421 episodes

Brett and Nazim are two attorneys who hate being attorneys. Each week, they discuss current Supreme Court cases with the intent to make the law more accessible to the average person, while ruminating on what makes the law both frustrating and interesting. This podcast is not legal advice and is for entertainment purposes only. If anything you hear leads you to believe you need legal advice, please contact an attorney immediately

The Citizen's Guide to the Supreme Court The Citizens Guide to the Supreme Court

    • Government
    • 4.4 • 225 Ratings

Brett and Nazim are two attorneys who hate being attorneys. Each week, they discuss current Supreme Court cases with the intent to make the law more accessible to the average person, while ruminating on what makes the law both frustrating and interesting. This podcast is not legal advice and is for entertainment purposes only. If anything you hear leads you to believe you need legal advice, please contact an attorney immediately

    The Case Against Donald Trump

    The Case Against Donald Trump

    This week's episode once again covers former President Donald Trump's cases before the Supreme Court, dealing mostly with Trump v. U.S. (whether a President has absolute immunity for criminal actions), but also covering Fischer v. U.S. (whether a statute meant to resolve evidence tampering can also be applied against January 6th Defendants).  Brett and Nazim, always sensitive to your tolerance for Trump cases, also give you a crash course in the Confrontation Clause in the third act of this episode by covering Smith v. Arizona.  Law starts at (05:43).

    • 57 min
    FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine Oral Argument

    FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine Oral Argument

    This week's episode covers the most recent abortion case before the Supreme Court, which covers less about the Constitution, and more about administrative law and the adversarial nature of the American legal system.  Brett and Nazim discuss the basics underlying the case and also predict the outcome based a fairly one-sided oral argument.  The law starts at (05:00).

    • 1 hr
    Colorado, Executive Immunity and Yes We're Talking About Trump Again.

    Colorado, Executive Immunity and Yes We're Talking About Trump Again.

    Time is a flat circle, folks.  Fresh off the heels of two SCOTUS decisions, Brett and Nazim discuss the Supreme Court hearing Trump's Executive Immunity defense in Trump v. U.S., and the Supreme Court's holding in Trump v. Anderson which bars Colorado from removing Trump from the ballot.  Next time we'll talk about something else.  We promise.  At least we hope.  Law starts at (03:00) following some sweet Dune talk.

    • 53 min
    Donald Trump and the Colorado Ballot

    Donald Trump and the Colorado Ballot

    This week's episode covers Trump v. Anderson, which asks whether Colorado can prevent Donald Trump from being on the Presidential ballot due to the 14th Amendment.  Considering how insane this case is, your boys discuss the lower decision to determine how the Supreme Court will likely reverse this, while discussing history, January 6th, and Colorado statutes.  Law starts from the beginning.

    • 1 hr 2 min
    Trump, Double Jeopardy and Guns

    Trump, Double Jeopardy and Guns

    Well hello there.  The podcast returns for a discussion on executive immunity (United States v. Trump), double jeopardy and the insanity defense (McElrath v. Georgia) and the second amendment's application to domestic violence crimes (Rahimni v. U.S.).  Other topics discussed include breakfast foods, Fortnight, and what 2024 may bring to the brains of legal scholars.  Law starts at (08:30)

    • 59 min
    The Third Wrongest Decision of the 2023 Term

    The Third Wrongest Decision of the 2023 Term

    Brett and Nazim are back to discuss the case of Students for Fair Admissions v. North Carolina/Harvard, in which the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action programs in school admissions.  The Law starts at (8:20), and Nazim's sound is wonky for like three minutes at the start.  We are sorry, but we missed you if that makes up for it.

    • 45 min

Customer Reviews

4.4 out of 5
225 Ratings

225 Ratings

chandleryesfriends ,

The intersection between food and the Supreme Court

Like the title, great podcast with two guys having fun and talking about the Supreme Court.

Facebook group is great too.

1019374 ,

Former fan

I was once a fan of this show but it’s basically turned into boilerplate liberal talking points. Yawn.

Aliengena ,

Gold!!

Love this podcast! Not a lawyer and have no legal aspirations, however this podcast is so thoroughly enjoyable. I’ve been a listener for about four years or so and looking forward to more. I’ve learned a ton and laughed a lot too. Thanks dudes!

Top Podcasts In Government

Strict Scrutiny
Crooked Media
Anne Hidalgo - Paris en Commun
Paris en Commun
The Lawfare Podcast
The Lawfare Institute
5-4
Prologue Projects
The Chris Plante Show
WMAL | Cumulus Podcast Network | Cumulus Media Washington
Red Eye Radio
Cumulus Podcast Network

You Might Also Like

We the People
National Constitution Center
Strict Scrutiny
Crooked Media
Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts
Slate Podcasts
Pod Save America
Crooked Media
Opening Arguments
Opening Arguments Media LLC
Stay Tuned with Preet
CAFE