Listen "Ep. 22: Supreme polarization"
Episode Synopsis
Democrats may control the White House and Congress, but Republicans have a clear advantage on the nation's highest court. Sixteen of the last 20 appointments to the Supreme Court have been GOP nominees, including six of nine sitting justices. Critics say that this has caused an imbalance of power that threatens the court's legitimacy. University of Chicago law professor Daniel Hemel questions, however, whether some of the reforms being discussed would help. Hemel has a paper in the Journal of Economic Perspectives arguing that ideological polarization on the Supreme Court is nothing new. And while it's true that Republicans have dominated recent appointments, proposals like 18-year term limits would do little to address partisan fighting. In fact, term limits could make matters even worse. Hemel spoke with the AEA's Chris Fleisher about the history of ideological division on the Supreme Court, proposals for creating a more balanced court, and what changes he believes hold the most promise for addressing those concerns.
More episodes of the podcast AEA Research Highlights
Ep. 93: Technological spillovers
05/11/2025
Ep. 92: Housing supply skepticism
08/10/2025
Ep. 91: Reviewing residential segregation
11/09/2025
Ep. 89: Measuring US income inequality
16/07/2025
Ep. 87: The cultural roots of rebellion
14/05/2025
Ep. 86: Reexamining air quality regulations
16/04/2025
Ep. 85: America's public safety net
19/03/2025
Ep. 84: Media salience and polarization
19/02/2025
ZARZA We are Zarza, the prestigious firm behind major projects in information technology.