Claim OwnershipU.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments
Subscribed: 7,330Played: 179,402
Subscribe
Description
Oral arguments before the Supreme Court of the United States, presented by Oyez, a multimedia judicial archive at the IllinoisTech Chicago-Kent College of Law.
692 Episodes
Reverse
A case in which the Court will decide whether a federal court of appeals must defer to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ judgment that a given set of undisputed facts does not demonstrate mistreatment severe enough to constitute “persecution” under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42).
A case in which the Court will decide whether an internet service provider can be held liable for copyright infringement simply for knowing about ongoing infringement by users and not terminating their accounts, and whether such knowledge alone is enough to find willful infringement under the Copyright Act.
A case in which the Court will decide whether district courts may consider sentencing disparities created by the First Step Act’s nonretroactive reduction of mandatory minimum penalties—which can result in defendants serving sentences decades longer than those imposed for identical conduct today—when determining whether "extraordinary and compelling reasons" warrant a sentence reduction under the compassionate release statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).
A case in which the Court will decide whether a combination of “extraordinary and compelling reasons” that may warrant a discretionary sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A) can include reasons that may also be alleged as grounds for vacatur of a sentence under 28 U.S.C. §2255.
A case in which the Court will decide whether an individual may sue a government official in his individual capacity for damages for violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA).
A case in which the Court will decide whether an order denying a government contractor’s claim of derivative sovereign immunity under Yearsley v. W.A. Ross Construction Co. is immediately appealable under the collateral-order doctrine, which permits interlocutory appeals of certain non-final orders that conclusively determine important issues separate from the merits.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the International Emergency Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1701 (“IEEPA”), permits the president to impose tariffs.
1A case in which the Court will decide whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) imposes any time limit to set aside a void default judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a federal court’s final judgment must be vacated if it is later determined that the case lacked complete diversity at the time of removal from state court, and whether a plaintiff can defeat diversity jurisdiction after removal by amending the complaint to assert a viable claim against a nondiverse defendant.
A case in which the Court will decide whether federal contractors enjoy immunity from state-law tort suits because they are integrated into combat operations, even when they violate military orders and contractual duties.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the fugitive-tolling doctrine applies in the context of supervised release.
A case in which the Court will decide (1) whether a rule requiring dismissal of repeat claims in state prisoner habeas petitions also applies to repeat claims in federal prisoner motions to vacate their sentences; and (2) whether it has jurisdiction to review lower court decisions allowing or denying federal prisoners permission to file repeat challenges to their sentences.
A case in which the Court will decide whether criminal restitution under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act (MVRA) is penal for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause.
A case in which the Court will decide whether federal candidates have Article III standing to challenge state election laws that extend the deadline for receiving and counting mail-in ballots beyond Election Day when they allege vote dilution and increased campaign costs from monitoring extended ballot counting.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a claim that Postal Service employees intentionally refused to deliver mail to a designated address arises out of “the loss” or “miscarriage” of postal matter under the Federal Tort Claims Act’s postal-matter exception.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a Colorado law banning “conversion therapy”—i.e., attempts to “convert” someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity—violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment permits two sentences for an act that violates 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and (j).
A case in which the Court will decide whether a Delaware law providing that a complaint must be dismissed unless it is accompanied by an expert affidavit must be applied in federal court.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a trial court violates a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel by banning discussion of the defendant’s ongoing testimony with counsel during an overnight recess.
A case in which the Court held that federal district courts likely lack equitable authority under the Judiciary Act of 1789 to issue universal injunctions that prohibit enforcement of executive actions beyond the parties before the court.
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store
United States
💚WATCH>>ᗪOᗯᑎᒪOᗩᗪ>>LINK>👉https://co.fastmovies.org
Footnote Kavanaugh
clement
What happened to this podcast? Why are there no new episodes?
53:03 has been written in history, Justice Thomas asks a question for the first time since 2016!
I wish the descriptions were a bit more detailed. It gets hard to keep up.
10 NEON 20.18. GOD