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
This study, A Christian Response to the Supreme Court Decision, exposes the foreboding Danger that this ruling will bring upon our nation if things don’t turn around very quickly. You will also be thoroughly equipped to give a loving Biblical apologetic response to 15 different accusations made against Christians regarding this issue.
…
continue reading
Throughout the years the Supreme Court has evolved much like the rest of the federal government. This would not be without landmark rulings, which will be the main focus of this podcast. Landmark rulings lay the groundwork for laws to be overturned or upheld and allow for the United States to work toward major goals. Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/aaron-larson2/support
…
continue reading
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 The case involved Amina Bouarfa, a U.S. citizen, whose petition for her noncitizen spouse was revoked …
…
continue reading
1
Moody v. NetChoice (Social Media / First Amendment)
15:17
15:17
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
15:17
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 Amendment to th…
…
continue reading
1
Trump v. United States (Presidential Immunity)
24:11
24:11
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
24:11
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 obstruct the collec…
…
continue reading
1
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson (Public Camping Laws)
12:38
12:38
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
12:38
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 activities such as c…
…
continue reading
1
Fischer v. United States (Obstruction of Official Proceeding)
8:31
8:31
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
8:31
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 extends that prohibit…
…
continue reading
1
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (Administrative Law / Chevron Deference)
20:58
20:58
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
20:58
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 still good law. …
…
continue reading
In this very brief Per Curiam decision, RJ Dieken also reads the concurring opinions authored Justice Kagan and Justice Barrett.Bởi Jake Leahy
…
continue reading
1
Harrington v. Purdue Pharma (Bankruptcy)
10:01
10:01
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
10:01
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 followed, the S…
…
continue reading
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, and it also requi…
…
continue reading
1
SEC v. Jarkesy (Jury Trial / Securities)
13:45
13:45
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
13:45
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 govern the registr…
…
continue reading
1
Murthy v. Missouri (Standing / Social Media / First Amendment)
12:12
12:12
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
12:12
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 jurisprudence. Held: Ne…
…
continue reading
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 that Section 666, …
…
continue reading
1
Texas v. New Mexico (Rio Grande Compact)
8:18
8:18
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
8:18
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 Mexico must de…
…
continue reading
1
Department of State v. Munoz (Immigration)
8:33
8:33
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
8:33
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 fundamental libert…
…
continue reading
1
Erlinger v. United States (Sixth Amendment -- Jury Trial)
11:14
11:14
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:14
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 sentence of 10 years…
…
continue reading
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 the admission …
…
continue reading
1
United States v. Rahimi (Second Amendment)
11:30
11:30
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:30
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 particular, the orde…
…
continue reading
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 topic. The Mayor…
…
continue reading
Moore v. United States Congress generally taxes the income of American business entities in one of two ways. Some entities, such as S corporations and partnerships, are taxed on a pass-through basis, where the entity itself does not pay taxes. 26 U. S. C. §§1361–1362. Instead, the entity’s income is attributed to the shareholders or partners, who t…
…
continue reading
1
Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon (Malicious Prosecution)
5:37
5:37
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
5:37
Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon This case involves a dispute between petitioner Jascha Chiaverini and police officers from Napoleon, Ohio. The officers charged Chiaverini, a jewelry store owner, with three crimes: receiving stolen property, a misdemeanor; dealing in precious metals without a license, also a misdemeanor; and money laundering, a felon…
…
continue reading
1
Diaz v. United States (Evidence / Expert Testimony)
5:39
5:39
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
5:39
Petitioner Delilah Diaz was stopped at a port of entry on the United States-Mexico border. Border patrol officers searched the car that Diaz was driving and found more than 54 pounds of methamphetamine hidden in the vehicle. Diaz was charged with importing methamphetamine in violation of 21 U. S. C. §§952 and 960, charges that required the Governme…
…
continue reading
1
United States Trustee v. John Q. Hammons Fall 2006, LLC (Bankruptcy Fee Remedy)
7:38
7:38
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
7:38
United States Trustee v. John Q. Hammons Fall 2006, LLC Two Terms ago, in Siegel v. Fitzgerald, 596 U. S. 464, the Court held that a statute violated the Bankruptcy Clause’s uniformity requirement because it permitted different fees for Chapter 11 debtors depending on the district where their case was filed. In this case, the Court is asked to dete…
…
continue reading
Campos-Chavez v. Garland To initiate the removal of an alien from the United States who is either “inadmissible” under 8 U. S. C. §1182 or “deportable” under §1227, the Federal Government must provide the alien with “written notice” of the proceedings. §§1229(a)(1), (2). Two types of “written notice” are described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of §1229…
…
continue reading
The National Firearms Act of 1934 defines a “machinegun” as “any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” 26 U. S. C. §5845(b). With a machinegun, a shooter can fire multiple times, or even continuously, by engagi…
…
continue reading
1
FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (Birth Control)
11:10
11:10
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:10
FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine In 2000, the Food and Drug Administration approved a new drug application for mifepristone tablets marketed under the brand name Mifeprex for use in terminating pregnancies up to seven weeks. To help ensure that Mifeprex would be used safely and effectively, FDA placed additional restrictions on the drug’s u…
…
continue reading
1
Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney (NLRB / Labor)
6:59
6:59
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
6:59
After several Starbucks employees announced plans to unionize, they invited a news crew from a local television station to visit the store after hours to promote their unionizing effort. Starbucks fired multiple employees involved with the media event for violating company policy. The National Labor Relations Board filed an administrative complaint…
…
continue reading
1
Vidal v. Elster (First Amendment / Trademark)
11:06
11:06
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:06
Drawing on a 2016 Presidential primary debate exchange between thencandidate Donald Trump and Senator Marco Rubio, respondent Steve Elster sought to federally register the trademark “Trump too small” to use on shirts and hats. An examiner from the Patent and Trademark Office refused registration based on the “names clause,” a Lanham Act prohibition…
…
continue reading
1
Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum (Bankruptcy)
8:23
8:23
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
8:23
Petitioner Truck Insurance Exchange is the primary insurer for companies that manufactured and sold products containing asbestos. Two of those companies, Kaiser Gypsum Co. and Hanson Permanente Cement (Debtors), filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after facing thousands of asbestos-related lawsuits. As part of the bankruptcy process, the Debtors filed …
…
continue reading
The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, 25 U. S. C. §5301 et seq., enables an Indian tribe to enter into a “self-determination contract” with the Indian Health Service to assume responsibility for administering the healthcare programs that IHS would otherwise operate for the tribe. §5321(a)(1). When IHS administers such programs…
…
continue reading
Connelly v. United States Michael and Thomas Connelly were the sole shareholders in Crown C Supply, a small building supply corporation. The brothers entered into an agreement to ensure that Crown would stay in the family if either brother died. Under that agreement, the surviving brother would have the option to purchase the deceased brother’s sha…
…
continue reading
In Cantero v. Bank of America, the Supreme Court reviewed a Second Circuit decision that struck down a New York bank regulation, finding that the State's authority was preempted by federal law. The Court held that Dodd-Frank requires a nuanced analysis -- rather than a bright line test -- on the issue of federal preemption. Justice Kavanaugh, writi…
…
continue reading
Petitioner National Rifle Association (NRA) sued respondent Maria Vullo—former superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services (DFS)—alleging that Vullo violated the First Amendment by coercing DFS-regulated parties to punish or suppress the NRA’s gun-promotion advocacy. The Second Circuit held that Vullo’s alleged actions constitut…
…
continue reading
1
Thornell v. Jones (Ineffective Assistance)
11:26
11:26
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:26
Thornell v. Jones Respondent Danny Lee Jones was convicted of the premeditated firstdegree murders of Robert and Tisha Weaver and the attempted premeditated murder of Robert’s grandmother Katherine Gumina. Arizona law at the time required the trial court to “impose a sentence of death” if it found “one or more” statutorily enumerated “aggravating c…
…
continue reading
Coinbase v. Suski The dispute here involves a conflict between two contracts executed by petitioner Coinbase, Inc., operator of a cryptocurrency exchange platform, and respondents, who use Coinbase. The first contract—the Coinbase User Agreement that respondents agreed to when they created their accounts—contains an arbitration provision with a del…
…
continue reading
These cases concern the application of the Armed Career Criminal Act to state drug convictions that occurred before recent technical amendments to the federal drug schedules. ACCA imposes a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence on defendants who are convicted for the illegal possession of a firearm and who have a criminal history thought to demonstrat…
…
continue reading
1
Alexander v. NAACP (Redistricting / Gerrymandering)
13:07
13:07
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
13:07
Alexander v. NAACP The Constitution entrusts state legislatures with the primary responsibility for drawing congressional districts, and legislative redistricting is an inescapably political enterprise. Claims that a map is unconstitutional because it was drawn to achieve a partisan end are not justiciable in federal court. By contrast, if a legisl…
…
continue reading
1
Harrow v. Department of Defense (Equitable Tolling / Jurisdictional Deadlines)
5:36
5:36
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
5:36
In Harrow v. Department of Defense, Stuart Harrow appealed an adverse administrative decision after the 60-day deadline -- claiming that he was unaware of the deadline. He filed this appeal to the Federal Circuit. Because the Federal Circuit saw the mandatory "shall" language in the statute (that is, it shall be filed within 60 days), the Court den…
…
continue reading
Smith v. Spizzirri The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) sets forth procedures for enforcing arbitration agreements in federal court. Section 3 of the FAA, entitled “Stay of proceedings where issue therein referable to arbitration,” provides that when a dispute is subject to arbitration, the court “shall on application of one of the parties stay the tr…
…
continue reading
1
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial
10:12
10:12
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
10:12
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU ET AL. v. COMMUNITY FINANCIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, LTD., ET AL. The Constitution gives Congress control over the public fisc subject to the command that “[n]o Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” Art. I, §9, cl. 7. For most federal agencies, Congr…
…
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
1
Warner Chappell Music v. Nealy (Copyright)
4:29
4:29
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
4:29
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
Muldrow v. St. Louis (Employment Discrimination)
8:19
8:19
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
8:19
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 (Criminal Forfeiture)
11:21
11:21
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
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
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
1
DeVillier v. Texas (Inverse Condemnation)
4:03
4:03
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
4:03
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
1
Sheetz v. El Dorado County (Takings Clause)
6:53
6:53
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
6:53
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
1
Macquarie Infrastructure v. Moab Partners (SEC Disclosure)
6:55
6:55
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
6:55
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
1
Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries (Federal Arbitration Act)
5:45
5:45
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
5:45
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
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