Short Circuit

On a special Short Circuit IJ’s Marie Miller sits down with a trio of school choice experts to provide an overview on where school choice is today. Nicole Garnett and Rick Garnett, both professors at Notre Dame Law School, join IJ’s Michael Bindas to discuss the history of school choice, answer common objections to school choice programs, and walk through some of the litigation that has culminated in the explosion of school choice programs we now see in 2023. The episode was recorded at the University of Notre Dame after a conference celebrating the publication of The Case for Parental Choice, a collection of essays by John Coons and edited by Nicole and Rick along with their colleague Ernest Morrell.

Click here for a transcript.

The Case for Parental Choice

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris

Espinoza v. Montana Dept. of Revenue

Carson v. Makin

Wouldn’t it be fun to own a time machine? If you said yes then you’re a lot like the Fifth Circuit. Last week its full set of judges trotted out their own Delorean and ran it at 88 miles an hour while issuing an order denying an en banc motion. We’re calling this “time travel” because unlike a normal denial of en banc the court did so after it already had over three months ago and the losing side (represented by IJ!) had already filed a cert petition with the Supreme Court. IJ’s Bob McNamara comes on to discuss this bending of the space-time continuum, but also the bending of long-established property rights principles. The case concerns a takings claim against the State of Texas where the state is trying to get away with not paying property owners for flooding their land. And if the Fifth Circuit’s ruling stands it’ll get away with it now and into the future. Continuing on the time traveling theme, your host then tells a tale straight out of a Donna Tartt novel (well, a combination of two of them): A six-thousand-year-old idol that’s sold on the New York art market and is of . . . uncertain provenance.

Click here for transcript.

Devillier v. Texas (cert petition)

Devillier v. Texas (2d denial of en banc)

Turkey v. Christie’s

H.G Well’s The Time Machine

Donna Tartt’s The Secret History

Donna Tartt’s The Goldfinch

Can a city get a renter evicted for a crime they didn’t commit? Unfortunately, in cities across the country the answer is yes. On a special Short Circuit we dig into this outrageous, and immensely underreported, issue. Professor Katy Ramsey Mason of the University of Memphis joins us to discuss crime free rental ordinances, laws that allow cities for force landlords to evict tenants after anyone in their household is merely charged (not convicted) of a crime. And not a crime committed on the property, but anywhere in town. We also hear from IJ attorney Sam Gedge who is part of a team currently challenging one of the worst examples of these laws in Granite City, Illinois. The case is currently at the Seventh Circuit and will be argued later this year. We even play some audio clips of what the eviction process has been like in Granite City as people who have done nothing wrong are kicked out of their homes.

Click here for transcript.

Register for March 31 conference on Meyer v. Nebraska!

Article in UCLA Law Review, “One-Strike 2.0”

IJ’s Granite City compulsory evictions case

ACLU case in Minnesota (now settled)

A nostalgic tale of judicial engagement where we examine whether recess is a crime and whether it’s fine for the government to follow your every move out on the water. First, Keith Neely of IJ joins us for the first time to discuss a Fourth Circuit opinion about a vague law that explicitly makes it illegal to be obnoxious. Then it’s his colleague Trace Mitchell’s turn with a Fifth Circuit tour of administrative law and the First Amendment. Keith also talks about the trivia test he had to take to become a circuit court clerk and how you pronounce “seconded.” (It’s not what you think. Unfortunately.) Plus, we close with a bit of rumination over “the youth of today” and how they can’t make obvious references to ‘60s sitcoms anymore.

Click here for transcript.

Register for March 31 conference on Meyer v. Nebraska!

Carolina Youth Action Project v. Wilson

Mexican Gulf Fishing Co. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce

The British origins of “seconded”

A special Short Circuit Live at Georgetown University hosts Joanna Schwartz of UCLA to discuss her book Shielded: How the Police Became Untouchable. And not only that, but after hearing her introduce the book itself we do a full Short Circuit looking at a number of recent cases in light of it. Anya Bidwell and Professor Schwartz are joined by professors Seth Stoughton, Carlos Manuel Vazquez, and Alex Reinert. Recorded on Tuesday, March 7 and co-sponsored with our friends at the Georgetown Center for the Constitution.

Click here for transcript.

Our March 31, 2023 conference on Meyer v. Nebraska

Come see Anthony on Thursday, March 16 at noon in Charleston, S.C.!

Work at IJ!

Shielded: How the Police Became Untouchable

Edwards v. City of Florissant

Sosa v. Martin County

Pettibone v. RussellMack v. Williams

Mack v. Williams

Short Circuit speaks with the law students at SMU in our first visit to The Big D. With Anya Bidwell as your host, she introduces us to Texas lawyers Zack Faircloth, Will Langley, and Don Tittle. They dig into recent cases on the Second Amendment, “premature bankruptcy,” vaping regulation, and (of course) qualified immunity. With more than one matter that seems to be on track for the Supreme Court this is the episode for Rick and Morty fans.

Register for March 7 event with Joanna Schwartz on her book “Shielded”!

Click here for podcast.

United States v. Rahimi

Wages and White Lion Investments v. FDA (motions panel)

Wages and White Lion Investments v. FDA (merits panel)

In re LTL Management

Molina v. City of St. Louis

Rick and Morty “Spa Planet” episode

For the first time Short Circuit welcomes the Jones-Act-hating, free-trade-loving, tariff-busting, T-shirt-writing, and top-5-ranking Scott Lincicome of the Cato Institute. Scott introduces us to a rare breed at Short Circuit, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. That’s because the court just issued (another) opinion upholding some of the dumbest steel tariffs of recent years (and that’s saying a lot). Scott walks us through the supposed national security issues, how tariff sausage gets made, and where the courts might go from here. After a somewhat difficult segue we then move to Andrew Ward of IJ, who tells a wild story from the Sixth Circuit of a shed that catches on fire, a sketchy warrant, security cameras, noises that sound like someone is ripping down a roof, and several kilos of a mysterious white substance in the sink. But none of it ever happened because of the fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine. Finally, we end with a top-5 list from Scott.

Primesource Building Products, Inc. v. U.S.

U.S. v. Waide

Tariffs Foster Political Dysfunction T-shirt

Capitolism newsletter

A qualified immunity and property rights pairing this week. But first we announce the winning answer from last episode’s “decretal language” competition. Then, Patrick Jaicomo explains why in the Fourth Circuit it can be unconstitutional for the police to prevent you from livestreaming an encounter, but you can’t sue them about it. Then Suranjan Sen walks us through a couple challenges to New York’s notorious rent control laws. The Second Circuit finds no taking there, whatever the realities of tenants who never move out. However, the question arises: Can these cases be heading somewhere higher? Also, courts, you’re not writing mystery novels. So stop opening your opinions like one.

Click here for transcript.

Register for Feb 18 Cleveland show, Comedy is not a Crime!

Register for event with Joanna Schwartz on her book “Shielded”!

Register for March 31 conference on Meyer v. Nebraska!

Sharpe v. Winterville Police Dept.

Community Housing Improvement Program v. City of New York

74 Pinehurst v. State of New York

Our newsletter begins announcements about federal en banc decisions with the phrase “And in en banc news.” And about a year ago we had an argument on the podcast on how to pronounce that fancy French-sounding phrase. Today we bring back the guests from that episode—Sam Gedge and Bob Belden—to settle the issue, once and for all. Along the way you’ll learn about how we have the Germans to thank for how we describe full sittings of the federal courts of appeals. You’ll also learn about two recent en banc cases, one from the Eleventh Circuit concerning how prisoners can sue in federal court, and one from the D.C. Circuit about how foreign students can stay in the country and get some work experience. There’s also a couple rabbit holes involving decretal language and whether a “dissental” is a thing.

Click here for transcript.

Register for Feb 17 panel at Case Western Reserve!

Register for Feb 18 Cleveland show, Comedy is not a Crime!

Register for Marc 31 conference on Meyer v. Nebraska!

Buy Anthony’s book!

Draft of article And in En Banc News . . . (to appear in Judicature)

Judge Newman article on decretal language

Wells v. Brown

Washington Alliance v. DHS

En banc argument episode

On this Groundhog Day special we’re sniffing out a couple eternally recurrent subjects: limits on government surveillance and limits on property rights. We’re joined by IJ’s Seth Young and also are very pleased to announce we once again have on Mike Chase, author of How to Become a Federal Criminal. Mike gives an overview of a case pending in the Fourth Circuit that could have major ramifications for everyone with a smart phone and a Google account—that is, everyone, period. After a bank robbery the police tried to track down a suspect using several layers of Google data. The court later found that the warrant in question violated the Fourth Amendment—yet excused it anyway. Mike explains the issues and also gives a preview of what’s coming in the world of federal crimes. Seth’s case is also from the Fourth Circuit, and it brings us to the happy days of March 2020 and what happened to a couple who simply wanted to access their own property. Was that a taking? The multifactored magic 8 ball says “no.”

United States v. Chatrie

Blackburn v. Dare County

16 USC § 668DD

50 CFR § 32.49

Phil Connors forecast