Jurisprudence
July 13, 20261:24 PM
Finn Gomez/Getty Images
This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate’s coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. Keep up with all of our Supreme Court coverage and analysis by signing up for weekly email roundups. The best way to support our work—and unlock exclusive legal analysis—is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!)
The Supreme Court term came crashing to a close in June with a barrage of decisions that, with a few narrow exceptions, further stripped away Americans’ right to govern themselves. On this week’s episode of Amicus, co-hosts Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern convened Slate’s annual Breakfast Table to discuss the major themes of a term dominated by 6–3 decisions empowering President Donald Trump—and the justices themselves—at the expense of Congress, lower courts, and democracy. They were joined by three of the court’s sharpest, wisest critics: Sherrilyn Ifill of Howard University School of Law, Nikolas Bowie of Harvard Law School, and Steve Vladeck of the Georgetown University Law Center. An excerpt of their conversation, below, has been edited and condensed for clarity.
