SCOTUScast

On Feb. 22, 2022 the Court heard arguments in Ysleta del Sur Pueblo vs. Texas, a case which concerned sovereign authority to regulate non-prohibited gaming activities. Joining to discuss this case is Anthony J. Ferate, of Counsel at Spencer Fane LLP.

On January 18, 2022 the Court heard oral argument in Shurtleff v. City of Boston, a case which concerned the flag-flying at Boston city hall. Joining today to discuss this case is Professor Scott Gaylord of Elon University School of Law.

On November 2nd, 2021 the Court heard argument in Houston Community College Sys. v. Wilson, a case which concerned whether the First Amendment restricts the authority of an elected body to issue a censure resolution in response to a member’s speech. Joining today to discuss oral argument is Jordan Pratt, senior counsel at the First Liberty Institute.

On January 11th, 2022 the Court heard arguments in two immigration cases, Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez and Garland, Attny Gen. V. Gonzalez. Joining today to discuss these arguments in two parts is Ilya Somin, Professor of Law at George Mason’s Antonin Scalia Law School.

This episode will begin with coverage of the question and background, and proceed in the second part to focused analysis of oral argument.

On Jan. 18, 2022 the Court heard argument in Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation. Joining today to discuss this decision in two parts is Professor Suzanna Sherry, the Herman O. Loewenstein Chair in Law Emerita at Vanderbilt Law School.

On January 19th, the Court heard arguments in Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate. At issue were: (1) Whether appellees have standing to challenge the statutory loan-repayment limit of 52 U.S.C. 30116(j); and (2) whether the loan-repayment limit violates the Free Speech clause of the First Amendment. Joining today to discuss this case is Professor Bradley Smith, the Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault Professor of Law at Capital University Law School.

The Supreme Court recently issued its decisions in two federal vaccine mandate cases, Biden v Missouri and National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Several states and interest groups sought emergency relief on regulations issued by OSHA as well as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

The OSHA rule mandated large employers to require vaccination or regular testing of their employees. CMS required vaccination of staff at health care facilities participating in Medicare or Medicaid programs. The Court granted a stay of the OSHA rule pending merits review in the Sixth Circuit, but stayed an injunction of the CMS rule allowing it to go into effect.

Joining today to discuss these decisions are, in order of appearance:
1) David Dewhirst, Solicitor General, Montana
2) Professor Dorit Reiss, James Edgar Hervey '50 Chair of Litigation, UC Hastings Law
3) Professor Ilya Somin, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

On December 10, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson and dismissed the federal government's suit against Texas in United States v. Texas. The Court held 8-1 in Jackson that plaintiff abortion providers can pursue claims against licensing officials.

A pair of distinguished federal-courts scholars join to discuss the cases, the legal issues involved, and the implications going forward.

Featuring:
Prof. Stephen Sachs, Antonin Scalia Professor of Law, Harvard Law School
Prof. Howard Wasserman, Professor of Law, Florida International University College of Law

On November 8th, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga, a case which concerned whether Section 1806(f) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 displaces the state-secrets privilege and authorizes a district court to resolve, in camera and ex parte, the merits of a lawsuit challenging the lawfulness of government surveillance by considering the privileged evidence.

Joining today to discuss this case in great detail is Dr. Riddhi Sohan Dasgupta, Counsel at Schaerr | Jaffe LLP. Dr. Dasgupta has served as the Deputy General Counsel of the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Special Counsel of the United States Department of Education (ED), and adjunct faculty at George Mason’s Antonin Scalia Law School.

On December 8th, the Court heard arguments in Carson v. Makin, a case which concerned whether a state violates the religion clauses or equal protection clause by prohibiting students participating in an otherwise generally available student aid program from choosing their aid to attend schools that provide religious, or sectarian, instruction. Joining today to discuss this decision in two parts is Professor Nicole Garnett, The John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School. This episode begins with coverage of the question and background, and proceeds in second part to focused analysis of oral argument.