Short Circuit

In 1842, the city of New Orleans prosecuted Father Bernard Permoli, a Catholic priest, for conducting an open casket funeral. A violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment? The Supreme Court said no: The protections in the Bill of Rights did not bind state and local governments. Then in 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment is ratified, and it incorporated the Bill of Rights against the states–or did it? On this episode, the failure of incorporation after Reconstruction.

Experts discuss the Auer deference and Administrative Procedures Act, the complexities of the Kaiser deference and its impact on Chevron deference, constitutional and administrative law issues surrounding the census case, Supreme Court's decision on the citizenship question in the US census, interpretation of the Federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, parallels between partisan gerrymandering and non-delegation doctrine.

Scott and Adrian discuss three important cases on qualified immunity and municipal liability, including a case where a homeless man lost due to lack of clearly established law. The disagreement between panels on qualified immunity is highlighted, along with the complexities of applying excessive force and accidental shootings. The case of prison inmates suing a guard for sexual assault and the dissenting opinion on municipal liability are also explored.

The podcast explores cases involving police non-disparagement and settlement money, discusses a case on religious discrimination in government meetings, examines deposition testimony and Trump's use of Twitter violating the First Amendment, and delves into the debate of whether Trump's Twitter account should be considered a government-created public forum.

The podcast discusses the importance of access to judicial records in the Jeffrey Epstein case, the court's role in document review, and the government's speech on flag flying. They explore the concept of government speech and unsettled questions about license plates. The panel debates the required disclosure of cell phone dangers and the lack of evidence supporting it.

Before the government can take away your life, liberty, or property, it must first give you due process: fair and meaningful procedure. On this episode, we trace the history of due process from 1215 to today. And we head to Harris County, Texas, which operates the the third-largest jail in the country, to see why federal courts say its system of money bail violated that ancient guarantee.

Discussion on a Supreme Court case on First Amendment retaliation and the implications for excessive noise charges. Examining the suspension of driver's licenses for unpaid traffic fines and the arguments made. Exploring the debate on the tension between incarceration and other restrictions on liberty. Discussing the legal implications of using secret cameras for surveillance without a warrant.

Tacy Flint, Will Baude, and Jim Pfander discuss topics such as the composition of the Seventh Circuit, working with Judge Posner, executive officers' influence on judicial decisions, challenges in proving deliberate indifference, and the relationship between municipalities and states.

After the Civil War, what many Americans needed most was protection from violence. That’s what the Equal Protection Clause was meant to guarantee, but today the Clause does entirely different work. On this episode: a tour of the history and meaning of the Clause and how African-style hair braiders use it today to protect their right to earn an honest living. For more resources: https://ij.org/sc_long_podcast/episode-5-tangled-the-equal-protection-clause/

Attorneys discuss a recent court case involving excessive fines. Qualified immunity and alleged police theft addressed, criticizing courts for lack of clarity. Discussion on the Fourth Amendment and civil forfeiture, including difficulties faced by individuals reclaiming seized property. Debate over a law criminalizing fetal tissue transfer and its impact on Alzheimer's research. Frustration expressed over courts' avoidance of difficult decisions and predictions for further litigation.