Hi, it's Dahlia Lithwick, and we are thundering toward July, and the U.S. Supreme Court is doing so with some serious clown car energy, a dozen-ish opinions still to come, one of which momentarily slipped out on Wednesday morning, only to be stuffed back inside its box. In a huge break for

our colleagues at Bloomberg, in the Press Corps game of Refresh, refresh, refresh, refresh,

roulette on the Supreme Court.gov website, the court momentarily published its decision in a pair

of emergency abortion cases, and then just as quickly it was all gone.

Later, the court's press office published a statement claiming it was all a big mistake and the real

EMTALA decision will be, quote, issued in due course, end quote.

Even later, Bloomberg shared a copy of the fleeting decision in which the court looks to have decided to dig,

aka dismiss the two cases, as improvidently granted. On Wednesday morning, the court managed to

intentionally publish two important cases that ought not be lost in this shuffle. Murthy v. Missouri,

the so-called social media job-owning case, and Snyder v. U.S., a case about a federal

bribery and corruption statute. They're both more humdinger than humdrum, in part because

of what they signal about what the justices are thinking and feeling in these last few days in June,

and also because they just tell us so clearly how very badly the Fifth Circuit truly sucks.

Here's a taste of my conversation with Slate's Mark Joseph Stern,

senior writer on the courts and on the law for Slate and my ride or die here on

Amicus as we tried to wrap our heads around all of it.

Oh my God, Dahlia.

Hi, it's so great to be here with you, but do we have to be here at all?

Jesus, this is a bad one.

I just feel like we cover like fireflies, luminous, fleeting fireflies in the sky.

Or as somebody pointed out to me today, Schrodinger's EMTala decision. It's close. What's happening?

We don't know. Can we talk briefly? This feels like just at the most surface level, an epic, unforced error again from

...