SCOTUScast The Federalist Society
-
- News
SCOTUScast is a project of the Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy Studies. This audio broadcast series provides expert commentary on U.S. Supreme Court cases as they are argued and issued. The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker. We hope these broadcasts, like all of our programming, will serve to stimulate discussion and further exchange regarding important current legal issues. View our entire SCOTUScast archive at http://www.federalistsociety.org/SCOTUScast
-
McIntosh v. United States - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in McIntosh v. United States. At issue was whether a district court’s failure to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(2)(B)’s requirement to enter a preliminary order imposing criminal forfeiture before sentencing bars a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to harmless-error principles on appellate review.
Join us to hear Stefan Cassella break down the decision and discuss its potential ramifications.
Featuring:
Mr. Stefan Cassella, CEO, Asset Forfeiture Law, LLC -
Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P. - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P. At issue was whether U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit erred in holding that a failure to make a disclosure required under Item 303 of SEC Regulation S-K can support a private claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, even in the absence of an otherwise misleading statement.
Join us to hear Prof. Adam Pritchard break down the decision and its potential ramifications.
Featuring:
Prof. Adam Pritchard, Frances and George Skestos Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School -
Pulsifer v. United States - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Pulsifer v. United States. The Supreme Court considered an Eighth Circuit case that raised the question: "Must a defendant show he does not meet any of the criteria listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) to qualify for a sentence lower than the statutory minimum?" At issue was the meaning of the word "and" in the statute, and whether text and context required "and" in this case be read as "and" to mean "or".
Join us to hear Vikrant Reddy break down the decision and offer his criticism of the Court's reasoning and ruling.
Featuring:
Mr. Vikrant Reddy, Senior Fellow, Stand Together Trust -
Garland v. Cargill - Post-Argument SCOTUScast
On February 28, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Garland v. Cargill. The Court considered whether bump stocks are considered "machineguns" as defined by Title 26 of the United States Code.
Please join us as we break down and analyze how oral argument went before the Court.
Featuring:
Stephen Halbrook, Senior Fellow, Independent Institute
(Moderator) Robert Leider, Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School -
Trump v. Anderson - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
On March 4, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Trump v. Anderson. At issue was whether the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering former President Donald Trump excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ballot; the Court held that Colorado did err in excluding Trump from the ballot.
Join us to hear Professor Muller break down the decision and offer his criticism of the Court's reasoning and ruling.
Featuring:
Prof. Derek Muller, Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School -
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, CA - Post-Argument SCOTUScast
On January 9, 2024, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, CA. The Court considered whether a building-permit exaction is exempt from the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine as applied in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard, Oregon simply because it is authorized by legislation
Please join us as we break down and analyze how oral argument went before the Court.
Featuring:
David Lanferman, Partner, Rutan & Tucker LLP
Nancie Marzulla, Partner, Marzulla Law