logo
episode-header-image
Aug 2022
49m 8s

(Thanos, J., dissenting)

Robert Scavone Jr.
About this episode

Constitutional adjudication is not a "Cosmic Battle" of good versus evil between Ironman and Thanos.  "Judges are not superheroes," and constitutional cases should be decided dispassionately, with an appreciation that judges or justices who disagree usually do so in good faith and for valid legal reasons.  But "some judges [and justices]  have confused their role with that of the Avengers."  When they disagree with their colleagues, they sometimes claim that the "other side" is acting in bad faith or in ways that are illegitimate.  Such ad hominem attacks, while rhetorically appealing and perhaps true in some cases, do not bolster the legal analysis.  They do, however, undermine the legitimacy of the courts, and judges and justices should not engage in such wars. 

This is the thesis of Professor H. Jefferson Powell's article - Judges as Superheroes: The Danger of Confusing Constitutional Decisions with Cosmic Battles.  He joins me to discuss how some judges and justices use rhetoric as a weapon against colleagues who disagree with them, and how doing so is harmful to institutional legitimacy.

Professor Powell teaches Constitutional and First Amendment law at the Duke University School of Law.  His latest book is The Practice Of Constitutional Law.  He holds a bachelor’s degree from St. David’s University College (now Trinity St. David) of the University of Wales; a master’s degree and PhD from Duke University; and a Master’s of Divinity and JD from Yale University.  Prior to entering academia almost 4 decades ago, Professor Powell clerked for Judge Sam J. Ervin III of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. 

Opinions and writings discussed:

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., USSC (2022).

McDougall v. Cnty. of Ventura, 9th Cir. (2022).

SisterSong v. Gov. of Georgia, 11th Cir. (2022). 

Manning v. Caldwell, 4th Cir. (2019).

Robert's LinkedIn article about Chief Judge William Pryor's opinion in SisterSong.

In Praise of Doubt: How to Have Convictions Without Becoming a Fanatic

Up next
Apr 2025
Goodbye
Hey folks. Robert here. I have decided to step away from the podcast for an indeterminate period of time. Thank you for listening and for your support. 🔗 Connect with the Hosts:Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.comSpencer Charif – CharifLaw.com 
37s
Feb 2025
Capital Punishment and Immigration: The word "shall" is a problem.
Melanie Kalmanson, a partner at Quarlers & Brady, joined Robert to discuss a new Florida statute that requires judges to impose a sentence of death if an "unauthorized alien" commits a capital offense. Melanie and Robert examine potential constitutional issues the law faces under ... Show More
31m 47s
Feb 2025
The Great Debate: Tanenbaum vs. Scavone
On February 6, Robert debated Judge Adam Tanenbaum (First DCA) about whether the prior-panel rule applies in the DCAs. The rule requires 3-judge appellate panels to follow prior-panel precedent unless the court overrules the prior precedent en banc or the precedent has been overr ... Show More
1h 26m
Recommended Episodes
Sep 2024
Anthony Michael Kreis, "Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development" (U California Press, 2024)
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forc ... Show More
1h 5m
Sep 2023
Aaron Tang, "Supreme Hubris: How Overconfidence Is Destroying the Court--And How We Can Fix It" (Yale UP, 2023)
Today I talked to Aaron Tang about his new book Supreme Hubris: How Overconfidence Is Destroying the Court--And How We Can Fix It (Yale UP, 2023).The Supreme Court, once the most respected institution in American government, is now routinely criticized for rendering decisions bas ... Show More
52m 15s
Jul 2023
Morgan L. W. Hazelton and Rachael K. Hinkle, "Persuading the Supreme Court: The Significance of Briefs in Judicial Decision-Making" (UP Kansas, 2022)
Each June in the United States, scholars, journalists, law makers, law enforcers, lawyers, and members of the public wait for the announcement of major decisions from the Supreme Court. Justices often read a summary of their decision from the bench dressed in their robes. Paper c ... Show More
55m 10s
Sep 2024
Anthony Michael Kreis, "Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development" (U California Press, 2024)
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forc ... Show More
1h 5m
Jul 2023
G. Edward White, "Law in American History, Volume III: 1930-2000" (Oxford UP, 2019)
For nearly two decades the renowned legal historian G. Edward White has been writing a multi-volume history of law in America. In his third and concluding volume, Law in American History, Volume III: 1930-2000 (Oxford University Press, 2019), he surveys the many developments in A ... Show More
1h 12m
Nov 2024
Ketanji Brown Jackson on Ethics, Trust, and Keeping It Collegial at the Supreme Court
Since the founding of the nation, just 116 people have served as Supreme Court Justices; the 116th is Ketanji Brown Jackson, appointed by President Biden in 2022. Jackson joined a Court with six conservative Justices setting a new era of jurisprudence. She took her seat just days ... Show More
25m 59s
Sep 2024
Kevin J. McMahon, "A Supreme Court Unlike Any Other: The Deepening Divide Between the Justices and the People" (U Chicago Press, 2024)
Many scholars and members of the press have argued that John Roberts’ Supreme Court is exceptional. While some emphasize the approach to interpreting the Constitution or the justices conservative ideology, Dr. Kevin J. McMahon suggests that the key issue is democratic legitimacy. ... Show More
59m 38s
Oct 2024
Jon Michaels and David Noll, "Vigilante Nation: How State-Sponsored Terror Threatens Our Democracy" (Atria/One Signal, 2024)
Law professors Jon Michaels and David Noll use their expertise to expose how state-supported forms of vigilantism are being deployed by MAGA Republicans and Christian nationalists to roll back civil, political, and privacy rights and subvert American democracy. Beyond identifying ... Show More
1h 21m
Jul 2023
The Supreme Court's Past, Present, and Future: A Conversation with John Yoo
It has been a momentous few weeks for the Supreme Court. What better time to discuss the Court's history and future? We are therefore launching our "Summer of Law" series to shed light on the legal world .Kicking the series off is John Yoo, the Heller Professor of Law at the Univ ... Show More
53m 19s