Government Efficiency Run Amok

The Citizen's Guide to the Supreme Court

#Comedy #Government #Attorney #Breyer #Ginsberg #Alito #Citizen #Citizensguidetothesupremecourt #Guide #Kagan #Law #Scalia #Sodomayor #Supremecourt #Thomas #Brett And Nazim #Citizens Guide To The Supreme Court #Lawyers #Robert

26:46

For many travelers, Antarctica is a bucket-list destination, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to touch all seven continents. In 2023, a record-breaking 100,000 tourists made the trip. But the journey begs a fundamental question: What do we risk by traveling to a place that is supposed to be uninhabited by humans? And as the climate warms, should we really be going to Antarctica in the first place? SHOW NOTES: Kara Weller: The Impossible Dilemma of a Polar Guide Marilyn Raphael: A twenty-first century structural change in Antarctica’s sea ice system Karl Watson: First Time in Antarctica Jeb Brooks : 7 Days in Antarctica (Journey to the South Pole) Metallica - Freeze 'Em All: Live in Antarctica Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices…

год назад 48:33

MP3•Главная эпизода

This week's episode covers the Supreme Court's decision in TikTok v. Garland, a great example of how the Federal government passing laws can end up as the Federal Government's own worst nightmare. Nazim has returned, so enjoy commentary on snow days, getting old, and legos. Law still starts from the beginning.

430 эпизодов

Government Efficiency Run Amok

The Citizen's Guide to the Supreme Court

published год назад

MP3•Главная эпизода

430 эпизодов

Все серии

1
The Foothills of Mt. Doomsday 46:57

6 дней назад46:57

46:57

This week's question asks the age old question of whether we are dealing with a Constitutional Crisis, or run-of-the-mill incompetency. Brett and Nazim discuss the cases of Noam v. Garcia and Trump v. JGG to determine the scope of both Supreme Court orders and how to view the President's actions in light of the Constitution. It's a fun episode! Very unlikely to increase your anxiety! Law starts at (05:25).…

1
Sex, Drugs, and Unemployment Taxes 1:02:29

19 дней назад1:02:29

1:02:29

Brett and Nazim return to cover three Con Law cases. The first, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, asks whether mandatory government ID verifications for adult websites violates the First Amendment. The second, Skrmetti v. US, discusses the application Equal Protection Standard for LGBT discrimination. The final case, Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Board, asks whether an entity owned by the Catholic Church which performs secular benefits is exempt from employment taxes. The law starts at (05:41).…

1
Government Efficiency Run Amok 48:33

14 weeks назад48:33

48:33

1
TikTok v. Garland Oral Argument 50:45

15 weeks назад50:45

50:45

This week's episode, which covers the oral argument in Tiktok v. Garland, is just Brett and no Nazim. We ask that you see past this fatal flaw and still enjoy discussion on why TikTok may not be a First Amendment case, what kind of First Amendment case it could be, and whether it would fail a strict scrutiny analysis. Law starts from the beginning.…

1
The 2024 Presidential Election 1:06:25

24 weeks назад1:06:25

1:06:25

So you've won/lost the 2024 Presidential election, what comes next? Brett and Nazim take some time to vet out what the 2024 election means for the President, the Supreme Court and Administrative Agencies. Sprinkle in a touch of doom, and just a hint of gloom, and you've got a winning podcast episode. Law starts from the beginning, with a healthy tangent in the middle about Nazim dressed in a hot-dog man costume. *Technical issue with episode has been fixed.…

1
The Rise and Fall of Chevron 54:25

40 weeks назад54:25

54:25

This week's episode discusses Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which the Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine, but not before discussing the potential success of lawsuits challenging the change in the Democratic candidate for President, and later discussing the many mysteries of the open ocean. It's an action-packed episode, folks. Law starts from the beginning.…

1
Trump Immunity Decision 1:09:39

43 weeks назад1:09:39

1:09:39

This week's episode covers Trump v. U.S. , which deals with the Court's new test for Presidential Immunity, how that test applies to former President Donald Trump, and whether Brett can talk Nazim off a ledge over the whole thing. Law starts from the beginning.

1
50 Shades of Originalism 50:09

44 weeks назад50:09

50:09

This week's episode covers two criminal cases with bickering concurrences. Rahimi v. U.S., holding that the Second Amendment does not invalidate a law disarming someone subject to a domestic violence restraining order, shows that a lot can happen in two summers, while Smith v. Arizona, holding that an expert witness cannot testify about a report the expert did not prepare, shows that twenty years is still not enough time to decide what testimonial means. Law starts at (02:22).…

1
Abortion & Guns (Civ Pro & Statutory Interpretation) 49:59

45 weeks назад49:59

49:59

This week's episode covers the cases of FDA v. Doctor's for Hippocratic Medicine and Cargill v. Garland , which deal with big legal issues in small legal ways. The podcast starts by also discussing Big Sam Alito's recently foibles with judicial ethics and ends with a discussion on dance recital season. The law basically starts from the beginning if you'll indulge a small anecdote.…

1
The Case Against Donald Trump 57:09

52 weeks назад57:09

57:09

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).…

1
FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine Oral Argument 1:00:39

1 year назад1:00:39

1:00:39

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
Colorado, Executive Immunity and Yes We're Talking About Trump Again. 53:45

1 year назад53:45

53:45

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.…

1
Donald Trump and the Colorado Ballot 1:02:57

1 year назад1:02:57

1:02:57

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
Trump, Double Jeopardy and Guns 59:59

1 year назад59:59

59:59

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)…

1
The Third Wrongest Decision of the 2023 Term 45:21

2 years назад45:21