![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
452 episodes
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) Jake Leahy
-
- Government
-
-
4.5 • 49 Ratings
-
The Supreme Court decision syllabus, read without personal commentary. See: Wheaton and Donaldson v. Peters and Grigg, 33 U.S. 591 (1834) and United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321, 337. Photo by: Davi Kelly. Founded by RJ Dieken. Now hosted by Jake Leahy. Frequent guest host Jeff Barnum. *Note this podcast is for informational and educational purposes only.
-
Trump v. United States (Presidential Immunity)
Trump v. United StatesA federal grand jury indicted former President Donald J. Trump on four counts for conduct that occurred during his Presidency following the November 2020 election. The indictment alleged that after losing that election, Trump conspired to overturn it by spreading knowingly false claims of election fraud to obstruct the collecting, counting, and certifying of the election results. Trump moved to dismiss the indictment based on Presidential immunity, arguing that a Preside...
-
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson (Public Camping Laws)
City of Grants Pass v. JohnsonGrants Pass, Oregon, is home to roughly 38,000 people, about 600 of whom are estimated to experience homelessness on a given day. Like many local governments across the Nation, Grants Pass has publiccamping laws that restrict encampments on public property. The Grants Pass Municipal Code prohibits activities such as camping on public property or parking overnight in the city’s parks. See §§5.61.030, 6.46.090(A)–(B). Initial violations can trigger a fine, while mu...
-
Fischer v. United States (Obstruction of Official Proceeding)
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 imposes criminal liability on anyone who corruptly “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.” 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(1). The next subsection extends that prohibition to anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.” §1512(c)(2). Petitioner Joseph Fisch...
-
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (Administrative Law / Chevron Deference)
Loper Bright Enterprises v. RaimondoThis is a consolidated opinion of two cases that were argued this term. Both of them bring into question rules promulgated by the National Marine Fisheries Service under the Magnuson-Stevens Act -- which applies the Adminsitrative Procedures Act. The only question on appeal is whether Chevron is still good law. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the 6-3 Court, holds that "The Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their i...
-
Moyle v. United States (Abortion)
In this very brief Per Curiam decision, RJ Dieken also reads the concurring opinions authored Justice Kagan and Justice Barrett.
-
Ohio v. EPA (Clean Air Act)
Ohio v. EPAThe Clean Air Act requires both the States and federal government to help develop environmental regulations. When the EPA creates certain standards regarding air quality, states have to develop their own "State Implementation Plan," which requires States to both set out how to go about applying the federal regulations, and it also requires States to consider its impact on neighboring States (called the Good Neighbor Provision). The EPA can step in when States won't comp...
Customer Reviews
Love this podcast!
This podcast is exactly what I was looking for to be able to easily access new US Supreme Court decisions. Thank you!
Covers a hard to find genre
Great podcast in a scarce genre of journalism that covers the judicial branch of government. I would recommend giving listeners the full decision breakdown before reading the full opinion, or at least giving the author of the opinion before reading it. I find myself either getting confused or losing interest or losing interest because I’m confused about the opinion before the end. Knowing the opinion author at the end is unhelpful. This term has several topics with 2 or more similar cases which I find difficult to distinguish. Given more relevant opinion details as context would help me follow the law through a story given by the author and deepen my understanding the opinion.
Thanks for this service!
Podcast does what very few others do. It peels back the curtain on what the Supreme Court is doing in a very easy to access and understand way.
Thanks!