I highly recommend adding the oral arguments to your podcast feed. It's great to hear them without preamble or spin. Just two good lawyers (usually) and the justices.
I got hooked to them when I listened to a batch and one case was something I know a lot about. I was yelling at both sides for their choice of arguments and the way they were presented. It definitely gave me a healthy respect/fear of Gell-Mann Amnesia.
What I find is that when it comes to the oral arguments, both sides usually have good points that they make, and the cases are usually decided on ideas much grater than the matter at hand. It also becomes clear that almost every case could be resolved with congressional clarification of the laws that they have passed.
The Gell-mann Amnesia is very real. Most SCOTUS reporting is grossly misleading if not factually wrong.
What do you think of the newer justices in oral? Their questions are obviously a different matter than their writing and decisions.
I have been impressed by Gorsuch. Kavanaugh seems to simply grandstand or throw softballs to whatever side he prefers. I haven't heard enough from Barret or Jackson to really form an opinion, although the latter seems prone to grandstanding as well.
I got hooked to them when I listened to a batch and one case was something I know a lot about. I was yelling at both sides for their choice of arguments and the way they were presented. It definitely gave me a healthy respect/fear of Gell-Mann Amnesia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnes...