Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Libertarian Podcast: The Supreme Court and Gay Marriage
Still hungry for more razor-sharp constitutional analysis after yesterday’s Law Talk? You’re in luck. We’ve got a double-shot this week, as Professor Epstein also weighs in on the Supreme Court’s gay marriage decision in Obergefell v. Hodges in the new episode of The Libertarian. And the conversation here is a little different — for instance, Richard discusses whether Chief Justice Roberts has any discernible judicial philosophy and whether Rand Paul’s suggestion that we get government out of marriage altogether is practical. It’s all available by listening in below or by subscribing to The Libertarian via iTunes or your favorite podcasting app.
Published in Law, Marriage, Podcasts
Can’t wait to listen. any new Classicist podcasts coming?
Yep. We’re recording on Friday.
Just a historical note:
It is my impression that Scott v. Sanford went well beyond saying that emancipation didn’t automatically confer citizenship (which the Constitution clearly didn’t require), but that emancipation or anything else couldn’t confer citizenship anywhere, in any state to a black person (which the Constitution didn’t speak to) . In fact, it’s logic extended really seemed to mean that states couldn’t abolish slavery at all, which was absolute nonsense.
Only very weakly tangential to Prof. Epstein’s point I know, but the idea that the Slave Power was anything but gaining victory after unfair, as well unjust, victory in the 1850s is something that I find many learned friends just don’t seem to get. I can’t seem to help but point it out whenever I can.
I have learned more from Richard Epstein’s expansions and dilations on this site and the places it has taken me than I can ever really say. His explanation of Massachusetts v. Mellon is worth $40/year by itself.