Mark, what should we call this conversation today?

I sense, Mary, that you have gleaned from my work with Dahlia Lithwick that we are strongly opposed to a Supreme Court curtain

razor. Is that allergic to the term as far as I can tell? Yes, indeed. I have lost count of the

number of times I've asked Slate's Mark Joseph Stern to tell me what the Supreme Court is about to do.

Every October, the justices begin their official term on the first Monday of the month.

Year after year, Mark walks me through the docket.

But this is the year.

I learned just how much Mark has begun to hate doing that.

Can I quote you to you?

Please.

You said the start of term curtain razor has moved from distraction to collusion.

Those are fierce words, friend.

Fighting words, one might say.

But I stand by them.

I really think that covering this Supreme Court in 2025 as though it's just starting another term like any other. They're going to hear some big cases. Here's a little rundown of them. Who knows how they'll come out? Let's speculate. All of that gives the court more credibility

and legitimacy than it deserves. And I think it normalizes them. It normalizes them. And even more

importantly, it pretends as though they are engaged in some kind of judicial decision making.

When I do not think that either their deliberations or their work product

bears much resemblance to actual judging these days.

Mark knows this is not how a reporter usually speaks about the people he's covering.

But over the course of his career, the Supreme Court's opinions have become less legally coherent to him.

The conservative majority has overturned precedent again and again. Mark says some justices

...