Wisconsin’s State Supreme Court heard one of the landmark cases of the 2020 presidential election. During oral arguments in Trump v Biden in December 2020, Justice Jill J Karofsky participated in proceedings via Zoom from her office inside the state capitol in Madison. Outside her office window, she could see armed protesters gathered in what she later viewed as a dry run for January 6th. In a 4-3 decision, with one Republican justice siding against Trump, the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted to uphold Biden’s victory in the state. On this week’s Amicus, Justice Karofsky speaks for the first time about the fallout from that case: Fallout in her personal life, for herself and loved ones. Fallout in her professional life, with an investigation and the threat of sanction for her line of questioning in oral argument. And beyond all that, the fallout for democracy—and for the role of jurists within that democracy.
In this week’s Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern to discuss the originalist Second Amendment ruling that puts women’s lives at risk, the looming prospect of a potential nationwide ban on a widely used, FDA-approved, abortion pill, and how the future of jurisprudence appears to be competing time machines.
Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
megaphone.fm/adchoicesWisconsin’s State Supreme Court heard one of the landmark cases of the 2020 presidential election. During oral arguments in Trump v Biden in December 2020, Justice Jill J Karofsky participated in proceedings via Zoom from her office inside the state capitol in Madison. Outside her office window, she could see armed protesters gathered in what she later viewed as a dry run for January 6th. In a 4-3 decision, with one Republican justice siding against Trump, the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted to uphold Biden’s victory in the state. On this week’s Amicus, Justice Karofsky speaks for the first time about the fallout from that case: Fallout in her personal life, for herself and loved ones. Fallout in her professional life, with an investigation and the threat of sanction for her line of questioning in oral argument. And beyond all that, the fallout for democracy—and for the role of jurists within that democracy.
In this week’s Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern to discuss the originalist Second Amendment ruling that puts women’s lives at risk, the looming prospect of a potential nationwide ban on a widely used, FDA-approved, abortion pill, and how the future of jurisprudence appears to be competing time machines.
Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
megaphone.fm/adchoicesWisconsin’s State Supreme Court heard one of the landmark cases of the 2020 presidential election. During oral arguments in Trump v Biden in December 2020, election.html">Justice Jill J Karofsky participated in proceedings via Zoom from her office inside the state capitol in Madison. Outside her office window, she could see armed protesters gathered in what she later viewed as a dry run for January 6th. In a 4-3 decision, with one Republican justice siding against Trump, the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted to uphold Biden’s victory in the state. On this week’s Amicus, Justice Karofsky speaks for the first time about the fallout from that case: Fallout in her personal life, for herself and loved ones. Fallout in her professional life, with an investigation and the threat of sanction for her line of questioning in oral argument. And beyond all that, the fallout for democracy—and for the role of jurists within that democracy.
In this week’s Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern to discuss the circuit-court-domestic-violence-second-amendment-right.html">originalist Second Amendment ruling that puts women’s lives at risk, the looming prospect of a potential pill-outlawed-single-judge-real-possibility.html">nationwide ban on a widely used, FDA-approved, abortion pill, and how the future of jurisprudence appears to be competing judge-abortion-still-constitutional-dobbs-13th-amenedment.html?via=rss_socialflow_facebook">time machines.
Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
