Grab Them by the Constitution
Summary
Julie Sook, author of *The Shadow Court*, argues that the U.S. Supreme Court’s anti-democratic structure has made it the de facto constitutional lawmaker, necessitating a new "shadow court" to empower Congress. She proposes this advisory body to generate alternative legal interpretations and restore legislative agency, drawing on global models like shadow cabinets. The discussion also examines how legal systems structurally fail women by ignoring their reliance interests and enforcing male over-entitlement, as seen in recent high-profile cases.
Topics discussed
Intro: Trump's power and the Supreme Court's role
Promo for Amicus Plus live event and subscription
Introduction of guest Julie Sook and her work
Why waiting for institutions to fix themselves is insufficient
The anti-democratic structure of the Supreme Court
Myths of American constitutional democracy and civic education
Comparing US institutions to post-fascist democracies
Systemic failure to protect women and the ERA
How state legislatures blocked Equal Rights Amendment ratification
Judicial supremacy and the myth of constitutional inevitability
Congressional options to counter Supreme Court decisions
Proposal for a non-binding 'shadow court'
Critique of current Supreme Court composition and diversity
Designing a representative shadow court and its benefits
The role of dissents and limits of current judicial process
Global models: Abstract review and constitutional courts
Standing doctrine and the need for legal analysis on urgent issues
The value of interplay between courts and Congress
Reflections on the Cornell case and institutional failure
Alito's 'reliance interest' argument and women's rights
Action items: Congressional statutes and constitutional amendments
Conclusion: Moving from 'what can we do' to 'what can't you do'
Preview of Amicus Plus bonus episode and credits
Listen ad-free on Castria