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
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
O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier (Public Official Social Media)
4:29
4:29
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
4:29
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
1
Lindke v. Freed (Public Official Social Media)
9:11
9:11
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
9:11
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
1
Pulsifer v. United States (Statutory Construction / Sentencing)
8:55
8:55
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
8:55
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
Trump v. Anderson (Per Curiam -- Majority)
24:31
24:31
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
24:31
Trump v. Anderson A group of Colorado voters contends that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits former President Donald J. Trump, who seeks the Presidential nomination of the Republican Party in this year’s election, from becoming President again. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed with that contention. It ordered the …
…
continue reading
1
Trump v. Anderson (Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson Concurrence)
11:02
11:02
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:02
Trump v. Anderson JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, JUSTICE KAGAN, and JUSTICE JACKSON, concurring in the judgment. "“If it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of a case, then it is necessary not to decide more.” Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U. S. 215, 348 (2022) (ROBERTS, C. J., concurring in judgment). That fundamental principle of j…
…
continue reading
Trump v. Anderson DONALD J. TRUMP, PETITIONER v. NORMA ANDERSON, ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO [March 4, 2024] JUSTICE BARRETT, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. I join Parts I and II–B of the Court’s opinion. I agree that States lack the power to enforce Section 3 against Presidential candidates. Th…
…
continue reading
MCELRATH v. GEORGIA Damian McElrath was charged with malice murder, felony murder, and aggravated assault -- all related to the death of his mother. A jury returned a split verdict. For the malice-murder charge, finding him “not guilty by reason of insanity” and “guilty but mentally ill” to the other counts. The Georgia Supreme Court stated that be…
…
continue reading
1
Great Lakes Insurance v. Raiders Retreat Realty (Maritime Contract)
6:40
6:40
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
6:40
Great Lakes v. Raiders Great Lakes Insurance (organized in Germany and HQ in UK) entered into a maritime insurance contract with Raiders Retreat Realty Company (HQ in PA). The contract included a provision to apply New York law. A Raiders vessel had an incident in Florida, Raiders then filed a claim. Great Lakes filed for declaratory judgment in a …
…
continue reading
1
Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC (Whistleblower / Retaliatory Discharge)
7:55
7:55
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
7:55
TREVOR MURRAY, PETITIONER v. UBS SECURITIES, LLC, ET AL. As part of Trevor Murray's job at UBS, he had to file reports to the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In these reports, he had to certify that the reports reflected his personal and independent views. Despite physical separation from the rest of the unit, Murray claimed that he was recei…
…
continue reading
1
USDA v. Kirtz (Fair Credit Reporting Act / Sovereign Immunity)
10:00
10:00
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
10:00
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE RURAL DEVELOPMENT RURAL HOUSING SERVICE v. KIRTZ Reginald Kirtz obtained a loan from the Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service. According to Kirtz, the USDA later told one of the major credit agencies (TransUnion) that Kirtz was behind on his payments. Kirtz says this was false and these false s…
…
continue reading
1
Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer (ADA / Mootness)
2:15
2:15
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
2:15
The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address a circuit split -- whether Deborah Laufer has Article III standing to sue hotels that fail to include information about accessibility accommodations as required by the ADA. She sued hundreds of hotels, most of which she never intended on trying to stay at. After her lawyer faced sanctions, Laufer deci…
…
continue reading
In Biden v. Nebraska, the Supreme Court reviewed whether the HEROES Act authorized the Secretary of Education to unilaterally forgive $10,000 of student loans for most borrowers. The Court held that the Secretary does not have this power under HEROES Act, despite the language that allows the Secretary to "waive or modify" certain student loan provi…
…
continue reading
1
Department of Education v. Brown (Student Loans / Standing)
9:11
9:11
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
9:11
In Department of Education v. Brown, the Supreme Court reviewed whether a person who was expecting student loan forgiveness, but not the maximum amount, had Article III standing to sue. The Court found that those individuals lacked standing to bring their challenge to the student loan forgiveness plan. Read by Jake A. Leahy.…
…
continue reading
1
303 Creative v. Elenis (First Amendment / Anti-Discrimination)
15:08
15:08
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
15:08
In 303 Creative v. Elenis, the Supreme Court considered whether a Colorado based website designer could be compelled to speak in a manner that violates her religious beliefs--that is, whether she could be compelled to create custom website designs for same-sex weddings. The Supreme Court held for the designer, finding that anti-discrimination laws …
…
continue reading
1
Groff v. DeJoy (First Amendment, Religious Liberty, Employment Accomodations)
13:45
13:45
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
13:45
In Groff v. DeJoy, the Supreme Court reviewed whether a postal worker was entitled to a religious accommodation that would allow him to not be scheduled on Sundays. The Court held that an employer who denies a religious accommodation is required to show a substantial burden if it had decided to accept the request. Read by Jeff Barnum.…
…
continue reading
In Abitron v. Hetronic, the Supreme Court answered whether certain sections of the Lanham Act were unconstitutionally extraterritorial. To decide this issue, the Court applies a two-part test. It first looks to: 1) whether “Congress has affirmatively and unmistakably instructed for the statute to regulate foreign conduct; and if part-one finds it i…
…
continue reading
1
Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (Affirmative Action)
22:25
22:25
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
22:25
In Students for Fair Admissions, the Supreme Court reviewed whether the admissions systems used by Harvard College and the University of North Carolina are constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Held: The universities' race-based affirmative action admissions programs are unconstitutional under the Equal Prote…
…
continue reading
1
Mallory v. Norfolk Southern R. Co. (Personal Jurisidction)
6:52
6:52
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
6:52
Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a State from requiring an out of state corporation to consent to personal jurisdiction in order to do business in the state. Mallory, a Virginia resident, brought suit against Norfolk Southern Railway Company under Pennsylvania Law -- claiming carcinogen exposure in Ohio and Virgi…
…
continue reading
1
Counterman v. Colorado (True Threats / First Amendment)
6:03
6:03
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
6:03
In Counterman v. Colorado, the Supreme Court reviewed whether a conviction for stalking based on "true threats" requires an objective or subjective test. The Court ruled that to government must prove true threats based on a subjective test. Under this test, the Court writes, the speaker need not intend harm, and that recklessness is enough. Justice…
…
continue reading
1
Moore v. Harper (Independent State Legislature / Elections)
13:56
13:56
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
13:56
In Moore v. Harper, the Supreme Court reviewed whether acts by the state Legislature regarding the regulation of federal elections can be subject to state-level judicial review. Government actions are presumptively subject to judicial review, the Constitution's elections clause does not create a carveout to this expectation. In Moore, the North Car…
…
continue reading
1
United States v. Hansen (First Amendment / Immigration)
11:41
11:41
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:41
In United States v. Hansen, the Supreme Court considered whether a statute that forbids purposeful facilitation and facilitation of certain acts in overbroad and unconstitutional. To be over broad, a statute must criminalize such an unreasonable amount of protected speech that it cannot be applied to anyone. Hansen incorrectly promised hundreds of …
…
continue reading
In Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski, the Supreme Court reviewed whether a district court must stay proceedings while an interlocutory appeal is pending regarding the arbitrability of the claim is ongoing. Writing for an (in part) 5-4 and (in part) 6-3 majority, Justice Kavanaugh answers in the affirmative, stating that while an interlocutory appeal is pen…
…
continue reading
In United States v. Texas, the Supreme Court reviewed whether Texas and Louisiana have Article III standing to challenge the Biden Administration's new immigration guidelines. Writing for an 8-1 majority, Justice Kavanaugh ruled no, the states do not have standing to challenge the actions. Read by Jeff Barnum.…
…
continue reading
1
Samia v. United States (Confrontation Clause)
11:21
11:21
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:21
In Samia v. United States, the Supreme Court reviewed whether the confrontation clause is violated when a confession one of the co-defendants that implicitly implicates one of the other co-defendants violates the confrontation clause. The Court held that it does not. Read by Jake Leahy.Bởi Jake Leahy
…
continue reading
In Pugin v. Garland, the Court reviewed "whether an offense 'relat[es] to obstruction of justice' under §1101(a)(43)(S) even if the offense does not require that an investigation or proceeding be pending. Dictionary definitions, federal laws, state laws, and the Model Penal Code show that the answer is yes: An offense “relat[es] to obstruction of j…
…
continue reading
In Arizona v. Navajo Nation, the Supreme Court answers whether the Navajo Nation has reserved water rights pursuant to the agreement that established the reservation for the Navajo people. Held: While the Navajo Nation has certain water and mineral rights, the United States is not required to take affirmative steps to provide for water rights to th…
…
continue reading
1
Yegiazaryan v. Smagin (Jurisdiction / RICO)
12:37
12:37
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
12:37
In Yegiazaryan v. Smagin, the Supreme Court reviewed whether the United States district court has jurisdiction over a Civil RICO claim where the plaintiff is a foreign national (who resides in Russia) who has pleaded an injury based on his "his efforts to execute on a California judgment in California against a California resident were foiled by a …
…
continue reading
In Jones v. Hendrix, the Supreme Court reviewed whether a prisoner can bring a habeas petition after the Supreme Court retroactively overruled Circuit Court precedent that would have allowed him to previously challenge his conviction. Held: The prisoner cannot circumvent the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, by filing a habeas …
…
continue reading
1
United States ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc.
13:27
13:27
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
13:27
In U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, the Supreme Court reviewed whether, in a qui tam False Claims Act action, the government can move to dismiss the case after not intervening during the so-called "seal" period. Writing for the 8-1 majority, Justice Kagan writes that the government may move to dismiss the False Claims Act action…
…
continue reading
In Lora v. United States, the Supreme Court reviewed whether the Section 924(c) prohibition on concurrent sentences applies to sentences arising out of different subsections. Justice Jackson, writing for a unanimous Court, writes that it does not, that crimes from other sections are not subject to the ban on concurrent sentences. Guest Host Jeff Ba…
…
continue reading
1
Smith v. United States (Venue and Double Jeopardy)
9:52
9:52
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
9:52
In Smith v. United States, the Supreme Court reviewed whether the principle of double-jeopardy prevents a person from being retried after a trial took place in the incorrect venue and the jury was selected from the incorrect district. In a unanimous decisions, Justice Alito writes that the defendant is entitled to set aside the jury's conviction, b…
…
continue reading
1
Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Coughlin (Tribal Bankruptcy)
8:18
8:18
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
8:18
In Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Coughlin, the Supreme Court whether Congress abrogated tribal sovereignty in the Bankruptcy Code. Writing for the majority, Justice Kagan rules that Congress unequivocally abrogated tribal sovereign immunity in the Bankruptcy Code. Kagan reasons that "foreign or domestic" governments is a…
…
continue reading
1
Haaland v. Brackken (Indian Child Welfare Act)
28:20
28:20
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
28:20
In Haaland v. Brackken, the Supreme Court reviewed whether provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act are constitutional under several portions of the Constitution. Writing for the majority, Justice Barrett writes that the Act, which (in part) prioritizes placing Indian children with Indian (rather than non-Indian families), is within the purview o…
…
continue reading
1
Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC (Trademark)
9:20
9:20
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
9:20
In Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, the Supreme Court examines the intersection of trademark law and First Amendment rights. The dispute centers around VIP's creation of a dog toy resembling a bottle of Jack Daniel's whiskey, with humorous modifications. Jack Daniel's argues that the toy infringes and dilutes their trademarks, wh…
…
continue reading
1
Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion Cty. v. Talevski (1983 Nursing Homes)
11:51
11:51
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
11:51
In Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion Cty. v. Talevski, the Supreme Court reviewed whether the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act (FBHRA) provides a right of action under Section 1983 against a privately owned nursing home that received Medicaid funds. Hosted by Jake Leahy.Bởi Jake Leahy
…
continue reading
1
Allen v. Milligan (Racial Gerrymandering)
21:14
21:14
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
21:14
In Allen v. Milligan, the Supreme Court reviewed whether Alabama’s Congressional maps violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. A three-judge district court panel found that the plaintiffs demonstrated a sufficient likelihood on success on the merits against Alabama. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, affirmed. Read by Host, Jake L…
…
continue reading
1
Dubin v. United States (Medicaid Fraud)
12:43
12:43
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
12:43
In Dubin v. United States, the Supreme Court reviewed whether a person who commits Medicaid fraud through fraudulent billing can also be convicted for statutory aggravated identity theft. The Court ruled for Dubin, holding that the aggravated identity theft charge can only be applied when the identity theft was at the crux of the crime, not if the …
…
continue reading
In Glacier Northwest v. Teamsters, the Supreme Court reviewed whether the National Labor Relations Act preempts Glacier's state tort law claims that allege the Teamsters intentionally destroyed the company's concrete trucks when the truckers did not complete their deliveries in transit. The Court held that these claims were not preempted by federal…
…
continue reading
1
Slack Technologies v. Pirani (Securities Act)
8:39
8:39
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
8:39
In Slack Technologies v. Pirani the Court held that Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 requires the plaintiff to prove that they purchased securities that were registered under a materially misleading registration statement. The Court rejected the argument that the term "such security" could include securities that were not registered under a…
…
continue reading
1
U.S. ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu Inc. (False Claims Act)
7:30
7:30
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
7:30
Supreme Court's decision is here. The False Claims Act allows for private citizens to bring a cause of action on behalf of the United Sates, against a person who "knowingly" submits a "false claim" to a federal program. The defendant can meet the knowledge requirement by, 1.) actual knowledge that the reported prices were not "usual and customary,"…
…
continue reading
1
Dupree v. Younger (1983 Post-Trial Motion)
5:34
5:34
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
5:34
In Dupree v. Younger, the Supreme Court addressed whether a post-trial motion of a purely legal issue that was resolved at summary judgment, requires a post-trial motion to be preserved on appeal. Kevin Younger sued Neil Dupree, who was a correctional officer under Section 1983. Dupree moved for summary judgment alleging that Younger had failed to …
…
continue reading
In Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court examines the scope the terms "waters" under the Clean Water Act. The EPA ordered the Sackets, who purchased property in Idaho, to restore the property after the family had backfilled it with dirt. The EPA claimed that putting dirt on their property violated the Clean Water Act, and th…
…
continue reading
1
Tyler v. Hennepin County (Takings Clause)
6:08
6:08
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
6:08
In Tyler v. Hennepin County, Chief Justice Roberts writes for the majority, reversing the Eighth Circuit. The District Court and Circuit Court had rejected a taxpayer's claim that Hennepin County keeping the $25,000 surplus after a tax sale violated both the Takings Clause under the Fifth Amendment and the prohibition on excessive fines under the E…
…
continue reading
1
Calcutt v. FDIC (Administrative Review)
13:06
13:06
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
13:06
The Supreme Court reversed the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, reasoning that the Court of Appeals must reverse the administrative agency if it reaches the same outcome for a different reason. Once an administrative agency has made an error of law, the decision must be remanded back to the administrative agency. Per Curiam. Read by Jake Leahy.…
…
continue reading
1
Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (Copyright Fair Use)
19:18
19:18
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
19:18
In Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith et al., the Supreme Court ruled that the commercial licensing of a derivative artwork by Andy Warhol, based on a copyrighted photograph taken by Lynn Goldsmith, did not qualify as fair use. The case involved the licensing of Warhol's "Orange Prince" image. This well-known image includ…
…
continue reading
1
Ohio Adjutant General’s Dept. v. FLRA (Labor)
7:20
7:20
Nghe Sau
Nghe Sau
Danh sách
Thích
Đã thích
7:20
In Ohio Adjutant General's Department v. FLRA, the Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (FSLMRS) grants jurisdiction to the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) over labor disputes involving state National Guards when they hire and supervise dual-status technicians in their civilian roles. These techni…
…
continue reading
On the same day, the Court released its decision in Twitter v. Taamneh. The Court largely disposed of the claims in Twitter, stating that Taamneh had failed to state a claim under the federal statute. Here, the Court in its per curiam opinion, writes that it need not consider the veracity of the Section 230 claims because Twitter's reasoning requir…
…
continue reading
The patent requires certain particularity, such that any person skilled in the craft would be able to manufacture, make, construct, or use the invention. The Court held that Amgen's patent failed to provide the detail required to protect its interest, in part, because the patent applies to a wide range of antibodies and requires a certain level of …
…
continue reading