meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Checks and Balance from The Economist

Checks and Balance: Courting controversy

Checks and Balance from The Economist

The Economist

Politics, News & Politics, News, Us Politics

4.61.7K Ratings

🗓️ 3 December 2021

⏱️ 44 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

The Supreme Court looks poised to place dramatic limits on abortion rights. Liberals worry this signals a conservative takeover of the nation’s laws, but the justices deny that they are politicians in robes. How is the Supreme Court reshaping America?


The Economist’s Steve Mazie explains what another case on the docket reveals about the court’s conservative wing. We go back to a surprising ruling on gay rights. And former Trump official Sarah Isgur tells us what the right thinks of the court.


Jon Fasman presents with Charlotte Howard. 


We would love to hear from you—please take a moment to complete our listener survey at economist.com/USpodsurvey 


For full access to print, digital and audio editions as well as exclusive live events, subscribe to The Economist at economist.com/uspod



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

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

When it comes to investing, there's do, and then there's do more.

0:04.9

That's why at BlackRock we've built MyMap, a simple multi-acid range that makes investing

0:09.8

easier and does more for your money.

0:12.3

Choose from a range of ready-made, actively managed and sustainable funds, each providing

0:16.7

more diversification than a single asset, and designed with different risk levels in mind,

0:22.1

so you choose the best option for you.

0:24.8

Search BlackRock MyMap now to do more.

0:28.0

Capital at risk, the value of investments and the income from them can fall as well as

0:31.5

rise and are not guaranteed.

0:33.6

Investors may not get back the amount originally invested, diversification and asset allocation

0:37.7

may not fully protect you from market risk.

0:43.7

Much of the Supreme Court's work involves narrow questions.

0:47.5

In the late 19th century, the owner of a produce company argued that tomatoes should be classified

0:52.5

as a fruit.

0:53.8

The better to avoid attacks on imported vegetables.

0:57.7

In 1893, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that tomatoes were indeed vegetables.

1:03.4

But every now and again, the Supreme Court hears cases with the potential to reshape American

1:07.9

life.

1:09.5

The same court that ruled on tomatoes would three years later rule that racial segregation

1:14.2

was constitutional.

1:16.3

That decision, Plessy Hugh Ferguson, remains one of the most notorious in the Court's history,

1:21.8

and though it was overturned almost 60 years later in Brown vs. Board of Education.

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

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

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

Copyright © Tapesearch 2025.