We discuss the morality of concurring and dissenting. And the usual nonsense.

Joe and Christian talk about the pandemic and, then, some nonsense.

We discuss the march on the Capitol and... all this.

In this holiday spectacular, we talk about small claims. In particular, would a court for small copyright claims be a good or bad thing? You can probably guess what we each say. In exploring this, we consider the nature of dogs, hunters, and children.

Joe lowers the boom, and we start talking. In the 213th episode of this very serious podcast, we discuss: scams, flight simulators, flight, K2, Joe's blue cheese odyssey, olives, the nature of expertise, nihilism, and the adversary system. And other things as well.

We discuss the Supreme Court's (I know, I know) decision in Roman Catholic Diocese v. Cuomo.

Is this thing on? What did we miss?

Just Joe and Christian on the pandemic, new articles, and spring break.

• Achieving A Fair and Effective COVID-19 Response: An Open Letter to Vice-President Mike Pence, and Other Federal, State, and Local Leaders from Public Health and Legal Experts in the United States
• The President in discussion with pharma execs on a vaccine

We are joined by our student, Justin Van Orsdol, who has co-authored a paper with Christian about a new approach to the gun violence crisis.

• Justin Van Orsdol's writing
• Christian Turner and Justin Van Orsdol, The Gun Subsidy
• Oral Argument 101: Tug of War

Special Guest: Justin Van Orsdol.

We discuss a proposal by Sen. Hawley to abolish, more or less, the Federal Trade Commission, the agency that administers consumer protection and antitrust laws, and place its responsibilities in the Justice Department. Antitrust, the unitary executive, independent agencies, Joe's Competition Commission, and more.

• Josh Hawley, Overhauling the Federal Trade Commission
• Mike Masnick, William Barr's Move to Rid the DOJ of Independence Shows One of Many Reasons Josh Hawley's FTC Plan Is Dangerous

Sometimes in law, as in other areas of life, we think we know something, but the more we think about, the more we realize we don't know it at all. Legal scholars have focused on puzzles like this before, like why blackmail should be illegal. Deborah Hellman joins us to discuss her attempt to answer a question you might not have known you had: What is wrong with bribery, and what is bribery anyway? The difficulties here shed some light on recent events.

• Deborah Hellman's faculty profile and writing
• Deborah Hellman, A Theory of Bribery
• Oral Argument 206: What Are We?

Special Guest: Deborah Hellman.