Supreme Court ציבורי
[search 0]
עוד

Download the App!

show episodes
 
Decisions of the Supreme Court, summarized by the court itself.Readings of the Supreme Court slip opinion syllabi, With no personal commentary, you can make up your own mind about the decisions. 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 KellyPatrion:https://t.co/SpeNDawjyoamp=1Paypal:https://paypal.me/SCOTUSsyllabusCash App: $RJDieken
 
Brett and Nazim are two attorneys who hate being attorneys. Each week, they discuss current Supreme Court cases with the intent to make the law more accessible to the average person, while ruminating on what makes the law both frustrating and interesting. This podcast is not legal advice and is for entertainment purposes only. If anything you hear leads you to believe you need legal advice, please contact an attorney immediately
 
The Queens Supreme Court podcast is the hilarious spinoff of the hit online series “The Queens Supreme Court” with Ts Madison. The premise of the weekly satirical show is to discuss pop culture and all the hot social media trends, topics and gossip THEN try them as cases, render judgements and sentence the crimes accordingly to determine the ultimate fate of each celebrity!
 
The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law U.S. Supreme Court podcast utilizes faculty experts from specific areas of law to discuss cases decided or pending by the Court, trends in the Court's decisions, or other issues facing the Court. Moritz faculty includes seven former Supreme Court clerks and experts from nearly every area of the law. The podcast is intended for scholars, students, legal professionals and journalists looking for thoughtful and concise commentary on some of the mo ...
 
News, views, and insight on the future of the Supreme Court. The ragtag gang of the usual suspects returns to chat about Justice Kennedy's retirement, and the nomination process to follow. This is the second season of the show following the Garland/Gorsuch* nominations. Following in the footsteps of our prior podcasts, Advice & Consent is insightful, not stodgy… opinionated, but not dogmatic. This is a serious process, but we find some entertainment along the way too. Advice & Consent is an ...
 
The Supreme Court of the United States is divided, and it's not the first time. For over two centuries, the justices on the nation's highest bench have argued with one another over the direction to take country. From Brown v. Board of Education to Roe v. Wade, the Court has repeatedly transformed American society and remains a polarizing political subject today. And yet no one really talks about what exactly happened in all of these cases. For instance, no one talks about how contraception, ...
 
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 ...
 
American Wonk is the signature podcast of FREOPP, the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity. On the show, FREOPP President Avik Roy explores the most important national issues of our time—like the economy, health care, technology, pandemics, and the Supreme Court—with the experts and political leaders who know them best.
 
The Supreme Court decides a few dozen cases every year; federal appellate courts decide thousands. So if you love constitutional law, the circuit courts are where it’s at. Join us as we break down some of the week’s most intriguing appellate decisions with a unique brand of insight, wit, and passion for judicial engagement and the rule of law. http://ij.org/short-circuit
 
Beyond the Bench is a podcast series produced by the Florida Supreme Court. These podcasts will give you a better understanding of how Florida's courts work and how they work for you. Shows cover a broad range of topics and are meant to be informational, educational and entertaining.
 
Drama has unfolded in these courtrooms for more than 130 years, from serial murderers and gangland wars to multimillion-dollar commercial disputes and celebrity defamation cases. Take a step behind the bench of one of Australia’s oldest institutions and hear from judges as they explain why they make the decisions they do. Gertie's Law takes a deep dive into some of the lesser-known, misunderstood or complex parts of the court’s work, such as sentencing, mental health, juries and the criminal ...
 
5-4 is a podcast about how much the Supreme Court sucks. It's a progressive and occasionally profane take on the ideological battles at the heart of the Court's most important landmark cases; an irreverent tour of all the ways in which the law is shaped by politics. Listen each week as hosts Peter, Michael, and Rhiannon dismantle the Justices’ legal reasoning on hot-button issues like affirmative action, gun rights, and campaign finance, and use dark humor to reveal the high court's biases. ...
 
The Law Is My Ass (apologies to Charles Dickens), AKA "Law My Ass," provides smart, humorous, commentary on current legal news and issues - from new Supreme Court decisions, to pending legislation, to the reach of the First Amendment -- presented by a unique and uniquely qualified combination of attorneys and humorists.
 
A weekly podcast of immigration case summaries and practice insights from your host, Kevin A. Gregg, a partner at the law firm Kurzban Kurzban Tetzeli & Pratt P.A. Each Monday, the Immigration Review podcast reviews the latest published opinions from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and all U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals—discussing some in depth, providing holdings for others, and always giving practical insights, rummaging through the week’s decisions so you don’t h ...
 
The question whether or not gays have the right to marry marches through the courts toward the Supreme Court. Hollywood preaches that children raised with two mommies or two daddies are just fine, and with the new breakthroughs in genetics who needs either a dad or a mom? How did the ultimate Supreme Court Judge get excluded from the discussion? Who do you believe has the right to define marriage and family, and how does all this impact Christ's Family--the Church?
 
Brought to you by Monnat & Spurrier, Chartered, and hosted by Paige Nichols, Just in Case is a podcast of criminal-law cases just in from the United States Supreme Court, the Tenth Circuit, and the Kansas Appellate Courts. Look for new episodes on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of every month. Contact us at justincasepodcast@gmail.com.
 
The Articles of Confederation: On November 15th, 1777 The Articles of Confederation became the first constitution of the United States, though not yet ratified by the thirteen original colonies. Ratification of the Articles took place almost three and a half years later on March 1st, 1781. The purpose of the articles was to create a confederation of sovereign states with a weak central government; thus allowing state governments to wield most of the power. It wasn’t long before the need for ...
 
Attorney Melaniece Bardley McKnight is originally from Gary, Indiana and the founding partner of Bardley McKnight & Associates, LLC. McKnight attended undergraduate school at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale on a full basketball scholarship where she earned a bachelor’s degree in political science. Attorney McKnight earned a Juris Doctorate degree from North Carolina Central University School of Law in Durham, North Carolina.While pursuing her law degree, McKnight was Secretary of ...
 
Loading …
show series
 
Get ready to learn, folks, because this episode discusses time, poison, wars and 160 million dollars worth of garbage in the context of Guam v. U.S.. Although its mostly a case about statutory interpretation; and it's core, its the case you didn't know you needed to know more about. The law is a moving target here, but there's less nonsense than yo…
 
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear arguments in a major abortion case that could roll back limits on abortion laws cemented by the landmark reproductive rights case Roe v. Wade. In its term beginning October, the court will consider a Mississippi state law banning abortions after 15 weeks. John Yang discusses the matter with Mary Zieglar fr…
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether pre-August 3, 2010, crack offenders sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C) have a “covered offense” under Section 404 of the First Step Act. DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding) Sep 28 2020 | Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 4,…
 
How many pop culture references can a judge make in an opinion before we start to cringe? “Dean” of #AppellateTwitter Raffi Melkonian joins us to give his thoughts on a recent Ninth Circuit case that perhaps broke the all-time record for “coolness,” perhaps to such an extent that it got in the way of its own underlying legal argument. Plus, Diana S…
 
On May 24, 2021 the Supreme Court decided United States v. Palomar-Santiago. The issue was whether a defendant who was removed from the United States is automatically entitled to a defense of invalid removal where the crime underlying his removal is no longer a qualifying removal offense within his circuit. In a 9-0 opinion authored by Justice Soto…
 
On June 1, 2021 the Supreme Court decided United States v. Cooley. The issue was whether the lower courts erred in suppressing evidence on the theory that a police officer of an Indian tribe lacked authority to temporarily detain and search the respondent, Joshua James Cooley, a non-Indian, on a public right-of-way within a reservation based on a p…
 
Terrorism cases are among the most high-profile offences to come to the Supreme Court. The trials are complicated and usually long, as are the resulting sentences. The cases attract a lot of public interest. On the day of a sentence, the public galleries and press seats will be full, and TV cameras, lights and journos will be set up outside the Cou…
 
[1:48] Ep. preview with United States v. Abdul Aziz (1st Cir. Jun. 2, 2021) Massachusetts marijuana and hemp [2:44] Garland v. Dai, No. 19-1155 (U.S. June 1, 2021) adverse credibility; presumption of credibility; deemed credible; persuasiveness [8:26] Garcia-Deleon v. Garland, No. 20-3957 (6th Cir. June 4, 2021) administrative closure; Castro-Tum; …
 
Dahlia Lithwick and Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern offer analysis of the big decisions due from SCOTUS any minute, and Dahlia hosts a conversation with Rep Katie Porter about the need for laws to shore up toppled norms. In our Slate Plus segment, Mark returns to discuss the Stanford law student targeted by the Federalist Society. Nicholas Wallace nearly…
 
There’s this mysterious word in English that courts love to talk about, the Notorious A-N-D. Does it, in fact, mean “and?” Or does it mean “or?” The correction interpretation of the First Step Act—and a lot of years in prison for a lot of people—ride on the answer. Wesley Hottot explains how the Ninth Circuit and the Eleventh Circuit recently disag…
 
On June 1, 2021 the Supreme Court decided City of San Antonio, Texas v. Hotels.com L.P. The issue was whether, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit alone has held, district courts “lack[] discretion to deny or reduce” appellate costs deemed “taxable” in district court under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39(e). In a 9-0 opinion aut…
 
[2:13] United States v. Palomar-Santiago, No. 20-437 (U.S. May 24, 2021) 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d); illegal reentry; Leocal; motion to reopen; change in law [7:42] Quintero v. Garland, No. 19-1904 (4th Cir. May 26, 2021) presumption of credibility; duty to develop record; Matter of W-Y-C- & H-O-B-; pro se respondents; acquiescence; aggregate harm; Convent…
 
Hi Amicus listeners. Some of you might be familiar with The Waves, Slate’s podcast about feminism and gender, which has been around for years in various forms. The Waves went on hiatus at the beginning of the COVID pandemic, but I’m glad to say that it is back. Every Thursday, you’ll find a new episode in your feed, looking at the news and culture …
 
Can the county foreclose on your house because you haven’t paid your taxes, and then just keep the rest of your equity? In Ohio, yeah, they can. That kind of sounds like a taking without just compensation, which is why Ohio attorney Emily White joined us to talk about her recent case at the Sixth Circuit. Then Kirby Thomas West of IJ takes us “up n…
 
On April 22, 2021 the Supreme Court decided Carr v. Saul. was whether a claimant seeking disability benefits under the Social Security Act forfeits an Appointments Clause challenge to the appointment of an administrative law judge by failing to present that challenge during administrative proceedings. In a 9-0 opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor,…
 
On May 17, 2021 the Supreme Court decided BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore.The issue was was whether 28 U.S.C. 1447(d) permits a court of appeals to review any issue encompassed in a district court’s order remanding a removed case to state court when the removing defendant premised removal in part on the federal-officer removal stat…
 
On May 17, 2021 the Supreme Court decided Edwards v. Vannoy. The issue was whether the Supreme Court’s decision in Ramos v. Louisiana applies retroactively to cases on federal collateral review. In a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Kavanaugh, the Court affirmed the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, holding, “The ju…
 
On April 22, 2021 the Supreme Court decided Jones v. Mississippi. The issue was whether the Eighth Amendment requires the sentencing authority to make a finding that a juvenile is permanently incorrigible before imposing a sentence of life without parole. In a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Kavanaugh, the Court affirmed the ruling of the Supreme C…
 
On April 1, 2021 the Supreme Court decided Facebook Inc. v. Duguid. The issue was whether the definition of an "automatic telephone dialing system" in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 encompasses any device that can “store” and “automatically dial” telephone numbers, even if the device does not “us[e] a random or sequential number gene…
 
The hosts discuss a case in which the Supreme Court denied "class" status to female Wal-Mart employees in a gender discrimination class action, proving in this 5-4 decision that boys will be boys. Follow Peter (@The_Law_Boy), Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon) and Michael (@_FleerUltra) on Twitter. Get bonus content on Patreon See acast.com/privacy for priva…
 
Most Victorians have heard of Sir Redmond Barry, not least because there’s so many things named after him in Melbourne. And notoriously, he’s the judge who sentenced Ned Kelly to the gallows. But his impact on Melbourne extends far beyond the Kelly story. From defending Aboriginal resistance fighters to getting into a duel, Barry is undoubtedly one…
 
[2:28] Islam v. DHS, No. 19-13287 (11th Cir. May 20, 2021) INA § 212(a)(3)(B); membership in a terrorist organization; definition of Tier III terrorist organization; jurisdiction; issue preclusion; collateral estoppel; “actually litigated”; void for vagueness; Bangladesh Nationalist Party or BNP [12:01] Figueroa v. Att’y Gen. U.S., No. 19-1419 (3d …
 
This week's episode covers three recent decisions, CIC Services v. IRS (procedure for challenging IRS notice requirements), Caniglia v. Strom (community care-taking exception for the home) and Edwards v. Vannoy (retroactivity of unanimous verdicts). Law starts at (04:07) and an explanation for the episode title follows soon after.…
 
Dahlia Lithwick is joined by two independent abortion providers, Amy Hagstrom Miller of Whole Women's Health and Tammi Kromenaker of Red River Women's Clinic, to share their reactions to two huge pieces of news in reproductive rights and health this week: the Supreme Court’s Dobbs grant, and SB8 in Texas. Then, Ian Milhiser of Vox and Sen. Sheldon …
 
[01:48] Introduction [03:18] Interview with John Pratt [19:51] EB-5 visas and Regional Center Program [35:24] AILA National elections Click this link to learn more about John! *Please note This interview slightly misstates the factual circumstances of the Iran-Contra Affair. Our apologies! *Sponsors and friends of the podcast! Kurzban Kurzban Tetze…
 
Second Amendment scholar David Kopel sits down with us to set the stage for a big issue we’ll hear a lot about over the next year: What “keep and bear arms” means outside of the home. Whether it’s conceal carry or open carry, does the Constitution protect that right, and if so, how? There’s a case at the Supreme Court from the Second Circuit challe…
 
On April 28, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. The question before the court was whether Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, which holds that public school officials may regulate speech that would materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school, appl…
 
On April 21, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com. The question before the Court was whether, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit alone has held, district courts “lack[] discretion to deny or reduce” appellate costs deemed “taxable” in district court under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3…
 
On May 17, 2021 the Supreme Court decided Caniglia v. Strom. The issue was whether the “community caretaking” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement extends to the home. In a 9-0 opinion authored by Justice Thomas, the Court vacated the ruling of the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and remanded the case. The Supreme Court he…
 
On today’s episode of American Wonk, Avik Roy talks to Congressman Jim Banks of Indiana, Chairman of the Republican Study Committee and author of a pathbreaking health care reform bill called the Hospital Competition Act. Should the GOP shed it’s big business reputation to help kitchen table voters? More on the Hospital Competition Act here. After …
 
On April 21, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic Inc. The question before the Court was whether a defendant in a patent infringement action who assigned the patent, or is in privity with an assignor of the patent, may have a defense of invalidity heard on the merits. Daniel Ortiz, Michael J. and Jane R. Ho…
 
On April 20, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in United States v. Gary. The question before the Court was whether a defendant who pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm as a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) and 924(a), is automatically entitled to plain-error relief if the district court did not advise him that one element of th…
 
On May 4, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Terry v. United States. The question before the court was whether pre-August 3, 2010, crack offenders sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C) have a “covered offense” under Section 404 of the First Step Act. Vikrant Reddy, Senior Reserch Fellow at the Charles Koch Institute, joins us today to…
 
The hosts discuss the 8th Amendment and juvenile life without parole, and the tension between modern neuroscience, and the conservative impulse to maintain 200-year-old traditions of punishment. Follow Peter (@The_Law_Boy), Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon) and Michael (@_FleerUltra) on Twitter. To get premium Patreon-only episodes, access to exclusive even…
 
Loading …

מדריך עזר מהיר

זכויות יוצרים 2021 | מפת אתר | מדיניות פרטיות | תנאי השירות
Google login Twitter login Classic login