I Say No To SubStack, And Chief Justice Roberts Says Yes

"Flagging for you a new essay by Chief Justice Roberts on William Howard Taft for In Pursuit..."

This morning I received an unusual email in my inbox. The subject line was "Chief Justice Roberts publishes essay on William Howard Taft for In Pursuit." For sure, I thought someone was pranking me. But no. It was a press release from DKC, a public affairs company in New York. Obviously, someone compiled a list of people who write about the Court, and paid zero attention to what they wrote. This was almost as tone-deaf as the PR email I received promoting the Federal Circuit's ridiculous AI video.

Here is the message:

Hi Josh,

Hope you're well. Flagging for you a new essay by Chief Justice Roberts on William Howard Taft for In Pursuit, a national initiative in which leading American public figures and scholars share lessons from each American President and select First Ladies.

In the essay, the Chief Justice reflects on how Taft maintained his dignity and principles through his defeat in the 1912 presidential election, thereby leading him to future success as "one of the most consequential Chief Justices in our Nation's history."

I've included a few key sections from the essay below for reference and you can read the full version on In Pursuit's Substack.

I say no to SubStack, and Chief Justice Roberts says yes. Makes sense.

I hadn't heard of the In Pursuit Substack. It seems to be founded by Jim Ambuske, a historian on American history (who I also haven't heard of). The site has been publishing essays since March of 2026. Influential figures wrote written essays on important figures in American history. Barack Obama wrote about Abraham Lincoln. Annette Gordon-Reed wrote about Andrew Johnson. Bill Clinton wrote about Theodore Roosevelt. Jack Rakove wrote about James Madison. Jon Meacham wrote about Andrew Jackson. And now Chief Justice Roberts has written about Taft.

The Chief also recorded an audio version of his essay. There is nothing too insightful here. Roberts does offer praise for Meyers, which the Court vindicated this past term in Slaughter.

At age 63, Taft ascended to the position for which he was most suited by ability and temperament. Chief Justice Taft achieved the success that eluded President Taft. To be sure, Taft opinions are few and far between in modern constitutional law casebooks. A notable exception is Myers v. United States, which upheld a President's power to remove executive branch officials. But as an administrator, Taft made landmark contributions to the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary more generally, escorting it into modern times and ensuring its effectiveness as a co-equal branch under the Constitution.

At present, the Substack about 27,000 subscribers. That number does not strike me as particularly high for the caliber of authors they've gotten. Indeed, that was roughly my estimate of how many unpaid subscribers I could earn by myself. Perhaps this is proof that SubStack is not what I thought it might be.