Hey folks, Joyce Vance here.

Preets out this week, so I'm joined by Supreme Court expert Dahlia Lithwick for a new episode of The Insider podcast.

Dahlia is a senior editor at Slate where she writes about the courts and the law and hosts the legal podcast amicus.

For the third year in a row, Dahllly joins me to preview the upcoming Supreme Court term

and highlight which cases we should be paying the most attention to.

If you're a member of Cafe Insider, head to the insider feed or click the link in the show

notes of this podcast to hear the full analysis.

Stay tuned, listeners.

Stick around for an excerpt from our conversation.

Members of Insider help support our work and get access to full episodes and other subscriber

benefits. We're living in unreasonable times. So join our community of reasonable voices.

Head to cafe.com slash insider or stay tuned.substack.com. Now, on to the show.

Do you think that this is the last chance that this court has to do what in my view would be to

get it right and to tell Donald Trump enough is enough? And that even though this is a court that describes to the unitary executive theory

and believes in a muscular presidency, there are some limits.

Or do you think, I mean, is that going to be the overall view this term,

that there are no limits to the imperial presidency?

So there is a theory, Joyce, to which I do not think I subscribe, which has been variously described as, you know, the best language for it is the appeasement theory, right?

That John Roberts and the center of the court can't pick a battle all day every day, can't quite literally usher in the constitutional crisis

by saying, Donald Trump, you can't do this and having him do it, right? And that the

theory goes that we think that whatever I'm characterizing is the center of the court, although it's a vanishingly small

center, but let's call it John Roberts. When John Roberts is your center, you're in deep trouble.

...