This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Monday, September 21st, 2020.

I'm Caleb Brown.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's passing has launched a whole new fight over the US Supreme Court.

Cato adjunct scholar David Post clerked for Justice Ginsburg twice and he has some

personal memories of the late justice.

We spoke yesterday.

I think it's fair to say that a lot of libertarians don't have a super high regard for the

jurisprudence at least on the Supreme Court of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, what can you tell us about

her work both as an attorney and a judge that should be most impressive to people who

care about individual liberty who people who would describe themselves as

liberal or libertarian?

Yeah, that's an interesting question.

I think there's some sort of standard answers or straightforward answers. I think her first amendment

jurisprudence is important and I think a libertarian would not be terribly uncomfortable with her First Amendment views.

I think she had a fairly strongly protective view of the First Amendment.

I was, during the year that I clerked for her on the Supreme Court, we had a case Madsen, I think it was Madsen versus the

ACLU, I think, which was about injunction, speech injunctions at abortion clinics.

So it was an interesting little case, not enormously important sort of doctrinally,

I don't think, but it sort of posed a particularly difficult dilemma I think for someone like

with Ginsburg who is sort of on both sides.

You know, it's a, it's the same conflict that the

ACLU, I think, faced and faces about support for reproductive rights on the one hand and support for the

...