This is the Kator Daily Podcast for Wednesday, July 10th, 2024.

I'm Caleb Brown.

In Murphy v. Missouri, the Supreme Court grappled with questions of so-called jaw-boning

that's pressure applied by governments

to coerce some behavior that if they wrote a law to that effect would clearly violate

someone's rights. And the court's decision tossing the complaint out based on standing doesn't close the door on future challenges that might more clearly show government strong arming

Theters Brent Scorrup and Walter Olson comment.

I want to note at the outset here that in the Cato Institute brief in Murphy v. Missouri,

there was not a recommendation provided for who should prevail at the US Supreme Court.

Instead it was a discussion about how the court ought to think about the important issues involved in the case.

But before we get to Murthy, this important case about so-called jawboning. I want to go back a little bit and talk about

the NRA case known as Volo, which I spoke with Andrew Grossman about that case a while back.

And so Volo was a case about the government of New York, essentially telling business partners of the National Rifle Association, you really don't want to do business with these guys.

And Walter, as you initially described this case to me, it was something that may have felt like nice business you got there.

Be a shame if something happened to it because you associated in a business enterprise with the NRA. So that case went one direction, this, the Murthy case went a different direction. Can both of you help me understand why that happened the way it did?

Well, between the Volo case and the Murphy case, six justices switched from the one position to the other, which is pretty

impressive.

Fellow had been unanimous, which was itself an impressive statement that the First Amendment was definitely going to be enforced in this area.

And then in the Murf case, it was the three liberals and the three quote-unquote moderate who ruled the opposite way

with respect to the facts of this one case.

And I want to get back several times properly to the facts of this one case. And I want to get back several times

properly to the idea of the facts of the one case, because so far as I can tell, the

...