On February 21, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC. At issue was whether choice-of-law provisions in maritime contracts are presumptively enforceable under federal maritime law.

Join us to hear Professor Andrew Hessick break down the decision and discuss its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
Prof. Andrew Hessick, Judge John J. Parker Distinguished Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Strategy & Planning, University of North Carolina School of Law

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri. At issue was whether an employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII must show that the transfer brought about some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment, but that harm need not be significant.

Join us to hear Alison Somin break down the decision and discuss its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
Mrs. Alison Somin, Legal Fellow, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation

On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC. At issue was whether a transportation worker need not work in the transportation industry to be exempt from coverage under Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act.

Join us to hear Professor Samuel Estreicher break down the decision and discuss its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
Prof. Samuel Estreicher, Dwight D. Opperman Professor of Law and Director, Center for Labor, New York University School of Law

On April 25, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Trump v. United States. The Court considered whether, and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.

Please join us as we break down and analyze how oral argument went before the Court.

Featuring:
Mr. Steven Bradbury, Distinguished Fellow, The Heritage Foundation

On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California. At issue was whether a building-permit exaction is exempt from the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine as applied in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard, Oregon simply because it is authorized by legislation.

Join us to hear Nancie Marzulla and Jayson Parsons break down the decision and discuss its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
Ms. Nancie Marzulla, Partner, Marzulla Law
Mr. Jayson Parsons, Associate, Rutan & Tucker LLP

On April 16th, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Devillier v. Texas. At issue was whether owners of property north of U. S. Interstate Highway 10 adversely affected by the flood evacuation barrier constructed by Texas should be permitted on remand to pursue their takings clause claims through the cause of action available under Texas law.

Join us to hear Prof. Ilya Somin break down the decision and discuss its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
Prof. Ilya Somin, Professor of Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School and B. Kenneth Simon Chair in Constitutional Studies, Cato Institute

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in McIntosh v. United States. At issue was whether 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 bars a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to harmless-error principles on appellate review.

Join us to hear Stefan Cassella break down the decision and discuss its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
Mr. Stefan Cassella, CEO, Asset Forfeiture Law, LLC

On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P. At issue was whether U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit erred in holding that a failure to make a disclosure required under Item 303 of SEC Regulation S-K can support a private claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, even in the absence of an otherwise misleading statement.

Join us to hear Prof. Adam Pritchard break down the decision and its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
Prof. Adam Pritchard, Frances and George Skestos Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School

On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Pulsifer v. United States. The Supreme Court considered an Eighth Circuit case that raised the question: "Must a defendant show he does not meet any of the criteria listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) to qualify for a sentence lower than the statutory minimum?" At issue was the meaning of the word "and" in the statute, and whether text and context required "and" in this case be read as "and" to mean "or".

Join us to hear Vikrant Reddy break down the decision and offer his criticism of the Court's reasoning and ruling.


Featuring:
Mr. Vikrant Reddy, Senior Fellow, Stand Together Trust

On February 28, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Garland v. Cargill. The Court considered whether bump stocks are considered "machineguns" as defined by Title 26 of the United States Code.

Please join us as we break down and analyze how oral argument went before the Court.

Featuring:
Stephen Halbrook, Senior Fellow, Independent Institute
(Moderator) Robert Leider, Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School

On March 4, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Trump v. Anderson. At issue was whether the Colorado Supreme Court erred in ordering former President Donald Trump excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ballot; the Court held that Colorado did err in excluding Trump from the ballot.

Join us to hear Professor Muller break down the decision and offer his criticism of the Court's reasoning and ruling.


Featuring:
Prof. Derek Muller, Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School