Supreme Court público
[search 0]
Más
Download the App!
show episodes
 
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. *Note this podcast is for informational and educational purposes only. Hosted by a non-attorney.*
  continue reading
 
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
  continue reading
 
Unedited English audio of oral arguments at the Supreme Court of Canada. Created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada's highest court. Not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. Original archived webcasts can be found on the Court's website at scc-csc.ca. Feedback welcome: podcast at scchearings dot ca.
  continue reading
 
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!
  continue reading
 
The Term is a podcast from Law360 for the busy U.S. Supreme Court watcher. Give us about 15 minutes each week and we'll catch you up on all the big action at the nation's highest court, along with a list of what to watch in the coming sessions. Hosts senior Supreme Court reporter Jimmy Hoover in Washington, D.C. and editor-at-large Natalie Rodriguez in New York City cut through a busy docket to focus on the key cases and developments everyone will be talking about.
  continue reading
 
Any listeners out there...really want entertaining basketball content? Don't want to worry about the hosts - all on the show trying to force "controversial" hot takes, all in your earbuds, yelling back and forth to win an argument? Come to The Supreme Court: A Basketball Podcast! Check back with the SC trio; Robaire, Chris, and Henri, Wednesdays as we discuss the latest NBA headlines, news, and transactions.
  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://anchor.fm/aaron-larson2/support
  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
 
Loading …
show series
 
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
 
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
 
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
 
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
 
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
 
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
 
The Supreme Court blocked a bankruptcy plan for drug maker Purdue Pharma that would have paid out billions of dollars to address the opioid epidemic and shielded the company's owners from legal liability. The Justice Department argued that shielding the Sackler family from all future lawsuits was an abuse of the bankruptcy system. William Brangham …
  continue reading
 
There are new details about the gifts Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has gotten from wealthy businessmen. ProPublica provided the fullest account yet of the gifts and there are far more than previously known. John Yang discussed the story with Brett Murphy, one of the reporters who unearthed these details, and Joel Anderson, host of Slate's …
  continue reading
 
Brett and Nazim are back to discuss the case of Students for Fair Admissions v. North Carolina/Harvard, in which the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action programs in school admissions. The Law starts at (8:20), and Nazim's sound is wonky for like three minutes at the start. We are sorry, but we missed you if that makes up for it.…
  continue reading
 
The Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action in college admissions has renewed the debate over legacy admissions. A Boston-based nonprofit filed a complaint alleging Harvard's legacy and donor-based admissions favors white students, and the NAACP called on 1,600 public and private universities across the country to end legacy admissions. Geo…
  continue reading
 
Well hello there. Your boys are back to discuss the two lousy decisions of Biden v. Nebraska (holding the President cannot forgive student loan debt pursuant to the HEROES Act) and 303 Creative v. Elenis (holding that Colorado's Public Accomodations Law violates the First Amendment's ban on compelled speech when applied to a wedding website designe…
  continue reading
 
Another U.S. Supreme Court season is in the books, and while the final week of opinions featured some supermajority holdings along party lines on divisive issues like affirmative action and gay rights, we also saw a number of decisions with unexpected lineups on issues like voting rights and religious freedom. This week, the hosts of both Pro Say a…
  continue reading
 
The U.S. Supreme Court ended its term this past week with the six conservative justices again flexing their supermajority to make big changes in law and society. Marcia Coyle, the PBS NewsHour's Supreme Court analyst, joins John Yang to discuss how the new court is shaping up and what its most recent term can tell us about its future. PBS NewsHour …
  continue reading
 
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
 
The Supreme Court struck down President Biden's plan to cancel more than $400 billion in student loan debt. The decision affects more than 40 million borrowers, but the president insisted that his fight is not over and pledged an alternative relief plan. Geoff Bennett discussed more with NewsHour Supreme Court analyst Marcia Coyle and Danielle Doug…
  continue reading
 
The U.S. Supreme Court wrapped up its term on Friday with a pair of monumental opinions. First, the court ruled that a Christian website designer in Colorado can refuse services for same-sex weddings on account of her protected free speech rights, and in a second case struck down President Joe Biden’s ambitious student loan forgiveness plan. We wel…
  continue reading
 
As colleges and universities digest the Supreme Court ruling that effectively ended affirmative action, schools are left to grapple with how to revamp their admission policies to ensure the diversity of their campuses. That will be a challenge and some schools are better prepared for it than others. William Brangham discussed that with Jeff Selingo…
  continue reading
 
New York Times columnist David Brooks and Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart join Geoff Bennett to discuss the week in politics, including the implications of the Supreme Court's major decisions this week. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/fundersPor PBS NewsHour
  continue reading
 
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
 
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
 
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.Por Jake Leahy
  continue reading
 
The U.S. Supreme Court dealt a major blow to affirmative action in higher education, striking down race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The ruling has widespread implications for the future of higher education. Geoff Bennett discussed the decision with NewsHour Supreme Court analyst Marcia C…
  continue reading
 
The fallout of the Supreme Court's affirmative action decisions will have major implications on colleges and universities across the country. One that knows the impact of ending race-based admissions all too well is the University of Michigan. University President Santa Ono discussed that with Amna Nawaz. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.…
  continue reading
 
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday dismantled affirmative action in a 6-3 majority opinion which held that race-based admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Law360 senior Boston courts reporter Chris Villani joins us to discuss the monumental ruling and its swe…
  continue reading
 
The Supreme Court rejected a legal theory that state legislatures have almost unlimited power to decide the rules for federal elections and draw partisan congressional maps without interference from state courts. Trump allies raised the theory as part of an effort to reverse the 2020 election outcome. Geoff Bennett discussed the ruling with Neal Ka…
  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
 
The U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on a pair of important immigration questions Friday morning, deciding in one opinion to uphold a federal law that makes it a crime to encourage illegal immigration, and in another opinion reviving the Biden Administration’s selective deportation policy over challenges from the state of Texas and others. On this wee…
  continue reading
 
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
 
This week marks the anniversary of the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade. It also marks critical days in the current Supreme Court term with major rulings expected on affirmative action, religious and LGBTQ+ rights. This as trust in the court remains low, according to a new PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll. Lisa Desjardins reports. PBS New…
  continue reading
 
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito took an undisclosed trip with billionaire donors, including hedge fund manager Paul Singer who later had business before the court. Coupled with previous reporting on Justice Thomas and megadonor Harlan Crow, it raises more ethical questions regarding the high court. Amna Nawaz discussed the latest with Josh Kapla…
  continue reading
 
Major decisions expected from the Supreme Court in the coming days could reshape higher education and immigration policy. Geoff Bennett discussed the cases with NewsHour Supreme Court Analyst Marcia Coyle. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/fundersPor PBS NewsHour
  continue reading
 
Loading …

Guia de referencia rapida