Anthony Kennedy, the Politics of the Supreme Court, and how a New Justice May Change the Court

The Politics Guys

Michael Baranowski

Politics, News

4.5 • 772 Ratings

🗓️ 4 July 2018

⏱️ 56 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

In our first ever three-person Politics Guys, Northern Kentucky University Law Professor Ken Katkin joins Mike and Jay to discuss: how Kennedy was different from the Court’s four other conservatives whether the Justices are politicians in robes or if they base their decisions on more than partisan calculations if Senator McConnell should hold off on hearings for President Trump’s nominee to replace Kennedy until after the election, as he did with President Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Scalia how the Court may alter its opinions on partisan gerrymandering, LGBTQ rights, denial of services to same-sex weddings, and Roe v. Wade with a new, more conservative replacement for Kennedy Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. If you’re interested in supporting the show, go to politicsguys.com/support. Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/the-politics-guys/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Welcome to the politics, guys, a place for a bipartisan, rational, and civil debate on American politics and policy.
0:06.0	I'm Michael Beronowski, a political scientist at Northern Kentucky University.
0:09.7	With me today is my regular co-host, Cleveland Area Attorney and Republican Factotum Jay Carson.
0:15.5	But joining us today for this special, our first ever three-person episode, focused on the retirement of Supreme
0:22.9	Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is Northern Kentucky University law professor Ken Katkin.
0:28.3	Hey, guys.
0:29.5	Good morning.
0:31.0	So I thought we could start by talking a little bit about who Anthony Kennedy was, you know, as a judge, because
0:39.4	obviously he mainly sided with the court's conservatives. In fact, in every major five, four
0:45.4	decision this term, I believe he did, but he would sometimes provide a pretty important
0:50.8	swing vote for the court's liberals, at least in the past. So what do you think differentiated him from Thomas, Lido, Gorsuch, and Roberts?
1:00.8	Why don't we start with you, Ken? What do you think?
1:05.5	Well, you can answer that question from a lot of perspectives,
1:10.6	but I think from a perspective of his
1:14.5	approach to being a judge, I think he really liked being the swing judge. He really liked
1:22.4	being the center of power on the court. He really liked it that all the arguments were
1:26.6	directed to get his vote. And I think
1:29.5	that was a big motivating factor for him. And so that actually required him to vote sometimes
1:34.8	with the liberals, right? Because the whole thing of being the swing judge and the one who gets
1:40.1	to decide all the cases is that your vote can't be reliably counted on by the
1:46.5	faction that you're in, and in his case, the conservative faction.
1:50.5	And I think he did fancy himself a libertarian.
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

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

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