This week's coming at you extra neutral this week, as Brett and Nazim try to take a neutral approach to two big Supreme Court issues and also say the word "neutral" about a hundred times. In particular, this week's episode covers the Supreme Court's review of the 11th Circuit's decision regarding Donald Trump's confidential documents, and the upcoming case of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard / North Carolina. The law starts from the beginning.

Brett and Nazim start a series of shorter episodes regarding fundamental legal topics. This episode covers Congress, including who can serve, what they do, and how they compare to other International legislative bodies.

Brett and Nazim start a series of shorter episodes regarding fundamental legal topics. This episode covers the Executive Branch, including what it includes, the extent of its power, and how the Supreme Court has shaped its authority over the past few years.

Brett and Nazim start a series of shorter episodes regarding fundamental legal topics. This episode covers the Judicial Branch, including what cases they can hear, how they are organized, and how appellate procedure works.

It's the end of the term, so Brett and Nazim are coming at you LIVE from an online google chatroom. This episode grades our evergreen predictions from last summer, and sets forth new predictions for what is hoping will be a less bleak summer in 2023. The Citizen's Guide to the Supreme Court will return in October 2022.

This week's episode previews some of the cases that will be covered next term, including cases about Delaware, Voting Rights, the Chevron Doctrine, Andy Warhol, Native American Sovereignty, the Independent State Legislature Theory and Affirmative Action. Your boys also discuss next week's Live Season Finale Episode. The law startst at (06:30).

It's the end the term, so this week's episode ties up loose ends, which include: a mea culpa on cannon ownership (2:00); the plan so far for the Season Finale episode (5:00); discussion on Concepcion v. U.S. (how judge's should interpret the First Step Act), Hemphill v. NY (whether there are exceptions to the Confrontation Clause, and Ruan v. U.S. (mens rea requirements for doctors violate drug distribution laws).

This week's episode covers three cases which discuss recent Supreme Court decisions on Native American Law and Tribal Sovereignty, including Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta (holding that State law has criminal jurisdiction on tribal land), Denezpi v. U.S (holding that the Double Jeopardy clause does not bar successive prosecutions involving CFR courts) and Yselta Del Sur Pueblo v. Texas (holding that Texas does not have jurisdiction to regulate gaming activities on reservations). Law starts at (1:30).

This week's celebration of administrative law features two John Roberts Opinions; one of which suggests the Supreme Court is OK with the end of the world (West Virginia v. EPA) and also favors Biden's half-baked use of Admin Law over Trump's even-less baked use of Admin Law (Biden v. Texas). Law starts at (3:15).

This week's episode discusses two cases in which the Supreme Court prioritized Free Exercise Clause rights over Establishment Clause rights. Carson v. Makin states that Maine cannot provide a voucher system that excludes religious schools and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District states that a football coach cannot be barred from saying a silent prayer after a football game. Brett and Nazim discuss both cases in detail and try to determine how influential these cases are from a big picture perspective. Law starts from the beginning.