Divided Argument Byzantine Wall
9 snips
Sep 11, 2025 The discussion kicks off with a humorous look at the latest Supreme Court rulings, emphasizing the podcast's dedication to ongoing dialogue. The hosts dive into the complexities of judicial dockets and recent legal battles over research grants. They analyze the implications of rulings during the Trump era and the shadow docket's impact on constitutional law. Immigration raids spark a conversation on racial profiling and civil rights. Justice Kavanaugh's views on executive power raise eyebrows, particularly regarding immigration policies and the rule of law.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Split Relief Forces Two-Track Litigation
- The Supreme Court split relief in NIH v. APHA: it allowed vacatur of grant terminations to go to the Court of Federal Claims while letting district courts enjoin NIH guidance.
- This forces two-track litigation and uncertain preclusion effects for grant recipients.
Tucker Act Creates Sequential Litigation Risk
- 28 U.S.C. §1500 may bar simultaneous suits in district court and Court of Federal Claims when facts substantially overlap.
- Plaintiffs may need sequential suits and face uncertain preclusion and estoppel outcomes.
Shadow Docket Can Create Binding Precedent
- Justice Gorsuch warned that even interim (shadow) docket rulings carry precedential weight and lower courts must follow them.
- The warning sparked controversy about whether rapid emergency orders should bind district courts without full opinions.