meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Case in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and Culture

#237: Bonus SCOTUS

Case in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and Culture

The Heritage Foundation

Government

4.5527 Ratings

🗓️ 14 June 2018

⏱️ 35 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

This week, Elizabeth and Tiffany talk about the Pacific Legal Foundation's big First Amendment win and Ginsburg bench slapping the 2nd Circuit. They also interview Utah Supreme Court Justice Tom Lee about corpus linguistics, clerking for Justice Thomas and Judge Wilkinson, and family dinner with Rex Lee.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

I'm Elizabeth Slattery, and I'm Tiffany Bates.

0:06.1

And welcome to SCOTUS 101, where we break down what's happening at the Supreme Court,

0:09.9

what the justices are up to, and other things related to our favorite branch of government.

0:14.1

This week we're talking about political t-shirts,

0:16.6

Ginsburg bench-slapping the Second Circuit,

0:18.5

and we'll interview Utah Supreme Court Justice Tom Lee. So this is our bonus episode of the week because the Supreme Court... So many opinions.

0:26.0

Yeah, added an extra opinion day. Except it wasn't that many. Thursday of this week. Yes. So they

0:31.0

issued two opinions on Thursday of this week. So now we have 19 cases to go. only a few more days left. But one of the opinions was

0:40.6

one we've been anticipating Minnesota Voters Alliance versus Manske. So this is a First Amendment

0:46.5

case, the case of Andrew Selleck, who was involved with the local tea party in Minnesota. He wore a

0:53.4

please ID me button and a don't tread on me t-shirt with the Gadsden flag to the polls on election day in 2010.

1:00.5

And he was turned away from the polls and then he learned that there is a Minnesota law that bans voters from wearing hats, t-shirts, buttons, and other insignia apparel with political, anything that's

1:13.4

construed is political when they go to the polls on Election Day. So he challenged this in court,

1:19.2

and it ended up going all the way to the Supreme Court, and the court ruled 7-2, in an opinion

1:24.5

by Chief Justice John Roberts, that the Minnesota law violates the free speech

1:28.1

clause of the First Amendment. So that's good news for voters across America because there are

1:32.9

something like nine other states that have pretty similar laws. So to quickly go through what the

1:37.9

court held, they said that the polls are a non-public forum. So this means that the government

1:42.8

can place some content-based restrictions

1:45.3

on speech, but they have to have a reasonable basis. The state has to be able to articulate some

1:49.6

reasonable basis for why it is restricting the speech. And in an earlier case in the 90s, the court

1:57.6

had upheld a state's ban on active campaigning outside, immediately outside

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from The Heritage Foundation, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of The Heritage Foundation and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.