Best Scotuscast Podcasts (2025)

1
Glossip v. Oklahoma - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 19:28

22d ago19:28

19:28

On February 25, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 5-3 opinion in Glossip v. Oklahoma. The Court held that the prosecution violated its constitutional obligation to correct false testimony under Napue v. Illinois. and the Court has the jurisdiction to review the judgment of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. Please join us in discussing…

1
Monsalvo Velazquez v. Bondi (Immigration) 6:03

20h ago6:03

6:03

Send us a text In Monsalvo Velazquez v. Bondi the Supreme Court held that when a voluntary departure deadline under 8 U.S.C. §1229c(b)(2) lands on a weekend or legal holiday, it carries over to the next business day. Monsalvo Velázquez had been granted 60 days to voluntarily depart the U.S. He filed a motion to reopen on the following Monday after …

1
Cunningham v. Cornell (ERISA) 6:16

2d ago6:16

6:16

Send us a text In Cunningham v. Cornell University, the Supreme Court addressed a fundamental pleading question under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). Petitioners—former and current Cornell University employees—alleged that university fiduciaries violated ERISA §1106(a)(1)(C) by causing their retirement plans to pay exce…

1
Trump v. J. G. G. (Immigration / Habeas) 8:27

14d ago8:27

8:27

Send us a text In Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. J.G.G., et al., the Supreme Court granted the government’s application to vacate temporary restraining orders issued by the District Court for the District of Columbia, which had blocked the removal of several Venezuelan detainees allegedly affiliated with the foreign terr…

1
Department of Education v. California (TRO) 5:41

15d ago5:41

5:41

Send us a text In Department of Education, et al. v. California, the Supreme Court in a per curiam decision granted the federal government’s application to stay a district court order that had mandated continued payment of certain education-related grants. The District Court for the District of Massachusetts had issued a temporary restraining order…

1
Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn (Civil RICO) 11:24

19d ago11:24

11:24

Send us a text In Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn, the Supreme Court affirmed the Second Circuit and held that a plaintiff may seek treble damages under the civil RICO statute for injuries to business or property, even if those injuries stem from a personal injury. Douglas Horn was fired after testing positive for THC, allegedly caused by using a C…

1
FDA v. Wages and White Lion Investments, LLC (Administrative Law) 14:35

20d ago14:35

14:35

Send us a text In FDA v. Wages and White Lion Investments, the Supreme Court unanimously vacated a Fifth Circuit decision that found the Food and Drug Administration acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it denied authorization for flavored e-cigarette products. Under the Tobacco Control Act of 2009, manufacturers must receive FDA approval before…

1
United States v. Miller (Bankruptcy) 10:11

20d ago10:11

10:11

Send us a text In United States v. Miller, the Supreme Court reversed the Tenth Circuit and held that a bankruptcy trustee cannot use §544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code to claw back funds from the federal government under a state fraudulent-transfer law, due to sovereign immunity. The case arose after shareholders of a failed Utah business used $145,00…

1
Bondi v. Vanderstok (ATF Ghost Guns) 7:00

23d ago7:00

7:00

Send us a text In Bondi v. Vanderstok, the Supreme Court reversed the Fifth Circuit and upheld the ATF’s 2022 rule interpreting the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) to cover certain “ghost gun” kits and unfinished firearm parts. The GCA requires licenses and background checks for firearm sales and defines “firearm” to include both weapons and their fr…

1
Williams v. Reed - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 34:33

1M ago34:33

34:33

On February 21, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in Williams v. Reed. The Court held that state courts may not deny those claims on failure-to-exhaust grounds when a state court’s application of a state exhaustion requirement in effect immunizes state officials from 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims challenging delays in the administrati…

1
Delligatti v. United States ("Crime of Violence") 7:25

1M ago7:25

7:25

Send us a text In Delligatti v. United States, the Supreme Court held that New York attempted second-degree murder qualifies as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. §924(c) because the knowing or intentional causation of death, whether by act or omission, necessarily involves the use of physical force under §924(c)(3)(A). Salvatore Delligatti was co…

1
Thompson v. United States (Criminal / False Statement) 5:52

1M ago5:52

5:52

Send us a text In Thompson v. United States the Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. §1014, which prohibits “knowingly mak[ing] any false statement” to influence the FDIC’s actions on a loan, does not extend to statements that are merely misleading but not technically false. Patrick Thompson, a former Chicago Alderman, was charged under §1014 after di…

1
Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc. - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 24:32

1M ago24:32

24:32

On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc. The Court held that in a trademark infringement suit under the Lanham Act the court, when awarding the "defendant’s profits" to the prevailing plaintiff, can award only profits ascribable to the "defendant" itself. Please join us…

1
Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v. United States, ex rel. Todd Heath - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 18:34

1M ago18:34

18:34

On February 21, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v. United States, ex rel. Todd Heath. Because the government “provided” (at a minimum) a “portion” of the money applied for by transferring more than $100 million from the Treasury into the fund, the E-Rate reimbursement requests in this case are "claims" …

1
TikTok, Inc. v. Garland - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 24:31

1M ago24:31

24:31

On January 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in TikTok, Inc. v. Garland. The Court held that the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act's provisions challenged by the petitioners do not violate the First Amendment rights of those petitioners. Please join us in discussing the decision and its …

1
Lackey v. Stinnie - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 23:35

1M ago23:35

23:35

On February 25, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 7-2 opinion in Lackey v. Stinnie. The Court held that a party that receives a preliminary injunction but does not obtain a final judgment on the merits before a case becomes moot is not a "prevailing party" eligible for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. §1988(b) Please join us in discussing th…

1
San Francisco v. EPA (Admin Law / Clean Water Act) 9:57

2M ago9:57

9:57

Send us a text In City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court addressed the scope of the EPA's authority under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The case arose when the EPA issued a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to San Francisco's wastewater treatment facilities, including provis…

1
Dewberry Group Inc v. Dewberry Engineers Inc (Trademark) 6:26

2M ago6:26

6:26

Send us a text In Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc., the Supreme Court addressed the scope of monetary remedies under the Lanham Act. The case arose from a trademark dispute between two entities using the "Dewberry" name. The district court awarded the plaintiff not only the defendant's profits but also those of affiliated companies. …

1
Waetzig v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. (Arbitration / Civil Procedure) 5:41

2M ago5:41

5:41

Send us a text In Waetzig v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc., the Supreme Court held that a case voluntarily dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) qualifies as a "final proceeding" under Rule 60(b), allowing a district court to reopen the case. Gary Waetzig sued Halliburton for age discrimination but later dismis…

1
Glossip v. Oklahoma (Criminal Trial) 11:41

2M ago11:41

11:41

Send us a text In Glossip v. Oklahoma, the Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant is entitled to a new trial when the prosecution knowingly fails to correct false testimony and that error could have contributed to the verdict. Richard Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death based primarily on the testimony of Justin Sneed, who claimed Gl…

1
Lackey v. Stinnie (Section 1983 Fees) 7:45

2M ago7:45

7:45

Send us a text In Lackey v. Stinnie, the Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who secure only preliminary injunctive relief before their case becomes moot do not qualify as "prevailing parties" entitled to attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. §1988(b). Virginia drivers challenged the constitutionality of a law suspending licenses for unpaid court fines. A…

1
Williams v. Reed (Civil Rights) 5:03

2M ago5:03

5:03

Send us a text In Williams v. Reed, the Supreme Court rejects Alabama’s administrative-exhaustion rule, holding that states cannot require claimants to complete an allegedly delayed administrative process before filing a 42 U.S.C. §1983 lawsuit challenging that very delay. Writing for the Court, Justice Kavanaugh explains that the Alabama Supreme C…

1
Wisconsin Bell v. US ex rel Heath (False Claims Act) 7:02

2M ago7:02

7:02

Send us a text In Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Heath, the Supreme Court unanimously affirms that E-Rate reimbursement requests qualify as “claims” under the False Claims Act (FCA). The case centers on whether federal subsidies distributed through the E-Rate program—funded by contributions from telecommunications carriers and admini…

1
Hungary v. Simon 8:05

2M ago8:05

8:05

Send us a text In Republic of Hungary v. Simon, the Supreme Court held the mere allegation of commingling funds doesn't satisfy the commercial nexus requirement under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA)’s expropriation exception. Holocaust survivors sued Hungary and its national railway, seeking damages for property seized during World War …

1
Andrew v. White (Trial Evidence) 24:33

3M ago24:33

24:33

Send us a text Andrew v. White In Andrew v. White, the Supreme Court reviewed the Tenth Circuit's decision to reject Brenda Andrew's due process challenge to her conviction for murder. Andrew was charged with murdering her husband -- at trial, the prosecution introduced prejudicial evidence with little probative value to the issue of her guilt. Thi…

1
TikTok v. Garland (Special Edition) 46:55

3M ago46:55

46:55

Send us a text ***Special edition -- with no syllabus in this case -- the recording includes the entire per curiam decision, as well as the two concurring opinions.*** In TikTok Inc. v. Garland, the Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. The Act prohibits U.S. com…

1
E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera (Labor / Overtime Wages) 6:16

3M ago6:16

6:16

Send us a text E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera (Decided January 15, 2025) In E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera, the Supreme Court considered the standard of proof employers must meet to classify employees as exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act's (FLSA) overtime-pay provisions. The case arose when sales representatives sued E.M.D. Sales, alleging the…

1
Royal Canin USA Inc. v. Wullschleger (Federal Jurisdiction) 10:19

3M ago10:19

10:19

Send us a text Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger (Decided January 15, 2025) In Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger, the Supreme Court addressed whether a federal court retains supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1367 when a plaintiff amends their complaint to remove all federal claims after a case is removed to federal court. The…

1
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas (Immigration) 7:59

4M ago7:59

7:59

Send us a text Bouarfa v. Mayorkas (Decided December 10, 2024) In Bouarfa v. Mayorkas, the Supreme Court addressed whether federal courts have jurisdiction to review the revocation of a previously approved visa petition under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The case involved Amina Bouarfa, a U.S. citizen, whose petition for her noncitizen spou…

1
SEC v. Jarkesy - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 16:50

8M ago16:50

16:50

On June 27, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 6-3 opinion in SEC v. Jarkesy. The Court held that when the Securities and Exchange Commission seeks civil penalties against a defendant for securities fraud, the Seventh Amendment entitles the defendant to a jury trial. Please join us in discussing the decision and its future implications. Feat…

1
Murthy v. Missouri - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 31:04

8M ago31:04

31:04

On June 26, 2024, the Supreme Court issued their opinion in Murthy v. Missouri. Originally filed as Missouri v. Biden, this case concerns whether federal government officials violated five individuals’ freedom of speech by “coercing” or “significantly encouraging” social media companies to remove or demote particular content from their platforms. E…

1
FDA v. AHM - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 23:36

8M ago23:36

23:36

On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine holding that the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to challenge the Food and Drug Administration’s regulatory actions regarding mifepristone. Join us to hear our panel break down the decision and discuss its potential rami…

1
Loper Bright & Relentless - Post-Decision SCOTUScast 23:02

9M ago23:02

23:02

On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its 6-2 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and its 6-3 decision in Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce. These decisions overturning Chevron v. NRDC (1984) may notably change the nature of the administrative state and the role of judges in reviewing agency actions moving forward. Join us…

1
Moody v. NetChoice (Social Media / First Amendment) 15:17

9M ago15:17

15:17

Send us a text Florida and Texas both enacted laws regulating social media companies and other online platforms. Netchoice alleges a facial challenge to the statutes under the First Amendment. Held: both judgments (of the Eleventh and Fifth Circuits) are vacated, as neither court conducted a proper analysis to the facial challenges under the First …

1
Trump v. United States (Presidential Immunity) 24:11

10M ago24:11

24:11

Send us a text Trump v. United States A federal grand jury indicted former President Donald J. Trump on four counts for conduct that occurred during his Presidency following the November 2020 election. The indictment alleged that after losing that election, Trump conspired to overturn it by spreading knowingly false claims of election fraud to obst…

1
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson (Public Camping Laws) 12:38

10M ago12:38

12:38

Send us a text City of Grants Pass v. Johnson Grants Pass, Oregon, is home to roughly 38,000 people, about 600 of whom are estimated to experience homelessness on a given day. Like many local governments across the Nation, Grants Pass has publiccamping laws that restrict encampments on public property. The Grants Pass Municipal Code prohibits activ…

1
Fischer v. United States (Obstruction of Official Proceeding) 8:31

10M ago8:31

8:31

Send us a text The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 imposes criminal liability on anyone who corruptly “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.” 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(1). The next subsection extend…

1
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (Administrative Law / Chevron Deference) 20:58

10M ago20:58

20:58

Send us a text Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo This is a consolidated opinion of two cases that were argued this term. Both of them bring into question rules promulgated by the National Marine Fisheries Service under the Magnuson-Stevens Act -- which applies the Adminsitrative Procedures Act. The only question on appeal is whether Chevron is s…

1
Moyle v. United States (Abortion) 25:44

10M ago25:44

25:44

Send us a text In this very brief Per Curiam decision, RJ Dieken also reads the concurring opinions authored Justice Kagan and Justice Barrett.By Jake Leahy

1
Ohio v. EPA (Clean Air Act) 8:04

10M ago8:04

8:04

Send us a text Ohio v. EPA The Clean Air Act requires both the States and federal government to help develop environmental regulations. When the EPA creates certain standards regarding air quality, states have to develop their own "State Implementation Plan," which requires States to both set out how to go about applying the federal regulations, an…

1
Harrington v. Purdue Pharma (Bankruptcy) 10:01

10M ago10:01

10:01

Send us a text Harrington v. Purdue Pharma Purdue Pharma pleaded guilty in 2007 to a federal felony based on its role in misbranding Oxycontin -- which was far more addictive than the company had made it out to be. Purdue faced seemingly endless lawsuits in the following years based on how addictive the opioid Oxycontin was. For over a decade that …

1
SEC v. Jarkesy (Jury Trial / Securities) 13:45

10M ago13:45

13:45

Send us a text SEC v. Jarkesy In the aftermath of the Wall Street Crash of 1929, Congress passed a suite of laws designed to combat securities fraud and increase market transparency. Three such statutes are relevant: The Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. These Acts respectively gov…

1
Murthy v. Missouri (Standing / Social Media / First Amendment) 12:12

10M ago12:12

12:12

Send us a text Murthy v. Missouri Missouri, alongside a few other states, sued the federal government alleging that certain federal officials illegally coordinated with social media companies to effectively silence certain viewpoints -- which they claim, amounts to these companies becoming state actors within the meaning of First Amendment jurispru…

1
Snyder v. United States (Corruption) 10:59

10M ago10:59

10:59

Send us a text Snyder v. United States Snyder served as the Mayor in a town in Indiana. After the town awarded a $1.2 million contract to a trucking company, he received a $13,000 payment from that company, he said this was for consulting services. He was prosecuted by the federal government and convicted for taking an illegal gratuity. He said tha…

1
Texas v. New Mexico (Rio Grande Compact) 8:18

10M ago8:18

8:18

Send us a text Texas v. New Mexico Approved by Congress in 1938, the Rio Grande Compact is an interstate agreement that apportions the waters of the Rio Grande River among Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. The Compact relies on the Federal Bureau of Reclamation’s operation of an irrigation system called the Rio Grande Project. Under the Compact, New…

1
Department of State v. Munoz (Immigration) 8:33

10M ago8:33

8:33

Send us a text Department of State v. Munoz Sandra Munoz is an American citizen who married Luis Ascenio-Cordero -- an El Salvador resident -- in 2010. He was denied entry into the United States by the consulate in San Salvador. Generally, these are finally determinations. But, Munoz, his wife, filed suit, claiming that his denial represented a fun…

1
Erlinger v. United States (Sixth Amendment -- Jury Trial) 11:14

10M ago11:14

11:14

Send us a text Erlinger v. United States Paul Erlinger pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U. S. C. §922(g). At sentencing, the judge found Mr. Erlinger eligible for an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act, §924(e)(1), which increases the penalty for a 922(g) conviction from a maximum sente…

1
Smith v. Arizona (Expert Witnesses) 8:17

10M ago8:17

8:17

Send us a text Smith v. Arizona The Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause guarantees a criminal defendant the right to confront the witnesses against him. In operation, the Clause protects a defendant’s right of cross-examination by limiting the prosecution’s ability to introduce statements made by people not in the courtroom. The Clause thus bars…

1
United States v. Rahimi (Second Amendment) 11:30

10M ago11:30

11:30

Send us a text United States v. Rahimi Respondent Zackey Rahimi was indicted under 18 U. S. C. §922(g)(8), a federal statute that prohibits individuals subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a firearm. A prosecution under Section 922(g)(8) may proceed only if the restraining order meets certain statutory criteria. In parti…

1
Gonzalez v. Trevino (Section 1983) 8:42

10M ago8:42

8:42

Send us a text Gonzalez v. Trevino The decision of the 5th Circuit is vacated and remanded for further proceedings. Gonzalez was 72 years old, when in 2019, she was elected to a seat on her local City Council in Texas. She collected signatures for a petition trying to get the City Manager removed. There was a long debate at the meeting about this t…

Podcasts Worth a Listen

Scotuscast Podcasts

Podcasts Worth a Listen