Typical civics and American Government courses teach that the Supreme Court has the final say in interpreting the Constitution - that is, determining its meaning and limits. Judicial Review, and other accepted powers of the court, are also taught as if the Founders built them that way.

But what if that’s not the case? What if the court’s powers and norms are the current state of a centuries-long evolution, one that isn’t necessarily, or supposed to ever be, complete?

Constitutional scholar Matthew Franck joins Jeff to discuss the evolution of the court’s powers, particularly that of judicial review, and how the view that they are a settled issue may not serve our republic well.

Read Federalist 78, mentioned in the episode:  ...