Average rating:

out of 750 ratings.

No longer a fan or follower

by i'n being blocked from posting on
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

I was a big fan until Dan and Leah put Ian on indefinite leave, ousting him from the podcast that was originally his idea, and Leah became the regular co-host with Dan. I am uninterested in listening to her self-congratulatory attitude on every topic no matter how well informed her legal opinions may be. I’m concerned about about Ian and hope that he’s finding the support that he needs.

Great Podcast but Uhs and Ums kill it

by Ttygdthgf on
Rating: ★★★★★

The content and thought are great. However, Dan, and some guests, seemingly cannot stop saying “uh” or “um” before and/or after literally every sentence at times. It is horrible and ruins the listening experience. Please stop!

Please replace Leah

by Jscott68 on
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

Leah’s open contempt for any opposing legal perspective has ruined a previously excellent podcast.

Longtime listener just unsubscribed

by Blueyedksk on
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

Sorry, but I cannot listen to Leah anymore. She has fleeting moments of objectivity and useful contributions, but overall she is over dramatic and hyper partisan. Ian brought a nice balance to the show

Long Live Leah

by voictr on
Rating: ★★★★★

Leah Litman is a fantastic addition to the First Monday’s team. She is smart, funny, knowledgeable, entertaining, intelligent, interesting, quick-witted... did I mention smart? In addition, it’s important that the pod is giving a voice to a woman. Legal analysis benefits from a variety of views. Sure, Ian and Dan played off each others differing political views. But at the end of the day, they’re just a couple of white guys. Reviews criticizing Leah’s voice or feminist takes are disgusting. Those listeners likely aren’t deserving of a serious show about the Supreme Court and just listen so they can seem intelligent on failed tinder dates. I’m becoming a Patreon subscriber to more than make up for their departure. Good riddance.

Great show but wish Leah had never returned

by lm5096 on
Rating: ★★★★☆

Love this podcast but Leah has the most irritating voice and manner of speaking ever

Enjoyable with two big caveats

by dks2008 on
Rating: ★★★☆☆

I genuinely enjoy the show, but there are two problems that frustrate. First, as many other reviewers have commented, Leah Litman is not a positive addition to the show. She advocates for her policy preferences, which doesn’t mesh with the typically fair-minded analysis the podcast presents. She won’t even engage with opposing viewpoints; a garbage approach to life and teaching. Second, the podcasts tend to be too long. Please stop drifting to 90 minutes and 2 hours! 60-75 minutes is the sweet spot.

One of Litman’s Virtues

by Billy McBible on
Rating: ★★★★★

Ms. Litman’s increased role has been a good thing for the show. She may have benefited from slower weeks at the Court, but her in-depth pieces with experts and extended discussion regarding an alternative to originalism were interesting and thoughtful (even if not ultimately persuasive to lil’ ole me in the center right). I like her instinct to provide a broader view outside of the show’s bread and butter on the Court’s weekly activity. I do think she could be more effective if she dialed down the vitriol a bit and tried a little harder to show an appreciation (if not acceptance) of the internal logic of conservative jurisprudes; I felt the same way about Mr. Samuel’s one-note, pipe-dream nagging nonsense about Court packing. That’s why I thought Ms. Litman was at her best during the piece on alternatives to originalism—thoughtful, even-handed, instructive without being preachy to the show’s more conservative listeners. Thanks for a great show!

This podcast is a national treasure

by #35ch on
Rating: ★★★★★

First Mondays should be required listening for all U.S. lawyers or anyone who cares about the Supreme Court. Dan and Ian are fantastic--smart but self-deprecating. Lately they've been having Will Baude on a lot, and he's great too (and it's funny how Will's presence induces subtle changes in Dan & Ian -- as if Will is the acknolwedged Alpha in the group). I expect that the Supreme Court will become even more important than usual in the next two years as Trump attempts to become an above-the-law King, so First Mondays will be even more indispensable in the months and years to come.

Great podcast!

by dukelaw232 on
Rating: ★★★★★

Smart, informative, funny. All you could want.

Better than More Perfect

by Bark Cavanaugh on
Rating: ★★★★★

PSA: “stone cold lead pipe lock” not a best practice for your law school final exam.

Living vicariously through prior SCOTUS clerks.

by Gujibear on
Rating: ★★★★★

Ah, some of us don’t have the wit or the work ethic to make it to that DELUXE Court in the sky, but it sure is great to pretend that we’re all still sitting in chambers whittling away at cert memos. S/o to Amy Wildermuth (Stevens Clerk) for getting me psyched on the Supremes.Keep up the good work y’all.

Excellent analysis

by leayrda on
Rating: ★★★★★

Really fantastic and easy to understand analysis on the court. Ian, Dan, and Leah break down all the nerdy details while also offering clarifying examples. Love the pod!

First Mondays is essential

by justinchina on
Rating: ★★★★★

I'm not a lawyer, and haven't ever given the supreme court much thought, but I started listening to First Mondays last year and I'm so glad that I did. The way of thinking about these issues, and the hosts ability to really dig deep on the topics has been very eye opening for me. I subscribe to a lot of podcasts, but First Mondays is the only one that every episode is listened to in its entirety. I love the perspective of each of the three regular hosts. (not sure why the sudden influx anti-Litman comments are coming from...I think each of you bring a vital perspective and insight.) Thanks for your efforts.

Go-to podcast for SCOTUS analysis

by MoonySBCB on
Rating: ★★★★★

There simply isn't another podcast out there with SCOTUS coverage as detailed or as broad. The commentary is smart and funny, and I always look forward to seeing a new episode of First Mondays on my podcast queue.UPDATE OCTOBER 2018: A bunch of reviews complain about frequent guest-host Leah Litman’s voice, as if she had the voice of Fran Dreschler or something. Her voice is fine. It is no more or less aurally pleasing than Ian Samuel’s voice. If you can’t pay attention to what a person is saying for their cadence and timbre not being to your liking, you’re going to have a rough go of it in life. Those other reviewers are dumb.

Highly informative

by fishxc on
Rating: ★★★★★

Excellent podcast. All the hosts are great, especially Leah

The Best SCOTUS Podcast Around

by EastCoastCowboy on
Rating: ★★★★★

This is the most comprehensive and in depth SCOTUS podcast available. It does a great job going deep on important (and sometimes less important) issues in front of and affecting the Court. The hosts try to make the podcast accessible to non-experts, but some familiarity with legal issues and the Court is generally required. While I generally find the two main hosts charming, the podcast definitely has a point of view, and does not strive to be unbiased. Which is fine! But often the most interesting episodes are those where they bring in co-hosts with differing views and/or backgrounds than the two main hosts.

Great Podcast!

by E.L.K. on
Rating: ★★★★★

Love the pod. Thank you!

Great podcast if you want to know how the Court really works

by n3ckf on
Rating: ★★★★★

Love the case summaries and review of Cert petitions (more than half the battle is getting your case granted!). Loved the ep with Dr Epstein!)

Funny and informative - what more can you ask for?

by Johnswas on
Rating: ★★★★★

About time! Dan and Ian (+ guest hosts) are shining new light on a critical institution that affects us all. I say that not as an attorney or a particularly learned person. And they do it all with great humor and humility. I hope to see the team devote more time to explaining the underlying theories and stare decisis driving current events. Background on the external forces that affect the court (e.g, appropriations, staffing levels) also would be interesting. Keep it up!

Not for adults

by JeromeIgnatius on
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

Liberal partisans with no talent. Guest host has some talent but they don’t give her many opportunities.

Hit job on the Supreme Court

by Mississippi Snopes on
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

Devoting the intro of a supposedly analytical Supreme Court blog to a deeply sexist rant about “women’s rights” to have the rules of evidence and due process suspended was deeply damaging to the Supreme Court, our only institution capable of protecting individual rights and liberties. I have never been so depressed about the future of America as a constitutional democracy and I would never have guessed that this podcast would have contributed so maliciously to our national bonfire.

Good overall

by JReb3 on
Rating: ★★★☆☆

Very good, detailed examination of the Court’s work, including cert grants, briefs, arguments and decisions. Ian and Dan know their stuff, and they generally provide a balanced and fair analysis, notwithstanding their liberalism. The only real negative arises when they have Leah Litman as a guest. She is a strident left-winger, and her valley girl cadence and voice are grating, making her segments difficult to listen to. Other than Litman, it is a good overall SC podcast.


by luca487075 on
Rating: ★★★★★

I’m delighted that I have found you. I’m a grandmother and I’m quite distressed that the state of the nation. It seems to me that the judiciary is the only branch of government which is working at this point and now they have Kavanaugh thrown into the mix, calling the reputation of the court into question, is it bad news. I know I can listen to you and at least get some perspective on what the court is deciding. Facts go a long way. Thanks

Smart analysis

by ramerman on
Rating: ★★☆☆☆

Original 5-star: And great banter. Almost as good as listening to scotus oral arguments.Revised 2-star: Based on coverage of confirmation, hosts have shown this is the leftist version of “SCOTUS101” but the hosts don’t admit their bias. I have listen to every episode and feel cheated.

Law for everyone

by Whudson5 on
Rating: ★★★★★

Heard about from Current Affairs podcast. If you find Slate’s Amicus Brief bland and want something spicer, try this podcast out.

Love it

by DimitriKDimitriK on
Rating: ★★★★★

Incredibly insightful and shockingly entertaining.

Intellectually intriguing

by TxLawKen on
Rating: ★★★★★

Great show. Both Ian and Dan are clearly brilliant!

This is a v good show.

by QueerFenrir on
Rating: ★★★★★

Sake pod: Best pod.

A bit too political

by Ashton69803 on
Rating: ★★★☆☆

I'm more of a stick to the issues person, but good podcast.

Great Legal Podcast With a Hottie Host!

by Mr. Kbear on
Rating: ★★★★★

It’s a great podcast from fmr supreme court clerks, that does suffer from a complete lack of diversity (both intellectual and racial). But otherwise it’s good. And one of the hosts, Ian Samuel, is super hot. (Look up his instagram, he has lots of thirst traps there!)

First Mondays

by Older Wiser Attorney on
Rating: ★★★★★

These guys and gals are wicked smaht but never talk over anyone’s head. They thoroughly explain all sorts of legal arguments in interesting detail and in such a way that most people can understand and may even gain a new perspective. I’m addicted!


by Not prof Vladek on
Rating: ★★★★☆

I can’t finish the episodes that include Leah. Sure, she’s a quick wit and exudes a passion for SCOTUS esoterica. But she is the embodiment of nails on a chalkboard.

Great stuff

by PuroPinchePariGomez on
Rating: ★★★★★

This podcast made me realize something— socialism will win ✌🏽. Great stuff!

Strong to quite strong

by Shooter6789 on
Rating: ★★★★★

It’s an intellectually stimulating podcast delivering exactly what you should expect from a podcast about the Supreme Court - questionable banter, analysis, and (usually) well-informed speculation. I highly recommend it, if that’s what you’re into.

Sort of like SportsCenter for SCOTUS Junkies

by Fugitiveprofessor on
Rating: ★★★★★

Commentary is first rate.

Fantastic show

by George_R_T on
Rating: ★★★★★

Extremely in-depth discussion on recent SCOTUS cases, coupled with witty, though sometimes over the top humor.

Incomprehensibly moronic

by MoRtiS NoCTu on
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

Mind-shuttering, vomit-inducing collectivist filth propagated by socialist windbag shills who desire the destruction of freedom and the domination of individual will by the mega-state and ruling class (who are exempt from the socialist hell they have created). Ian Samuel is a disgusting, bottom-feeding demon who desires nothing more than to prey mercilessly on the plebeians. I don’t think I’ve ever heard more revolting commentary by an individual, and delivered in such a misleading and manipulative way as to trick the masses into playing into and desiring his garbage, despotic false-utopia of social and economic destruction. Leeching scum like you, who hate freedom and individual choice, will inevitably be crushed into dust.

SCOTUS Analysis For the Cyber Age!

by comptorn on
Rating: ★★★★★

Excellent pod by smart and good people.

Awesome and Informative

by iphone to much on
Rating: ★★★★★

I’m Starting Law School in the fall. I began listening to FM a few months ago with literally zero understanding of the legal jargon employed by Ian and Dan. Fortunately, thanks to both their explanations and refusal to dumb-down their podcast, I’ve both learned about SCOTUS proceedings and been fired up about going to Law School. Highly recommend 101 first street episodes to new listeners.

Drop Litman as a hostess

by Waldorf Hilton on
Rating: ★★★★☆

Leah Litman has a grating voice and speech pattern of lazy vowels that is insufferable to hear, made worse by her condescendingly hostile attitude to opposing views of the law and legal system.

High Court Snark!

by John Tavner on
Rating: ★★★★★

As an attorney that long ago helped make the top 90% of my class possible, I absolutely LOVE the breakdowns of these cases. This podcast is my go to , me-time guilty pleasure. Podcast is even better after the second bourbon of the night.

An absolute essential for anyone interested in the workings of the Supreme Court.

by 2D /// on
Rating: ★★★★★

Samuel and Epps consistently bring both intellectual rigor and entertaining analysis to First Mondays. As a side note, I also appreciate how neither host makes an effort to hide their political beliefs or potential intellectual biases, while still openly engaging arguments with which they may disagree.

Entertaining and informative

by lreyzin on
Rating: ★★★★★

The hosts are great: they’re entertaining and informative and don’t talk down to their audience. And the topic is interesting. What more could you want from a podcast?

Great, Just one downside

by mr Nitpicky on
Rating: ★★★☆☆

I have been listening to your podcast for over a month now and find it very insightful BUT have one issue with it. Do you guys notice how often you say "right?" in the middle and at the end of your sentences? It's similar to people saying "like" or "umm" as a filler and I just wanted to point it out because it can be really off-putting for listeners. You'll be surprised how often you say it once you notice.

More Leah, Please!

by Sam DKW on
Rating: ★★★★★

Great podcast about the Supreme Court. Hits the sweet spot of being substantive without being too lost in the weeds. My only request is more of guest host Leah Litman, please! Dan and Ian are great, but Leah’s recall and knowledge of a handful of substantive legal areas (such as postconviction review) is downright ridiculous. You guys have LeBron James sitting on the bench, get her in the game a bit more often!

Twitter sent me

by patrixnyc on
Rating: ★★★★★

I found the podcast from one of Ian's tweets. I didn't really have an interest in the Supreme Court, but I can't stop listening. If they're not careful, they may make my mother very happy by making me want to go to law school.

great podcast!

by esquan on
Rating: ★★★★★

What a fun insider's view of the Court. Dan and Ian bring a great perspective, and their co-host Leah is excellent at diving deep into the law behind some of the most interesting cases. The three of them make a great team.

Very informative - from a leftwing echo chamber

by Chuckie88 on
Rating: ★★★★☆

Ian and Dan provide great commentary regarding cases currently before the court, but don't expect a balanced or even-handed perspective. Their left-leaning agenda is obvious, and their frequent guest host, Leah Litman, gleefully ridicules any idea or position with which she disagrees. It's annoying and disappointing. Episodes with Nina Totenberg are fantastic.

Great breakdown of the Court

by Elizabeth, New York on
Rating: ★★★★★

I have been listening to First Mondays since the beginning, and I’m a huge fan of the show. (I’ve been a Patreon supporter since the campaign started as well.) I think it’s a phenomenal resource for Supreme Court junkies to get a lay of the landscape of the current Term and an insider’s perspective on how the Court operates more broadly. The hosts (former SCOTUS clerks) offer commentary on pending cert petitions, preview arguments, interview practitioners before the Court, and break down recent decisions, at a level that is interesting for legal nerds (me) while being accessible and fun for nonlawyers with an interest in the Court (my partner). I find episodes with guest hosts to be particularly enjoyable and effective. I love that Nina Totenberg has recently been added to the rotation of commentators, and I think Leah Litman is an extraordinary host who adds a needed point of view, level of nuance, and preparedness (sorry, Dan and Ian!) to the show; I would love to hear more from her.