one, because a lot that language doesn't, from the brief that robbie kaplan and edie windsor filed and also it wasn't olson's case and i wondered, i wondered why. i wonder if it's a bit of an effort to have olson's team have more play in a dome and decision that perhaps -- not that it was influential, but it was striking to me. >> guest: one of the interesting things about these cases as they converge is there's a tension between the two cases that sort of, robbie kaplan always felt like doma was, a joke in the office, edie windsor was already married, already gay, and so what he was trying to convince the court to do, and in her breathe and in her brief, talked about this gumshoes trying to make, this is a tax case. i'm not asking for some big ezra klein mark thing. here she finds a kind are you alongside olson who is absolutely saying, i want a huge landmark brown v. board that decision, and there's a moment in the book where we are at moot court again and this tension poseable bit and one of the people who is doing the moot court, lawyers peppered them and pretend to be justices and