SCOTUScast

On February 28, 2023, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Delaware v. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The issue at hand was a dispute over whether uncashed MoneyGrams qualify as “a money order, traveler’s check, or other similar written instrument (other than a third party bank check) on which a banking or financial organization or a business association is directly liable,” pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 2503, and therefore whether they should be escheated to the debtor's or creditor's state.Join us to hear Prof. Adam MacLeod unpack the decision's reasoning and discuss its jurisprudential impacts going forward.Featuring:Adam Macleod, Professor of Law, Faulkner University Thomas Goode Jones School of Law

On April 18, 2023, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in New York v. New Jersey. The issue at hand is New Jersey's right to withdraw unilaterally from the 1953 Waterfront Commission Compact (with New York), in the face of opposition from New York.Tune in to hear Prof. Daniel Barnhizer, a contracts scholar and professor at Michigan State University College of Law, break down the background of the case, the reasoning behind the 9-0 vote, and the decision's implications.

On March 28, 2023, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Wilkins v. United States. The issue at hand is the Quiet Title Act's statute of limitations.Tune in to hear Prof. Ilya Somin, a scholar of constitutional law, federalism, and property law from the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, break down the vote and the decision's implications.

On April 24, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Coughlin. At issue is whether the Bankruptcy Code abrogates tribal sovereign immunity. Join us to hear from Prof. Tom Gede as he breaks down the case.

On March 29, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Polselli v. Internal Revenue Service. At issue is how much authority the IRS has (balanced against privacy rights) to seek records from third-party recordkeepers when it thinks such documents would help it collect a delinquent taxpayer’s payment.Join us to hear from Prof. David Schizer as he breaks down the case, argument, and potential implications.

On March 28, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Smith v. United States. At issue is a circuit split over the proper remedy for the government’s failure to prove venue: acquittal barring re-prosecution of the offense, or allowing the government to re-try the defendant for the same offense in a different venue.Join us to hear from Prof. Brian Kalt as he breaks down the case and argument.

On March 21, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski. At issue is district court jurisdiction to proceed with litigation pending appeal (of the denial of a motion to compel arbitration) in arbitration cases under the Federal Arbitration Act.Join us to hear from Dr. Tamar Meshel as she breaks down the case and argument.

On March 20, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the consolodated cases of Arizona v. Navajo Nation and Dep. of Interior v. Navajo Nation. At issue is whether the federal government has an affirmative duty to the Navajo Nation to assess and provide for the Nation's water needs from particular sources, given that such a duty was not expressly established in past treaties between the federal government and the Nation. Join us to hear from Prof. Tom Gede as he breaks down the case.

On February 28, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases challenging the Biden Administration's student loans forgiveness program: Board of Education v. Brown and Biden v. Nebraska. In August 2022, the Biden Administration's Department of Education announced plans to forgive up to $20,000 in federal student loans for borrowers who qualified. In order to do this, the DOE relied on the HEROES Act, which allows the government to modify student loans, among other things, during a national emergency.Both cases challenge this action. Biden v. Nebraska involves a challenge to the Executive action from six states who contend they will suffer direct harm based on a loss of tax revenue. In Department of Education v. Brown, two individual borrowers, one of whom has loans that are fully intelligible for forgiveness under the program, and one of whose loans only qualify for part of the maximum relief possible, also challenge the legitimacy of the program. The Court is faced with two questions in both cases: first, do the challengers, whether they be the states or the individual borrowers, have standing to sue? The Biden administration contends neither of the respondents possess standing. Second, assuming the Court decides there is standing to sue, the Court will face the question “Does the plan exceed the statutory authority available to the Secretary of Education, and adopted in a procedurally proper manner?”We will break down and analyze how oral argument went in both cases in this program.Featuring:Mark Chenoweth, President and General Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance

On February 27, 2023, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in Dubin v. United States. At issue in the case is whether, when using (reciting, mentioning, or employing) someone else’s' name or identifying information in the committing a predicate offense, one also commits aggravated identity theft.Petitioner David Dubin was convicted of healthcare fraud for submitting a factually inaccurate reimbursement claim to Medicaid that mischaracterized the nature of the provider, the time spent on the testing in question, and the date of the test. Additionally, because he used the name and identifying information of a real patient, Dubin was also convicted of one count of aggravated identity theft. Both the district court and the Fifth Circuit upheld the convictions on appeal.Dubin claims that the Fifth Circuit’s decision, if upheld, has massive and undesirable implications for a spectrum of other white collar crimes.Join us as we break down and analyze how oral argument went before the Court. Featuring:John C. Richter, Partner, King & Spalding