SCOTUScast is a project of the Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy Studies. This audio broadcast series provides expert commentary on U.S. Supreme Court cases as they are argued and issued. The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker. We hope these broadcasts, like all of our programming, will serve to stimulate discussion and further exchange regarding important current legal issues. View ou ...
…
continue reading
Audio of Supreme Court opinions. Finally. Listen to full-length readings of the most current opinions as they are issued by the Court. Or, browse through a library containing dozens of landmark opinions from the past. Either way, it’s free! A rare find for SCOTUS nerds.
…
continue reading
A Heritage Foundation podcast breaking down what's happening at the Supreme Court, what the justices are up to, and more. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
…
continue reading
The Supreme Court decision syllabus, read without personal commentary. See: Wheaton and Donaldson v. Peters and Grigg, 33 U.S. 591 (1834) and United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321, 337. Photo by: Davi Kelly. Founded by RJ Dieken. Now hosted by Jake Leahy. Frequent guest host Jeff Barnum. *Note this podcast is for informational and educational purposes only.
…
continue reading
A podcast from SCOTUSblog.com
…
continue reading
Raw oral argument audio from the US Supreme Court.
…
continue reading
Haha, gov projects amiright? Cover art photo provided by Gulistan Elidemir on Unsplash: https://unsplash.com/@a_musing
…
continue reading
Podcast by James
…
continue reading
The right to counsel. Cover art photo provided by Carl Raw on Unsplash: https://unsplash.com/@carltraw
…
continue reading
SCOTUStalk is a nonpartisan podcast about the Supreme Court for lawyers and non-lawyers alike, brought to you by SCOTUSblog. SCOTUStalk is hosted by Amy Howe and produced and edited by Ellena Erskine. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
…
continue reading
A quick, three-day weblog as a podcast host for the United States Supreme Court's oral arguments regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010.
…
continue reading
Culley v. Marshall Petitioner Halima Culley loaned her car to her son, who was later pulled over by Alabama police officers and arrested for possession of marijuana. Petitioner Lena Sutton loaned her car to a friend, who was stopped by Alabama police and arrested for trafficking methamphetamine. In both cases, petitioners’ cars were seized under an…
…
continue reading
I hope you will follow me to my Youtube channel where I will continue to offer free access to all 350+ past episodes and audio of future high-profile Supreme Court opinions. www.whatSCOTUSwroteus.comVon Pippah Getchell
…
continue reading
1
Tent Cities, Immunity, and Natural Law
47:12
47:12
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
47:12
It's the end of oral arguments, and this week the Court heard two big ones. Your hosts discuss Grants Pass, where the Court will decide whether it's "cruel and unusual punishment" to enforce anti-camping laws, and they discuss the Trump immunity case, which has big implications not only for the presidential election but for the office of the presid…
…
continue reading
Warner Chappell Music v. Nealy Under the Copyright Act, a plaintiff must file suit “within three years after the claim accrued.” 17 U. S. C. §507(b). On one understanding of that limitations provision, a copyright claim “accrue[s]” when “an infringing act occurs.” Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 572 U. S. 663, 670. But under an alternative v…
…
continue reading
1
Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
15:28
15:28
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
15:28
On February 21, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC. At issue was whether choice-of-law provisions in maritime contracts are presumptively enforceable under federal maritime law. Join us to hear Professor Andrew Hessick break down the decision and discuss its potential ramificatio…
…
continue reading
1
Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
15:54
15:54
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
15:54
On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri. At issue was whether an employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII must show that the transfer brought about some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment, but that harm need not be significant. Join us to hear Alis…
…
continue reading
1
Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
15:27
15:27
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
15:27
On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC. At issue was whether a transportation worker need not work in the transportation industry to be exempt from coverage under Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act. Join us to hear Professor Samuel Estreicher break down the decision and discuss i…
…
continue reading
1
Trump v. United States - Post-Argument SCOTUScast
27:15
27:15
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
27:15
On April 25, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Trump v. United States. The Court considered whether, and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office. Please join us as we break down and analyze how oral argume…
…
continue reading
1
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
23:19
23:19
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
23:19
On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California. At issue was whether a building-permit exaction is exempt from the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine as applied in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard, Oregon simply because it is authorized by legislation. Join us…
…
continue reading
1
Devillier v. Texas - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
17:51
17:51
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
17:51
On April 16th, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Devillier v. Texas. At issue was whether owners of property north of U. S. Interstate Highway 10 adversely affected by the flood evacuation barrier constructed by Texas should be permitted on remand to pursue their takings clause claims through the cause of action available under Texas law…
…
continue reading
Muldrow v. City of St. Louis Sergeant Jatonya Clayborn Muldrow maintains that her employer, the St. Louis Police Department, transferred her from one job to another because she is a woman. From 2008 through 2017, Muldrow worked as a plainclothes officer in the Department’s specialized Intelligence Division. In 2017, the new Intelligence Division co…
…
continue reading
1
McIntosh v. United States - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
17:35
17:35
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
17:35
On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in McIntosh v. United States. At issue was whether a district court’s failure to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(2)(B)’s requirement to enter a preliminary order imposing criminal forfeiture before sentencing bars a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to …
…
continue reading
1
NEW: Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries | Federal Arbitration Act, Transportation Workers
18:17
18:17
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
18:17
Listen to the unanimous opinion of the Supreme Court in Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC., decided April 12, 2024. Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get podcasts.Von Pippah Getchell
…
continue reading
1
NEW: FBI v. Fikre | Mootness, No Fly List
17:54
17:54
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
17:54
The unanimous opinion of the Supreme Court in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fikre, decided March 19, 2024. Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get podcasts.Von Pippah Getchell
…
continue reading
1
NEW: DeVillier v. Texas | Fifth Amendment Takings Clause
11:38
11:38
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
11:38
The unanimous opinion of the Court in DeVillier v. Texas, decided April 16, 2024. Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get podcasts.Von Pippah Getchell
…
continue reading
1
Live Summary of the Trump Criminal Cases | Palomar College
55:06
55:06
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
55:06
I have something a little different for you today: since I often read documents from the Trump cases on the show, I thought my super nerds might be interested in hearing the audio from a guest lecture I gave last week summarizing the four Trump criminal cases at a Palomar College event held every semester called the Political Economy Days Lecture S…
…
continue reading
1
Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P. - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
12:47
12:47
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
12:47
On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P. At issue was whether U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit erred in holding that a failure to make a disclosure required under Item 303 of SEC Regulation S-K can support a private claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange A…
…
continue reading
1
MacQuarie Infrastructure v. Moab Partners | Securities Exchange Act § 10(b)
15:31
15:31
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
15:31
The unanimous opinion of the Supreme Court in MacQuarie Infrastructure Corporation, et al. v. Moab Partners, L.P., et al., decided April 12, 2024. The Court is asked whether the Second Circuit erred in holding-in conflict with the Third, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits- that a failure to make a disclosure required under Item 303 can support a private …
…
continue reading
1
Part 2: Pulsifer v. United States | Safety-valve Relief, Mandatory Minimum Sentences
30:04
30:04
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
30:04
Part 2 of 2 of the opinion of the Supreme Court in Pulsifer v. United States, decided March 15, 2024. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-340_p86a.pdf A criminal defendant facing a mandatory minimum sentence is eligible for safety-valve relief under 18 U. S. C. §3553(f)(1) only if the defendant satisfies each of the provision’s three con…
…
continue reading
1
McIntosh v. United States (Criminal Forfeiture)
11:21
11:21
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
11:21
McIntosh v. United States Petitioner Louis McIntosh was indicted on multiple counts of Hobbs Act robbery and firearm offenses. The indictment set forth the demand that McIntosh “shall forfeit . . . all property . . . derived from proceeds traceable to the commission of the [Hobbs Act] offenses.” The Government also later provided McIntosh with a pr…
…
continue reading
1
Pulsifer v. United States | Safety-valve Relief, Mandatory Minimum Sentences
39:54
39:54
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
39:54
Part 1 of 2 of the opinion of the Supreme Court in Pulsifer v. United States, decided March 15, 2024. A criminal defendant facing a mandatory minimum sentence is eligible for safety-valve relief under 18 U. S. C. §3553(f)(1) only if the defendant satisfies each of the provision’s three conditions. Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get pod…
…
continue reading
1
Aristotle's Ethics and Harlan's Great Dissent
48:00
48:00
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
48:00
This week the Court heard oral arguments in a case challenging a January 6th prosecution, had a spirited debate about nationwide injunctions, and issued major opinions on property rights and employment discrimination. Your hosts discuss all those developments, and then GianCarlo interviews Professor Andre Archie about his fascinating new book The V…
…
continue reading
1
Rudisill v. McDonough (VA Benefits)
11:15
11:15
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
11:15
Petitioner James Rudisill enlisted in the United States Army in 2000 and served a total of eight years over three separate periods of military service. He became entitled to Montgomery Bill benefits as a result of his first period of service. Rudisill earned an undergraduate degree and used 25 months and 14 days of Montgomery benefits to finance hi…
…
continue reading
DEVILLIER v. TEXAS CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Argued Jan. 16, 2024—Decided Apr. 16, 2024 Richard DeVillier and more than 120 other petitioners own property north of U. S. Interstate Highway 10 between Houston and Beaumont, Texas. The dispute here arose after the State of Texas took action to use portions …
…
continue reading
George Sheetz was required by the County of El Dorado to pay $23,420 George Sheetz tried to get a residential building permit from El Dorado County. To do so, the County made him pay a $23,420 "traffic impact fee." The fee was part of the County's "General Plan" -- this plan was intended to address the impact that development has on public services…
…
continue reading
Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation owns a subsidiary that operates terminals to store bulk liquid commodities, including No. 6 fuel oil, which has almost 3% sulfer. The UN adopted IMO in 2016, which set in in 2020. This regulation capped the sulfur content on fuel oil used in shipping to 0.5%. Macquarie did not discuss this IMO in its public docu…
…
continue reading
Flowers makes baked goods that are then distributed across the country. Bissonnette owned the distribution rights in a certain part of the country. Their contract subjected them to the F.A.A.. After Bissonnette sued under Labor (wage) laws, Flowers moved to compel arbitration. Bissonnette said they're exempt because the F.A.A. exempts “contracts of…
…
continue reading
1
Part 3: Trump v. United States | Brief for the United States
29:36
29:36
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
29:36
Today I'll be reading Special Counsel Jack Smith's Brief for the United States in Donald Trump v. United States (filed April 8, 2024) - the Supreme Court case in which Donald Trump asserts that presidents have absolute criminal immunity. The brief is 49 pages long, so I will be recording it in several segments. If you are interested in listening to…
…
continue reading
1
Part 2: Trump v. United States | Brief for the United States
23:19
23:19
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
23:19
Today I'll be reading Special Counsel Jack Smith's Brief for the United States in Donald Trump v. United States (filed April 8, 2024) - the Supreme Court case in which Donald Trump asserts that presidents have absolute criminal immunity. If you are interested in listening to the oral arguments in this case, they are scheduled to take place later th…
…
continue reading
1
Part 1: Trump v. United States | Brief for the United States
32:35
32:35
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
32:35
Today I'll be reading Special Counsel Jack Smith's Brief for the United States in Donald Trump v. United States (filed April 8, 2024) - the Supreme Court case in which Donald Trump asserts that presidents have absolute criminal immunity. The brief is 49 pages long, so I will be recording it in several segments. If you are interested in listening to…
…
continue reading
1
Part 2: U.S. v. Trump | DOJ Response to Judge Cannon's Jury Instructions Order (Documents Case)
20:20
20:20
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
20:20
Listen to Special Counsel Jack Smith's April 2, 2024 filing responding to Judge Cannon's order requiring preliminary proposed jury instructions and verdict forms on counts 1-32. If you need a quick explainer on the Presidential Records Act, check out mine. Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get podcasts. WhatSCOTUSWroteUs.com…
…
continue reading
1
Part 1: U.S. v. Trump | DOJ Response to Judge Cannon's Jury Instructions Order (Documents Case)
30:00
30:00
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
30:00
Listen to Special Counsel Jack Smith's April 2, 2024 filing responding to Judge Cannon's order requiring preliminary proposed jury instructions and verdict forms on counts 1-32. If you need a quick explainer on the Presidential Records Act, check out mine. Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get podcasts. WhatSCOTUSWroteUs.com…
…
continue reading
1
Lindke v. Freed | Social Media, Public Officials, First Amendment
33:19
33:19
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
33:19
When does a public official’s social media activity constitute state action subject to the First Amendment? Listen to the unanimous opinion of the Supreme Court in Lindke v. Freed (March 15, 2024) and find out. Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get podcasts. WhatSCOTUSWroteUs.comVon Pippah Getchell
…
continue reading
1
Abortion, Immunity, and Originalism
36:24
36:24
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
36:24
This week the Court heard oral arguments in the high-profile case challenging the Food and Drug Administration's expansion of access to the abortion drug mifepristone. GianCarlo discusses that case, oral arguments, and the mess of standing doctrine. After that, Zack interviews Professor John Yoo who gives his expert take on the Trump immunity case …
…
continue reading
1
Pulsifer v. United States - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
17:53
17:53
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
17:53
On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Pulsifer v. United States. The Supreme Court considered an Eighth Circuit case that raised the question: "Must a defendant show he does not meet any of the criteria listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) to qualify for a sentence lower than the statutory minimum?" At issue was the meaning of the word…
…
continue reading
This term is shaping up to be a big one for free speech cases. The Court heard arguments in three such cases this week and handed down decisions in other cases involving public officials blocking people on social media, the FBI's No-Fly-List, and the meaning of the word "and." Your hosts discuss those cases, and then GianCarlo interviews Robert McN…
…
continue reading
Respondent Yonas Fikre, a U. S. citizen and Sudanese emigree, brought suit alleging that the government placed him on the No Fly List unlawfully. In his complaint, Mr. Fikre alleged that he traveled from his home in Portland, Oregon to Sudan in 2009 to pursue business opportunities there. At a visit to the U. S. embassy, two FBI agents informed Mr.…
…
continue reading
Wilkinson v. Garland Congress gives immigration judges discretionary power to cancel the removal of a noncitizen and instead permit the noncitizen to remain in the country lawfully. 8 U. S. C. §§1229b(a)–(b). An IJ faced with an application for cancellation of removal proceeds in two steps: The IJ must decide first whether the noncitizen is eligibl…
…
continue reading
1
Garland v. Cargill - Post-Argument SCOTUScast
47:11
47:11
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
47:11
On February 28, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Garland v. Cargill. The Court considered whether bump stocks are considered "machineguns" as defined by Title 26 of the United States Code. Please join us as we break down and analyze how oral argument went before the Court. Featuring: Stephen Halbrook, Senior Fellow, Independent Instit…
…
continue reading
1
Trump v. Anderson - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
17:20
17:20
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
17:20
On March 4, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Trump v. Anderson. At issue was whether the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering former President Donald Trump excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ballot; the Court held that Colorado did err in excluding Trump from the ballot. Join us to hear Professor Muller break down the decis…
…
continue reading
O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier In 2014, Michelle O’Connor-Ratcliff and T. J. Zane created public Facebook pages to promote their campaigns for election to the Poway Unified School District (PUSD) Board of Trustees. While O’Connor-Ratcliff and Zane (whom we will call the Trustees) both had personal Facebook pages that they shared with friends and fami…
…
continue reading
James Freed, like countless other Americans, created a private Facebook profile sometime before 2008. He eventually converted his profile to a public “page,” meaning that anyone could see and comment on his posts. In 2014, Freed updated his Facebook page to reflect that he was appointed city manager of Port Huron, Michigan, describing himself as “D…
…
continue reading
PULSIFER v. UNITED STATES No. 22–340. Argued October 2, 2023—Decided March 15, 2024 After pleading guilty to distributing at least 50 grams of methamphetamine, petitioner Mark Pulsifer faced a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years in prison. At sentencing, he sought to take advantage of the “safety valve” provision of federal sentencing law, which…
…
continue reading
1
Rehearing: Justice Caleb Stegall
36:00
36:00
Später Spielen
Später Spielen
Listen
Gefällt mir
Geliked
36:00
In this Rehearings episode, we replay our interview with Kansas Supreme Court Justice Caleb Stegall. Rehearings airs our favorite old interviews on weeks when things are otherwise quiet at the Supreme Court. Follow us on Twitter @scotus101 and @tzsmith. And please send questions, comments, or ideas for future episodes to scotus101@heritage.org. Don…
…
continue reading
This was a big week for former president Trump who prevailed in Trump v. Anderson against an attempt to remove him from the ballot in Colorado. Your hosts dive deep into that decision unpacking the majority opinion, the debate among the concurring justices, and the case's short- and long-term implications. After that, GianCarlo interviews Ninth Cir…
…
continue reading