x

75% of people globally want unbiased news (Pew Research) but are concerned they're not getting that.

Get balanced coverage with Symby. See how stories are covered across diverse outlets and spot when one side covers a story the other skips.

PODCAST

The High Court Report

SCOTUS Oral Arguments

The High Court Report makes Supreme Court decisions accessible to everyone. We deliver comprehensive SCOTUS coverage without the legal jargon or partisan spin—just clear analysis that explains how these cases affect your life, business, and community. What you get: Case previews and breakdowns, raw oral argument audio, curated key exchanges, detailed opinion analysis, and expert commentary from a practicing attorney who"s spent 12 years in courtrooms arguing the same types of cases the Supreme

government

All Episodes

01:08:40

Oral Argument: Texas v. New Mexico | Case No. 141,...

The High Court Report ·

2024/03/20

Oral Argument: Texas v. New Mexico | Case No. 141, Orig. | Date Argued: 3/20/24 | Date Decided: 6/21/24 Link to Docket: Here.Question Presented: EXCEPTION OF THE UNITED STATE TO THE THIRD INTERIM REPORT OF THE SPECIAL MASTER: The United States excepts to the Special Master's recommendation that the States' joint motion to enter a consent decree be granted.Holding: Because the proposed consent decree would dispose of the United States’ Compact claims without its consent, the States’ motion to enter

en

01:25:44

Oral Argument: Gonzalez v. Trevino | Case No. 22-1025...

The High Court Report ·

2024/03/20

Oral Argument: Gonzalez v. Trevino | Case No. 22-1025 | Date Argued: 3/20/24 | Date Decided: 6/20/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:In Nieves v. Bartlett, this Court held that probable cause does not bar a retaliatory arrest claim against a "police officer" when a plaintiff shows "that he was arrested when otherwise similarly situated individuals not engaged in the same sort of protected speech had not been." 139 S. Ct. 1715, 1727 (2019). The circuits admittedly disagree on whether only specific

en

01:24:55

Oral Argument: Diaz v. United States | Case No. 23-14...

The High Court Report ·

2024/03/19

Oral Argument: Diaz v. United States | Case No. 23-14 | Date Argued: 3/19/24 | Date Decided: 6/20/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background: Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) provides: "In a criminal case, an expert witness must not state an opinion about whether the defendant did or did not have a mental state or condition that constitutes an element of the crime charged or of a defense. Those matters are for the trier of fact alone." Fed. R. Evid. 704(b).Question Presented: In a prosecution for drug

en

01:42:31

Oral Argument: Murthy v. Missouri | Case No. 23-411 |...

The High Court Report ·

2024/03/19

Oral Argument: Murthy v. Missouri | Case No. 23-411 | Date Argued: 3/18/24 | Date Decided: 6/26/24 Link to Docket: Here.Question Presented: Whether Respondents have Article III standing; Whether the government's challenged conduct transformed private social-media companies' content-moderation decisions into state action and violated Respondents' First Amendment rights; and Whether the terms and breadth of the preliminary injunction are proper.Holding: Respondents, two states and five individual

en

01:14:26

Oral Argument: National Rifle Association of America...

The High Court Report ·

2024/03/18

Oral Argument: National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo | Case No. 22-842 | Date Argued: 3/18/24 | Date Decided: 5/30/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:Bantam Books v. Sullivan held that a state commission with no formal regulatory power violated the First Amendment when it "deliberately set out to achieve the suppression of publications" through "informal sanctions," including the "threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion, persuasion, and intimidation." 372 U.S. 58,

en

01:30:25

Oral Argument: Garland v. Cargill | Case No. 22-976 |...

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/28

Oral Argument: Garland v. Cargill | Case No. 22-976 | Date Argued: 2/28/24 | Date Decided: 6/14/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:Since 1986, Congress has prohibited the transfer or possession of any new "machinegun." 18 U.S.C. 922(o)(1). The National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. 5801 et seq., defines a "machinegun" as "any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger." 26

en

42:56

Oral Argument: Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski | Case No....

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/28

Oral Argument: Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski | Case No. 23-3 | Date Argued: 2/28/24 | Date Decided: 5/23/24 Link to Docket: Here.Question Presented: Where parties enter into an arbitration agreement with a delegation clause, should an arbitrator or a court decide whether that arbitration agreement is narrowed by a later contract that is silent as to arbitration and delegation?Holding: Where parties have agreed to two contracts, one sending arbitrability disputes to arbitration, and the other either

en

01:47:46

Oral Argument: Cantero v. Bank of America, N.A. |...

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/27

Oral Argument: Cantero v. Bank of America, N.A. | Case No. 22-529 | Date Argued: 2/27/24 | Date Decided: 5/30/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background: At least thirteen states have, enacted laws requiring mortgage lenders to pay a minimum interest rate on funds held in mortgage escrow accounts. Congress has since recognized the existence of these state escrow-interest laws and has expressly required national banks to comply with them where applicable. See 15 U.S.C. § 1639d(g)(3).Question Presented: Does

en

48:57

Oral Argument: McIntosh v. United States | Case No....

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/27

Oral Argument: McIntosh v. United States | Case No. 22-7386 | Date Argued: 2/27/24 | Date Decided: 4/17/24 Link to Docket: Here.Question Presented: Whether a district court may enter a criminal forfeiture order outside the time limitations set forth in Rule 32.2, Fed.R.Crim.P.?Holding: A district court's failure to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(2)(B)'s requirement to enter a preliminary order imposing criminal forfeiture before sentencing does not bar a judge from ordering

en

01:20:05

Oral Argument: NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton | Case No....

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/26

Oral Argument: NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton | Case No. 22-555 | Date Argued: 2/26/24 | Date Decided: 7/1/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:Throughout our Nation's history, the First Amendment's freedoms of speech and press have protected private entities' rights to choose whether and how to publish and disseminate speech generated by others. E.g., Manhattan Cmty. Access Corp. v. Halleck, 139 S. Ct. 1921, 1930 (2019); Hurley v. Irish-Am. Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Grp. of Boston, 515 U.S. 557, 570, 575

en

02:22:30

Oral Argument: Moody v. NetChoice, LLC | Case No....

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/26

Oral Argument: Moody v. NetChoice, LLC | Case No. 22-277 | Date Argued: 2/26/24 | Case No. 7/1/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:Florida has enacted a law that attempts to prevent social-media companies from abusing their enormous power to censor speech.Question Presented: Whether the First Amendment prohibits a State from requiring that social-media companies host third-party communications, and from regulating the time, place, and manner in which they do so. Whether the First Amendment prohibits

en

01:29:05

Oral Argument: Ohio v. EPA | Case No. 23A349 | Date...

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/21

Oral Argument: Ohio v. EPA | Case No. 23A349 | Date Argued: 2/21/24 | Date Decided: 6/27/2024 Case consolidated with Kinder Morgan, Inc. v. EPA, Case No. 23A350, American Forest & Paper Assn. v. EPA, Case No. 23A351 and U.S. Steel Corp. v. EPA, Case No. 23A384.Link to Docket: Here.Holding: The enforcement of the Environmental Protection Agency's federal implementation plan against the applicant states, whose own state implementation plans were determined by EPA to be inadequate because they

en

53:19

Oral Argument: Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy |...

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/21

Oral Argument: Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy | Case No. 22-1078 | Date Argued: 2/21/2024 | Date Decided: 5/9/24 Link to Docket: Here.Question Presented: Whether, under the discovery accrual rule applied by the Circuit Courts and the Copyright Act's statute of limitations for civil actions, 17 U.S.C. §507(b), a copyright plaintiff can recover damages for acts that allegedly occurred more than three years before the filing of a lawsuit.Holding: The Copyright Act entitles a copyright owner to

en

01:10:13

Oral Argument: Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of...

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/20

Oral Argument: Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors, FRS | Case No. 22-1008 | Date Argued: 2/20/2024 | Date Decided: 7/1/2024 Link to Docket: Here.Background:Petitioner Corner Post, Inc. is a convenience store and truck stop in North Dakota that first opened for business in 2018. In 2021, Corner Post sued the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System under the Administrative Procedure Act, challenging a Board rule adopted in 2011 that governs certain fees for debit-card transactions. The

en

01:00:18

Oral Argument: Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park...

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/20

Oral Argument: Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC | Case No. 23-51 | Date Argued: 2/20/24 | Date Decided: 4/12/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:The Federal Arbitration Act exempts the "contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce." 9 U.S.C. § 1. The First and Seventh Circuits have held that this exemption applies to any member of a class of workers that is engaged in foreign or interstate commerce in the

en

01:18:28

Oral Argument: Department of Agriculture Rural...

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/08

Oral Argument: Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Serv. v. Kirtz | Case No. 22-846 | Argument Date: 11/6/23 | Date Decided: 2/8/24 Link to Docket: Here.Question Presented: Whether the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., unequivocally and unambiguously waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.Holding: A consumer may sue a federal agency under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681n, 16810 for defying the terms of the Fair Credit Reporting

en

02:09:04

Oral Argument: Trump v. Anderson | Case No. 23-719 |...

The High Court Report ·

2024/02/08

Oral Argument: Trump v. Anderson | Case No. 23-719 | Date Argued: 2/8/24 | Date Decided: 3/4/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:The Supreme Court of Colorado held that President Donald J. Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President because he "engaged in insurrection" against the Constitution of the United States-and that he did so after taking an oath "as an officer of the United States" to "support" the Constitution. The state supreme court ruled that the Colorado Secretary of State

en

01:16:13

Oral Argument: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo |...

The High Court Report ·

2024/01/17

Oral Argument: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo | Case No. 22-451 | Date Argued: 1/17/24 | Date Decided: 6/28/24 Case consolidated with Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce, Case No. 22-1219.Link to Docket: Here.Background: The Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) governs fishery management in federal waters and provides that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) may require vessels to "carry" federal observers onboard to enforce the agency's myriad regulations. Given that space onboard a

en

02:11:44

Oral Argument: Relentless, Inc. v. Department of...

The High Court Report ·

2024/01/17

Oral Argument: Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce | Case No. 22-1219 | Date Argued: 1/17/24 | Date Decided: 6/28/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:The Magnuson-Stevens Act ("MSA'') governs fishery management in federal waters. It states that, with the approval of the Secretary of Commerce, the National Marine Fisheries Service ("NMFS") may require fishing vessels to carry federal observers who enforce the agency's regulations. Congress appropriates funds for these observers. In three

en

01:11:55

Oral Argument: Devillier v. Texas | Case No. 22-913 |...

The High Court Report ·

2024/01/16

Oral Argument: Devillier v. Texas | Case No. 22-913 | Date Argued: 1/16/24 | Date Decided: 4/16/24 Link to Docket: Here.Background:In First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles, this Court recognized that the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause was "self-executing" and that "[s]tatutory recognition was not necessary" for claims for just compensation because they "are grounded in the Constitution itself[.]" 482 U.S. 304, 315 (1987). Since First English, several state courts of

en

421 results

Similar Podcasts

The Fly

Georgetown"s Institute of Politics and...

THE CONSTITUTION STUDY

Paul Engel

The DSR Daily

The DSR Network

The Lawfare Podcast

The Lawfare Institute

Fora do Baralho

Rádio Observador