Sotomayor vs. Kavanaugh?

In this episode of Advisory Opinions, hosts Sarah Isger and David French dive into a range of legal and cultural topics, beginning with a fiery discussion about Justice Sonia Sotomayor's rare public criticism of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Sotomayor's comment—suggesting Kavanaugh's background may have insulated him from understanding hourly wage workers—sparked debate over whether such personal critiques by justices cross an ethical line. The hosts weigh in, with David French calling it inappropriate and Sarah Isger suggesting it may have been a regrettable 'mulligan' moment. They then explore Stephen Colbert’s long-standing fascination with corporate personhood, tracing it back to the misattributed 1883 Santa Clara County case, and debate the legal and philosophical underpinnings of corporate rights. The conversation turns to concerns about judicial pipeline elitism, as both hosts express alarm over the growing dominance of Supreme Court clerks in shaping the judiciary, creating a self-reinforcing 'clerk family House of Lords.' They also spotlight the chaotic state of circuit court seals, with the Fifth Circuit’s proposed redesign amid a sea of inconsistent, sometimes absurd designs. The episode closes with two standout circuit cases: a Fifth Circuit ruling striking down the 150-year-old ban on home distillation on constitutional grounds, and a Third Circuit decision that redefines 'sparkling sports gambling' as federally regulated derivatives, potentially undermining state gambling laws. The hosts emphasize the broader implications of these rulings for federal power, state sovereignty, and the future of regulation. Key takeaways include: 1) Public personal critiques between Supreme Court justices, while rare, risk undermining institutional decorum; 2) Corporate personhood, though legally flawed in origin, serves a functional purpose in modern governance and free expression; 3) The judicial nomination pipeline is increasingly narrow and self-perpetuating, threatening diversity of thought and background; 4) The chaos in circuit court seals reflects deeper administrative and symbolic issues within the judiciary; 5) The Fifth Circuit’s home distillation ruling challenges the limits of Congress’s taxing power and may signal a shift in how federal regulatory authority is interpreted; and 6) The Third Circuit’s 'sparkling sports gambling' decision highlights the growing tension between federal derivatives regulation and state gambling laws. The episode closes with a call to explore AI, prediction markets, and their implications for national security and democracy.