SCOTUS Vibe Check - The Dispatch 7%

By Sarah Isgur0% David French5%

7/9/2026, 12:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Biased Writer Voice, and Optimism Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 18.1% saturation with 110 hits. Analysis detected 355 faulty-reasoning hits from 607 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 23.1% and a BS Rank of 7% (20,456 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 93.50% of the article peer group.

Sarah Isgur & David French 
= 3 && ageInMonths 3 months old . 
Some information may be outdated.'; 
} else if (ageInMonths >= 6 && ageInMonths 6 months old . 
Some information may be outdated.'; 
} else if (ageInMonths >= 12 && ageInMonths 1 year old . 
Some information may be outdated.'; 
} else if (ageInMonths >= 12) { 
const ageInYears = Math.floor(ageInMonths / 12); 
this.message = `This post is more than ${ageInYears} ${ageInYears === 1 ? 
'year' : 'years'} old . 
Some information may be outdated. 
`; 
Listen on your player of choice 
this.tooltipOpen = false; 
Members can share articles with friends & family to bypass the paywall. 
Live from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Center in Washington, D.C., Sarah Isgur and David French review the OT25 term with Akhil Amar, professor of law and political science at Yale University, and David Lat, author of Original Jurisdiction . 
The four break down the most consequential cases of the past term—from the tariffs case to Humphrey’s Executor , birthright citizenship, and what it all means for President Trump’s relationship with the court. 
–Thank you to the ACLU for sponsoring our SCOTUSblog Summit at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Center 
–Getting deep into trucking Twitter 
–How the culture war is shifting toward separation-of-powers fights 
–Counting jelly beans and winning heifers 
–The demise of Humphrey’s Executor in Slaughter 
–Did Trump win or lose this term? 
–What even makes a “big” case? 
Sarah Isgur is a senior editor at The Dispatch and is based in northern Virginia. 
Prior to joining the company in 2019, she had worked in every branch of the federal government and on three presidential campaigns. 
She’s also a ABC News contributor and the author of Last Branch Standing , a deep dive into the inner workings of the Supreme Court. 
When Sarah is not hosting podcasts or writing newsletters, she’s probably sending uplifting stories about spiders to Jonah, who only pretends to love all animals. 
David French is a columnist for the New York Times. 
He’s a former senior editor of The Dispatch. 
He’s the author most recently of Divided We Fall: America's Secession Threat and How to Restore Our Nation. 
The podcast transcription below was generated using artificial intelligence and may include occasional errors or misspellings. 
Welcome to the Advisory Opinions podcast. 
I'm Sarah Isgur, and we have a special episode for you today. 
We are here at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Center in lovely Washington, DC, where you'll be shocked to hear that while, yes, it is very humid, the temperature is actually quite civilized. 
And I want to thank, of course, our presenting partner, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU, which has, uh, allowed us all to be here today. 
We are so grateful. 
And joining me on stage for this OT 25 term review, the David French, frequent partner in crime, and Professor Akhil Amar, the one, the only, the shaggy-haired. 
He has enough hair for he and David combined. 
And finally, David Lat of Original Jurisdiction. 
Gentlemen, let's get to it. 
Interactive transcripts are available to Premium members. 
Join to follow along with the audio. 
{ if (opened) $nextTick(() => $refs.giftRecipientNameInput?.focus()) })" 
class="relative w-full max-w-md md:max-w-lg rounded-xl bg-white shadow-xl max-h-[90vh] overflow-y-auto" 
Gift this article to a friend 
Checking gift availability... 
Unlimited gift links 
gift links remaining this month 
You've used all your gift links this month 
Upgrade to Premium for unlimited gift links 
Click the button below to copy the article link to your clipboard. 
{ if (opened) $nextTick(() => $refs.shareEmailInput?.focus()) })" 
class="relative w-full max-w-md rounded-xl bg-white shadow-xl" 
Share this article via email 
Email sent successfully! 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.7%The Dispatch: 4.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.7%The Dispatch: 1.9%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 3.1%Sarah Isgur: 6.4%The Dispatch: 4.8%Framing Effect3.1%This article: 3.3%Sarah Isgur: 0.5%The Dispatch: 0.7%Loss Aversion3.3%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.3%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.6%Optimism Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 2.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.4%The Dispatch: 5.3%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%Sarah Isgur: 6.4%The Dispatch: 1.8%Halo Effect3.6%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.9%Straw Man0.0%This article: 18.1%Sarah Isgur: 3.0%The Dispatch: 3.5%Appeal to Authority18.1%This article: 1.2%Sarah Isgur: 0.4%The Dispatch: 2.4%False Dilemma1.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 6.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 2.7%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 10.7%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 7.1%Biased Writer Voice10.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Isgur: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 13.2%Sarah Isgur: 2.6%The Dispatch: 5.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…13.2%

607 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers24%attributed speech462writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageACLU • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 12 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 32 words • 100.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 27 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 4 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 28 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 9 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 7 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Isgur • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

ACLU

100%flagged-word coverage
16 attributed words11% of attributed speech44% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +86.1 ptsWriter: 13.9%ACLU: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-7.1 ptsWriter: 7.1%ACLU: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.