It’s out of the frying pan and into the fire, as professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo take us from the just-concluded drama of the Amy Coney Barrett hearings to the just-emerging drama over the Supreme Court’s role in the 2020 election. Along the way they consider how seriously we should take the court-packing threat; whether super-precedents are actually a thing; if Roe v. Wade and the ACA are actually in danger with a Justice Barrett on the court; and what the newest Supreme Court justice’s judicial blindspot is most likely to be. Then it’s on to the Supreme Court’s unpredictable role in the 2020 presidential election. Will Chief Justice Roberts surprise us all again? Do any of the lessons of Bush v. Gore apply this year? And does ACB have a duty to recuse herself? Come for the top-shelf legal analysis, stay for Professor Epstein posing a grammar brainteaser for the ages.

Summer school is starting early in the faculty lounge. On this episode, Professors Epstein and Yoo have a full agenda: Are Minnesota prosecutors setting themselves up for a fall in the Derek Chauvin case? Should the Supreme Court have taken a case that could have allowed it to pare back qualified immunity? What should we make of Justice Gorsuch’s surprising turn in the LGBT discrimination case? Or Chief Justice Roberts siding with the court’s liberals in subjecting California churches to strict COVID protocols? Does President Trump have the power to stop John Bolton’s book from being released? And, finally, can we find eternal truths about intellectual property law in the battle between a couple of authors of wolf-themed erotica? At least one professor thinks so!

With Professors Epstein and Yoo deemed essential workers, the faculty lounge reopens for another round of COVID-19 analysis. On this episode: Can President Trump override state efforts to keep economies shuttered? Are there limits to the intrusive restrictions being enacted by the nation’s governors? Do churches (or abortion clinics) get special treatment during shutdowns? How can the Chinese government be held to account for the spread of coronavirus? What was the right response to the USS Roosevelt controversy? Was President Trump justified in removing a troublesome inspector general? And does a new report show it’s time to blow up the FISA proces? All that plus a Law Talk examination of Tom Brady’s new IP play, a sampling of avian life in John’s neighborhood, and we play “Which Prof is More Likely to Snap in Lockdown?

Every other faculty lounge in America may be closed, but Professors Epstein and Yoo are still showing up to work. On this episode: what are the legal ramifications of the coronavirus? Can Catholic charities be excluded from providing adoption services because of their refusal to place children with same-sex couples? Is there any hope for President Trump’s libel lawsuits against the New York Times and Washington Post? Is encouraging an illegal immigrant to stay in the country a crime? Is the Supreme Court about to make a game-changing decision on abortion? And is getting hit by a foul ball about to be grounds for a lawsuit? All that plus the professors struggle with virtual classes, dish on tell-all books, and continue their annual tradition of making the nation’s most unreliable World Series predictions.

In a Law Talk first, Professors Richard Epstein & John Yoo and host Troy Senik are gathered in the same studio to kick off their tenth year of the podcast. On this episode: Can Congress rein in President Trump’s power to pursue military action against Iran? What was Nancy Pelosi trying to accomplish by withholding the articles of impeachment? Can the Justice Department compel Apple to create a backdoor on encrypted devices? And is Utah’s effort to rescind a personalized license plate a potential First Amendment violation? All that and more as the faculty lounge reopens for 2020.

Impeachment is on the syllabus as the faculty lounge reopens its doors. In this episode: Does the Democrats’ pivot from ‘quid pro quo’ to ‘bribery’ add up? Has the first week of witnesses changed either professor’s mind? And when exactly would a White House have the authority to hold up foreign aid? All that plus analysis of what’s most likely to compel the release of the Trump tax returns (hint: it’s not the case that looks headed for the Supreme Court) and the strange case of the Equal Rights Amendment, which is either one vote away from being added to the Constitution or already dead on arrival. We’ll let the professors explain.

The men of Law Talk reconvene between their respective journeys to Greece and there’s a very full docket. On this episode: could President Trump’s conversations with Ukraine lay the predicate for impeachment? What’s the proper role for the U.S. in the Iran-Saudi Arabia conflict? Is the FDA within its rights to crack down on vaping? Should California be able to go its own way on regulating automobile emissions? Can the president solve West Coast homelessness? And why has New Mexico made it a little more dangerous to get married?

It’s time for summer school in the faculty lounge and Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are reviewing the Supreme Court term that was. On this episode: was the census ruling a backdoor victory for critics of the administrative state? Are critics right that Alex Acosta should have done more to prosecute Jeffrey Epstein? John gives us one weird trick for determining when religious symbols are allowed on government property. And the professors weigh in on the legal repercussions of renegade ice cream licking. All that plus Epstein’s tips for how to defraud grocery stores, Yoo condemns a legendary American political figure to eternal damnation, and we get a faculty lounge review of Maine’s state soft drink.