Advisory Opinions

On today’s podcast, our hosts discuss the Supreme Court’s March 25 ruling in Torres v. Madrid, a Fourth Amendment case involving a failed attempt by police officers to restrain suspect Roxanne Torres using physical force. “She’s claiming that they violated her Fourth Amendment rights by unreasonably seizing her,” Sarah explains. “And the question becomes: Can you seize someone if they got away?” After a deep dive into Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, Sarah and David talk about the legal history surrounding hate crimes and the constitutionality of D.C. statehood. They end the episode with some career advice for their aspiring lawyer listeners. Show Notes: -Caniglia v. Strom, Torres v. Madrid, Terry v. Ohio, R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Wisconsin v. Mitchell -“Supreme Court agrees to hear first abortion case with 6-3 conservative majority” by Alice Miranda Ollstein in Politico. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today’s pod, Sarah and David give us an update on the goings on at the Supreme Court, with an in-depth look at a union takings case out West. “A California regulation allows union representatives to meet with farm workers at their work sites for up to three hours a day for as many as 120 days a year,” Sarah explains. “And so the question is: Is this a per se taking under the Fifth Amendment?” After Sarah and David discuss oral arguments for the case, they do a deep dive on a 9th Circuit Second Amendment case, Twitter’s lawsuit against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, and a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case on the ministerial exception. They wrap things up with some much needed Netflix recommendations and a conversation about D.C. statehood. Show Notes: -Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid and Supreme Court oral arguments. -New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett and Holloway v. Garland. -Twitter, Inc. v. Ken Paxton. -Deweese-Boyd v. Gordon College. -Torres v. Madrid. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today’s action-packed pod, our hosts start with an interesting certiorari grant to U.S. v. Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon bombing case. The appellate court overturned the trial court’s death sentence for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the grounds that 1) the trial judge did not ask the jurors about their pretrial media consumption, and 2) that he did not allow evidence about the his brother Tamerlan’s alleged involvement in a previous murder to inform the case. Tamerlan Tsarnaev died in a shootout with police after the 2013 bombing. Sarah and David give us their predictions on how the Supreme Court is likely to rule. Also in the hopper for today: Our hosts introduce us to a union case and discuss speculation surrounding Justice Stephen Breyer’s retirement, a D.C. Circuit dissent by Judge Laurence Silberman, the MAGA right’s rejection of originalism, and best picture nominee Promising Young Woman. Show Notes: -U.S. v. Tsarnaev. -Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association et al. v. Gina Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce, et al. -Antiquities Act. -Christiana Tah and Randolph McClain v. Global Witness Publishing, Inc. and Global Witness. -New York Times v. Sullivan. -“A Better Originalism” by Hadley Arkes, Josh Hammer, Matthew Peterson, and Garrett Snedeker in the American Mind. -“Zack Snyder’s Justice League and America’s Second-Greatest Superhero Trilogy” by David French in The Dispatch. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today’s podcast, Sarah and David discuss a lawsuit in which a high school student sues his Nevada charter school “for repeatedly compelling his speech involving intimate matters of race, gender, sexuality and religion.” Our hosts explain why the critical race theory curriculum in question is unlikely to be deemed unlawful by the court. Per David: “You don’t have an inherent right, once your kid is in public school, to direct and control the curriculum that they see.” Stay tuned to hear special guest Chris Bogart chat about his career in commercial litigation finance. Show Notes: -Clark et al v. State Public Charter School Authority et al. -Brown v. Hot, Sexy and Safer Productions, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today, our hosts are taking a break from the news cycle to share some fun facts about the Supreme Court and answer a series of questions from their listener mailbox: Are Democratic-appointed Supreme Court justices more ideologically reliable than their Republican-appointed counterparts? What are some cases where you are inclined to agree with the legal reasoning but were bothered by the policy outcome? And perhaps most important, how should one go about hiring an attorney? Sarah and David have the scoop. Show Notes: -“Cleaning Up Quotations” by Jack Metzler in the Journal of Appellate Practice and Process. -“ ‘(Cleaned Up)’ Parenthetical Arrives in the Supreme Court” by Eugene Volokh in Reason. -“Larry Flynt’s Life in Contempt” by Ross Anderson in Los Angeles Magazine. -“Empirical SCOTUS: Interesting meetings of the minds of Supreme Court justices” by Adam Feldman in SCOTUSBlog. -Federal Tort Claims Act and Immigration and Nationality Act. -Cases they mentioned: Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., Knick v. Township of Scott, Bostock v. Clayton County, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, Morse v. Frederick, Rucho v. Common Cause and Kelo v. City of New London. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

David took the internet by storm last night when he joined a Clubhouse session called “David French, Based or Cringe?” As David puts it in today’s pod, “There’s kind of a subculture where people really hate me!” Joined by a very special guest on today’s episode, David and Sarah chat about nominal damages, the constitutionality of H.R. 1’s effort to federalize elections, and the increasing number of state laws that are aiming to ban critical race theory from being taught in K-12 classrooms. Show Notes: -H.R. 1, also known as the “For the People Act.” -“The New War on Woke” by Jeffrey Sachs in ArcDigital. -Garcetti v. Ceballos. -“Beyond Originalism” by Adrian Vermeule in The Atlantic. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Katie Barlow, lawyer and media editor of SCOTUSBlog, sits in for David on today’s episode. Sarah and Katie kick off things by discussing the decision handed down in Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, in which an 8-1 majority ruled that even seeking “nominal damages” can be enough to give a plaintiff standing. Plus, Katie explains how her time working for Nina Tottenberg at NPR helped her prepare for translating SCOTUS decisions into one-minute TikTok videos. And, of course, she weighs in on the “should you go to law school” debate. Make sure you stick around to the end to hear Sarah and Katie sing the praises of Oprah and react to the Prince Harry and Megan Markle interview on CBS. Show Notes: -Nominal damages decision -SCOTUSBlog article about the decision -Nina Totenberg’s Twitter -Katie Barlow’s Twitter (which has all of her TikToks) -CBS’ Harry and Megan interview Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is the Equality Act necessary to codify Bostock v. Clayton County? How might the Equality Act affect religious liberty, if at all? How do we definitively differentiate between men and women? Today, our hosts chat about invidious sex discrimination as it relates to the Equality Act, and what this law means for the future of nondiscrimination law if it is passed by the Senate. Stay tuned to hear our hosts recap oral arguments for Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, a Supreme Court case that deals with the Voting Rights Act. Show Notes: -“The Equality Act Has a Foundational Legal Problem” by David French in The Dispatch. -Radiolab Presents: Gonads. -Bostock v. Clayton County. -Religious Freedom Restoration Act. -Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. -Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee and its Supreme Court oral arguments. -Shelby v. Holder. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week for Lange v. California, a Fourth Amendment case that will determine whether a police officer’s hot pursuit of a person suspected of committing a misdemeanor counts as an exigent circumstance to justify the officer’s warrantless entry onto the suspect’s property. In today’s Supreme Court heavy episode, Sarah and David also talk about two other cases dealing with hostile work environments and whether women should constitutionally be required to register for the draft. Show Notes: -Lange v. California oral arguments and transcript. -National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System cert petition. -Robert Collier v. Dallas County Hospital District cert petition. -Rostker v. Goldberg. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas made headlines last week for his dissent to the majority’s denial of cert in Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Veronica Degraffenreid. Even though his dissent mainly focused on the mootness of the case, many media outlets seized on the opportunity to mischaracterize Justice Thomas’ argument by claiming he promoted President Trump’s baseless voter fraud claims. After Sarah and David give us their spiel about how media outlets often botch Supreme Court coverage, University of Chicago Law professor William Baude joins today’s show for an extremely nerdy conversation about the Supreme Court’s shadow docket that you won’t want to miss. Show Notes: -Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Veronica Degraffenreid. -“Dissent by Justice Thomas in election case draws fire for revisiting baseless Trump fraud claims” by Mark Joseph Stern in Slate. -“Clarence Thomas Promotes Trump’s Voter Fraud Lies in Alarming Dissent” by John Fritze in USA Today. -“Foreword: The Supreme Court's Shadow Docket” by William Baude in the New York University Journal of Law & Liberty. -Feb. 18 House Judiciary Committee hearing on the Supreme Court’s shadow docket. -Supreme Court Practice by Eugene Gressman. -South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom. -Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices