Dear Mr. Vladeck: Thank you and your family and colleagues for your invaluable newsletter. I look forward to reading each new edition. It’s a beacon in an ocean of misinformation and superficiality. 🙏
Congrats to you both! Tell your daughter I, for one, read your updates from start to finish without fail. I deeply appreciate your concise, thoughtful interpretations w/historical background of the current court deluge and chaos. Reading it helps me stay convinced, as Joyce Vance says, " we're in this together, we can't give up." We will come through to the other side of of " DJT Season II " - be it battered and bruised, but stronger.
Finding your newsletter allowed me to begin to understand the process of the judiciary even if some decisions are incomprehensible. Your effort is invaluable to the struggle to preserve democracy. Thank you!
How wonderful, congrats! I think a Tik Tok, perhaps an Instagram would be great. Educating on SCOTUS (civics needs a boost too) is important for "youth"; your daughters could certainly suggest how best to do that.
"'Why not start a Substack?' they said. How hard could it be? A couple of posts a week, a few big decisions per term, maybe a little trivia and arcana. Heck, it will practically write itself, most of the time anyway. Let's do it!"
November 6. 2024. "We're gonna need a bigger liquor cabinet."
Happy to be a subscriber, and I'll be even happier if the times get a little less ... interesting. And may we all have just a little of our sanity left if they do.
Dear Steve, You're truly amazing -- I've long known that. And yet, you continue to amaze me with all you've accomplished. You come from a family of amazing Vladecks, and you honor their legacy and their commitment to INFORMED legal justice. May the arc of your amazing work be a long one and may you find comfort in all the good work you do for the rest of us. I so hope our paths cross again sometime, if only to personally express my sincere gratitude.
I agree with all the comments I've read here this morning. I am not a lawyer but I've had a strong interest in US Supreme Court decisions since reading the NY Times account of Justice William O. Douglas's majority decision in Griswold v. Connecticut in June 1965.
My income is very low, at age 77, and as a freelance reporter I already spend a large chunk of it on subscriptions to both print and online news media. I can contribute only token amounts to your effort here, but I plan to send you one today. The issue of waning public confidence in the judiciary is important even at the local level here in Berkshire County, Massachusetts.
I'll admit that when I saw the caption my first thought was that this piece wouldn't say anything substantive, so I could skip it. But I was surprised by its substance. I appreciated your re-emphasizing your principles and your principled approach to analyzing SCOTUS opinions ("A common theme across all of these developments is the Court increasingly turning its back on the idea that it is—and ought to be—accountable" so "I’ve dedicated just about all of my professional life to the importance of stable institutions in preserving the rule of law—and, especially, an independent and accountable judiciary.").
Too many view federal judges--and especially SCOTUS justices--as essentially priests in a de facto establishment of religion speaking for "the Court" as if it were "the Church" dictating the truth about the word of God. James Madison (without whom our Constitution and nation likely would not exist and largely because of whom our Constitution expressly secures the freedom of thought and expression) was one of many who highlighted the vital importance of writing like yours to the survival and success of our republican form of government:
"A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
Alexander Hamilton emphasized the same principle with different words in The Federalist No. 70:
“The two greatest securities” that “the people” have “for the faithful exercise of any delegated power” (powers that We the People delegated to our public servants in federal government) are “the restraints” imposed by “public opinion” and the public’s “opportunity of discovering with facility and clearness [official] misconduct” to facilitate officials’ “removal from office” or “punishment.”
Our safety and security, our rights and privileges, depend on the people not foolishly presuming that we can trust any person who is sufficiently ambitious to seek or seize political power.
I have seen you in discussions on Substack for a while, and always appreciate the clarity you bring to discussions. Did not realize you had a stack going until recently when saw you quoted by many of the folks I respect here. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and I will subscribe soon.
Congratulations on three years for One First! Thank you for providing such valuable and informed insights into the Supreme Court. And please listen to Karen - Stop using “X”!! The sooner people like yourself quit using it the sooner it will be even more irrelevant other than for Nazis to promote their propaganda.
Why go out of your way to tell the ‘enemy’ what you’re thinking? They’ll only use the knowledge to thwart your plans. Make them go out of their way to find out what your thoughts are. If conversion is the aim, they’ll more likely come to you to be converted. Otherwise you’re just giving away valuable info to people who either won’t understand or will actively misuse it. It’s a technique I learned while studying with former classmate Elena Kagan at Hunter College High School in NYC, years ago. As I remember it Elena and I were the only two AP American History students in HCHS '77 that wrote senior honors theses. Elena wrote about Felix Frankfurter (Elena was literally destined for the Supreme Court since childhood, if not birth) and I was assigned the topic of "The Causes of the Civil War" since I was born in Dallas and it was decided as a "southerner" I could bring insights to this topic.
Your clarifications of the actions of the Supreme Court 2-3-4 times a week have been invaluable during these tumultuous times in our nation's history. I am very grateful.
Thank you for your work. Understanding the shadow docket's perniciousness has been especially valuable to me. I've found that when I feel threatened, My go-to is to seek information and you've been part of that solution.
My most comforting thought these days is "Out of breakdowns come breakthroughs." We're headed for some breakthroughs in the Supreme Court.
Dear Mr. Vladeck: Thank you and your family and colleagues for your invaluable newsletter. I look forward to reading each new edition. It’s a beacon in an ocean of misinformation and superficiality. 🙏
Congrats to you both! Tell your daughter I, for one, read your updates from start to finish without fail. I deeply appreciate your concise, thoughtful interpretations w/historical background of the current court deluge and chaos. Reading it helps me stay convinced, as Joyce Vance says, " we're in this together, we can't give up." We will come through to the other side of of " DJT Season II " - be it battered and bruised, but stronger.
Finding your newsletter allowed me to begin to understand the process of the judiciary even if some decisions are incomprehensible. Your effort is invaluable to the struggle to preserve democracy. Thank you!
Best legal analysis-bar none.
pun intended?
How wonderful, congrats! I think a Tik Tok, perhaps an Instagram would be great. Educating on SCOTUS (civics needs a boost too) is important for "youth"; your daughters could certainly suggest how best to do that.
Maybe his daughters could participate in explaining in a way other youth would understand (if he was willing for them to be seen, of course).
Thanks for writing so much! It's a gigantic job, but it sure needed doing
A small stylistic point: The blog is Karen's brainchild. Not the other way around.
She was the first customer clamoring for the product. Thank you, Karen!
"'Why not start a Substack?' they said. How hard could it be? A couple of posts a week, a few big decisions per term, maybe a little trivia and arcana. Heck, it will practically write itself, most of the time anyway. Let's do it!"
November 6. 2024. "We're gonna need a bigger liquor cabinet."
Happy to be a subscriber, and I'll be even happier if the times get a little less ... interesting. And may we all have just a little of our sanity left if they do.
Quickly went from “I’m not sure we will have enough content” to “OH MY GOD”
You really doubted y’all’s ability to yap about the legal system? Really?
Dear Steve, You're truly amazing -- I've long known that. And yet, you continue to amaze me with all you've accomplished. You come from a family of amazing Vladecks, and you honor their legacy and their commitment to INFORMED legal justice. May the arc of your amazing work be a long one and may you find comfort in all the good work you do for the rest of us. I so hope our paths cross again sometime, if only to personally express my sincere gratitude.
I am new to your publication here.
I agree with all the comments I've read here this morning. I am not a lawyer but I've had a strong interest in US Supreme Court decisions since reading the NY Times account of Justice William O. Douglas's majority decision in Griswold v. Connecticut in June 1965.
My income is very low, at age 77, and as a freelance reporter I already spend a large chunk of it on subscriptions to both print and online news media. I can contribute only token amounts to your effort here, but I plan to send you one today. The issue of waning public confidence in the judiciary is important even at the local level here in Berkshire County, Massachusetts.
-- John B. in Great Barrington
Thank you for this newsletter! My students and I have learned a lot from it, especially this year!
I'll admit that when I saw the caption my first thought was that this piece wouldn't say anything substantive, so I could skip it. But I was surprised by its substance. I appreciated your re-emphasizing your principles and your principled approach to analyzing SCOTUS opinions ("A common theme across all of these developments is the Court increasingly turning its back on the idea that it is—and ought to be—accountable" so "I’ve dedicated just about all of my professional life to the importance of stable institutions in preserving the rule of law—and, especially, an independent and accountable judiciary.").
Too many view federal judges--and especially SCOTUS justices--as essentially priests in a de facto establishment of religion speaking for "the Court" as if it were "the Church" dictating the truth about the word of God. James Madison (without whom our Constitution and nation likely would not exist and largely because of whom our Constitution expressly secures the freedom of thought and expression) was one of many who highlighted the vital importance of writing like yours to the survival and success of our republican form of government:
"A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
Alexander Hamilton emphasized the same principle with different words in The Federalist No. 70:
“The two greatest securities” that “the people” have “for the faithful exercise of any delegated power” (powers that We the People delegated to our public servants in federal government) are “the restraints” imposed by “public opinion” and the public’s “opportunity of discovering with facility and clearness [official] misconduct” to facilitate officials’ “removal from office” or “punishment.”
Our safety and security, our rights and privileges, depend on the people not foolishly presuming that we can trust any person who is sufficiently ambitious to seek or seize political power.
Q: What's the difference between God and a federal judge?
A: God doesn't think he's a federal judge.
I have seen you in discussions on Substack for a while, and always appreciate the clarity you bring to discussions. Did not realize you had a stack going until recently when saw you quoted by many of the folks I respect here. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and I will subscribe soon.
Congratulations on three years for One First! Thank you for providing such valuable and informed insights into the Supreme Court. And please listen to Karen - Stop using “X”!! The sooner people like yourself quit using it the sooner it will be even more irrelevant other than for Nazis to promote their propaganda.
I tend to agree but he can reach an audience there that would not be on here
Why go out of your way to tell the ‘enemy’ what you’re thinking? They’ll only use the knowledge to thwart your plans. Make them go out of their way to find out what your thoughts are. If conversion is the aim, they’ll more likely come to you to be converted. Otherwise you’re just giving away valuable info to people who either won’t understand or will actively misuse it. It’s a technique I learned while studying with former classmate Elena Kagan at Hunter College High School in NYC, years ago. As I remember it Elena and I were the only two AP American History students in HCHS '77 that wrote senior honors theses. Elena wrote about Felix Frankfurter (Elena was literally destined for the Supreme Court since childhood, if not birth) and I was assigned the topic of "The Causes of the Civil War" since I was born in Dallas and it was decided as a "southerner" I could bring insights to this topic.
Nice!! Congratulations and thank you!!
Your clarifications of the actions of the Supreme Court 2-3-4 times a week have been invaluable during these tumultuous times in our nation's history. I am very grateful.
Thank you for your work. Understanding the shadow docket's perniciousness has been especially valuable to me. I've found that when I feel threatened, My go-to is to seek information and you've been part of that solution.
My most comforting thought these days is "Out of breakdowns come breakthroughs." We're headed for some breakthroughs in the Supreme Court.