You ready?

I was born ready.

Welcome to the advisory opinions podcast. This is David French beginning by

Duncan on co-host Sarah Isger for day after day for week after week. Supreme court expert,

Supreme court watcher, Supreme court nerd, Sarah Isger kept predicting a case called

Espinoza. And for day after day, week after week, month after month, that case did not

issue from this court. And the first day, the first day that I said it was going to happen,

it happened. Now, you might think this is a little bit cruel that I'm going to begin

out of podcast by Duncan on my co-host, but I actually received multiple email requests for

just that. Look, the investigation is still out. We don't know whether you were sending bribes

to the court to push it. We don't know what baked goods may or may not have exchanged hands.

Sipinas will be issued forth with. I expected more than fake news conspiracy theorizing

for Muesera. But yes, we did. We did get an important religious liberty opinion in Kindra,

Espinoza at Al versus Montana Department of Revenue dealing with blame amendments and religious

education and public funding. But here's what I'm curious. I mean, we'll get into all of this.

But unlike June medical, where you might not have liked the outcome, but you liked some of the

reasoning, I'll be very curious on this opinion, where I think you will, you David, like the outcome.

But I'm not sure how much you liked the reasoning in some of this. We'll see.

Yeah, yeah, that we'll we'll we'll get into that. Don't jump ahead. I'm still in preview mode.

So we're also going to talk about what what are we thinking sort of a grab bag,

popery, what are we thinking 24 hours after June medical after we've had a time to think about not

just the legal implications of the ruling, but the political implications of the ruling and

...