Campus protests highlight free speech limitations, police aggression, and community support. Discussion on anti-Semitism, humor in jail, and activist motivations. Podcast delves into nuances of First Amendment and challenges in maintaining protest safety.

Exploring the landmark case of Hans v. Louisiana, this podcast discusses the limits citizens face in suing their state in federal court. It delves into the implications of the 11th Amendment and state sovereign immunity, as well as the political dynamics of a case involving Louisiana bonds. The podcast also highlights the impact of Supreme Court cases on state sovereignty and individual rights, emphasizing the challenges of holding states accountable for constitutional violations.

Guest Sonia Sotomayor discusses calls for her retirement and the impact on Supreme Court balance. Topics include controversy, comparisons to past events, critiques of a music festival, and implications of Sotomayor's retirement ahead of election year.

Exploring the legal implications of providing support to designated terrorist organizations under material support laws and the challenge to the constitutionality of such statutes. Delving into dissenting opinions on political speech and First Amendment protection. Examining the complexities of training individuals in human rights law and its ties to national security concerns. Reflecting on systemic injustices in international law and the Supreme Court's decisions on the foreign terrorist organization list.

The podcast discusses Texas passing a law to police the US-Mexico border, challenging federal policy. It delves into the conflict between state and federal powers, exploring the implications of criminalizing presence in the US illegally and escalating border patrol encounters.

Exploring the complexities of insanity defense in the legal system, United States v. Jones highlights the indefinite commitment for pleading not guilty by reason of insanity. The case of Michael Jones sheds light on involuntary commitments, historical evolution of the insanity defense, and the intersection of mental health and the legal system. Critiques on punitive mental health interventions and upcoming episode on right-wing resistance to the Supreme Court add depth to the insightful discussion.

Exploring the legality and ethics of using drug-sniffing dogs in routine traffic stops, the podcast delves into Fourth Amendment rights, privacy concerns, and the fallibility of dog sniffs. Justices dissent on the broad scope of investigations, highlighting the erosion of privacy rights and flawed assumptions guiding their use. The discussion raises questions about the reliability of dog sniffs, probable cause, and the blurred lines between searches and privacy rights.

The podcast discusses Trump's legal battles to stay on the Colorado ballot, critiquing the Supreme Court's decision. Topics include Justice Amy Coney Barrett's concurrence, dissent from liberal justices, and the lack of consequences for insurrectionist actions. The episode concludes with banter with guest Jay Willis and promotions for social media and Patreon.

The legal academy is losing its mind. Good news for us, the profs are talking about their broken brains in the New York Times. Today on the show, Peter, Rhiannon, and Michael discuss “The Crisis in Teaching Constitutional Law” by Jesse Wegman to snark on the state of legal education.If you're not a 5-4 Premium member, you're not hearing every episode! To get exclusive Premium-only episodes, access to our Slack community, and more, join at fivefourpod.com/support.5-4 is presented by Prologue Projects. Benjamin Frisch is our producer for this episode. Leon Neyfakh and Andrew Parsons provide editorial support. Our researcher is Jonathan DeBruin, and our website was designed by Peter Murphy. Our artwork is by Teddy Blanks at Chips NY, and our theme song is by Spatial Relations.Follow the show at @fivefourpod on most platforms. On Twitter, find Peter @The_Law_Boy and Rhiannon @AywaRhiannon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Exploring the complexities of presidential immunity, the podcast discusses legal challenges in suing a sitting president and the lack of clear precedents. It delves into an unusual court settlement between President Nixon and Mr. Fitzgerald, with a side bet on the Supreme Court's ruling. The debate on presidential immunity, holding presidents accountable for their actions, and the implications on legal proceedings involving former presidents are also discussed.