Supreme Court สาธารณะ
[search 0]
เพิ่มเติม

ดาวน์โหลดแอปเลย!

show episodes
 
Decisions of the Supreme Court, summarized by the court itself.Readings of the Supreme Court slip opinion syllabi, With no personal commentary, you can make up your own mind about the decisions. 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---Paypal:https://paypal.me/SCOTUSsyllabus---Cash App: $RJDieken---Venmo: RJ-Dieken
 
T
The Citizen's Guide to the Supreme Court

1
The Citizen's Guide to the Supreme Court

The Citizens Guide to the Supreme Court

Unsubscribe
Unsubscribe
รายเดือน+
 
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 Term is a podcast from Law360 for the busy U.S. Supreme Court watcher. Give us about 15 minutes each week and we'll catch you up on all the big action at the nation's highest court, along with a list of what to watch in the coming sessions. Hosts senior Supreme Court reporter Jimmy Hoover in Washington, D.C. and editor-at-large Natalie Rodriguez in New York City cut through a busy docket to focus on the key cases and developments everyone will be talking about.
 
The Queens Supreme Court podcast is the hilarious spinoff of the hit online series “The Queens Supreme Court” with Ts Madison. The premise of the weekly satirical show is to discuss pop culture and all the hot social media trends, topics and gossip THEN try them as cases, render judgements and sentence the crimes accordingly to determine the ultimate fate of each celebrity!
 
Throughout the years the Supreme Court has evolved much like the rest of the federal government. This would not be without landmark rulings, which will be the main focus of this podcast. Landmark rulings lay the groundwork for laws to be overturned or upheld and allow for the United States to work toward major goals.
 
This study, A Christian Response to the Supreme Court Decision, exposes the foreboding Danger that this ruling will bring upon our nation if things don’t turn around very quickly. You will also be thoroughly equipped to give a loving Biblical apologetic response to 15 different accusations made against Christians regarding this issue.
 
News, views, and insight on the future of the Supreme Court. The ragtag gang of the usual suspects returns to chat about Justice Kennedy's retirement, and the nomination process to follow. This is the second season of the show following the Garland/Gorsuch* nominations. Following in the footsteps of our prior podcasts, Advice & Consent is insightful, not stodgy… opinionated, but not dogmatic. This is a serious process, but we find some entertainment along the way too. Advice & Consent is an ...
 
Loading …
show series
 
A case in which the Court will decide (1) whether appellees have standing to challenge the statutory loan-repayment limit of 52 U.S.C. 30116(j); and (2) whether the loan-repayment limit violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
 
We have one more emergency episode, which covers the Supreme Court's decisions in NFIB v. DOL and Biden v. Missouri, which discusses why one mandate is OK and the other mandate is not OK. Once again, there's probably more administrative law than you're expecting. Law starts from the beginning.
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether an alien who is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1231 is entitled by statute, after six months of detention, to a bond hearing at which the government must prove to an immigration judge that the alien is a flight risk or a danger to the community; and (2) whether, under 8 U. S. C. § 1252(f)(1), the courts below had jurisdiction…
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether a district court must or may consider intervening legal and factual developments when deciding whether to “impose a reduced sentence” on an individual under Section 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018.
 
For purposes here Only Babcock’s National Guard service payments are payments for service “as a member of a uniformed service” not his technicians pay. Support the show (https://paypal.me/SCOTUSsyllabus)โดย RJ Dieken
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether an alien who is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1231 is entitled by statute, after six months of detention, to a bond hearing at which the government must prove to an immigration judge by clear and convincing evidence that the alien is a flight risk or a danger to the community. Date Proceedings and Orders Nov 08 2019 | Applic…
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether the federal Medicaid Act provides for a state Medicaid program to recover reimbursement for Medicaid’s payment of a beneficiary’s past medical expenses by taking funds from the portion of the beneficiary’s tort recovery that compensates for future medical expenses. Date Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding) Mar 09…
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether the 30-day time limit to file a petition for review in the Tax Court of a notice of determination from the commissioner of internal revenue in 26 U.S.C. § 6330(d)(1) is a jurisdictional requirement or a claim-processing rule subject to equitable tolling.
 
One of two cases on the docket for this term in which the Court will decide whether noncitizens who have spent more than six months in immigration detention awaiting resolution of their deportation withholding claim are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge to determine whether they can be released on bond.…
 
One of two cases on the docket for this term in which the Court will decide whether noncitizens who have spent more than six months in immigration detention awaiting resolution of their deportation withholding claim are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge to determine whether they can be released on bond.…
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether the federal Medicaid Act provides for a state Medicaid program to recover reimbursement for Medicaid’s payment of a beneficiary’s past medical expenses by taking funds from the portion of the beneficiary’s tort recovery that compensates for future medical expenses.…
 
Sound the alarm, as we are back with an emergency podcast discussing the oral argument in National Federation of Independent Businesses (i.e. the Dudes) v. Department of Labor, and Biden v. Missouri, two cases discussing the Constitutionality of President Biden's Vaccine Mandate, BUT only through the context of Administrative Law. The law starts fr…
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether the Supreme Court should issue a stay of OSHA's vaccine-or-testing regime for all businesses with 100 or more employees. Date Proceedings and Orders Dec 17 2021 | Application (21A244) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh. Dec 20 2021 | Response to application (21A244) requested by Justice Kavanaugh, due by 4 p.m., …
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether the Supreme Court should issue a stay of the injunction issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri blocking a federal rule that requires all health care workers at facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid programs to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 unless they are eli…
 
This week's episode covers two recent opinions by Judge Neil Gorsuch, including Whole Women's Health v. Jackson (which determined whether injunctive lawsuits by abortion clinics to stop the Texas Heartbeat Law could proceed) and Dr. A v. Hochul (which asked whether President Biden's mandate could be enjoined pending a resolution on religious except…
 
This week's episode (which is far less attractive than our November 21st episode) covers Thompson v. Clark, a case which asks how not-guilty a person must be to file a 1983 claim against a police officer accused of violating a person's Constitutional Rights. Although complicated and unsexy, its a case which is interesting in the context of police-o…
 
Petitioners may pursue a pre enforcement challenge against certain of the named defendants, but not others (rejecting some on standing, and some on sovereign immunity). Support the show (https://paypal.me/SCOTUSsyllabus)โดย RJ Dieken
 
Discrimination or church-state separation? That was the question the Supreme Court justices debated this week in a blockbuster First Amendment case over a Maine private school subsidy program that excludes "sectarian" schools. Law360's The Term dives into the arguments on this week's episode.โดย Law360 - Legal News & Analysis
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether application of the equitable rule the Supreme Court announced in Martinez v. Ryan renders the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, which precludes a federal court from considering evidence outside the state-court record when reviewing the merits of a claim for habeas relief if a prisoner or his attorney has fai…
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether a state violates the religion clauses or equal protection clause of the United States Constitution by prohibiting students participating in an otherwise generally available student-aid program from choosing to use their aid to attend schools that provide religious, or “sectarian,” instruction. Date Proceedings and Orders…
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A)’s definition of “crime of violence” excludes attempted Hobbs Act robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a). Date Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding) Apr 14 2020 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 17, 2021) Apr 30 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a res…
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether allegations that a defined-contribution retirement plan paid or charged its participants fees that substantially exceeded fees for alternative available investment products or services are sufficient to state a claim against plan fiduciaries for breach of the duty of prudence under the Employee Retirement Income Security…
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) preserves the jurisdiction of federal courts to review a nondiscretionary determination that a noncitizen is ineligible for certain types of discretionary relief. Date Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding) Jan 15 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 22, 2…
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether a state law prohibiting students participating in an otherwise generally available student-aid program from choosing to use their aid to attend schools that provide religious, or “sectarian,” instruction violates the Religion Clauses or Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.…
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether allegations that a defined-contribution retirement plan paid or charged its participants fees substantially higher than those for alternative available investment products or services are sufficient to state a claim against plan fiduciaries for breach of the duty of prudence under the Employee Retiremen…
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) preserves the jurisdiction of federal courts to review a nondiscretionary determination that a noncitizen is ineligible for certain types of discretionary relief.
 
Brace yourself, as this week's episode covers oral argument in Dobbs v. Jackson's Women's Health, a case in which the justices debate the Constitutionality of a 15-week ban on abortions in Mississippi. Brett and Nazim go through the underlying precedent, and then cover the when, how, and why the Roe and Casey standards may be changed by this decisi…
 
Loading …

คู่มืออ้างอิงด่วน

Google login Twitter login Classic login