Law Day 2022

Pat’s Picks Pat Eckler

Bound by Oath. An anthology podcast from the Institute for Jus- tice, “Bound by Oath” focused in Season 1 on the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, and in Season 2 addressed how gov- ernment is to be held accountable and the ways in which courts have all but eliminated that accountabil- ity. Article VI of the Constitution declares that judges are “bound by oath” to uphold the Constitution.

Dissed. An anthology podcast hosted by Anastasia Boden and Eliz- abeth Slattery, both of the Pacific Legal Foundation, “Dissed” focuses on dissenting opinions and their his- tory, the context in which they were written and their impact on latter decisions. Described as “catnip for legal nerds” by David Lat, lawyer and founder of the newsletter Original Jurisdiction, this podcast provides a well-researched, deep dive into some of the most important opinions is- sued by the Supreme Court — even if they did not carry the day.

Donald “Pat” Eckler is a partner at Freeman, Mathis, & Gary LLP.

Short Circuit. Also from the In- stitute for Justice, this weekly pod- cast discusses decisions from the federal courts of appeals on a wide range of issues, from insurance cov- erage to qualified immunity to civil procedure. It often serves as a pre- view of particular cases making their way to the Supreme Court, or high- lights issues percolating in the lower federal courts until a sufficient split or appropriate vehicle arises for high court review.

Teleforum. A near daily podcast produced by The Federalist Society, this show offers discussions of oral arguments and decisions from the Supreme Court in its “Courthouse Steps” episodes, as well as litigation updates on cases pending in the federal circuit and district courts and discussions of pending petitions for certiorari.

Law Talk. This monthly podcast has been produced for more than a decade by the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. The show is hosted by Troy Senik with John Yoo and Richard Epstein. It’s irreverent in tone but serious in content, with perspectives from two pillars of the conservative legal movement. Often surprising in the positions that the interlocutors take, it is always orig- inal and thoughtful.


Powered by