Born Equal is being read - by academics, pundits, historians, and citizens. Reaction has begun to pour in, and discussion has begun. In this episode, we bring you some of the very best flavor of such discussion - an academic symposium held at Penn Carey Law School on the book. Professors Kate Shaw and Kermit Roosevelt each read the work with great care and deliver extensive remarks on the book, pointing out themes and insights - and raising questions. Oh, so many questions. Professor Amar then responds in the moment, and students in the audience pose their own queries. The constitutional conversation continues, and is never complete. But this one in particular will go on, as there were so many important questions raised that they could never be answered in this short interval. But you will thrill to deep engagement and fascinating perspectives from this all-star panel of great thinkers. Meanwhile, we also have a bonus for you: the great historian Gordon Wood has weighed in having read the book, and his extended remarks can be found at akhilamar.com/podcast. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Happy Constitution Day! And Happy Born Equal Publishing Day! The book tour is underway, and we treat you to an event held live at Princeton University. Professor Amar speaks about the bridge from the last book to this one, and in doing so, the importance of the uniquely grand sweep of his project becomes apparent - as themes from The Words That Made Us merge crucially with the new revelations of Born Equal to shed light on some of the most important constitutional questions in American history. The audience gets involved, too, with questions that might well be your questions. And this is just the beginning, as some amazing events have already taken place that will fill our podcasts with debate and insight in the weeks and months to come. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

With the imminent publication of Born Equal, we explore Lincoln’s grand vision of equality as it played out during and after his life. The new book goes further still, offering an expansive though still relentlessly originalist view of this constitutional vision. And now Professor Amar sees this vision through with even greater implications for the 160 years since his death and into the future. The new book introduces, and this podcast and those to follow explore, a new unifying thread that gives even greater coherence to the Constitution, as amended and as understood through this momentous scholarly effort. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Trump is keeping the courts active; this week saw a ruling against many of the widespread tarrifs he has sought to impose, and the Fifth Circuit upheld his dismissal of an NLRB member. Meanwhile, a Fed governor was dismissed, supposedly for cause. And the social media announcements of supposedly impending executive orders imposing voting requirements such as voter ID kept coming. And there’s more. We try to keep it all straight for you, identify the constitutional issues, and look at what the Courts might do. Meanwhile, your fantastic response to the impending Born Equal release is noted, appreciated, and we respond to it. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Gerrymandering, borders, the use of the military on US soil, and even the status of the District of Columbia. All these relate to geography, and the "more perfect union" our founders sought. The Constitution therefore speaks to all these issues, and originalism must be considered. We look at what the Constitution has to say, why it says these things, and what the underlying principles tell us. This has obvious implications for today's questions, but without clarity on the historical background, confusion may reign, which aids those who might be in the wrong. It's timely in another way, because the forthcoming Born Equal addresses many of these geographic questions - because Americans in the 19th Century, including Lincoln most prominently, thought about them prominently. Professor Amar brings it together for you. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

President Trump has taken to social media, as usual. This time he asserts an authority to control elections through executive order. He claims that he is empowered to do this as the sole representative - nay, the sole decider - of the nation’s interest. We look to the constitution for a reply. He also echoes some election complaints, and election claims, from controversies past, and we have an answer there, as well. Meanwhile, the publication date of Born Equal, Professor Amar’s new book, draws near, and we have an enticing offer for our listeners. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges at podcast.njsba.com.

With all our recent discussion on Skrmetti, and questions of scrutiny as applied to gender dysphoric individuals, the question of where women’s rights stand in this morass deserves new attention. Professor Jill Hasday has written an important book, We the Men, which is deeply relevant to these discussions. To what extent does inequality persist in the law? When Courts seek to answer this question, they often cite the great progress that has been made. Professor Hasday hypothesizes that this very celebration of progress tends to obscure the remaining issues, and may in a sense pre-empt the scrutiny required. The echoes of Skrmetti are profound, and Professor Hasday joins us for a lively discussion of these issues and many others - including that recent bugaboo, the Geduldig case, which rears its ugly head once again. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

We continue our discussion of the deep issues raised in the case of US v. Skrmetti. Last time we observed the Court wrestling with questions of whether the Tennessee law banning gender dysphoria treatments in minors was a form of sex discrimination. Later in the argument the Court addressed the question of whether transgender individuals, or some related group, constituted a so-called “suspect classification” and therefore laws purporting to affect that group would be subject to close examination (“Scrutiny”) by the Court. In this episode we listen, and react to, those arguments as the Court itself did. Professor Vik Amar returns to join Akhil in this task, and rightly so, since the “brothers in law” have written several recent posts on the deep questions raised by this and other recent cases. This has resulted in a new unifying theory which they begin to articulate in this episode. CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.