The auto ad tehcnology is what makes the 4 episode a week schedule possible. However, it's also something that I have no control over. There seems to be some issue on the server side. The episode was cut off at the place where the second ad slot was supposed to go. There is absolutely nothing I can do beyond submitting a support ticket, which I have. Apologies for this. As always, the patron feed has no ads and therefore this episode was obviously fine over there. In the meantime, I'm just releasing it without ads so that people can still listen. We'll give up ad revenue for this one, no big deal!
Thanks for your understanding and sorry for the inconvenience!
Yikes... We're once again joined by the great Liz Dye! This time, she's here to breakdown the absolute shellacking Dershowitz and co. recieved for being horrible lying pieces of sh!t and terrible lawyers. They're not sending their best!
On November 7, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Michelle Cochran v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. In April 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) brought an enforcement action against Michelle Cochran, a certified public accountant, alleging that she had failed to comply with federal auditing standards. A SEC administrative law judge (ALJ) determined Cochran had violated federal law, fined her $22,500, and banned her from practicing before the SEC for five years. The SEC adopted the ALJ’s decision, and Cochran objected.
Before the SEC could rule on Cochran’s objection, the Supreme Court decided Lucia v. SEC, in which it held that SEC ALJs are officers of the United States under the Appointments Clause, who must be appointed by the President, a court of law, or a department head. In response to the Lucia ruling, the SEC remanded all pending administrative cases for new proceedings before constitutionally appointed ALJs, including Cochran’s.
Cochran filed a federal lawsuit arguing that while Lucia may have addressed one constitutional issue with ALJs, it left uncorrected another problem: because SEC ALJs enjoy multiple layers of "for-cause" removal protection, they are unconstitutionally insulated from the President's Article II removal power. The district court dismissed her case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction based on five circuit courts of appeal ruling that the Exchange Act implicitly stripped district courts of the jurisdiction to hear challenges to ongoing SEC enforcement proceedings. Arguing that in 2010, the Supreme Court had unanimously ruled in Free Enterprise Fund that nothing in the Exchange Act stripped federal court jurisdiction either explicitly, or implicitly, Cochran appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. A three judge panel affirmed the dismissal 2-1, but later, the Fifth Circuit sitting en banc, reversed 9-7, holding that Cochran had district court jurisdiction to bring her challenge to the SEC ALJ’s removal protections.
Amarica’s Constitution is invited to Yale Law School by the YLS chapter of the Federalist Society for a live podcast, and Yale cooperates by choosing this day to withdraw from the US News rankings of Law Schools. Naturally, we take that on, and it is the law students themselves that serve as our guests for a lively discussion. Beyond this issue, however, we take a look inside this iconic Law School, and we see what it’s like for the FedSoc members - perhaps outside of YLS’ ideological mainstream, but as you will hear, an impressive and thoughtful lot. Many of you will emerge from this listen with a sense that a valuable discourse can be had with them - and we can all agree that our nation needs more of that. Or so one would think - but does Yale Law School concur?
Everyone's favorite 1st Amendment understander Devin Nunes has sued cow after twitter cow and it obviously has all gone nowhere. BUT, his defamation lawsuit against Rachel Maddow has survived a motion to dismiss... So... HOW?!?! Is this a big deal? What happened? Did Maddow f up? Andrew T's got the full breakdown!
Melissa and Kate recap oral arguments in a couple of cases that could limit the reach of federal fraud statutes, plus an immigration case out of Texas. And of course, there's the latest story out of the New York Times, spilling the tea on a years-long effort by conservative activists to ingratiate themselves with Supreme Court justices.
On December 6th, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Moore v. Harper, a case about the independent state legislature idea/thingamajig/fantasy. We've covered it extensively, so catch up on previous episodes before the chaos is unleashed on Wednesday.
HUGE reminder that it’s run-off time in Georgia. Early voting started Monday, November 28th for the December 6th election. That’s TOMORROW. If you're a Georgia voter, head over to votesaveamerica.com to make your plan.And if you want to help out no matter where you live, you can donate and find remote and in-person volunteer opportunities to make sure the Warnock campaign has the resources it needs.51 senators means the difference between a true majority, or being faced with another 2 years of roadblocks like problem children Kyrsten Sinema & Joe Manchin. Make sure that every Georgia voter can make their voice heard again at votesaveamerica.com.
Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025!
Wow it's almost like there really was an armed coup on January 6th on our nation's Capital. Stewart Rhodes and Kelly Megs have been found guilty of sedition. But when it comes to their sentencing... it's actually not very clear how much time they will do. That's because there really isn't much precedent for this. Andrew has the breakdown! Before that, though, we have a follow-up on the music episode. We share further thoughts inspired by some of the response we got. And we got a lot...
When Christian conservatives lost in Masterpiece Cake Shop back in 2018, they regrouped and picked up the trail of breadcrumbs from Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissent that suggested a freedom of speech approach. Next week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in 303 Creative v Elenis - another case that takes aim at Colorado’s anti discrimination laws. This time, arguments about whether a website designer has the right to advertise that she will not design websites for same-sex weddings, will be focused on freedom of speech. But as this week’s guest, Hila Keren, argues, excluding people from the marketplace and humiliating them in the process is not a matter of free speech, and it is a matter progressives have been largely silent about. Together, Dahlia Lithwick and Professor Keren dig deep into a case that hasn’t been given the attention its potential wide-ranging consequences demand.
In this week’s Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Mark Joseph Stern to talk about another big case - this past week’s arguments in US v Texas, including brazen judge-shopping, nationwide injunction-slapping, and President Biden’s immigration policy. Then Mark explains exactly what is - and isn’t - in the same sex marriage bill that’s making its way to President Biden’s desk.
Want a behind-the-scenes look at how we create the show? Check out Slate's Pocket Collections for research and reading lists, as well as additional insights into how we think about the stories behind the episodes.
It's a bit of a good news show! The Respect for Marriage Act has passed the Senate! Justice Alito was ratted out by a Rev. Schenck. And, the 11th Circuit delivered a whopper of a decision putting an end to the Judge Cannon Naro Lago nonsense.
On October 31, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court heard Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College (and Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. University of North Carolina).
In perhaps the most anticipated case of this term, the court considers a challenge to the use of racially preferential undergraduate student admissions practices at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina.
Tune in to hear our experts break down the oral argument.
Featuring: Prof. Amanda Shanor, Assistant Professor of Legal Studies & Business Ethics, The Wharton School Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity Moderator: Curt Levey, President, Committee for Justice
