Lame ducks - and presidents: what will they do next? Description: On this week’s episode, we sit down with judicial expert and Senate veteran Tom Jipping to talk post-election plans for a Congress and President in their waning days of service.

What will congressional Democrats attempt to pass? What does the Constitution permit? And what about those last-minute judicial nominations from President Biden? Can new judges be appointed before President-elect Trump takes the oath of office at the end of January? We’ve got those answers and more on Case in Point! 

This week on Case in Point, and only hours after one of the most significant Republican sweeps in a generation, we sit down with Hans Von Spakovsky, Senior Manager of Heritage's Election Law Reform Initiative. Hans offers his thoughts on the landmark 2024 election, the likelihood of future litigation on political races, the Supreme Court's election-related emergency docket orders, and why election integrity should matter to every American.

On this episode of Case in Point, host Sarah Parshall Perry sits down with Will Trachman, General Counsel at Mountain States Legal Foundation, to reminisce about their time working in a presidential administration.

Will also talks about their case pending at the Supreme Court that concerns what citizen petitions are required to include before an issue is included on the ballot during an election. Plus, we talk dumb judicial opinions, DEI dismantling, and whether American public education is salveagable.

On this week's episode of Case in Point, host Sarah Parshall Perry is joined by Caroline Moore, Vice President of Parents Defending Education (PDE). They discuss PDE's "indoctrination map," an epidemic of school gender secrecy policies, the power of an active parent, and more. 

On today’s episode of Case in Point, we'll talk high-profile cases pending on requests for review at the Supreme Court. And we'll catch up with Kim Hermann, Executive Director for Southeastern Legal Foundation who's fighting in the trenches for sex-based protections for women and girls in education—from sports, to spaces, to scholarships and more. Title IX, school gender secrecy policies, preferred pronouns and more on Case in Point. 

On the FIRST official episode of Case in Point, host Sarah Parshall Perry tees up some big cases at the Supreme Court--controversial enough that they're sure to grab headlines.

AND we air former SCOTUS 101 host Zack Smith's recent Supreme Court Preview event at the Heritage Foundation with some legal heavyweights.

On this episode of SCOTUS 101, Zack Smith and Giancarlo Canaparo welcome fellow Heritage Senior Legal Fellow Sarah Parshall Perry who introduces a brand-new legal podcast platform, Case In Point. The lawyers catch each other up on some goings-on in their careers, have a good laugh about the suitability (or lack thereof) of some hosts’ faces for video podcasts, and Zack and Giancarlo hand the reins to Sarah for an introduction of Case in Point, where she identifies some of the most controversial cases headed to court this year: Gender “affirming” medicine, women’s sports, porn (yes, porn), and more. Bon Voyage, SCOTUS 101, Bienvenue, Case in Point!

The term is over, and what an ending it was! Presidents are entitled to broad immunity for official acts, Chevron deference is no more, the Seventh Amendment applies against the administrative state, nobody gets to sue over social media censorship, and the 8th Amendment does not prohibit anti-camping laws. These are the holdings of just a few of the blockbuster cases released in the last few days of this term. After your hosts discuss those cases, GianCarlo gets one last chance to stump Zack in trivia, and then they follow the Court into the summer recess.

Over the summer, your hosts arrange interviews with judges, lawyers, and experts, so please let them know if there are any people you'd like them to interview or legal issues you'd like them to cover in depth next term.

Follow us on X @scotus101 and @tzsmith. And please send questions, comments, or ideas for future episodes to [email protected].

Don't forget to leave a 5-star rating.

Stay caffeinated and opinionated with a SCOTUS 101 mug.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's almost the end of the term and the Court is now giving us some of the term's biggest cases. Bump stocks, abortion drugs, and taxes on unrealized gains are the just a few of the hot cases this week. After your hosts explore those cases, Zack interviews Judge Kathryn Mizelle of the Middle District of Florida about her meteoric rise to the bench and her many clerkships. Tune in next week for what is likely to be the final week of the term!

Follow us on X @scotus101 and @tzsmith. And please send questions, comments, or ideas for future episodes to [email protected].

Don't forget to leave a 5-star rating.

Stay caffeinated and opinionated with a SCOTUS 101 mug.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The end of the terms is a month away, and the opinions are coming fast. This week, your hosts discuss the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau case, a racial redistricting case, and the National Rifle Association's free-speech victory. After that, Zack interviews John Eastman about the lawfare used against him and other lawyers who have represented former President Donald Trump. Last up, inspired by the New York Times' latest conniption fit over flags, GianCarlo quizzes Zack about flags at the Court.

Follow us on X @scotus101 and @tzsmith. And please send questions, comments, or ideas for future episodes to [email protected].

Don't forget to leave a 5-star rating.

Stay caffeinated and opinionated with a SCOTUS 101 mug.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.