Immunity in High Places
Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts
Slate Audio
4.6 • 3.4K Ratings
🗓️ 21 January 2017
⏱️ 49 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Summary
Can a group of wrongfully-detained noncitizens sue high-ranking Bush Administration officials for violating their rights in the days following 9/11? That’s the central question in Ziglar v Abbasi, which was argued this week at the Supreme Court. On today’s episode, we hear from Rachel Meeropol of the Center for Constitutional Rights, who represented the former detainees.
We also consider Lee v. Tam, another big case argued at the high court on Wednesday. It centers on a trademark claim by the Asian-American dance-rock band The Slants. That claim was denied on the grounds that the name was disparaging towards “persons of Asian descent.” Simon Tam joins us to tell the story of his band’s name, and to make the case that the government isn’t equipped to be deciding who is and isn’t using language disparagingly.
Transcripts of Amicus are available to Slate Plus members. Consider signing up today! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial here.
Amicus is brought to you by The Great Courses Plus, a video learning service that offers lectures on all kinds of topics. Get the first full month FREE when you sign up by going to TheGreatCoursesPlus.com/amicus.
And by Blue Apron. Blue Apron’s meal kits are delivered right to your door, and make cooking at home easy. Get your first THREE meals FREE by going to BlueApron.com/amicus.
Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Our email is amicus@slate.com. Follow us on Facebook here. Podcast production by Tony Field.
Need to set up your Slate Plus feed? If you subscribed through Slate.com, check out our FAQ at slate.com/podcastfaqs for easy instructions. Members subscribed via Apple Podcasts get automatic access—no setup required.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | Hi and welcome to Amicus Slate's podcast about the Supreme Court and the law. |
| 0:07.9 | I'm Dahlia Lithwick. I cover the courts for Slate. |
| 0:12.9 | This will be the first amicus podcast that takes place post inauguration, which means that you, me, and everyone else now lives in the President |
| 0:23.3 | Donald Trump era. Among the many things that that implicates are Jeff Sessions and his bid to be |
| 0:31.1 | the U.S. Attorney General, a nomination that is now pending in the Senate. For those of you who |
| 0:36.7 | weren't in the room for his testimony, |
| 0:38.7 | let me just note that Sessions, among other things, said that in his view, lawyers who are |
| 0:44.7 | secular or not religious are going to have a harder time grasping what he calls truth. |
| 0:51.3 | So let's sit with that for a minute. and let's think about the fact that Donald Trump |
| 0:56.1 | has said he'll announce his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court in the coming days. In addition to |
| 1:01.7 | all of that, this week, the court heard several fascinating cases and we're going to discuss them |
| 1:07.3 | on the show today. One of them had to do with the government's searches and arrests |
| 1:12.6 | and detentions of immigrants, including many Muslims, in the days after 9-11. Then Attorney |
| 1:19.3 | General, John Ashcroft, and other officials from the Bush administration are still trying to |
| 1:24.1 | shut down a lawsuit over the way these men were treated. I should note that |
| 1:28.8 | that treatment included strip searches, beatings, and other brutal abuses, some of which |
| 1:34.4 | lasted months and months. But first, we turn to another case, argued Wednesday, at the |
| 1:40.2 | High Court, posing this question, what's in a name or what's in a band's name or maybe more |
| 1:47.1 | aptly what's not in a band's name? This is a case that pits a group called the slants. This is the |
| 1:54.5 | self-described first and only all Asian American dance rock band against the U.S. patent and trademark office. The PTO refused in |
| 2:05.5 | this case to issue the band, a trademark for their band name, on the theory that the word slants |
| 2:11.1 | actually disparages Asians. This dispute has been bouncing around for five years. It was argued before the High Court this week. |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Slate Audio, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of Slate Audio and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.

