Supreme Court открытые
[search 0]
Больше
Download the App!
show episodes
 
Unedited English audio of oral arguments at the Supreme Court of Canada. Created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada’s highest court. Not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. Original archived webcasts can be found on the Court’s website at scc-csc.ca. Feedback welcome: podcast at scchearings dot ca.
  continue reading
 
The Supreme Court decision syllabus, read without personal commentary. 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. Founded by RJ Dieken. Now hosted by Jake Leahy. *Note this podcast is for informational and educational purposes only. Hosted by a non-attorney.*
  continue reading
 
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!
  continue reading
 
T
The Supreme Court: A Basketball Podcast
Series avatar that links to series page

1
The Supreme Court: A Basketball Podcast

Robaire Taylor, Chris Young, Henri Taylor

Unsubscribe
Unsubscribe
Ежемесячно
 
Any listeners out there...really want entertaining basketball content? Don't want to worry about the hosts - all on the show trying to force "controversial" hot takes, all in your earbuds, yelling back and forth to win an argument? Come to The Supreme Court: A Basketball Podcast! Check back with the SC trio; Robaire, Chris, and Henri, Wednesdays as we discuss the latest NBA headlines, news, and transactions.
  continue reading
 
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
  continue reading
 
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. Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/aaron-larson2/support
  continue reading
 
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.
  continue reading
 
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.
  continue reading
 
Loading …
show series
 
The appellant, John Aquino, was the directing mind of Bondfield Construction Company Limited (“BCCL”) and its affiliate, 1033803 Ontario Inc., commonly known as Forma-Con (“debtor companies”). He and the other appellants carried out a false invoicing scheme over a number of years by which they siphoned off tens of millions of dollars from both debt…
  continue reading
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in transfer decisions absent a separate court determination that the transfer decision caused a signification disadvantage.
  continue reading
 
The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address a circuit split -- whether Deborah Laufer has Article III standing to sue hotels that fail to include information about accessibility accommodations as required by the ADA. She sued hundreds of hotels, most of which she never intended on trying to stay at. After her lawyer faced sanctions, Laufer deci…
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to approve, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, a release that extinguishes claims held by nondebtors against nondebtor third parties, without the claimants’ consent. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★…
  continue reading
 
The nine Supreme Court justices handed down a surprise unanimous decision binding themselves to a new code of ethics. It comes after criticism over undisclosed perks for some of the justices. Amna Nawaz unpacked the court's new rules with Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis specializing in legal and government ethi…
  continue reading
 
(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE) Mr. Tayo Tompouba was charged with sexual assault. On his first appearance, he was not advised of his right to apply for a trial in French, despite the court’s obligation to inform him of that right under s. 530(3) of the Criminal Code. He was convicted following a trial in English. The Court of Appeal acknowledged that no…
  continue reading
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to approve, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, a release that extinguishes claims held by non-debtors against non-debtor third parties, without the claimants’ consent.
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): (1) Whether statutory provisions that empower the Securities and Exchange Commission to initiate and adjudicate administrative enforcement proceedings seeking civil penalties violate the Seventh Amendment; (2) whether statutory provisions that authorize the SEC to choose to enforce the securities laws through an agency…
  continue reading
 
(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE) The appellants are members of the Canadian Armed Forces who had various charges laid against them. They each filed a preliminary application in the Court Martial seeking a stay of proceedings because of an alleged infringement of their constitutional right to be tried by an independent and impartial tribunal guaranteed by …
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether an agency determination that a given set of established facts does not rise to the statutory standard of “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” is a mixed question of law and fact reviewable under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D), or whether this determination is a discretionary judgment call unreviewable under S…
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibits a second prosecution for a crime of which a defendant was previously acquitted. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★Austin Songer
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether the "serious drug offense" definition in the Armed Career Criminal Act incorporates the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the federal firearm offense or the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the prior state drug offense. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★…
  continue reading
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether the statutory scheme that empowers the Securities and Exchange Commission violates the Seventh Amendment, the nondelegation doctrine, or Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
  continue reading
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether an agency determination that a given set of established facts does not rise to the statutory standard of “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” is a mixed question of law and fact reviewable under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D), or instead is a discretionary judgment call unreviewable under Section 1252…
  continue reading
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether the "serious drug offense" definition in the Armed Career Criminal Act incorporates the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the federal firearm offense or the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the prior state drug offense.…
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether a veteran who has served two separate and distinct periods of qualifying service under the Montgomery GI Bill and the Post-9/11 GI Bill is entitled to receive a total of 48 months of education benefits as between both programs, without first exhausting the Montgomery benefit in order to obtain the more generous…
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, violates the Second Amendment on its face. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★Austin Songer
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act unequivocally and unambiguously waive the sovereign immunity of the United States. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★Austin Songer
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether the refusal to register a trademark under 15 U.S.C. § 1052(c) violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment when the mark contains criticism of a government official or public figure. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★Austin Songer
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether a public official engages in state action subject to the First Amendment by blocking an individual from the official’s personal social media account, when the official uses the account to feature their job and communicate about job-related matters with the public, but does not do so pursuant to any governmental…
  continue reading
 
QUESTION PRESENTED: Issue(s): Whether a public official’s social media activity can constitute state action only if the official used the account to perform a governmental duty or under the authority of his or her office. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★Austin Songer
  continue reading
 
Question Presented: Issue(s): Whether district courts, in determining whether the due process clause requires a state or local government to provide a post-seizure probable-cause hearing prior to a statutory judicial-forfeiture proceeding and, if so, when such a hearing must take place, should apply the “speedy trial” test employed in United States…
  continue reading
 
In 1991, Newfoundland and Labrador reorganized its northeast Avalon municipalities, expanding St. John’s boundaries and triggering a new planning process for St. John’s. The Lynch property and others were zoned as “watershed” because they fall within the Broad Cove River Watershed, which feeds St. John’s municipal water supply. In 2011, the Lynches…
  continue reading
 
Appellant Ummugulsum Yatar was injured in a motor vehicle accident. Ms. Yatar applied to her insurer, TD Insurance Meloche Monnex (hereafter, “TD”) for housekeeping and home maintenance benefits, as well as income replacement benefits (IRB). TD initially paid those benefits. About a year later, following insurance medical examinations, TD denied Ms…
  continue reading
 
Bombardier inc. entered into a procurement contract with the respondent branch of the Greek government (HMOD) for ten firefighting amphibious aircraft. There was also an Offsets contract by which Bombardier committed to offset programs inviting Greek suppliers as subcontractors for the work, for a total credited value of 110% of the main contract. …
  continue reading
 
In 1850, the respondents, the Anishinaabe of the northern shores of Lakes Huron and Superior, entered into two treaties with the Crown: the Robinson-Huron Treaty and the Robinson-Superior Treaty (“Treaties”). The Treaties provided for cessation of a vast territory in northern Ontario, and for payment, in perpetuity, of an annuity to the Anishinaabe…
  continue reading
 
A corporate taxpayer requested that the Minister of National Revenue exercise her discretionary power under s. 247(10) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.) (“ITA”) to adjust the value of a non-arm’s length transaction downward, which would, in turn, reduce the amount of the taxpayer’s assessment. The Minister declined to do so. The …
  continue reading
 
In 1850, the respondents, the Anishinaabe of the northern shores of Lakes Huron and Superior, entered into two treaties with the Crown: the Robinson-Huron Treaty and the Robinson-Superior Treaty (“Treaties”). The Treaties provided for cessation of a vast territory in northern Ontario, and for payment, in perpetuity, of an annuity to the Anishinaabe…
  continue reading
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether a veteran who has served two separate and distinct periods of qualifying service is entitled to receive all of the education benefits at once from programs associated with both periods of service.
  continue reading
 
The Supreme Court heard a case on Tuesday about whether people with domestic violence court orders should be barred from owning guns. Supreme Court analyst Marcia Coyle joins Geoff Bennett to discuss the arguments. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/fundersPBS NewsHour
  continue reading
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act unequivocally and unambiguously waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.
  continue reading
 
A case in which the Court will decide whether the refusal to register a trademark under 15 U.S.C. § 1052(c) violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment when the mark contains criticism of a government official or public figure.
  continue reading
 
The Supreme Court heard arguments in two key cases about how public officials use social media. The cases explore whether two school board members in California and a city manager in Michigan violated the First Amendment by blocking constituents from posting criticism on their personal social media pages. Geoff Bennett discussed the stakes with New…
  continue reading
 
Loading …

Краткое руководство