Business Law 101

David D. Schein

Professor David D. Schein discusses the legal concepts that all business owners need to know.

  1. 13 de mai.

    FDA vs Louisiana: Why the 5th Circuit Blocked Mail Order Abortion Pills

    Can the FDA ship abortion pills by mail? Discover why the 5th Circuit stayed the 2023 rule in this legal breakdown.📬 SPONSORSHIP & GUEST INQUIRIES: DrDaveSavesAmerica@gmail.com 🤝If you enjoy our content, please take a moment to like this video, subscribe to our channel, and/or drop us a note in the comments!ABOUT THIS EPISODE Following the 2022 Dobbs decision, the landscape of reproductive law in America shifted drastically. In this episode, we dive into the intense legal battle between the State of Louisiana and the FDA regarding the distribution of mifepristone. After the FDA moved to allow the abortion drug to be prescribed online and sent via mail—removing the long-standing requirement for in-person doctor visits—Louisiana challenged the rule under the Administrative Procedure Act. They argued the decision lacked sufficient data and placed an undue burden on state Medicaid costs. We explore the trial court’s initial hesitation and the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals' significant ruling that labeled the FDA’s actions as arbitrary and capricious. Join us as we unpack the 5th Circuit’s jurisdiction, safety testing requirements, and what this means for mail-order medication moving forward.TIMESTAMPS 0:00 – Post-Dobbs: The FDA’s New Rule on Mifepristone0:37 – Louisiana’s Legal Challenge and the Administrative Procedure Act1:56 – The 5th Circuit Ruling: Why the Mail-Order Stay Was GrantedCONNECT WITH DAVID D. SCHEIN LinkedIn: @DavidScheinTwitter: @DrDaveSavesFacebook, Instagram, & YouTube: @DrDaveSavesAmericaWebsite: www.DrDaveSavesAmerica.comBuy “Bad Deal for America”: https://a.co/d/0cVwX2jLBuy “The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures”: https://a.co/d/0g4DmyvGCredits: ntl-studio; NatureBoy

    3 min

  2. 6 de mai.

    SCOTUS Unanimous Victory: First Choice vs. NJ Attorney General Explained

    NJ’s Attorney General targeted First Choice donors, but SCOTUS just stepped in. Here is the truth about this First Amendment win. 📬 SPONSORSHIP & GUEST INQUIRIES: BusinessLaw101@gmail.com 🤝If you enjoy our content, please take a moment to like this video, subscribe to our channel, and/or drop us a note in the comments!ABOUT THIS EPISODE In this episode, we dive into the landmark legal battle involving First Choice Women’s Resource Centers and the state of New Jersey. Since 1985, First Choice has operated as a religious nonprofit providing vital resources and counseling to pregnant women, rooted in the belief that life begins at conception. The conflict began in 2022 when New Jersey’s Attorney General launched a Reproductive Rights Strike Force, issuing a consumer alert and a sweeping subpoena against the organization. The state demanded sensitive donor data, including names, addresses, and places of employment—a move that First Choice argued was a direct violation of their First Amendment rights.After facing setbacks in the trial court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, the case reached the Supreme Court. We break down the unanimous SCOTUS holding that reversed the lower court decisions, confirming that First Choice established a present injury to its constitutional rights. This case marks a significant moment for religious nonprofits, donor privacy, and the fight against government overreach.TIMESTAMPS 0:00 – The History of First Choice Women’s Resource Centers0:31 – The NJ Strike Force and the Controversial Subpoena1:58 – SCOTUS Ruling: A Unanimous Win for the First AmendmentPhoto credits: KurArtCONNECT WITH DAVID D. SCHEIN LinkedIn: @DavidScheinTwitter: @DrDaveSavesFacebook, Instagram, & YouTube: @DrDaveSavesAmericaWebsite: www.DrDaveSavesAmerica.comBuy “Bad Deal for America”: https://a.co/d/0cVwX2jLBuy “The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures”: https://a.co/d/0g4DmyvG

    3 min

  3. 5 de mai.

    SCOTUS Rules on Louisiana Redistricting: The End of Section 2 as We Know It?

    The Supreme Court just ruled on Louisiana’s redistricting. Is the Voting Rights Act being demolished?📬 SPONSORSHIP & GUEST INQUIRIES: BusinessLaw101@gmail.com 🤝If you enjoy our content, please take a moment to like this video, subscribe to our channel, and/or drop us a note in the comments!ABOUT THIS EPISODE In this episode of Business Law 101, I dive into the landmark 6-3 Supreme Court decision regarding Louisiana’s congressional districts. The case, Louisiana v. Callais, centers on whether the state’s creation of a second majority-black district constituted an unconstitutional racial gerrymander or a necessary move to comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965. I break down the high court's ruling, which states that the US Constitution almost never permits a state to discriminate based on race, even when attempting to comply with federal voting laws. This decision has massive implications for future redistricting and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Is compliance with the Voting Rights Act still a valid justification for race-based districting, or has the court just issued a seismic shift in civil rights law? Join me for this essential recap of one of the most significant legal battles of 2026. TIMESTAMPS - 0:00 The History of Louisiana's 2022 Congressional Map - 0:31 Racial Gerrymandering vs. The Voting Rights Act - 1:17 The SCOTUS Decision: Strict Scrutiny and the 14th AmendmentCONNECT WITH DAVID D. SCHEIN LinkedIn: @DavidScheinTwitter: @DrDaveSavesFacebook, Instagram, & YouTube: @DrDaveSavesAmericaWebsite: www.DrDaveSavesAmerica.comBuy “Bad Deal for America”: https://a.co/d/0cVwX2jLBuy “The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures”: https://a.co/d/0g4DmyvG

    3 min

  4. 15 de abr.

    The real reason you can't buy a car in Texas on Sunday

    Why are Texas car lots locked on Sundays? 🔒 It's not just religion—it’s a law car dealers actually FIGHT to keep. Here’s why. 📬 SPONSORSHIP INQUIRIES: ⁠DrDaveSavesAmerica@gmail.com⁠ 🤝 If you enjoy our content, please take a moment to like this video, subscribe to our channel, and/or drop us a note in the comments! ABOUT THIS EPISODE Ever tried to buy a truck on a sunny Sunday in Texas, only to find the gates locked tight? Most people assume the "Sunday Showroom Silence" is a religious holdover, but the truth is rooted in the Texas Transportation Code Section 728.002. In this episode, we go behind the scenes of the Texas Blue Laws to explain why car dealerships are legally prohibited from selling vehicles on consecutive Saturdays and Sundays. While most blue laws were repealed in 1985, the "Sunday Ban" remains—and surprisingly, it’s the Texas Automobile Dealers Association lobbying to keep it that way. We dive into the economics of protectionism, overhead costs, and how a government-mandated break allows dealers to save on labor and electricity without losing customers to the competition across the street. If you've ever wondered why the free market takes a day off in the Lone Star State, this breakdown is for you. TIMESTAMPS 0:00 – The Sunday Showroom Silence: A Texas Mystery0:39 – Texas Transportation Code & The "Consecutive Day" Rule1:23 – Protectionism: Why Dealers Lobby to Stay Closed  CONNECT WITH DAVID D. SCHEIN LinkedIn: @DavidScheinTwitter: @DrDaveSavesFacebook, Instagram, & YouTube: @DrDaveSavesAmericaWebsite: ⁠www.DrDaveSavesAmerica.com⁠Buy “Bad Deal for America”: ⁠https://a.co/d/0cVwX2jL⁠Buy “The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures”: ⁠https://a.co/d/0g4DmyvG⁠Photo Credits: MAD_Production

    2 min

  5. 8 de abr.

    Why the Supreme Court Ruled Tomatoes Are Vegetables (Nix v. Hedden) [Business Law 101, Episode 370]

    Is a tomato a fruit? The Supreme Court says no. Discover the 1893 case that changed food history. 🍅⚖️ #NixvHedden 📬 SPONSORSHIP inquiries: DrDaveSavesAmerica@gmail.com 🤝 Support Business Law 101: Partner with us to reach our engaged audience: www.DrDaveSavesAmerica.com If you enjoy our content, please take a moment to like this video, subscribe to our channel, and/or drop us a note in the comments! ABOUT THIS EPISODE Is a tomato a fruit or a vegetable? While botany says one thing, the U.S. Supreme Court says another. In this episode, we explore the landmark 1893 case Nix v. Hedden. We dive into the Tariff Act of 1883, a protectionist law that taxed imported vegetables but left fruits tax-free. When importer John Nix sued tax collector Edward Hedden, it sparked a legal battle that went all the way to the highest court in the land. Learn why Justice Horace Gray ignored the dictionary in favor of the "dinner table" and established the Ordinary Meaning Rule—a legal principle still used today to interpret ambiguous laws based on common language rather than scientific technicalities. TIMESTAMPS 0:00 – The Botanical vs. Legal Tomato Debate 0:48 – Nix v. Hedden: The 10% Vegetable Tax 1:30 – The Ordinary Meaning Rule & The Verdict CONNECT WITH DAVID D. SCHEIN LinkedIn: @DavidSchein Twitter: @DrDaveSaves Facebook, Instagram, & YouTube: @DrDaveSavesAmerica Website: www.DrDaveSavesAmerica.com Buy “Bad Deal for America”: https://a.co/d/0cVwX2jL Buy “The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures”: https://a.co/d/0g4DmyvG

    2 min

  6. 18 de mar.

    SCOTUS Rules on Trump Immigration Order: Biden Parole Programs Ended for 500k+ Non-Citizens

    SCOTUS just cleared the way for the Trump Admin to end Biden-era parole programs. Here is what it means for 500,000+ people. ⚖️ 📬 SPONSORSHIP INQUIRIES: BusinessLaw101@Gmail.com 🤝 If you enjoy our content, please take a moment to like this video, subscribe to our channel, and/or drop us a note in the comments! ABOUT THIS EPISODE In this episode of B-Law 101, Dr. Dave Schein (DDS) breaks down two major, back-to-back Supreme Court rulings that have effectively ended Biden-era immigration parole programs. Following a series of executive orders from the Trump Administration and new DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, SCOTUS has intervened to allow the termination of temporary status for over 500,000 non-citizens from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. We analyze the legal battle between federal judges in Massachusetts and San Francisco and the highest court in the land. Key topics covered include: The fragility of programs established by Executive Order.Why the Trump Administration cited program fraud as the primary reason for termination.The legal impact on Venezuelan nationals currently residing in the United States.What’s next for the thousands of people now facing potential deportation while cases move through the lower courts.Stay informed on the intersection of constitutional law, federal regulations, and national leadership. TIMESTAMPS 0:00 – The Risk of Executive Orders in Federal Law0:46 – SCOTUS Rules on Cuba, Haiti, and Nicaragua Parole1:15 – Venezuelan Parole Terminated: Fraud Claims & Legal Fallout CONNECT WITH DAVID D. SCHEIN LinkedIn: @DavidScheinTwitter: @DrDaveSavesFacebook, Instagram, & YouTube: @DrDaveSavesAmericaWebsite: www.DrDaveSavesAmerica.comBuy “Bad Deal for America”: https://a.co/d/0cVwX2jLBuy “The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures”: https://a.co/d/0g4DmyvGPhoto credits: Silverman Media Services, LLC

    2 min

  7. 17 de mar.

    SCOTUS Rules on DOGE: Elon Musk, FOIA Lawsuits, and Privacy Victories

    SCOTUS just handed DOGE two massive legal wins. Here is how Elon Musk’s efficiency task force beat FOIA and privacy hurdles. 📬 SPONSORSHIP INQUIRIES: BusinessLaw101@Gmail.com 🤝 Support Business Law 101: Partner with us to reach our engaged audience: BusinessLaw101@Gmail.com If you enjoy our content, please take a moment to like this video, subscribe to our channel, and/or drop us a note in the comments! ABOUT THIS EPISODE In this episode of Business Law 101, we break down two major Supreme Court rulings that provide a significant legal boost to DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency). Following the return of the Trump Administration, the high court issued 6-3 decisions that define the legal boundaries of this high-profile task force originally led by Elon Musk. We dive into the specifics of Social Security Administration v. AFSCME, where the court lifted an injunction regarding confidential data access, and U.S. DOGE Service v. CREW, which addressed whether DOGE is subject to FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests. This episode explores the critical distinction between executive authority and federal agencies, and what these rulings mean for the Federal Records Act and government transparency. TIMESTAMPS 0:00 – The Conservative Majority: SCOTUS Issues DOGE Rulings 0:27 – Social Security Data Access & The Privacy Act Case 0:54 – Is DOGE a Federal Agency? The FOIA & CREW Decision CONNECT WITH DAVID D. SCHEIN LinkedIn: @DavidSchein Twitter: @DrDaveSaves Facebook, Instagram, & YouTube: @DrDaveSavesAmerica Website: www.ClaremontProductions.com Buy “Bad Deal for America”: https://a.co/d/0cVwX2jL Buy “The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures”: https://a.co/d/0g4DmyvG Photo credits: KurtArt

    2 min

  8. 11 de mar.

    Due process for TdA detainees

    SCOTUS blocks summary deportations of TdA detainees, ruling they must have due process and time for habeas relief. A major legal check on executive power. ⚖️ Thanks for joining me for this episode! I’m a Houston- based attorney, run an HR Consulting company called Claremont Management Group, and am a tenured professor at the University of St. Thomas. I’ve also written several non-fiction political commentary books: Bad Deal for America (2022) explores the Vegas-style corruption running rampant in Washington DC, while The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures (2018) analyzes – and grades – the leadership qualities of the past 100 years of U.S. presidents. You can find my books on Amazon, and me on social media (Twitter @DSchein1, LinkedIn @DavidSchein, Facebook & Instagram @AuthorDavidSchein, and YouTube @DrDaveSavesAmerica). I’d love to hear from you! As always, the opinions expressed in this podcast are mine and my guests’ and not the opinions of my university, my company, or the businesses with which I am connected.

    2 min
Ver tudo (373)

3,2
de 5
6 avaliações

Sobre

Professor David D. Schein discusses the legal concepts that all business owners need to know.

Informações

  • Criado por
    David D. Schein
  • Anos de atividade
    2020 - 2026
  • Episódios
    373
  • Classificação
    Livre
  • Copyright
    © David D. Schein
  • Site do podcast
    Business Law 101