Welcome to Summarily: A Podcast for Busy Lawyers.
This is a follow-on episode to the emergency pod about the leak of the draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
On this episode, Robert is joined by Professor Caroline Mala Corbin of the University of Miami School of Law to discuss the substance of the opinion. She explains her views on the opinion’s flawed substantive due process analysis, why she believes the majority’s decision is driven in part by “intense hostility towards abortion,” and how religion plays a role in the outcome.
Professor Corbin recently authored a critique of the draft majority opinion on Think: 8 Legal Reasons to Dislike Justice Alito’s Draft Opinion on Abortion.
Professor Corbin is Dean’s Distinguished Scholar at UM Law, where she teaches Constitutional Law, several courses on the First Amendment (including Feminism and the First Amendment), and Advanced Topics in Reproductive Rights. Her scholarship focuses on the First Amendment’s speech and religion clauses, particularly their intersection with equality issues. Professor Corbin holds a B.A. from Harvard University and a J.D. from Columbia Law School.
-------
Desperately Seeking Certainty, by Dan Farber and Suzanna Sherry, “attacks the current legal vogue for grand unified theories of constitutional interpretation. On both the Right and the Left, prominent legal scholars are attempting to build all of constitutional law from a single foundational idea. Farber and Sherry find that in the end no single, all-encompassing theory can successfully guide judges or provide definitive or even sensible answers to every constitutional question.”
Questions/Comments/Suggestions? E-mail Robert at summarilypod@gmail.com.
🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com
