You ready?

I was born ready. Welcome to Advisory opinions. I'm Sarah Asger, that's David French and this is the long-awaited episode. It's maybe four, five years in the making David.

It is. It is. Because today we have a guest who is going to take on originalism head on and maybe more

importantly that guest isn't just any guest it's Judge Edmond Sargis from the Southern District of Ohio, who's come to really explain a different judicial

philosophy that we've been having a conversation back and forth now for about a year.

I met Judge Sargis at Legal Eagles in Gettysburg last year and it's been one of the

most rewarding conversations of my legal career.

And Judge, I'm so thrilled that you're here and willing to share some of your thoughts with our audience.

Well, thank you, Sarah, and thanks to you and David for inviting me. As you know I am a

very avid listener of the podcast so let me first give kudos to both of you. I really enjoy that you are able to

address controversial subjects in a way that treats different sides of the debate fairly.

I don't think we do enough these days to talk to each other about divisive issues. I think people, I'm one of them,

oftentimes avoid topics like this, so we don't end up getting in arguments with people we respect in life,

but don't want to necessarily disagree with.

So what I'm hoping we can do today

is to ferret out different ways of looking

at constitutional interpretation.

I will tell you as we begin I am not a believer that one size fits all.

I think originalism has its place.

I think the common law organic view has its place.

And I should also add a caveat as a district judge.

The one thing I tell new members of our court when they start,

...