DeepSummary
The podcast episode begins by discussing how Disney was once a unique motion picture studio in Hollywood, but had to grow to survive, raising questions about whether that growth has eroded what made Disney special. The transcript then shifts to discuss inflation, with an economist arguing the Federal Reserve Chair is not fully in control of the economy.
Preet Bharara, the host, then introduces a segment discussing the recent Supreme Court decision on the abortion pill mifepristone. He interviews Trevor Morrison, a law professor and former clerk to Justice Ginsburg, to get insights on the ruling. They discuss issues like standing, the reasoning behind the unanimous decision, and its implications.
The discussion also touches on other recent Supreme Court cases, including one on trademarking phrases referencing living people. Morrison and Bharara analyze the significance of these rulings, the Court's reasoning, and the potential for future cases on related issues.
Key Episodes Takeaways
- The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the plaintiffs in the mifepristone case lacked standing, avoiding ruling on the merits of FDA's approval of the abortion pill.
- Standing is a key legal doctrine requiring plaintiffs to show an actual injury to bring a case, and the Court found these anti-abortion doctors did not meet that bar.
- While the ruling preserves access to mifepristone for now, the issue could return to the Court if plaintiffs with proper standing bring new challenges.
- Legal experts expect continued efforts by states and ideologically-motivated parties to bring new cases challenging FDA approval of mifepristone.
- The Court also issued a separate unanimous ruling upholding Congress' ability to prohibit trademarking phrases referencing living persons without consent.
- A pending blockbuster case before the Court tests the scope of potential immunity from prosecution for former President Trump related to the Jan 6th insurrection.
- Delays in issuing a ruling on Trump's immunity could impact whether any trial occurs before the 2024 election.
- The unanimity on mifepristone may partly reflect judicial prudence but also highlights the one-sided nature of plaintiffs' lack of standing.
Top Episodes Quotes
- “Justice Kavanaugh actually quoted Justice Scalia's line in this opinion that's right.“ by Trevor Morrison
- “The technical legal issue is really a matter of administrative law and statutory interpretation whether FDA had an adequate basis to approve this drug for that use.“ by Trevor Morrison
- “I don't know that they're too polite to lobby. I think it might just be a question of how to lobby to do it in the right way.“ by Trevor Morrison
- “I think it's very unlikely that the court will find Trump categorically immune, but I think there are lots of middle positions that the court might take.“ by Trevor Morrison
- “At this point, it is far from clear that there would be time to have a trial before the election, no matter what the court says, and I think that's concerning.“ by Trevor Morrison
Entities
Concept
Person
Company
Product
Book
Episode Information
Stay Tuned with Preet
CAFE
6/17/24
Trevor Morrison is a professor of law and Dean Emeritus at New York University School of Law. As the Supreme Court continues to hand down consequential opinions this month, Morrison joins Preet to discuss the long-awaited decision concerning the abortion drug Mifepristone, and a second case concerning whether the First Amendment protects an individual's right to trademark the catchphrase "Trump too small."
Stay Tuned in Brief is presented by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Please write to us with your thoughts and questions at letters@cafe.com, or leave a voicemail at 669-247-7338.
For analysis of recent legal news, join the CAFE Insider community. Head to cafe.com/insider to join for just $1 for the first month.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices