Suing the United States government is really hard. So hard that someone's family might not get to even if the government is at fault for that person dying in a flood. Adam Shelton explains why that luckily might not be true in this case, but all too often is. Then Diana Simpson walks us through a procedural pretzel of property rights preventing people from putting up homes. She also discusses some old cases you might not know about, but really should.

Barron v. United States, https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/21/21-50776-CV0.pdf

Rice v. Village of Johnstown, https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/22a0068p-06.pdf

IJ's Amicus Brief in Xi v. Haugen, https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Xiaoxing_Xi-amicus.pdf

Eubank v. Richmond, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/226/137/

Adam Shelton, https://ij.org/staff/adam-shelton/

Diana Simpson, https://ij.org/staff/diana-simpson/

Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

Short Circuit 216 | Sovereign Immunity and NIMBY Neighbors

The Supreme Court decides a few dozen cases every year; federal appellate courts decide thousands. So if you love constitutional law, the circuit courts are where it’s at. Join us as we break down some of the week’s most intriguing appellate decisions with a unique brand of insight, wit, and passion for judicial engagement and the rule of law.  http://ij.org/short-circuit

News

Government

News Commentary

First of all: PARENTAL ADVISORY! If you have children nearby you might want to save part of this episode for later. It doesn’t happen until just after 32 minutes into the episode, but the naughty language the Seventh Circuit quotes in one of this week’s cases forces IJ’s Sam Gedge to choose between dishonest modesty and, as he puts it, revealing the un-expurgated truth. Like a gentlemen, he goes for the latter while discussing a qualified immunity case about a “kung fu cop” with “multiple blackbelts” who gets a little punchy with a man who had a few too many. After that things just get weird as Sam introduces us to the first case in the American (reported, at least) tradition to use a certain word on George Carlin’s famous list. We close with a conversation about Patrick O’Brian’s and Jane Austin’s editing styles. But before any of that IJ’s Jared McClain tells us how to successfully make a mandamus claim against the Capitol Police. Although it seems you can get close in the D.C. Circuit, the common law gauntlet is a tough one.



Leopold v. Manger



Brumitt v. Smith



Edgar v. McCutchen



Memoirs of the Countess of Cardigan



Quart of Blood Technique

Short Circuit 326 | Modesty of Our Lexicographers

How does history inform our interpretation of the Constitution? In all kinds of ways, it seems, and perhaps in too many of them. We once again look at how history and the Second Amendment are mixing together, in a case from the Eighth Circuit. The opinion lets us do a bit of digging into a less-well-known founding father, Benjamin Rush, and his enthusiastic embrace of putting people behind bars. But before that IJ’s Bobbi Taylor details some of the latest class-action shenanigans in the Seventh Circuit. For the first time we address “mootness fees,” settlements extracted in some disclosure litigation against public corporations. And we consider whether they’re “a racket” as the court suggests.



Alcarez v. Akorn, Inc.



U.S. v. Veasley



Ted Frank episode, SC 154



Szasz, The Manufacture of Madness

Short Circuit 325 | This Is a Racket

We take a break from the federal courts of appeals and look into a brave new world—or is it an Orwellian one? Our thoughts—our inner mental processes—are the one aspect of our lives that is completely private. Right? Well, emerging technology is making that not so true anymore. IJ’s Anya Bidwell welcomes Professor Nita Farahany of Duke University to Short Circuit to discuss her recent book The Battle for Your Brain: Defending the Right to Think Freely in the Age of Neurotechnology. They talk about how neurotechnology works and how it has many potentially transformative implications, including many good ones. But in the wrong hands—especially the hands of the State—those implications can be quite unsettling. And there are so many gray areas in-between. People in China and other countries are already dealing with some of these implications and the legal and constitutional system in the United States is not yet ready for them if we are to keep the mental privacy we all value. Get ready for a conversation about what is private, what is human, and how liberal values and the Constitution can address the good and the bad of a future that is already here. And how to write a book via the Pomodoro method.



The Battle for Your Brain



Searching Secrets



Incriminating Thoughts



Pomodoro Technique

Short Circuit 324 | The Battle for Your Brain

We’re gonna read you the Riot Act. Again. An old friend of Short Circuit returns, the Anti-Riot Act. Perhaps (?) named in homage to its 18th century predecessor, the Congressional statute received a facial test at the Seventh Circuit, and IJ’s Kirby Thomas West tells us how it fared in the face of a guy who requested that everyone bring their family and a brick to a “riot.” He did not do so well in court, but perhaps the Anti-Riot Act has problems anyway? Then we go for a drive down a Houston freeway where Sam Gedge makes a citizen's arrest of a qualified immunity claim while drinking at a local flea market at 2am. The Fifth Circuit served up a wild ride of a case that is too good to pass up but also holds bigger lessons for how judges perceive “split-second decisions” and premeditated lies.



U.S. v. Betts



Hughes v. Garcia



The Riot Act



Short Circuit 146 (4th Cir. Anti-Riot Act case)

Short Circuit 323 | Poor Behavior

Stories we hope our listeners can relate to this week: borrowing cars and lousy neighbors. First, from the Sixth Circuit, IJ’s Rob Frommer details how a man sitting in the passenger seat of a running car somehow lost his Fourth Amendment standing. And went to prison. And then in the Second Circuit your host explores what can be done when your neighbor is an embassy. It’s an all-too-familiar tale of a building project gone awry but with a twist of sovereign immunity.  



Click here for transcript.



Register for the May 10 open fields conference!



U.S. v. Rogers



Harvey v. Sierra Leone



Neighbors 1980’s opening song



Fawlty Towers—The Builders

Short Circuit 216 | Sovereign Immunity and NIMBY Neighbors

Download our free app to listen on your phone