Short Circuit

Insurance expert Ben Field tells a harrowing story of a church dealing with acts of God and insurance claims. The podcast also explores the rivalry between Harvard and Yale regarding contract interpretation. Additionally, it discusses a First Amendment challenge to a Louisiana statute by Tofurky, which could impact the veggie burger industry.

A panel discusses the State of Minnesota's attempt to take insulin without compensation, exploring the Eighth Circuit's view on just compensation. They also discuss a case involving a speedy trial delay and analyze factors considered in speedy trial violations.

Experts discuss the history of school choice, address objections, and explore litigation in the expansion of school choice programs. Supreme Court cases, including Zelman and Espinoza, are highlighted. The importance of parental choice for all parents, the impact on public education, and the compatibility with the establishment clause are examined. The reasons behind the rise of school choice programs and the ongoing fight for empowerment of parents are discussed.

The podcast discusses a time travel-themed court case involving property rights and an en banc motion denial. It also explores a takings claim against the State of Texas and the implications for property owners. Additionally, the hosts talk about an idol sold on the New York art market with uncertain provenance.

Podcast explores crime-free rental ordinances that can lead to eviction of innocent people. Discussion on the arbitrary and discriminatory nature of these laws. Highlights the history and evolution of crime-free housing ordinances. Examines the regulation of public property and challenges in local government lawmaking. Explores the implications of landlords being forced to evict tenants by the government. Discusses the impact of these laws on vulnerable communities. Emphasizes the need to examine municipal codes and constitutional protections.

In this podcast, the hosts discuss a Fourth Circuit opinion about a vague law that makes it illegal to be obnoxious. They also explore administrative law and the First Amendment in a Fifth Circuit tour. The unique selection mechanism for circuit court clerks is discussed, along with the origin of the word 'seconded.' The hosts reflect on their performance in a trivia quiz and share experiences with secundment and eviction defense. They also delve into the vagueness and overreach of South Carolina's school disciplinary laws, and analyze a court case regarding the regulation of charter boating in the fishing industry.

In this episode, the podcast discusses Professor Joanna Schwartz's book 'Shielded' and explores procedural barriers to civil rights lawsuits. They delve into four cases that highlight the difficulties in holding law enforcement accountable. The concept of qualified immunity is examined extensively, along with its impact on dismissing cases involving constitutional violations. The limitations of Bivens actions and state common law remedies are discussed, as well as a case involving strip search allegations and federal law enforcement's interaction with state and local agencies.

Law students at SMU are treated to a discussion covering cases on the Second Amendment, premature bankruptcy, vaping regulation, and qualified immunity. The panel, consisting of Texas lawyers Zack Faircloth, Will Langley, and Don Tittle, dive into the constitutional implications of gun possession restrictions, bankruptcy procedures, the irony of financial distress, and FDA regulations on vaping companies. Rick and Morty fans will find this episode particularly intriguing.

Scott Lincicome, economist and senior fellow at the Cato Institute, discusses the dumbest steel tariffs upheld by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, explores national security issues and the making of tariff sausage. Andrew Ward of IJ shares a wild story involving a shed fire, a sketchy warrant, and the fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine. The podcast ends with Scott's top-5 list.

In this podcast, the hosts discuss recent court cases involving rent control laws and livestreaming police encounters. They explore the conflicts between constitutional rights and qualified immunity. The complexities of regulatory takings and the lack of clarity in protecting property rights are also highlighted. The significance of a clear roadmap in legal opinions and the importance of transparency in police activities are emphasized.