The hosts discuss a tax case and bankruptcy case, as well as an abortion-related case in Texas. They delve into the implications of the 16th Amendment on income taxes and challenge the solicitor general's argument. They also explore the bankruptcy settlement plan for Purdue Pharma and the liability of the Sackler family. Additionally, they examine workplace discrimination, Justice Thomas' stance, expanding religious liberty, and criticize originalism and judicial restraint.
Read more
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
auto_awesome
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
The bankruptcy settlement between Purdue Pharma and the federal government could set a precedent for wealthy individuals to avoid personal liability through bankruptcy, impacting future bankruptcy cases.
The Supreme Court is considering whether the tax code provision requiring shareholders to pay a one-time tax on unrealized wealth is constitutional, which could have broader implications for the definition and taxation of income.
The legal battle over a Texas woman's right to terminate a non-viable pregnancy highlights the challenges faced by women seeking reproductive healthcare in restrictive abortion regimes and could have significant consequences for reproductive rights in Texas and beyond.
Deep dives
The Bankruptcy Settlement between Purdue Pharma and the Federal Government
This podcast episode discusses the bankruptcy settlement between Purdue Pharma and the federal government. The settlement involves the release of the Sackler family, who owned the company, from any liability related to the marketing of OxyContin and the opioid crisis. The federal government argues that the court does not have the authority to release individual members of the Sackler family from liability since they are not themselves declaring bankruptcy. The settlement plan is popular among claimants, but the federal government is concerned that it could set a precedent for wealthy individuals to escape liability by withdrawing funds from a company and then using bankruptcy to avoid personal liability. The Supreme Court is considering whether the bankruptcy code gave the court authority to approve this plan. The outcome of the case could have implications for future bankruptcy cases related to personal liability and mass tort litigation.
The Implications of Realized Income in Taxation
This podcast episode explores a case centered around the concept of realized income in taxation. The case involves a challenge to a provision in the tax code that requires shareholders who own at least 10% of a US taxpayer controlled foreign corporation to pay a one-time tax on their share of the corporation's income. The challenge argues that this tax on unrealized wealth is not authorized by the 16th Amendment, which grants Congress the power to tax incomes. The Supreme Court is tasked with determining whether the tax is constitutional and whether the concept of realized income should include unrealized wealth. This case has potential implications for the broader tax code and the way income is defined and taxed.
The Battle Over a Texas Woman's Right to Terminate a Non-Viable Pregnancy
In this podcast episode, the ongoing legal battle over a Texas woman's right to terminate a non-viable pregnancy is discussed. The woman, Kate Cox, has a wanted pregnancy with severe abnormalities that threaten her health and future fertility. While Texas officials have been trying to force her to remain pregnant against the advice of her doctors, Cox and her physician have sought legal relief, leading to a temporary restraining order being granted by a trial court. However, the Texas Attorney General has threatened hospitals and healthcare providers involved in the case, and the Texas Supreme Court has issued an administrative stay, effectively keeping Cox from terminating her pregnancy. The case highlights the challenges faced by women seeking reproductive healthcare in restrictive abortion regimes. The outcome of this legal battle could have significant consequences for reproductive rights in Texas and beyond.
Overview of a Holiday Gifting Dilemma and the Solution Offered by Real Paper
This podcast episode focuses on an issue with traditional holiday gifting and offers an alternative solution. It highlights the environmental and practical drawbacks of giving coal as a gift and suggests a more sustainable and practical option: premium, sustainable bamboo toilet paper from Real Paper. The episode emphasizes the positive environmental impact of choosing bamboo toilet paper over traditional tree-based options and mentions the convenience of subscribing to Real Paper for easy and hassle-free delivery. Listeners are encouraged to visit the Real Paper website to learn more and take advantage of a special offer provided through the podcast.
Justices focus on equities in opioid case
In a recent podcast episode, the justices in a Supreme Court case concerning opioids displayed a notable emphasis on the equity and fairness aspects of the case. The justices discussed the possibility of allowing the release of non-parties in some cases, while acknowledging the particular circumstances of this case where the assets in question had come from the company involved. Neil Gorsuch offered a different perspective based on a case from the 1600s, but was met with criticism for not considering the modern bankruptcy code. Despite concerns about immunizing private parties, it is predicted that most of the justices will approve the plan in this unique situation.
Title VII case prompts debate on workplace DEI efforts
A recent argument heard by the Supreme Court in the Mildrow v. City of St. Louis case raised questions about what constitutes unlawful employment discrimination under Title VII. The plaintiff argued that the requirement to show adversity as a result of a job transfer does not align with the intended purpose of the law, while both civil rights advocates and opponents of workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts rallied behind the petitioner. The case has the potential to impact challenges to workplace DEI initiatives and could open the door to increased claims based on reverse discrimination. The argument also led to a broader discussion about affirmative action in the workplace.
Melissa, Kate, and Leah recap arguments in a big tax case, Moore v. United States, and a bankruptcy case involving Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family. Plus, we have a breaking (and heart-breaking) update on an abortion-related case out of Texas.
