --> 00:16:00,200
Speaker 1: there's still a lot of subjectivity and weighing all of

273
00:16:00,240 --> 00:16:05,480
Speaker 1: this stuff, but it's pretty good guideline if you ask me, no, absolutely. Um. Well,

274
00:16:05,520 --> 00:16:07,720
Speaker 1: the first thing, and this is a little bit counterintuitive,

275
00:16:07,800 --> 00:16:13,640
Speaker 1: but it's easier to overturn a decision based on the

276
00:16:13,680 --> 00:16:18,880
Speaker 1: Constitution than it is a statutory law. And again that

277
00:16:18,920 --> 00:16:23,400
Speaker 1: seems counterintuitive because the Constitution can feel so locked in.

278
00:16:23,480 --> 00:16:25,920
Speaker 1: But basically what that means is is if it's just

279
00:16:25,960 --> 00:16:28,360
Speaker 1: statutory law, then you can change the law pretty easily.

280
00:16:28,720 --> 00:16:31,680
Speaker 1: Like the Constitution is very hard to get changed. So

281
00:16:31,760 --> 00:16:34,479
Speaker 1: it's easier to change a decision based on the Constitution

282
00:16:34,720 --> 00:16:39,080
Speaker 1: than the actual underlying constitution. Yeah, because Congress is going

283
00:16:39,200 --> 00:16:41,720
Speaker 1: to say, oh, yeah, we we we miss that one.

284
00:16:42,200 --> 00:16:46,400
Speaker 1: And then similarly to Congress can actually create laws to

285
00:16:46,600 --> 00:16:51,960
Speaker 1: overturn unpopular judicial rulings. Um, So they can make a

286
00:16:52,000 --> 00:16:54,400
Speaker 1: law that, you know, if everybody's really mad about, say

287
00:16:54,520 --> 00:16:58,440
Speaker 1: some judicial ruling, and Congress says, you know, our constituents

288
00:16:58,440 --> 00:16:59,800
Speaker 1: are really up in arms, let's make a law that

289
00:16:59,800 --> 00:17:02,520
Speaker 1: says the opposite of what that was just ruled. That

290
00:17:02,520 --> 00:17:06,679
Speaker 1: that law um takes precedence over every ruling, including that

291
00:17:06,760 --> 00:17:10,000
Speaker 1: Supreme Court ruling. So now judges have to follow that

292
00:17:10,080 --> 00:17:13,160
Speaker 1: law until new precedents are set that kind of adjust

293
00:17:13,200 --> 00:17:17,320
Speaker 1: it and make it evolve. That's right. Uh. The next

294
00:17:17,359 --> 00:17:20,920
Speaker 1: one is working something called workability, which is basically like,

295
00:17:21,080 --> 00:17:24,920
Speaker 1: how difficult in practice is it really to implement this

296
00:17:25,040 --> 00:17:28,960
Speaker 1: original decision? Uh? And if it's really difficult for lower

297
00:17:29,000 --> 00:17:32,640
Speaker 1: courts to to follow whatever that original decision was in practice,

298
00:17:32,680 --> 00:17:35,400
Speaker 1: then you may want to take another look at it. Yep.

299
00:17:36,080 --> 00:17:38,440
Speaker 1: Another one is reliance, and this one makes a lot

300
00:17:38,440 --> 00:17:43,200
Speaker 1: of sense to me too. It's um, really kind of um,

301
00:17:44,320 --> 00:17:46,560
Speaker 1: what's that word that people use when it's just kind

302
00:17:46,560 --> 00:17:50,480
Speaker 1: of like it lacks substance though it's it's not concrete.

303
00:17:50,520 --> 00:17:54,680
Speaker 1: It's kind of poofy coofy sounds great. I've never heard it,

304
00:17:54,720 --> 00:17:57,399
Speaker 1: but I like that word. If you're gonna go with

305
00:17:57,440 --> 00:17:59,399
Speaker 1: that from now on, So reliant it makes sense. But

306
00:17:59,440 --> 00:18:01,679
Speaker 1: it's a little fee I think legally speaking, because what

307
00:18:01,760 --> 00:18:06,480
Speaker 1: it's saying is if if this judgment was not quite right,

308
00:18:06,680 --> 00:18:10,680
Speaker 1: if the reasoning wasn't very good, if the deliberation wasn't perfect.

309
00:18:10,720 --> 00:18:15,560
Speaker 1: But it's become so enshrined in society that overturning it

310
00:18:15,600 --> 00:18:21,680
Speaker 1: would basically really mess society up, even temporarily. Um, then

311
00:18:21,760 --> 00:18:24,400
Speaker 1: you would not want to overturn that. That's UM. There's

312
00:18:24,440 --> 00:18:27,520
Speaker 1: a good example of the Miranda rights were under attack

313
00:18:27,560 --> 00:18:31,040
Speaker 1: in two thousand I guess from a case and Um,

314
00:18:31,160 --> 00:18:33,720
Speaker 1: the court I think, in a very narrow I think

315
00:18:33,760 --> 00:18:36,960
Speaker 1: five to four ruling said no Miranda should stay. It's

316
00:18:36,960 --> 00:18:39,920
Speaker 1: on it's based on a flawed interpretation of the Constitution.

317
00:18:40,520 --> 00:18:44,000
Speaker 1: But we've become so reliant on it to protect legal

318
00:18:44,080 --> 00:18:46,720
Speaker 1: rights of people accused of crimes that we're just gonna

319
00:18:46,800 --> 00:18:48,760
Speaker 1: leave it, they said, But it's already in all the

320
00:18:48,760 --> 00:18:53,880
Speaker 1: TV shows exactly. Lawn owner editors were just like, please don't,

321
00:18:53,920 --> 00:18:56,600
Speaker 1: please don't. Yeah, I mean, reliance is kind of the

322
00:18:56,680 --> 00:19:01,320
Speaker 1: it's too late to turn back now. Basically, Yeah, the

323
00:19:01,359 --> 00:19:03,920
Speaker 1: bell has been wrong, the genie's out of the bottle,

324
00:19:04,640 --> 00:19:08,760
Speaker 1: the smell is in your nose. That's my favorite. The

325
00:19:08,800 --> 00:19:12,760
Speaker 1: basically the next one is abandonment, which is basically UM,

326
00:19:12,800 --> 00:19:15,600
Speaker 1: when the court says this is old timey, Um, this

327
00:19:15,680 --> 00:19:19,480
Speaker 1: is antiquated. When they looked at Lawrence v. Texas in

328
00:19:19,520 --> 00:19:24,359
Speaker 1: two thousand three that overturned the previous ruling, UM about

329
00:19:24,440 --> 00:19:28,480
Speaker 1: private same sex as sodomy laws things like that. Uh,

330
00:19:28,520 --> 00:19:30,800
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court came along and said, oh, you know,

331
00:19:30,920 --> 00:19:33,199
Speaker 1: things have kind of changed and maybe we shouldn't be

332
00:19:33,200 --> 00:19:36,040
Speaker 1: in people's bedroom and forcing laws about how they want

333
00:19:36,080 --> 00:19:38,440
Speaker 1: to have sex. Yeah, they're like, we all just saw

334
00:19:38,520 --> 00:19:43,200
Speaker 1: Brokeback Mountain and really we really feel differently about such

335
00:19:43,200 --> 00:19:47,840
Speaker 1: a great love story they wrestled. So there's also legitimacy

336
00:19:47,960 --> 00:19:51,879
Speaker 1: to um, which is saying like, Okay, there's a really

337
00:19:51,920 --> 00:19:55,800
Speaker 1: good chance that if we start overturning previous decisions that

338
00:19:55,880 --> 00:19:59,600
Speaker 1: people have come to rely on that we're actually good decisions. Um,

339
00:19:59,640 --> 00:20:03,360
Speaker 1: that going to to harm the legitimacy of the Supreme

340
00:20:03,400 --> 00:20:07,600
Speaker 1: Court in the eyes of the public. I can't think

341
00:20:07,600 --> 00:20:11,760
Speaker 1: of any example, um, but that is it is something

342
00:20:11,800 --> 00:20:15,000
Speaker 1: that they take into account when they are considering overturning

343
00:20:15,040 --> 00:20:18,080
Speaker 1: something or not. That's right. Um. The next one, I'm

344
00:20:18,119 --> 00:20:21,600
Speaker 1: just going to call it the was it close. That's

345
00:20:21,600 --> 00:20:25,400
Speaker 1: when they can look back at a previous case and say,

346
00:20:25,840 --> 00:20:28,800
Speaker 1: you know, this was five four, there was a really

347
00:20:28,840 --> 00:20:33,320
Speaker 1: spirited descent it wasn't you know, it was maybe a

348
00:20:33,359 --> 00:20:37,000
Speaker 1: controversial case, but not necessarily but just really really close. Uh.

349
00:20:37,119 --> 00:20:41,240
Speaker 1: Then maybe you know, we could take another peek at it, right. Um,

350
00:20:41,280 --> 00:20:43,520
Speaker 1: there's also quality of reasoning. I've kind of hit on

351
00:20:43,560 --> 00:20:45,760
Speaker 1: that a couple of times that it's like, if you

352
00:20:45,800 --> 00:20:48,439
Speaker 1: can look back and look at the judgment and the

353
00:20:48,480 --> 00:20:51,480
Speaker 1: reasoning behind the judgment and it still makes sense, then

354
00:20:51,720 --> 00:20:53,919
Speaker 1: maybe kind of leave that law alone. If it's just

355
00:20:54,040 --> 00:20:58,639
Speaker 1: completely and equated, if it's um racist, if it just

356
00:20:58,680 --> 00:21:02,159
Speaker 1: doesn't jibe with the most of you know, society today,

357
00:21:02,200 --> 00:21:05,400
Speaker 1: then maybe it is ripe for being overturned or other laws,

358
00:21:05,400 --> 00:21:07,359
Speaker 1: like of other laws have come along since then to

359
00:21:07,480 --> 00:21:12,760
Speaker 1: kind of eroded or negated, or if facts have changed. Yeah,

360
00:21:12,760 --> 00:21:15,600
Speaker 1: that's a big one, especially when it comes to scientific

361
00:21:15,640 --> 00:21:18,439
Speaker 1: findings and stuff like like you find the moon is

362
00:21:18,560 --> 00:21:21,399
Speaker 1: not made of cheese, so cheesemakers no longer have to

363
00:21:21,400 --> 00:21:25,000
Speaker 1: pay a moon tax. That's a good example of real

364
00:21:25,200 --> 00:21:28,480
Speaker 1: real life. Uh was that off the cuff? Very nice? No,

365
00:21:28,720 --> 00:21:31,359
Speaker 1: I wrote it down. Let's still I could not think

366
00:21:31,359 --> 00:21:33,960
Speaker 1: of an example, and that is the best I could

367
00:21:34,000 --> 00:21:37,720
Speaker 1: come up with. Sad, that's really good. Uh. So here's

368
00:21:37,720 --> 00:21:42,000
Speaker 1: where judicial philosophy kind of comes into play, because when

369
00:21:42,040 --> 00:21:43,800
Speaker 1: it comes to being a jurist, as we've seen on

370
00:21:43,840 --> 00:21:47,359
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court, especially lately. Uh. There are a couple

371
00:21:47,440 --> 00:21:51,000
Speaker 1: of different ways you can go as far as looking

372
00:21:51,040 --> 00:21:56,200
Speaker 1: at the Constitution. You can be what's called an originalist, which, um,

373
00:21:56,200 --> 00:21:58,840
Speaker 1: you know, some originalists say, you know what, the only

374
00:21:58,840 --> 00:22:01,960
Speaker 1: thing that matters is what these founding fathers meant when

375
00:22:01,960 --> 00:22:04,760
Speaker 1: they wrote these laws hundreds of years ago. Yeah, so

376
00:22:04,880 --> 00:22:08,879
Speaker 1: like whatever happens in society today, however it applies to

377
00:22:08,960 --> 00:22:12,240
Speaker 1: the late eighteenth century, that is the law. That's what

378
00:22:12,359 --> 00:22:16,240
Speaker 1: the originalists think. And there are actually justices on the

379
00:22:16,240 --> 00:22:20,439
Speaker 1: Supreme Court who are fervent originalists, that's right. Uh. And

380
00:22:20,520 --> 00:22:23,840
Speaker 1: there are originalists that say, you know, what's happened in

381
00:22:23,880 --> 00:22:27,959
Speaker 1: the past two and thirty four years is uh some

382
00:22:28,040 --> 00:22:30,320
Speaker 1: of these decisions, a lot of them have subverted the

383
00:22:30,320 --> 00:22:34,560
Speaker 1: will of the and the intent of the founders. And

384
00:22:34,680 --> 00:22:39,800
Speaker 1: pragmatists come along and then say, duh exactly, because what

385
00:22:39,840 --> 00:22:44,359
Speaker 1: we would like to decide law based on is modern

386
00:22:44,680 --> 00:22:48,199
Speaker 1: times and uh, the context in which we live and

387
00:22:48,240 --> 00:22:51,800
Speaker 1: the impact on our society as it is today, and

388
00:22:51,880 --> 00:22:56,280
Speaker 1: those two things pushing and pulling is uh, as we've

389
00:22:56,760 --> 00:22:59,520
Speaker 1: you know, it's always been this way. But every I

390
00:22:59,520 --> 00:23:01,879
Speaker 1: think gener ration when they see the big decisions coming

391
00:23:01,880 --> 00:23:05,240
Speaker 1: down paid more attention to it. So right now, because

392
00:23:05,280 --> 00:23:07,919
Speaker 1: of Row, obviously everyone is paying a lot of attention

393
00:23:07,960 --> 00:23:12,320
Speaker 1: to this push and pull of originalists versus pragmatist but

394
00:23:12,400 --> 00:23:18,359
Speaker 1: also pragmatizing, but also the tension between originalists and people

395
00:23:18,400 --> 00:23:22,760
Speaker 1: who follow Starry Decisive too, there's a big tension between

396
00:23:22,800 --> 00:23:25,800
Speaker 1: that as well. Um and I was reading about originalism

397
00:23:25,880 --> 00:23:29,560
Speaker 1: Chuck and Clarence Thomas is like a hardcore died in

398
00:23:29,560 --> 00:23:34,880
Speaker 1: the wool originalist, like literally what the Founders literally meant

399
00:23:34,920 --> 00:23:38,240
Speaker 1: when they wrote the Constitution is law and anything beyond

400
00:23:38,280 --> 00:23:41,480
Speaker 1: that should not be law. And he if you read it,

401
00:23:41,560 --> 00:23:44,400
Speaker 1: he kind of makes a pretty good case. It makes

402
00:23:44,440 --> 00:23:47,119
Speaker 1: sense to an extent, But then you stop and realize

403
00:23:47,119 --> 00:23:50,119
Speaker 1: what he's talking about is a civil law society, a

404
00:23:50,240 --> 00:23:53,280
Speaker 1: law where you have a founding document of laws and

405
00:23:53,400 --> 00:23:59,159
Speaker 1: rules and regulations and it's super um specific and it

406
00:23:59,320 --> 00:24:02,119
Speaker 1: covers as any basis that possibly can, and then the

407
00:24:02,640 --> 00:24:06,480
Speaker 1: judiciary has a very limited role in in shaping those laws.

408
00:24:06,680 --> 00:24:09,040
Speaker 1: You come before a judge and they say, uh, did

409
00:24:09,040 --> 00:24:12,440
Speaker 1: you violate this this um article? Yes you did, Yes

410
00:24:12,520 --> 00:24:14,879
Speaker 1: you're guilty, or no you didn't know, you're not guilty.

411
00:24:14,920 --> 00:24:17,240
Speaker 1: That's the role of judges, and that sounds like Clarence

412
00:24:17,280 --> 00:24:20,520
Speaker 1: Thomas is like dream job. But he's in the wrong

413
00:24:20,600 --> 00:24:23,480
Speaker 1: kind of society because we have a civil law society

414
00:24:23,680 --> 00:24:27,320
Speaker 1: where judges are dependent upon to interpret the law correctly

415
00:24:27,440 --> 00:24:30,320
Speaker 1: and sensibly and in a way that applies to the

416
00:24:30,359 --> 00:24:34,080
Speaker 1: society at large. And that that really is intention with

417
00:24:34,119 --> 00:24:37,920
Speaker 1: originalism big time. Yeah. And I'm you know, no shock,

418
00:24:37,960 --> 00:24:40,159
Speaker 1: I'm a pragmatist, and I don't think you should like

419
00:24:41,080 --> 00:24:43,840
Speaker 1: just ditch the Constitution. But I think it's crazy to

420
00:24:43,920 --> 00:24:47,879
Speaker 1: think about in a hundred and fifty years in the

421
00:24:47,960 --> 00:24:51,600
Speaker 1: in the in the future where we're flying around and

422
00:24:51,600 --> 00:24:54,640
Speaker 1: and we look like Buck Rogers in the twenty first century. Man,

423
00:24:55,280 --> 00:24:57,800
Speaker 1: it'll be twenty second century. I can't wait. I'm gonna

424
00:24:57,840 --> 00:24:59,720
Speaker 1: be first in line to get that haircut to once

425
00:24:59,800 --> 00:25:03,159
Speaker 1: this over, jumpsuits come out. But it's crazy to me

426
00:25:03,200 --> 00:25:06,000
Speaker 1: to think about going back to a time when they

427
00:25:06,320 --> 00:25:10,280
Speaker 1: spelled the word time with a y, you know, and

428
00:25:10,359 --> 00:25:13,199
Speaker 1: say like, no, we still have to go back, you know,

429
00:25:13,600 --> 00:25:17,520
Speaker 1: four or five six years to what these uh, I mean,

430
00:25:17,520 --> 00:25:20,520
Speaker 1: the world just changes so much. I just it's crazy

431
00:25:20,560 --> 00:25:22,200
Speaker 1: to me that the law shouldn't change with it, and

432
00:25:22,240 --> 00:25:24,199
Speaker 1: the law has changed with it. I'm not, you know,

433
00:25:24,480 --> 00:25:26,760
Speaker 1: saying that it hasn't, But I don't know. It's a

434
00:25:26,760 --> 00:25:29,800
Speaker 1: little frustrating sometimes I'm kind of in between. I'm a

435
00:25:29,920 --> 00:25:33,480
Speaker 1: starry decisiveist, I guess you'd say, because I feel like

436
00:25:33,640 --> 00:25:36,199
Speaker 1: pragmatism can be a little whiplash eat. The law can

437
00:25:36,280 --> 00:25:39,359
Speaker 1: change a little too much, um, which we've seen, you know,

438
00:25:39,440 --> 00:25:42,840
Speaker 1: where one administration comes in and makes a bunch of rules,

439
00:25:42,880 --> 00:25:45,920
Speaker 1: and then the next administration comes in and and changes them,

440
00:25:45,960 --> 00:25:49,280
Speaker 1: and it's it's really tough to say, like run a

441
00:25:49,320 --> 00:25:52,000
Speaker 1: business like that or to live your life like that. Um.

442
00:25:52,040 --> 00:25:55,879
Speaker 1: But with starry decisives, it's it's veneration and respect to

443
00:25:56,080 --> 00:25:59,040
Speaker 1: tradition and custom and stability. But there's again, there's that

444
00:25:59,119 --> 00:26:03,480
Speaker 1: ability to change, to be pragmatic when it's called for. Um,

445
00:26:03,920 --> 00:26:05,760
Speaker 1: it's again it's really middle of the road, and it's

446
00:26:05,800 --> 00:26:08,880
Speaker 1: it's right up my alley, right up your alley. UM.

447
00:26:08,960 --> 00:26:11,560
Speaker 1: So let's get to the confusing part. I mentioned earlier

448
00:26:12,520 --> 00:26:14,760
Speaker 1: that there would be an eventual breakdown of kind of

449
00:26:14,800 --> 00:26:18,000
Speaker 1: how courts bind to one another. And when we're talking

450
00:26:18,040 --> 00:26:22,280
Speaker 1: about binding authority, that basically means decisions that a lower

451
00:26:22,480 --> 00:26:28,639
Speaker 1: court must follow from an upper court in its jurisdiction. Uh,

452
00:26:28,680 --> 00:26:32,120
Speaker 1: and it and it goes a little something like this. Uh.

453
00:26:32,160 --> 00:26:35,720
Speaker 1: State courts are only bound by higher state courts in

454
00:26:35,760 --> 00:26:38,879
Speaker 1: their own state. They're not bound by federal courts except

455
00:26:38,960 --> 00:26:42,680
Speaker 1: for the Supreme Court. Again the ultimate authority. Uh, they

456
00:26:42,680 --> 00:26:46,400
Speaker 1: can strike down state court decisions is unconstitutional. And then

457
00:26:46,440 --> 00:26:48,400
Speaker 1: you've got the whole and I want to say, mess.

458
00:26:48,440 --> 00:26:50,159
Speaker 1: It's not a mess if you really understand it, but

459
00:26:50,720 --> 00:26:54,280
Speaker 1: the whole sort of Plato spaghetti, which is the federal

460
00:26:54,320 --> 00:26:59,359
Speaker 1: court system, which is take it away, man. I was

461
00:26:59,400 --> 00:27:01,520
Speaker 1: hoping you're and take it all the way home. The

462
00:27:02,040 --> 00:27:04,879
Speaker 1: federal court system is based on those circuits that was

463
00:27:05,040 --> 00:27:08,480
Speaker 1: established all the way back in the twelfth century. Um.

464
00:27:08,600 --> 00:27:11,000
Speaker 1: But rather than traveling around, I think judges kind of

465
00:27:11,000 --> 00:27:14,400
Speaker 1: have home courts. But the point is these courts are

466
00:27:14,400 --> 00:27:18,639
Speaker 1: related to one another. And there's ninety four districts. Um.

467
00:27:18,760 --> 00:27:21,840
Speaker 1: You know, there's twelve districts with ninety four district courts.

468
00:27:22,240 --> 00:27:26,239
Speaker 1: It's very confusing. Twelve regional circuits, okay, thank you, with

469
00:27:26,320 --> 00:27:29,680
Speaker 1: nine district courts spread out among them, right. Yeah. Each

470
00:27:29,760 --> 00:27:33,440
Speaker 1: each regional court has one appellate court. And then there's

471
00:27:33,440 --> 00:27:36,480
Speaker 1: a court of appeals for the federal Circuit. It has

472
00:27:36,600 --> 00:27:41,840
Speaker 1: nationwide jurisdiction over certain cases. It gets really confusing, Yeah,

473
00:27:41,840 --> 00:27:44,080
Speaker 1: it really does, because you start out in district court,

474
00:27:44,160 --> 00:27:47,320
Speaker 1: you end up in um, I guess circuit court maybe,

475
00:27:47,320 --> 00:27:49,840
Speaker 1: and then you end up in appellate court. Um. I

476
00:27:49,920 --> 00:27:52,000
Speaker 1: may have added a step there, you know, I like

477
00:27:52,080 --> 00:27:54,359
Speaker 1: to do stuff like that. And then eventually you end

478
00:27:54,440 --> 00:27:57,800
Speaker 1: up at the Supreme Court, which is the final arbiter

479
00:27:58,040 --> 00:28:01,160
Speaker 1: of the law of the land. Um. But the Supreme

480
00:28:01,200 --> 00:28:07,000
Speaker 1: Court tries not to overrule state law because the states

481
00:28:07,040 --> 00:28:10,119
Speaker 1: have their own supreme courts and they tend to be respected.

482
00:28:10,400 --> 00:28:13,080
Speaker 1: The point is in federal court in a district, if

483
00:28:13,119 --> 00:28:17,840
Speaker 1: you have a ruling made in a district appellate court,

484
00:28:18,920 --> 00:28:21,440
Speaker 1: it will apply to all the courts in that district,

485
00:28:21,480 --> 00:28:24,120
Speaker 1: But in the next district over it will have no

486
00:28:24,600 --> 00:28:29,080
Speaker 1: no impact whatsoever. Yeah, And you don't you know, as

487
00:28:29,119 --> 00:28:31,840
Speaker 1: a regular citizen, if you ever are bouncing through the

488
00:28:32,720 --> 00:28:35,720
Speaker 1: bouncing away up the court system, you don't have to

489
00:28:35,720 --> 00:28:37,919
Speaker 1: really understand it because you're gonna have an attorney that says, well,

490
00:28:37,920 --> 00:28:39,920
Speaker 1: now you go see this lady, all right, Well, now

491
00:28:39,960 --> 00:28:44,360
Speaker 1: you go see this guy, and you just go okay, right,

492
00:28:44,520 --> 00:28:46,840
Speaker 1: like and and they're like, and by the way, you

493
00:28:46,880 --> 00:28:49,880
Speaker 1: owe us another check or you could just come listen

494
00:28:49,920 --> 00:28:55,360
Speaker 1: to this on repeat several times. Yeah, good luck with that, right.

495
00:28:56,240 --> 00:28:58,120
Speaker 1: So the other so the thing is is like they're

496
00:28:58,280 --> 00:29:01,040
Speaker 1: there this This didn't land with me until like the

497
00:29:01,080 --> 00:29:04,479
Speaker 1: second or third time I really kind of read over this.

498
00:29:04,520 --> 00:29:09,640
Speaker 1: But you have to follow precedent if your state supreme

499
00:29:09,680 --> 00:29:14,000
Speaker 1: court rules on something. If you're a lower court and

500
00:29:14,080 --> 00:29:18,280
Speaker 1: that same similar case comes to you, um, you have

501
00:29:18,400 --> 00:29:21,040
Speaker 1: to follow with the supreme court ruled on that other

502
00:29:21,120 --> 00:29:24,520
Speaker 1: case that that established precedent, you have to. Um. That's

503
00:29:24,640 --> 00:29:27,680
Speaker 1: that's binding. That's what that's called. But there are other

504
00:29:28,200 --> 00:29:30,800
Speaker 1: times where, um, if you're a lawyer or if you're

505
00:29:30,800 --> 00:29:34,880
Speaker 1: a judge and you're kind of examining case law, there's

506
00:29:34,920 --> 00:29:40,320
Speaker 1: other kinds of non binding types of judgments or precedents

507
00:29:40,360 --> 00:29:42,920
Speaker 1: that you can use to be persuaded one way or

508
00:29:42,960 --> 00:29:46,360
Speaker 1: another to prove your case. Um. But it's it's not

509
00:29:46,480 --> 00:29:50,040
Speaker 1: like incumbent upon you to actually follow those. Yeah, that's

510
00:29:50,040 --> 00:29:52,000
Speaker 1: a good way to say it. One of those is

511
00:29:52,600 --> 00:29:56,040
Speaker 1: what's called persuasive precedents. It is non binding, and that

512
00:29:56,280 --> 00:29:58,200
Speaker 1: you know that means exactly what you said. There's no

513
00:29:58,480 --> 00:30:02,760
Speaker 1: real precedent, but maybe the decision is very useful. Maybe

514
00:30:02,800 --> 00:30:05,480
Speaker 1: it's a very similar kind of case, and maybe it's

515
00:30:05,920 --> 00:30:08,440
Speaker 1: a principle that you can look at at least when

516
00:30:08,440 --> 00:30:11,400
Speaker 1: you do make your decision. Um. Another one is called

517
00:30:11,440 --> 00:30:15,520
Speaker 1: an unpublished when they say it's not for publication their opinion.

518
00:30:16,520 --> 00:30:19,200
Speaker 1: And this is basically like, it doesn't mean it's literally

519
00:30:19,240 --> 00:30:21,320
Speaker 1: not They just like wattered up and throw it away

520
00:30:21,320 --> 00:30:24,520
Speaker 1: at the end. It just means, hey, this is a

521
00:30:25,080 --> 00:30:27,880
Speaker 1: like you see this most times in state trial court,

522
00:30:27,960 --> 00:30:30,480
Speaker 1: Like this is just some run of the mill state

523
00:30:30,760 --> 00:30:34,480
Speaker 1: trial case. The judge doesn't like, Hey, this isn't gonna

524
00:30:34,520 --> 00:30:38,680
Speaker 1: affect law or precedent moving forward. I don't want if

525
00:30:38,680 --> 00:30:41,120
Speaker 1: I mess up one tiny little thing, I don't want

526
00:30:41,160 --> 00:30:43,120
Speaker 1: people to refer back to this and say, oh, but

527
00:30:43,200 --> 00:30:45,960
Speaker 1: this judge said that. It's kind of like it's sort

528
00:30:45,960 --> 00:30:49,640
Speaker 1: of the let's go to lunch, let's get to lunch already, uh,

529
00:30:50,120 --> 00:30:52,680
Speaker 1: and just get through this trial and it's not really

530
00:30:52,720 --> 00:30:56,200
Speaker 1: that important. So they just say it's not for publication. Yeah,

531
00:30:56,280 --> 00:30:58,240
Speaker 1: And I guess it's up to the judge to decide

532
00:30:58,280 --> 00:31:01,680
Speaker 1: that or not. So I about Like you said, though,

533
00:31:01,720 --> 00:31:03,840
Speaker 1: it's not like they just throw it away. It is

534
00:31:03,880 --> 00:31:07,160
Speaker 1: actually published, it's just not it means that this is

535
00:31:07,200 --> 00:31:11,200
Speaker 1: a non binding decision. It's like, don't come looking at me,

536
00:31:12,080 --> 00:31:16,080
Speaker 1: right right, I'm just going to t G I Friday. Okay,

537
00:31:16,640 --> 00:31:18,360
Speaker 1: you want to take a break and then come back

538
00:31:18,400 --> 00:31:35,560
Speaker 1: and talk about some overruled precedents, sure, let's do it.

539
00:31:35,640 --> 00:31:51,880
Speaker 1: Stop stop, okay, Chuck. It seems like they the Supreme

540
00:31:51,880 --> 00:31:54,680
Speaker 1: Court over rules precedents every couple of days these days.

541
00:31:54,720 --> 00:31:59,400
Speaker 1: But I guess they started out fairly slow. Um, in total,

542
00:32:00,040 --> 00:32:03,200
Speaker 1: they have overruled their own judgment. So remember if you

543
00:32:03,240 --> 00:32:05,680
Speaker 1: look at the Supreme Court as a single body made

544
00:32:05,720 --> 00:32:09,719
Speaker 1: up of you know, rotating or incoming and outgoing members,

545
00:32:09,760 --> 00:32:15,520
Speaker 1: but it's still it's the same things. I don't know how,

546
00:32:15,560 --> 00:32:18,160
Speaker 1: I just like everyone knows that the Supreme Court is

547
00:32:18,200 --> 00:32:20,640
Speaker 1: and I just managed to make it confusing. Anyway. The

548
00:32:20,680 --> 00:32:23,720
Speaker 1: Supreme Court has overruled itself over two d and thirty

549
00:32:23,760 --> 00:32:28,600
Speaker 1: times in in the it's lifetime, and it started in

550
00:32:28,680 --> 00:32:32,520
Speaker 1: eighteen ten, right, But like you said, it didn't happen

551
00:32:32,560 --> 00:32:38,000
Speaker 1: a lot. I think in with Pollock ve Farmers and

552
00:32:38,040 --> 00:32:42,560
Speaker 1: Loan Trust Company, Uh, that is when things really got

553
00:32:42,640 --> 00:32:47,000
Speaker 1: rolling and the Supreme Court started overturning itself more and

554
00:32:47,040 --> 00:32:50,440
Speaker 1: more because it's happened. I mean, that wasn't that long ago,

555
00:32:50,520 --> 00:32:54,080
Speaker 1: and it's happened, Uh, how many times since then? Well,

556
00:32:54,120 --> 00:32:58,560
Speaker 1: it happen. Yeah, it only happened twenty six times in

557
00:32:58,600 --> 00:33:01,960
Speaker 1: the entire nineteenth century from eighteen ten to eighteen nine nine.

558
00:33:02,040 --> 00:33:05,480
Speaker 1: So everything since then, yeah, has been you know, they've

559
00:33:05,520 --> 00:33:09,800
Speaker 1: been going gangbusters. Um. And that that Pollock versus Farmers

560
00:33:09,840 --> 00:33:11,800
Speaker 1: Loan and trust had to do with the income tax.

561
00:33:11,840 --> 00:33:14,000
Speaker 1: And that's actually a good example of Congress coming in

562
00:33:14,040 --> 00:33:16,920
Speaker 1: and saying, oh, you overruled our ability to have an

563
00:33:16,920 --> 00:33:23,720
Speaker 1: income tax. Here's the sixteenth Amendment down your throat. So Um,

564
00:33:23,760 --> 00:33:25,760
Speaker 1: the thing is is like little by little, kind of

565
00:33:25,800 --> 00:33:27,400
Speaker 1: like the little train that could going up the hill

566
00:33:27,440 --> 00:33:29,640
Speaker 1: and starting to kind of gain steam and gain speed.

567
00:33:29,680 --> 00:33:34,920
Speaker 1: If you look at the Supreme courts um over rulings

568
00:33:35,080 --> 00:33:38,560
Speaker 1: or overturned precedents, um, if you like, graft him on

569
00:33:38,600 --> 00:33:42,400
Speaker 1: like a spectrum of time, the few, the present, and

570
00:33:42,640 --> 00:33:45,400
Speaker 1: you know, the recent past would have a lot of

571
00:33:45,440 --> 00:33:48,600
Speaker 1: dots on it. And some people say that's evidence that

572
00:33:48,640 --> 00:33:51,760
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court has become much more activist and politicized

573
00:33:51,800 --> 00:33:54,880
Speaker 1: over the years. But then other people say, well, I mean,

574
00:33:54,880 --> 00:33:57,640
Speaker 1: it just makes sense that further back in time they

575
00:33:57,680 --> 00:34:02,640
Speaker 1: had much fewer rulings to return. They're basically starting from scratch.

576
00:34:03,080 --> 00:34:06,920
Speaker 1: Now there's so many rulings to consider and deliberate on them. Yeah,

577
00:34:07,000 --> 00:34:10,600
Speaker 1: of course there's going to be more overturned because there's

578
00:34:10,680 --> 00:34:14,399
Speaker 1: more precedents to be overturned. Yeah, I think the middle

579
00:34:14,400 --> 00:34:16,200
Speaker 1: of the road, like myself would say, it's probably a

580
00:34:16,200 --> 00:34:19,800
Speaker 1: bit of both. Yeah, I agreed. Um, you know, a

581
00:34:20,719 --> 00:34:26,000
Speaker 1: starry decisiveist like us. Um, here are some very famous

582
00:34:26,040 --> 00:34:30,840
Speaker 1: examples and truly important, you know, because I mean I

583
00:34:30,840 --> 00:34:34,880
Speaker 1: think overall, overturning precedent as a starry decisist isn't the

584
00:34:34,920 --> 00:34:38,359
Speaker 1: greatest thing, but um boy that it sure has been

585
00:34:38,400 --> 00:34:41,239
Speaker 1: the right thing in a lot of cases. Yea. And

586
00:34:41,280 --> 00:34:44,440
Speaker 1: of course that's it's all subjective, but that's my opinion. Um,

587
00:34:44,520 --> 00:34:47,360
Speaker 1: Brown v. Board is one of the big ones. Uh.

588
00:34:48,960 --> 00:34:51,479
Speaker 1: Plus e v. Ferguson, the U. S. Supreme Court said,

589
00:34:51,560 --> 00:34:54,840
Speaker 1: separate but equal is how we should go forward. We

590
00:34:54,880 --> 00:34:57,880
Speaker 1: can segregate things. We can make black kids go to

591
00:34:57,920 --> 00:35:01,400
Speaker 1: black schools and white kids go to white schools, and

592
00:35:01,480 --> 00:35:04,120
Speaker 1: it doesn't protect or I'm sorry, it doesn't violate the

593
00:35:04,200 --> 00:35:08,200
Speaker 1: equal protection clause of the fourteenth Amendment. As long as

594
00:35:08,200 --> 00:35:10,120
Speaker 1: long at things are equal and these schools have the

595
00:35:10,160 --> 00:35:14,319
Speaker 1: same uh, school supplies and they're all they're all the same,

596
00:35:14,360 --> 00:35:18,319
Speaker 1: it's all good. And that was later overturned. Of course,

597
00:35:18,320 --> 00:35:20,840
Speaker 1: the lower courts um sided with it, but the in

598
00:35:21,000 --> 00:35:24,239
Speaker 1: the the double A CP would eventually appeal this to

599
00:35:24,360 --> 00:35:29,880
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court with Brown v. Board And this is

600
00:35:29,880 --> 00:35:33,280
Speaker 1: one of those situations where like new uh, new data

601
00:35:33,360 --> 00:35:35,920
Speaker 1: and new studies kind of came into play. Then it

602
00:35:36,000 --> 00:35:40,520
Speaker 1: happened since that original plus e versus Ferguson ruling, UH

603
00:35:40,560 --> 00:35:43,120
Speaker 1: in Chief Justice or A. Warren said hey, look we're

604
00:35:43,120 --> 00:35:45,920
Speaker 1: looking at these studies now that say, yeah, these schools

605
00:35:45,920 --> 00:35:49,239
Speaker 1: may be equal on paper, but inherently they are not

606
00:35:49,360 --> 00:35:53,680
Speaker 1: equal if they are segregated. And that will, um, that

607
00:35:53,719 --> 00:35:57,759
Speaker 1: will really has a big psychological component to a young

608
00:35:57,840 --> 00:36:02,080
Speaker 1: black student, even if they have the same textbooks and

609
00:36:02,120 --> 00:36:05,080
Speaker 1: school supplies, just affects the fact that they have to

610
00:36:05,080 --> 00:36:08,640
Speaker 1: go to a different schools harmful to them, right, And

611
00:36:08,680 --> 00:36:12,840
Speaker 1: so that clearly violates the Fourteenth Amendment to equal protection

612
00:36:12,920 --> 00:36:15,640
Speaker 1: under the law, and that made Brown versus. Board of

613
00:36:15,719 --> 00:36:18,640
Speaker 1: Education one of the most celebrated not just court cases,

614
00:36:18,680 --> 00:36:21,680
Speaker 1: but one of the most celebrated um overturnings of a

615
00:36:21,760 --> 00:36:26,080
Speaker 1: legal precedent in American history. For sure, pretty much everybody

616
00:36:26,120 --> 00:36:28,520
Speaker 1: can get behind Brown versus Board of Education. You know,

617
00:36:29,040 --> 00:36:32,279
Speaker 1: there's probably a few holdouts there are. I was researching it,

618
00:36:32,440 --> 00:36:35,160
Speaker 1: and it's surprising. It's not everybody you would think it's

619
00:36:35,200 --> 00:36:37,360
Speaker 1: It's kind of like people on both sides are like,

620
00:36:37,440 --> 00:36:40,439
Speaker 1: it was kind of better before, But for the most part,

621
00:36:40,520 --> 00:36:43,520
Speaker 1: society is like now now, even if it was rough

622
00:36:43,560 --> 00:36:45,440
Speaker 1: at first, like it was a step we needed to

623
00:36:45,480 --> 00:36:47,960
Speaker 1: take as a society so we could evolve and stop

624
00:36:48,000 --> 00:36:51,760
Speaker 1: living separately, because that's ridiculous. What about paying versus Tennessee?

625
00:36:52,520 --> 00:36:55,040
Speaker 1: This one, I I thought was surprising. It kind of

626
00:36:55,040 --> 00:36:57,279
Speaker 1: flies under the radar if you're not paying attention to

627
00:36:57,360 --> 00:37:00,400
Speaker 1: low stuff. But there it used to be. The Supreme

628
00:37:00,440 --> 00:37:03,560
Speaker 1: Court upheld this idea that you could not have a

629
00:37:03,640 --> 00:37:07,680
Speaker 1: victim impact statement at sentencing because they said that it

630
00:37:07,760 --> 00:37:11,800
Speaker 1: violated the Eighth Amendments protection against cruel and Unusual punishment

631
00:37:12,080 --> 00:37:16,680
Speaker 1: because this emotionally charged you know, atmosphere right before a

632
00:37:16,800 --> 00:37:19,759
Speaker 1: person's sentence really increases the risk that they're going to

633
00:37:19,760 --> 00:37:24,719
Speaker 1: get the death penalty. And in uh nineteen late eighties case,

634
00:37:24,760 --> 00:37:26,760
Speaker 1: a guy named Purvise Pain who had murdered a woman

635
00:37:26,840 --> 00:37:31,400
Speaker 1: and her two year old daughter. UM, the woman's mother

636
00:37:31,560 --> 00:37:35,040
Speaker 1: had given a victim impact statement, and apparently the Supreme

637
00:37:35,080 --> 00:37:39,560
Speaker 1: Court at the time was made up with I think

638
00:37:39,719 --> 00:37:43,480
Speaker 1: enough liberal justices that they were like, now you should

639
00:37:43,520 --> 00:37:46,720
Speaker 1: be able to have victim impact statements. And third Good Marshal,

640
00:37:47,560 --> 00:37:50,240
Speaker 1: who was one of the most liberal justices in Supreme

641
00:37:50,239 --> 00:37:54,440
Speaker 1: Court history, wrote a descent and a critical descent saying like, hey,

642
00:37:54,840 --> 00:37:58,560
Speaker 1: you're taking starry, decisive way too lightly, Like this is

643
00:37:58,640 --> 00:38:00,680
Speaker 1: this is tradition, this is cus to minute, it's like

644
00:38:00,840 --> 00:38:04,080
Speaker 1: reasonable that Yeah, it increases the risk that somebody's going

645
00:38:04,120 --> 00:38:06,439
Speaker 1: to be put to death. Uh, and you guys really

646
00:38:06,520 --> 00:38:09,799
Speaker 1: dropped the ball. But now, uh, the Supreme Court overturned it.

647
00:38:09,880 --> 00:38:12,760
Speaker 1: So to this day you're allowed to have victim impact

648
00:38:12,760 --> 00:38:16,359
Speaker 1: statements at sentencing in the US. Uh. Yeah, that's um.

649
00:38:16,440 --> 00:38:19,799
Speaker 1: Ropert versus Simmons was another that was a case where

650
00:38:19,800 --> 00:38:22,960
Speaker 1: they basically um where like kind of things had changed

651
00:38:23,000 --> 00:38:26,960
Speaker 1: since the original decision. UH in nineteen eighty nine Stanford

652
00:38:27,040 --> 00:38:30,600
Speaker 1: versus Kentucky. UM. That was they found that it was

653
00:38:30,719 --> 00:38:34,759
Speaker 1: unconstitutional to sentence a minor. I'm sorry. In two thousand five,

654
00:38:34,800 --> 00:38:38,040
Speaker 1: they found it was unconstitutional to sentence a minor to death,

655
00:38:38,080 --> 00:38:42,080
Speaker 1: which overturned the nineteen eighty nine decisions Stanford versus Kentucky.

656
00:38:42,680 --> 00:38:45,440
Speaker 1: And they basically said, you know, we've evolved since then.

657
00:38:45,520 --> 00:38:48,080
Speaker 1: In in nineteen eighty nine, and most people thought it

658
00:38:48,120 --> 00:38:50,799
Speaker 1: was okay to to put a sixteen year old to death,

659
00:38:50,840 --> 00:38:53,279
Speaker 1: but now things have changed and we don't really feel

660
00:38:53,320 --> 00:39:00,080
Speaker 1: that way. As the year graduated high school, Uh, I

661
00:39:00,120 --> 00:39:03,359
Speaker 1: could have been put to death. And it's a good

662
00:39:03,400 --> 00:39:05,319
Speaker 1: thing you didn't get in trouble, Chuck. That was a

663
00:39:05,320 --> 00:39:09,880
Speaker 1: good kid. But they cited a state legislature UH, and

664
00:39:09,960 --> 00:39:13,319
Speaker 1: the decisions there that outlawed it. UH. And they even

665
00:39:13,360 --> 00:39:15,280
Speaker 1: looked at like sort of what was going on around

666
00:39:15,280 --> 00:39:16,919
Speaker 1: the world as far as that kind of thing goes.

667
00:39:18,280 --> 00:39:23,240
Speaker 1: There's another really consequential case that came before the Supreme

668
00:39:23,280 --> 00:39:27,440
Speaker 1: Court and UM had to do with their emergency docket,

669
00:39:27,440 --> 00:39:30,200
Speaker 1: which will we'll talk about a little bit about later.

670
00:39:30,520 --> 00:39:33,920
Speaker 1: But UM, in some cases where the time is of

671
00:39:33,960 --> 00:39:38,560
Speaker 1: the essence, the Supreme Court will hear really important emergency cases.

672
00:39:38,960 --> 00:39:41,680
Speaker 1: I'm very short noticed, will deliberate on it over a

673
00:39:41,760 --> 00:39:44,960
Speaker 1: very short period of time and issue a ruling um

674
00:39:45,040 --> 00:39:48,919
Speaker 1: that does not have anything to do with anything else

675
00:39:48,960 --> 00:39:52,680
Speaker 1: except for that one case. Ideally, but Bush versus Gore

676
00:39:52,719 --> 00:39:55,120
Speaker 1: is a good example of how that's not the case,

677
00:39:55,239 --> 00:39:57,680
Speaker 1: because this is a this is one of those emergency

678
00:39:57,719 --> 00:39:59,959
Speaker 1: cases that they heard, and Chuck, I think we needed

679
00:40:00,000 --> 00:40:03,239
Speaker 1: do an entire episode on the two thousand election because

680
00:40:03,280 --> 00:40:06,439
Speaker 1: it was so consequential to the United States, and also

681
00:40:06,480 --> 00:40:09,600
Speaker 1: it's just super interesting too. But the upshot of is

682
00:40:09,680 --> 00:40:13,120
Speaker 1: that the there was a really important quote that came

683
00:40:13,120 --> 00:40:16,719
Speaker 1: out of it that said, our consideration the Supreme Court

684
00:40:16,760 --> 00:40:20,560
Speaker 1: is saying this, our consideration is limited to the present circumstances.

685
00:40:20,840 --> 00:40:24,520
Speaker 1: Comma for the problem of equal protection and election processes

686
00:40:24,880 --> 00:40:28,920
Speaker 1: generally presents many complexities. And some people say the fact

687
00:40:28,960 --> 00:40:31,520
Speaker 1: that they said that their consideration is limited just to

688
00:40:31,560 --> 00:40:35,640
Speaker 1: the present circumstances means that it's not precedents. Other people say, yeah,

689
00:40:35,680 --> 00:40:38,719
Speaker 1: but that second part about how you know, all all

690
00:40:38,760 --> 00:40:42,319
Speaker 1: election processes are different. They're actually saying, like, don't just

691
00:40:42,360 --> 00:40:44,840
Speaker 1: apply this rotely to it. So it is a precedent,

692
00:40:45,040 --> 00:40:47,640
Speaker 1: and it's been cited a bunch of times since then.

693
00:40:47,719 --> 00:40:50,440
Speaker 1: But even though it's a big controversy about whether those

694
00:40:50,520 --> 00:40:53,439
Speaker 1: kind of rulings should be included at all in precedence. Yeah,

695
00:40:53,520 --> 00:40:55,840
Speaker 1: and that's sort of the it's not a slippery slope.

696
00:40:55,840 --> 00:40:58,000
Speaker 1: It's just sort of the system we have when there

697
00:40:58,040 --> 00:41:01,919
Speaker 1: there isn't a law about precedent. It's just sort of like,

698
00:41:02,120 --> 00:41:04,960
Speaker 1: you know, we'll try and figure it out case by case.

699
00:41:05,680 --> 00:41:08,680
Speaker 1: H I laughed because slippery slope came out of the

700
00:41:08,680 --> 00:41:12,919
Speaker 1: Supreme Court too. I think it was suitor right, Oh really, yeah,

701
00:41:12,960 --> 00:41:16,759
Speaker 1: I don't remember what cases. Yeah, the slippery slope came

702
00:41:16,760 --> 00:41:20,160
Speaker 1: out of out of the Supreme Court. Did not know that.

703
00:41:20,160 --> 00:41:23,120
Speaker 1: That's good fact. That's why I laughed, because I'm the

704
00:41:23,120 --> 00:41:28,520
Speaker 1: biggest nerd on the BOK. That is pretty funny. Um,

705
00:41:28,560 --> 00:41:30,840
Speaker 1: and now you know we should close with row. We

706
00:41:30,920 --> 00:41:34,040
Speaker 1: did a full episode on just the ins and outs

707
00:41:34,040 --> 00:41:38,480
Speaker 1: of Roe v. Wade not too long ago. But um,

708
00:41:38,560 --> 00:41:41,760
Speaker 1: did that come out right after the decision had been rendered?

709
00:41:41,760 --> 00:41:47,319
Speaker 1: I think did? Or right before our podcast episode? Right

710
00:41:47,360 --> 00:41:53,399
Speaker 1: after after? Okay, we're very timely in topical Yeah, don't

711
00:41:53,440 --> 00:41:58,320
Speaker 1: break your arm adding yourself on the back. I couldn't

712
00:41:58,360 --> 00:42:01,040
Speaker 1: remember if it was before after, but at any UM rate,

713
00:42:01,080 --> 00:42:03,279
Speaker 1: we should touch on it here at least because that

714
00:42:03,440 --> 00:42:10,040
Speaker 1: is obviously the most recent really super impactful uh time,

715
00:42:10,440 --> 00:42:14,080
Speaker 1: when a super impactful time when the some members of

716
00:42:14,120 --> 00:42:18,319
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court said sorry, sorry decisive. But even though

717
00:42:18,360 --> 00:42:21,879
Speaker 1: we might have even said in our confirmation that this

718
00:42:22,000 --> 00:42:25,759
Speaker 1: was settled ball, we're gonna reverse on that now. Yeah.

719
00:42:25,760 --> 00:42:28,000
Speaker 1: And the reason that Row was upheld for so long,

720
00:42:28,040 --> 00:42:30,319
Speaker 1: and we talked about this in our episode that it

721
00:42:30,360 --> 00:42:34,520
Speaker 1: was really roundly considered to be based on shaky legal foundation,

722
00:42:35,280 --> 00:42:37,719
Speaker 1: but it was upheld time and time again because it

723
00:42:37,760 --> 00:42:40,920
Speaker 1: had become reliant. People had come to rely on it.

724
00:42:41,000 --> 00:42:44,040
Speaker 1: So that reliance factor kept it from being overturned even

725
00:42:44,040 --> 00:42:46,719
Speaker 1: though a lot of justice is considered it like this

726
00:42:46,800 --> 00:42:49,719
Speaker 1: is not the best ruling we've ever made. UM. But

727
00:42:49,800 --> 00:42:54,799
Speaker 1: then with UM Dobbs versus Jackson Women's Health Organization, the

728
00:42:54,880 --> 00:42:58,799
Speaker 1: ruling from was two. Yeah, that overturned. Man, it's been

729
00:42:58,840 --> 00:43:02,839
Speaker 1: a heck of a year that overturned Row. UM. They

730
00:43:03,080 --> 00:43:06,840
Speaker 1: they basically said like, no, we're we're just going to

731
00:43:06,880 --> 00:43:09,880
Speaker 1: go ahead and say like this is not this argument

732
00:43:09,920 --> 00:43:13,400
Speaker 1: was totally fallacious it was a bad, bad argument. But

733
00:43:13,520 --> 00:43:16,920
Speaker 1: also we're gonna go one step further and apply our

734
00:43:16,960 --> 00:43:20,680
Speaker 1: originalism to it and say, the Constitution doesn't say anything

735
00:43:20,719 --> 00:43:24,400
Speaker 1: about abortions, and if you're going to apply the fourteenth

736
00:43:24,440 --> 00:43:27,240
Speaker 1: Amendment to it, which is what that shaky legal reasoning

737
00:43:27,400 --> 00:43:31,800
Speaker 1: was for Row that, um, you couldn't deprive a woman

738
00:43:32,160 --> 00:43:36,000
Speaker 1: of her privacy a k. A liberty that was guaranteed

739
00:43:36,040 --> 00:43:39,000
Speaker 1: through the fourteenth Amendment. If we're gonna apply the fourteenth Amendment,

740
00:43:39,120 --> 00:43:40,880
Speaker 1: let's go back and talk about what things were like

741
00:43:40,920 --> 00:43:43,439
Speaker 1: in eighteen sixty eight and how people understood the law

742
00:43:43,440 --> 00:43:45,920
Speaker 1: in eighteen sixty eight, and they would not have been

743
00:43:45,960 --> 00:43:49,279
Speaker 1: okay with abortion because three quarters of states already had

744
00:43:49,320 --> 00:43:52,880
Speaker 1: abortion outlawed on the books ipso facto abortion has no

745
00:43:53,000 --> 00:43:58,040
Speaker 1: constitutional protections. But again, they really went to the other extreme,

746
00:43:58,160 --> 00:44:01,879
Speaker 1: which in this case was the far right, in saying like,

747
00:44:02,239 --> 00:44:06,120
Speaker 1: there's nothing in the Constitution about abortion, and no one

748
00:44:06,200 --> 00:44:09,520
Speaker 1: had ever said it was in the Constitution, or that

749
00:44:09,600 --> 00:44:14,080
Speaker 1: the Constitution explicitly, you know, protected women's rights to choose

750
00:44:14,400 --> 00:44:17,759
Speaker 1: about reproductive health. What they were saying is, you know,

751
00:44:17,920 --> 00:44:22,920
Speaker 1: the judges kind of determined over time that this was, um,

752
00:44:23,080 --> 00:44:26,760
Speaker 1: this was worthwhile and this was what society needed, um,

753
00:44:27,000 --> 00:44:29,479
Speaker 1: and they ruled on it. So it was a case

754
00:44:29,560 --> 00:44:34,399
Speaker 1: of pragmatism, frankly and originalism, which is where we're at now,

755
00:44:34,920 --> 00:44:38,040
Speaker 1: and then eventually we may get to that middle of

756
00:44:38,120 --> 00:44:42,399
Speaker 1: the roads storry, decisive, nous, who knows, I don't know,

757
00:44:42,640 --> 00:44:46,320
Speaker 1: No one knows, right. And it was also a case though, where, uh,

758
00:44:46,360 --> 00:44:48,360
Speaker 1: if you're going to open up that can of worms

759
00:44:48,400 --> 00:44:51,160
Speaker 1: with the fourteenth Amendment, all of a sudden you're looking

760
00:44:51,200 --> 00:44:55,560
Speaker 1: at other decisions decided on that same rationale, like same

761
00:44:55,560 --> 00:45:01,680
Speaker 1: sex marriage and uh, interracial marriage and say sex sex

762
00:45:02,480 --> 00:45:06,719
Speaker 1: um also called just sex. That's right, depending on who

763
00:45:06,719 --> 00:45:10,560
Speaker 1: you are. Uh. Alito said, you know, but but you know,

764
00:45:10,640 --> 00:45:13,279
Speaker 1: it doesn't apply to that stuff. It just applies to this,

765
00:45:14,120 --> 00:45:17,520
Speaker 1: and that's UM. I think a lot of people worry, like, well, yeah,

766
00:45:17,560 --> 00:45:21,000
Speaker 1: but the can of worms is now open. And I

767
00:45:21,000 --> 00:45:23,719
Speaker 1: think immediately after Clarence Thomas even said like, maybe we

768
00:45:23,719 --> 00:45:26,520
Speaker 1: should go back and look at these other cases. Yeah, totally.

769
00:45:26,560 --> 00:45:29,000
Speaker 1: And that's the scary thing about it because it established

770
00:45:29,000 --> 00:45:32,320
Speaker 1: a precedent, and a big one too because of that reasoning.

771
00:45:32,719 --> 00:45:36,359
Speaker 1: But then again, a Supreme Court can come with new

772
00:45:36,400 --> 00:45:38,279
Speaker 1: sitting judges down the line and be like, this was

773
00:45:38,440 --> 00:45:42,160
Speaker 1: terrible reasoning. We don't agree with originalism. We're gonna overturn dobbs.

774
00:45:42,160 --> 00:45:44,960
Speaker 1: Who knows. I suspect that it's going to kind of

775
00:45:44,960 --> 00:45:49,440
Speaker 1: ping pong back and forth for a while. Who knows. Uh.

776
00:45:49,600 --> 00:45:54,240
Speaker 1: There's also a bit here that I move your honor,

777
00:45:54,320 --> 00:45:57,400
Speaker 1: that we uh, that we cover this in a short stuff.

778
00:45:57,880 --> 00:46:01,759
Speaker 1: Overruled this whole Oh oh uh. There's a whole matter

779
00:46:01,800 --> 00:46:04,000
Speaker 1: of the shadow docket, which I think it would make

780
00:46:04,040 --> 00:46:06,439
Speaker 1: for a good short stuff. Yeah, that was that had

781
00:46:06,520 --> 00:46:09,120
Speaker 1: to do with that Bush versus Gore two thousand election thing.

782
00:46:09,160 --> 00:46:12,400
Speaker 1: It's like an emergency thing that they probably are using

783
00:46:12,800 --> 00:46:15,480
Speaker 1: a little flagrantly these days. But I agree, I think

784
00:46:15,480 --> 00:46:19,200
Speaker 1: that's a good short So sustained after all, thank you?

785
00:46:19,760 --> 00:46:23,120
Speaker 1: You got anything else about um legal precedents? Now? I

786
00:46:23,160 --> 00:46:24,720
Speaker 1: don't want to talk about the law for a while,

787
00:46:24,760 --> 00:46:29,440
Speaker 1: so maybe bump shadow ducket out to summer twenty three. Okay,

788
00:46:29,520 --> 00:46:31,880
Speaker 1: that sounds good. We did it, Chuck. We made it

789
00:46:31,920 --> 00:46:36,480
Speaker 1: through legal precedents. If you want to know more about

790
00:46:36,560 --> 00:46:43,080
Speaker 1: legal precedents, you can research starry, decisive originalism, pragmatism, all

791
00:46:43,120 --> 00:46:46,759
Speaker 1: that stuff. On your favorite search engine. And since I

792
00:46:46,760 --> 00:46:48,920
Speaker 1: said that and Chuck said, woo who, it's time for

793
00:46:49,000 --> 00:46:54,799
Speaker 1: listener mail. I'm gonna call this just one email about

794
00:46:54,800 --> 00:46:57,880
Speaker 1: our sitcom's two parter m. You got a lot of

795
00:46:57,920 --> 00:47:01,520
Speaker 1: great feedback. People really enjoyed those episodes, I think, which

796
00:47:01,560 --> 00:47:04,479
Speaker 1: is always fun. We did miss a couple of things

797
00:47:04,520 --> 00:47:07,719
Speaker 1: before I read this. Um, I don't know why. I

798
00:47:07,760 --> 00:47:10,719
Speaker 1: guess I said that Rhoda was a spinoff of All

799
00:47:10,719 --> 00:47:13,960
Speaker 1: in the Family. No, I did, Oh you did? Okay,

800
00:47:14,200 --> 00:47:15,920
Speaker 1: I thought it might have been me. I knew it

801
00:47:15,920 --> 00:47:17,560
Speaker 1: was Mary Tyler Moore. I don't know why I didn't

802
00:47:17,600 --> 00:47:20,640
Speaker 1: speak up. Then, if I could take one thing back

803
00:47:20,640 --> 00:47:23,920
Speaker 1: in this entire podcast history, it would be that so

804
00:47:24,600 --> 00:47:28,000
Speaker 1: many people wrote in to say that, and some also,

805
00:47:28,400 --> 00:47:31,120
Speaker 1: most of were very nice. But I want to give

806
00:47:31,160 --> 00:47:33,520
Speaker 1: you a piece of guidance, just as a friend here everybody,

807
00:47:33,840 --> 00:47:38,120
Speaker 1: if you send an email and the subject lind contains

808
00:47:38,360 --> 00:47:41,720
Speaker 1: more than one question mark, it made you're being hostile

809
00:47:41,840 --> 00:47:44,320
Speaker 1: and you may want to second guest sending that email

810
00:47:44,360 --> 00:47:46,520
Speaker 1: because it makes you look like a huge jerk. You

811
00:47:46,560 --> 00:47:49,880
Speaker 1: mean that the subject line is who does your research

812
00:47:49,960 --> 00:47:56,440
Speaker 1: for a four question marks? Maybe? Also, UM, the Simpsons

813
00:47:56,600 --> 00:47:59,920
Speaker 1: has a little Maggie. They're not for Simpsons. Yeah, I

814
00:48:00,120 --> 00:48:03,160
Speaker 1: really goof that one. I forget about Maggie. I I

815
00:48:03,200 --> 00:48:05,400
Speaker 1: love babies, but Maggie didn't do a lot on the show,

816
00:48:06,160 --> 00:48:10,239
Speaker 1: so I forgot all about her. Big apologies to Maggie Simpson. Yeah,

817
00:48:10,400 --> 00:48:13,160
Speaker 1: same here. I didn't catch that either. Um. And then

818
00:48:13,200 --> 00:48:16,920
Speaker 1: also a lot of people, at least as many who

819
00:48:16,920 --> 00:48:19,200
Speaker 1: wrote in about Rhoda being a spin off of Mary

820
00:48:19,200 --> 00:48:23,360
Speaker 1: Tyler Moore UM wrote in about um Roseanne and the

821
00:48:23,440 --> 00:48:27,319
Speaker 1: two Becky's pulling a Darren switch, Um, which I just

822
00:48:27,360 --> 00:48:29,680
Speaker 1: walked right past. I was never a big Roseanne fan.

823
00:48:29,719 --> 00:48:32,400
Speaker 1: I never watched it, but there were a lot of

824
00:48:32,520 --> 00:48:36,680
Speaker 1: Roseanne watchers. I'm assuming the original one right, But that

825
00:48:36,719 --> 00:48:39,719
Speaker 1: one falls under not so much a correction as how

826
00:48:39,760 --> 00:48:43,040
Speaker 1: could you not include this? And we get a lot

827
00:48:43,120 --> 00:48:46,200
Speaker 1: of those, especially with stuff like this like how could

828
00:48:46,239 --> 00:48:48,560
Speaker 1: you not talk about everybody loves Raymond? How could you

829
00:48:48,600 --> 00:48:52,160
Speaker 1: not talk about my favorite shoe? Yeah, it's kind of

830
00:48:52,200 --> 00:48:55,080
Speaker 1: like we put together, um a list of the one

831
00:48:55,120 --> 00:48:58,160
Speaker 1: hundred top sitcoms of all time in a two episode

832
00:48:58,200 --> 00:49:01,120
Speaker 1: format and just let her rip because it was inevitable.

833
00:49:01,160 --> 00:49:03,719
Speaker 1: I'm actually surprised we didn't get more stuff. And it's

834
00:49:03,760 --> 00:49:07,600
Speaker 1: really interesting that almost everybody wrote in to talk about

835
00:49:07,760 --> 00:49:10,479
Speaker 1: Roseanne Us leaving out Roseanne. I know I didn't watch

836
00:49:10,480 --> 00:49:13,760
Speaker 1: that show. Yeah, I just didn't do Sorry everybody, hopefully

837
00:49:13,800 --> 00:49:17,200
Speaker 1: we didn't taint your experience. But here's a fun email

838
00:49:17,239 --> 00:49:22,760
Speaker 1: from Laura Lampert that summed up her admiration of this episode. Hey, guys,

839
00:49:22,840 --> 00:49:25,680
Speaker 1: this is a complaint that these two episodes were too

840
00:49:25,680 --> 00:49:28,839
Speaker 1: engaging and entertaining. I really needed to sleep, but it

841
00:49:28,880 --> 00:49:31,719
Speaker 1: wasn't happening. So I put my podcast Q onto play

842
00:49:31,760 --> 00:49:34,640
Speaker 1: starting with these two episodes because I really didn't find

843
00:49:34,640 --> 00:49:38,200
Speaker 1: the subject that interesting. Uh. The thought was that listening

844
00:49:38,239 --> 00:49:40,560
Speaker 1: to you guys drone on about a dull topic to

845
00:49:40,640 --> 00:49:43,280
Speaker 1: me would send me off to the land of nod.

846
00:49:43,600 --> 00:49:45,960
Speaker 1: But that didn't happen. Here I am at three am

847
00:49:46,000 --> 00:49:48,120
Speaker 1: sit in front of my computer to find out about

848
00:49:48,160 --> 00:49:51,919
Speaker 1: the universe that was mentioned. I guess the Tommy what's

849
00:49:51,920 --> 00:49:56,359
Speaker 1: it called universe, Tommy Westfall, Tommy west Fall universe as

850
00:49:56,360 --> 00:49:58,440
Speaker 1: wide awake as I was two hours ago. Maybe you

851
00:49:58,440 --> 00:50:01,160
Speaker 1: consider some dull or less interesting to topics, guys, and

852
00:50:01,200 --> 00:50:04,200
Speaker 1: then just leave them that way. No jokes, no side notes,

853
00:50:04,239 --> 00:50:07,320
Speaker 1: no tangents, just drone on. You can label its stuff

854
00:50:07,360 --> 00:50:11,120
Speaker 1: you should sleep by, and that is Laura Lampert. That's

855
00:50:11,160 --> 00:50:14,279
Speaker 1: a good idea. That's a really good idea. We could

856
00:50:14,320 --> 00:50:18,600
Speaker 1: just kind of talk like that's the whole time. That's

857
00:50:18,680 --> 00:50:22,239
Speaker 1: right about Varya boring things? Yeah, like a legal precedence

858
00:50:22,600 --> 00:50:25,839
Speaker 1: we should have would that could have been our debut episode.

859
00:50:26,040 --> 00:50:27,680
Speaker 1: We have to rerecord it, Chuck, we have to go

860
00:50:27,719 --> 00:50:30,080
Speaker 1: back and give it another shot. Just play it at

861
00:50:30,080 --> 00:50:33,240
Speaker 1: half speed. There you there you go. That's great advice

862
00:50:33,280 --> 00:50:35,960
Speaker 1: to Laura Lampert. Great name. You can tell it's a

863
00:50:35,960 --> 00:50:38,080
Speaker 1: great name because I remembered it and didn't have to ask,

864
00:50:38,200 --> 00:50:40,759
Speaker 1: Chuck Um. Which is not to say that when I

865
00:50:40,840 --> 00:50:42,680
Speaker 1: don't remember your name, it means you don't have a

866
00:50:42,719 --> 00:50:46,680
Speaker 1: great name. It's just not quite as memorable. How about that? Sure? Well,

867
00:50:46,719 --> 00:50:49,560
Speaker 1: since I just dug myself out of that hole, everybody, Um,

868
00:50:49,600 --> 00:50:51,319
Speaker 1: that's the end of listener mail. And if you want

869
00:50:51,360 --> 00:50:53,359
Speaker 1: to get in touch with this, like Laura Lampert did,

870
00:50:53,440 --> 00:50:56,400
Speaker 1: you can send us an email to to Stuff podcast

871
00:50:56,680 --> 00:51:02,200
Speaker 1: at iHeart radio dot com. Stuff you Should Know is

872
00:51:02,200 --> 00:51:05,080
Speaker 1: a production of I Heart Radio. For more podcasts, my

873
00:51:05,120 --> 00:51:08,400
Speaker 1: Heart Radio visit the I heart Radio app, Apple podcasts,

874
00:51:08,520 --> 00:51:13,200
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. H