we are talking with university of texas law professor steve vladeck. we are going to go to your phone calls right now. as a reminder, (202) 748-8000 free democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. our first caller is mark in asheville, north carolina on the independent line. what is your question or comment? caller: i generally agree with professor vladeck's concern about the shadow docket. the example of the antiabortion drug decision in texas is actually a different kind of problem and i do not think the supreme court needed to articulate that concern. here we have another problem in the judicial system, which is one justice in one court in amarillo, texas takes a nontraditional view of saying that the fda, a federal agency, did not have the basis for proving the drug and had the supreme court not stated that, that would have been the law across the country, which is a far bigger problem. i realize that exception to the general concerns that you voiced about the shadow docket. i just wanted to point out i think that what th

we are back with stephen vladeck discussed his new book "the shadow docket".is about the supreme court's action to change law without public hearings justifying the decision in a public manner. the morning. >> thanks for having me. pres. biden: thank you so much for joining us. big, fancy positions that we get each term from the supreme court, whether about abortion or affirmative-action. these long signed, thoroughly explain decisions that we may agree with or disagree with, but that we have lengthy explanations for. it turns out it is only about 1% of all of the decisions the supreme court hands down. 99% of the rulings of the supreme court hands down by volume are these unsigned, unexplained orders that reside in obscurity that are publicly accessible but not really understandable. the term shadow docket was coined by a conservative university of chicago law professor in 2015 to capture that other part of the courts work. an umbrella term to suggest, over here where we are not paying attention, there is a lot of stuff going on that can be significant. host:

vladeck: that's right.of rise, what we think of as the modern flurry of this kind of emergency application where the court is being asked to intervene early in the case, and not as the court of last resort starts with the reinstitution of the death penalty in the late seventies, but it stays over there in the death penalty space for the better part of 35 years. you ask folks who clerked on the court in that period, and they'll say, yeah, we had death cases, but not these other ones. what really shifts in the mid -2010s, and president trump's justice department is a big part of the cause of this shift is the court taken approaches that had become normalized in the death penalty context. full court decisions without oral argument without a lot of briefing with no explanation, and now applying it to whether particular immigration policies will be in effect or nothile the case was his way through the courts. whether state abortion bans will be in effect or not. whether covid vaccination mandates will be in effe

we are talking with university of texas law professor steve vladeck. your phone calls right now. as a reminder, (202) 748-8000 free democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. our first caller is mark in asheville, north carolina on the independent line. what is your question or comment? caller: i generally agree with professor vladeck's concern about the shadow docket. the example of the antiabortion drug decision in texas is actually a different kind of problem and i do not think the supreme court needed to articulate that concern. here we have another problem in the judicial system, which is one justice in one court in amarillo, texas takes a nontraditional view of saying that the fda, a federal agency, did not have the basis for proving the drug and had the supreme court not stated that, that would have been the law across the country, which is a far bigger problem. i realize that exception to the general concerns that you voiced about the shadow docket. i just wanted to point out i think that what the supreme court did, w

joining us now is the university of texas law professor, steve vladeck, the author of the new book "shadowt" how the supreme court uses stealth rulings to amass power and undermine the republic. thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me. >> what did i say wrong? >> nothing. no. i think the reality is that over the last five or six years, we've seen the supreme court use what used to be rare orders that we actually saw in the 1980s and 1990s in the death penalty context where they were enormously important to the state and prisoner but didn't tend to have broader implications on state wide or federal policies. >> and you can understand why they would be so time sensitive. the execution is scheduled for x and you must move before x. >> versus 2015, 2016, 2017, now if it is a big policy issue, whether the student loan program or covid vaccine mandates, the supreme court is handling so many of these through these emergency applications and what is really most hard to see until you put them all together is the neutral legal principles that people might try to say explain these rulings fall

and steve vladeck, professor at the university of texas school of law and an expert on federal courtsw book on the supreme court is "the shadow docket." thank you both for being with us. remind us why this case is so significant, said to be the most consequential since the overturning of roe. sarah: in the last number of years the number of women who rely on medication abortion pills has grown. to more than 50%. . so access to this regimen is incredibly important for women around the country. when the judge issued his decision in texas, it essentially said mifepristone would have to come off the market. that would affect of course women who want to access abortion medication to terminate a pregnancy. it is also used a lot in early miscarriage management treatment. that is something that physicians around the country regularly turn to. geoff: the new orleans-based fifth circuit is consided one of the most conservative appellate courts in the country. they have routinely ruled against the dighton doj. what lines of inquiry did the judges explore today and what can you glean from it? ste

on sunday, steve vladeck tweeted, 54 years ago today, may 14th, 1969, was the last day on which a majoritystices had been appointed by democratic president. the next 11 appointments were by republican presidents. 11 in a row. 16 of the last 21 appointments to the supreme court have been by republican presidents. the republican court packing tonight begin with donald trump and mitch mcconnell, but took it to a new level. now most republican members of the mcconnell senate have effectively taken position that no democratic presidents should ever be allowed to appoint a supreme court justice. joining us now is steven lad, a law professor at the university of texas in austin, the author of the new book, the shadow docket. how the supreme court uses stealth rulings to amass power and undermine the republic. professor, thank you very much for joining us tonight. i am wondering how the development of the shadow docket tracks with the republican takeover of the supreme court. >> lawrence, it's great to be with you. i actually think that it's an iterative process, where it was not because of the ri

steve vladeck thank you. >> thank you so much. >> we will be right back!ilable without a prescription. astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid-free spray. while flonase takes hours, astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can [ spray, spray ] astepro and go. what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. ♪ stay off the freeways! we know patients are more than their disease. that's why, at novo nordisk, we've spent a hundred years developing treatments to help unlock humanity's full potential. these are the greats: people living with, thriving with — not held back by — disease. they motivate us to fight diabetes and obesity, rare diseases and cardiovascular conditions, for generations to come. so, everyone can meet their moment. because your disease doesn't define you. so, what will? novo nordisk. driving change. trying to control my asthma felt anything but normal. ♪ ♪ enough was enough. i talked to an asthma specialist and found out my severe asthma is driven by eosi