This episode currently has no reviews.
Submit ReviewThe October sitting has ended—and we’re here to wrap it up for you. On this episode, we begin by discussing the biggest news of the month: our new microphones, brought to you courtesy of our Patreon supporters. We also break down the December argument calendar (warrantless location tracking, cake-as-speech, federalism, and gambling) as well as the Court’s long-awaited disposition of the travel-ban case.
We’re also joined this week by Nina Totenberg, who talked with us about how the first month looked from her (very nice) seat in the courtroom. Justice Gorsuch’s manner at oral argument: discussed. The reaction of the “reasonable party-goer” to marijuana: discussed. The extent to which the background of the Court’s members creates a pro- or anti-“corporate” tilt: also discussed.
Last week, the Court heard oral argument in Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLC, a major case about human-rights litigation and the Alien Tort Statute, and we discuss how the argument went in some detail. The Court also heard argument in a case about the extent to which a time limit in a rule of appellate procedure is jurisdictional, and (ever on-brand) we discuss that case in nearly equal detail. Finally, we wrap things up with some listener hotline calls, including the whether and what liberals put on their steak.
First Mondays is brought to you this week by Ironclad—our favorite software suite for corporate legal teams, which streamlines contract creation, signing, and tracking. Check them out at https://ironcladapp.com/.
This episode currently has no reviews.
Submit ReviewThis episode could use a review! Have anything to say about it? Share your thoughts using the button below.
Submit Review