They didn't break that, but they have pretty good access to those people.

She actually, her image, she subconsciously mocks that lineage.

So that's happening?

Okay.

It seems like an incredible story here on many fronts.

From One World Trade Center in Manhattan, this is The New Yorker Radio Hour, a co-production

of WNYC Studios and The New Yorker.

Welcome to The New Yorker Radio Hour. I'm David Remnick.

The most beloved and acclaimed author in American fiction, due respect to Tony Morrison or Philip Roth and many other

masters, is Mo Willems. He's the author of Don't Let the Pigeon Drive the Bus. Hooray for Amanda

and her alligator, and pigs make me sneeze. He'll join us in the studio later this hour.

Now last week, Neil Gorsuch took questions from the Senate

Judiciary Committee in his bid to fill the seat that Justice Scalia had held for so long on

the Supreme Court. One question that conservatives and liberals alike have been asking is how

does Gorsuch's legal philosophy compare to Scalia's? And to understand that, you have to look not just at the

record of his decisions as a judge, which is important enough, but at its view of history,

that's what Jill Lippoor tells us. Jill is both a staff writer at the magazine and a historian.

She wrote a fantastic essay recently about the Supreme Court, history, and the law.

Now, Jill, before we get to Neil Gorsuch, I think you should start by describing what you call the history test.

Not the kind of test that you give to undergraduates, I take it, but explain what this history test is.

Sure. Well, unlike the kind of test you give to undergraduates, this one is very difficult

to pass because it's quite vague and uncertain. But the court, in trying to make judicial decisions,

...