I'm John Bachelor with Richard Epstein. Professor Richard Epstein teaches law at NYU in the University of Chicago.

He's at the Civitas Institute to comment on a general opinion I read now and again, especially in the substack world of blogging,

that the Supreme Court, the Roberts Court, is completely deferential

to the executive, Mr. Trump, and that the Supreme Court steps back and endorses larger and

larger powers in the hands of the president and does not challenge him in any fashion that is acceptable to the

opposition. I speak generally because we're looking at an empirical analysis of this allegation

that the Roberts Court is deferential to the president's power. Richard O' column recently at the

SCOTUS blog by Adam Feldman

ranges over the whole history of the court,

reaching back to the 19th century, the Fuller Court,

talks about the Warren Court in the 20th century

and looks at the Robert Court, all the courts in between.

I'm unfamiliar with this whole territory, but the general charge that Mr. Roberts and the

six presumed conservative votes on the court are giving and will give the president

powers that exceed that of previous executives.

Feldman challenges that.

What is your measure, Richard?

Good evening to you.

Yes, well, I'm not a fan of the kind of empirical analysis that Adam Feldman runs.

I think it's much more important to look at particular cases and particular disputes.

The landscape of the world, of course, has changed very

much from the full of years, 1890 to 1910, because the administrative state was not around at that

...