Oh, yay.

Oh, yay.

The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court.

Unless there is any more question to be able to find an argument in this case.

All persons having business before the Honorable, the Supreme Court of the United States, are in mind us to give their attention.

Welcome to Divided Argument, an unscheduled, unpredictable, serving court podcast.

I'm Dan Apps.

And I'm Will Bode.

So, Will, we do like to stay unpredictable, like last episode when we kept telling people

throughout the episode that we were going to cover two cases, Brinovich and AFP.

And then we got to the end and realized we had used up all of our time block.

So, you know, that's just what we're going to do.

You can't predict.

Even if we tell you we're going to do something, we might not do it.

So, Dan, are we going to cover one case or two cases today?

I think we should now adopt a policy of not overpromisingising. So I think the over-under for today is

1.5 cases, but I'm not going to commit to more than that. So let's see. And so we are going

to do that AFP case. But before we jump into that, anything we should talk about?

Some interesting feedback, some substantive, some stylistic. So we got a really

interesting email from a listener, Jared Knight, asking about the cat's paw theory, which was

rejected in Bernovich, which we talked about last time. This is the idea that the fact that

some members of the legislature might have racist motives doesn't necessarily infect the entire process.

...