Judicial Philosophies Are Way Overrated with Mark Tushnet - Episode 192

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