Rejection of Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness plan suggests Supreme Court conservatives are going to be more comfortable with second-guessing federal agency determinations even when they fall within a federal statute.UCLA law professor Adam Winkler joins Cases and Controversies to discuss what he's calling the "supersized" Major Questions Doctrine, the high court-made principle that's risen in recent terms and was the reasoning behind the 6-3 ruling in Biden v. Nebraska.Podcast hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler take listeners beyond the headlines of the biggest opinions of the term. They also look ahead to the one starting in October which Winkler says is shaping up as another with blockbuster potential on guns and the SEC to start with.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Rejection of Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness plan suggests Supreme Court conservatives are going to be more comfortable with second-guessing federal agency determinations even when they fall within a federal statute.UCLA law professor Adam Winkler joins Cases and Controversies to discuss what he's calling the "supersized" Major Questions Doctrine, the high court-made principle that's risen in recent terms and was the reasoning behind the 6-3 ruling in Biden v. Nebraska.Podcast hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler take listeners beyond the headlines of the biggest opinions of the term. They also look ahead to the one starting in October which Winkler says is shaping up as another with blockbuster potential on guns and the SEC to start with.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Supreme Court ‘Supersized’ Major Questions Doctrine

Conservative justices asserted themselves in a big way in the final days of the Supreme Court term.The six Republican-appointed justices joined together in striking down affirmative action, rejecting Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, and supporting religious liberty in a setback for LGBTQ rights.While the end of this term for argued cases wasn’t as explosive as a year ago when the court handed conservatives landmark victories on abortion and guns, the final flurry of decisions still packed plenty of drama, especially tension in written opinions and readings from the bench.In the newest episode of Cases and Controversies, hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler take listeners behind the scenes to break down the biggest decisions, notable moments, and update listeners on some newly granted cases for next term.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Conservative justices asserted themselves in a big way in the final days of the Supreme Court term.The six Republican-appointed justices joined together in striking down affirmative action, rejecting Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, and supporting religious liberty in a setback for LGBTQ rights.While the end of this term for argued cases wasn’t as explosive as a year ago when the court handed conservatives landmark victories on abortion and guns, the final flurry of decisions still packed plenty of drama, especially tension in written opinions and readings from the bench.In the newest episode of Cases and Controversies, hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler take listeners behind the scenes to break down the biggest decisions, notable moments, and update listeners on some newly granted cases for next term.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Supreme Court Wraps Up With Conservative Trifecta on Big Cases

The Supreme Court heads into the final week of the term for argued cases with a flurry of opinions on tap, including what could be a blockbuster on affirmative action in higher education and the fate of Joe Biden’s student loan relief plan.Ten 10 cases remain with work expected to be wrapped up by June 30.Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr take listeners down the homestretch and behind the scenes of what court watchers might expect and whether surprises are in store.They also break down the opinions most recently handed down. That includes Friday’s decision clearing the way for the Biden administration to shift immigration enforcement priorities to focus on people who recently crossed the border or are a threat to public safety.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

The Supreme Court heads into the final week of the term for argued cases with a flurry of opinions on tap, including what could be a blockbuster on affirmative action in higher education and the fate of Joe Biden’s student loan relief plan.Ten 10 cases remain with work expected to be wrapped up by June 30.Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr take listeners down the homestretch and behind the scenes of what court watchers might expect and whether surprises are in store.They also break down the opinions most recently handed down. That includes Friday’s decision clearing the way for the Biden administration to shift immigration enforcement priorities to focus on people who recently crossed the border or are a threat to public safety.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Biggest Cases Loom as Supreme Court Hits Homestretch

In upholding a landmark measure meant to keep adopted American-Indian children with tribal families, the Supreme Court again declined to embrace a colorblind view of federal law.The conservative argument that race should almost never be a factor in setting and interpreting federal law hasn’t fared well this term. But that could change with decisions pending in challenges to affirmative action at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.In a 7-2 ruling on Thursday in Haaland v. Brackeen that kept in place the decades-old Indian Child Welfare Act, the justices dismissed race-related claims on technical grounds.And the color-blind arguments were explicitly rejected in the justices’ surprise ruling June 8 in Allen v. Milligan. The 7-2 court there said claims under the Voting Rights Act didn’t have to be “race-neutral.”But Cases and Controversies host Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler explain why the outcome could be different the affirmative action cases, which the court is expected to hand down before the end of June.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

In upholding a landmark measure meant to keep adopted American-Indian children with tribal families, the Supreme Court again declined to embrace a colorblind view of federal law.The conservative argument that race should almost never be a factor in setting and interpreting federal law hasn’t fared well this term. But that could change with decisions pending in challenges to affirmative action at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.In a 7-2 ruling on Thursday in Haaland v. Brackeen that kept in place the decades-old Indian Child Welfare Act, the justices dismissed race-related claims on technical grounds.And the color-blind arguments were explicitly rejected in the justices’ <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/justices-surprise-by-refusing-to-remake-voting-rights-podcast" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">surprise</a> ruling June 8 in Allen v. Milligan. The 7-2 court there said claims under the Voting Rights Act didn’t have to be “race-neutral.”But Cases and Controversies host Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler explain why the outcome could be different the affirmative action cases, which the court is expected to hand down before the end of June.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Tribal Adoption Law Survives Colorblind Challenge

The Supreme Court declined to make it harder to bring racial challenges to voting rules, shocking court watchers who expected the majority conservative court to make major changes to the law.Goodwin's William Jay joins Cases and Controversies to discuss the reasons why Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh refused to go along with their conservative colleagues, and what, if anything, it might signal about the upcoming affirmative action cases. Along with co-hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler, Jay also discusses two IP cases in front of the justices—one a trademark dispute decided by the justices Thursday and the other a case to be heard next term involving a phrase that alludes to the size of former President Trump's hands.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

The Supreme Court declined to make it harder to bring racial challenges to voting rules, shocking court watchers who expected the majority conservative court to make major changes to the law.Goodwin's William Jay joins Cases and Controversies to discuss the reasons why Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh refused to go along with their conservative colleagues, and what, if anything, it might signal about the upcoming affirmative action cases. Along with co-hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler, Jay also discusses two IP cases in front of the justices—one a trademark dispute decided by the justices Thursday and the other a case to be heard next term involving a phrase that alludes to the size of former President Trump's hands.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Justices Surprise by Refusing to Remake Voting Rights

Ketanji Brown Jackson continues to draw notice on the Supreme Court, this time writing the first solo dissent from a first-term justice since Clarence Thomas in 1991.Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr discuss Jackson’s dissent in the labor case, and how she’s handled herself since joining the court in October. They’ll also analyze some of the 27 cases still outstanding with the term nearing an end, and how a few of the big ones might play out.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Ketanji Brown Jackson continues to draw notice on the Supreme Court, this time writing the first solo dissent from a first-term justice since Clarence Thomas in 1991.Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr discuss Jackson’s dissent in the labor case, and how she’s handled herself since joining the court in October. They’ll also analyze some of the 27 cases still outstanding with the term nearing an end, and how a few of the big ones might play out.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

New Jackson Milestone as Supreme Court Term Nears End

· Court clips EPA authority over clean water· Chides local government on home seizureAlthough Supreme Court justices were unanimous in backing landowners in a Big EPA case, their reasoning in the latest check on administrative authority shows there is still deep division.Styled as a concurrence, Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s opinion in Sackett v. EPA on how to determine whether the agency can regulate certain bodies of water read more like a dissent. Joined by the three liberal justices, Kavanaugh accused the five other conservatives of creating a test that is “overly narrow and inconsistent with the Act’s coverage of adjacent wetlands.”The progressive-leaning Constitutional Accountability Center’s Miriam Becker-Cohen joins “Cases and Controversies” to discuss that case and the other May 25 rulings.Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Greg StohrGuest: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Constitutional Accountability CenterProducer: Matthew S. Schwartz

· Court clips EPA authority over clean water· Chides local government on home seizure Although Supreme Court justices were unanimous in backing landowners in a Big EPA case, their reasoning in the latest check on administrative authority shows there is still deep division.Styled as a concurrence, Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s opinion in Sackett v. EPA on how to determine whether the agency can regulate certain bodies of water read more like a dissent. Joined by the three liberal justices, Kavanaugh accused the five other conservatives of creating a test that is “overly narrow and inconsistent with the Act’s coverage of adjacent wetlands.”The progressive-leaning Constitutional Accountability Center’s Miriam Becker-Cohen joins “Cases and Controversies” to discuss that case and the other May 25 rulings.Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Greg StohrGuest: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Constitutional Accountability CenterProducer: Matthew S. Schwartz

Unanimity Doesn’t Mean Supreme Court Agrees Completely

 Jackson spoke significantly more than any other justice Was joined by other liberals as most talkative Ketanji Brown Jackson made her mark on US Supreme Court arguments like no other new justice in memory.Her historic confirmation as the first Black woman justice was followed by seven months of oral arguments in which she spoke almost twice as much as any other of her colleagues, according to Empirical SCOTUS’ Adam Feldman. Jackson so far has defied the norm of junior justices taking a back seat during their first few terms.Latham &amp; Watkins’ Roman Martinez joins the podcast to look at Jackson’s first term as well as what the future might hold.Co-hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler also breakdown the court’s most recent opinions, including a highly anticipated copyright case and a sigh of relief for social media companies.Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler﻿Guest: Roman Martinez, Latham &amp; WatkinsProducer: Matthew S. Schwartz

<ul> <li>Jackson spoke significantly more than any other justice</li> <li>Was joined by other liberals as most talkative</li> </ul> Ketanji Brown Jackson made her mark on US Supreme Court arguments like no other new justice in memory.Her historic confirmation as the first Black woman justice was followed by seven months of oral arguments in which she spoke almost twice as much as any other of her colleagues, according to Empirical SCOTUS’ Adam Feldman. Jackson so far has defied the norm of junior justices taking a back seat during their first few terms.Latham &amp; Watkins’ Roman Martinez joins the podcast to look at Jackson’s first term as well as what the future might hold.Co-hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler also breakdown the court’s most recent opinions, including a highly anticipated copyright case and a sigh of relief for social media companies.Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler﻿Guest: Roman Martinez, Latham &amp; WatkinsProducer: Matthew S. Schwartz

Jackson Breaks Mold for New Justices at Oral Argument

The Supreme Court kicked off opinion season with five rulings, leaving 39 more to get out before the term wraps up in June.Hosts Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr break down decisions covering immigration, public corruption, and state morality laws. Supreme Court veteran Daniel Geyser, of Haynes and Boone, also joins the podcast to look back on changes to high court arguments post-pandemic, including some sessions that now go way beyond the scheduled time.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

The Supreme Court kicked off opinion season with five rulings, leaving 39 more to get out before the term wraps up in June.Hosts Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr break down decisions covering immigration, public corruption, and state morality laws. Supreme Court veteran Daniel Geyser, of Haynes and Boone, also joins the podcast to look back on changes to high court arguments post-pandemic, including some sessions that now go way beyond the scheduled time.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

High Court Veteran Examines Changing Oral Arguments

The Supreme Court hasn’t released an opinion in weeks, but it did add a major case on May 1 to its docket looking at the power of administrative agencies.A dispute that started over a federal rule for companies fishing for herring off the Atlantic coast could wipe out a legal doctrine that tells courts they should defer to a federal agency’s interpretation when the law they’re administering is ambiguous.Jonathan Adler, who teaches administrative and constitutional law at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, joins Cases and Controversies to discuss how the court next term could narrow the Chevron doctrine without overruling it.Hosts Lydia Wheeler and Greg Stohr also update listeners on the latest report on Justice Clarence Thomas and ethics.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

The Supreme Court hasn’t released an opinion in weeks, but it did add a major case on May 1 to its docket looking at the power of administrative agencies.A dispute that started over a federal rule for companies fishing for herring off the Atlantic coast could wipe out a legal doctrine that tells courts they should defer to a federal agency’s interpretation when the law they’re administering is ambiguous.Jonathan Adler, who teaches administrative and constitutional law at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, joins Cases and Controversies to discuss how the court next term could narrow the Chevron doctrine without overruling it.Hosts Lydia Wheeler and Greg Stohr also update listeners on the latest report on Justice Clarence Thomas and ethics.Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Supreme Court Ethics, Agency Powers Draw Spotlight

Bloomberg Law's Cases and Controversies brings you the latest from the Supreme Court. Each week we preview oral arguments at the Court or feature in-depth interviews. We explore critical legal issues with Supreme Court advocates, judges, law professors, lawyers, and legal journalists. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr.

Love the dialogue and occasional input from guests. Perfect way to get your SCOTUS fill. Keep it up!

These guys are great!

Great podcast. Really enjoy incorporation of audio from oral arguments.

Great Podcast!

Cases and Controversies

It's time to count down everything from the best songs to the best memes to the best mince pies for the holidays.We want to do our part at Bloomberg Law. So we present this special "Supremely Funny" episode on the funniest high court moments of 2019. From Ruth Bader Ginsburg's damning admission that she doesn't read her cumbersome financial documents to Samuel Alito's late-night observations on the D.C. Metro, there's something for all court watchers.

It's time to count down everything from the best songs to the best memes to the best mince pies for the holidays.We want to do our part at Bloomberg Law. So we present this special "Supremely Funny" episode on the funniest high court moments of 2019. From Ruth Bader Ginsburg's damning admission that she doesn't read her cumbersome financial documents to Samuel Alito's late-night observations on the D.C. Metro, there's something for all court watchers.

Supremely Funny: 2019's Funniest High Court Moments

Four days of confirmation hearings for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh kick off Sept. 4.Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin discuss the likely focal points as the now-Judge gets grilled by Republican and Democratic senators on the Judiciary Committee. Expect to hear tough questions on abortion, presidential powers, and Kavanaugh's earlier testimony—made during his confirmation hearings for the D.C. Circuit—regarding enemy combatants.

Four days of confirmation hearings for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh kick off Sept. 4. Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin discuss the likely focal points as the now-Judge gets grilled by Republican and Democratic senators on the Judiciary Committee. Expect to hear tough questions on abortion, presidential powers, and Kavanaugh's earlier testimony—made during his confirmation hearings for the D.C. Circuit—regarding enemy combatants.

Kavanaugh Hearings: How to Watch

Just last week, the Trump administration broke the record for the most circuit court judges confirmed.Bloomberg Government Congressional reporter Nancy Ognanovich and Bloomberg Law legal editor Patrick Gregory join this Cases and Controversies podcast to discuss the administration's successes, its failures, and what's next for Trump Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.Enjoy!

Just last week, the Trump administration broke the record for the most circuit court judges confirmed. Bloomberg Government Congressional reporter Nancy Ognanovich and Bloomberg Law legal editor Patrick Gregory join this Cases and Controversies podcast to discuss the administration's successes, its failures, and what's next for Trump Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Enjoy!

Trump's Judicial Victory

This is your SCOTUS Sneak Peek of the cases in front of the justices the week of Jan. 14. For now, the high court is still open, and it will tackle cases about immunity on the Tennessee River, the government taking your property, and states regulating liquor sales. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

This is your SCOTUS Sneak Peek of the cases in front of the justices the week of Jan. 14. For now, the high court is still open, and it will tackle cases about immunity on the Tennessee River, the government taking your property, and states regulating liquor sales. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

Sneak Peek: Court Takes on a Case of Wine

The Supreme Court wrapped up its 2017 term on June 27, handing down a string of 5-4 decisions.Although the court won't be back in session until October, there's sure to be a lot of Supreme Court news, as the President and Senate move to fill the vacancy left by retiring longtime Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. Bloomberg Law's Supreme Court reporter Kimberly Robinson and criminal law reporter Jordan Rubin discuss this term's divisive nature, and what's likely to come next in the fight over Kennedy's seat in this Cases and Controversies podcast.

The Supreme Court wrapped up its 2017 term on June 27, handing down a string of 5-4 decisions. Although the court won't be back in session until October, there's sure to be a lot of Supreme Court news, as the President and Senate move to fill the vacancy left by retiring longtime Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. Bloomberg Law's Supreme Court reporter Kimberly Robinson and criminal law reporter Jordan Rubin discuss this term's divisive nature, and what's likely to come next in the fight over Kennedy's seat in this Cases and Controversies podcast.

That’s a Wrap on SCOTUS… Sort Of

The justices kicked off their last full week with four opinions and an array of vote lineups ranging from the usual 5-4 suspects to some unexpected combinations.Bloomberg Law's Supreme Court team recaps the action in cases about double jeopardy, redistricting, uranium, and the First Amendment featuring parings like Gorsuch and Ginsburg in one case and a 3-3-3 vote breakdown in another.Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.Listen and subscribe to Cases and Controversies from your mobile device: Via Apple Podcasts | Via Stitcher | Via Overcast|Via Spotify

The justices kicked off their last full week with four opinions and an array of vote lineups ranging from the usual 5-4 suspects to some unexpected combinations.Bloomberg Law's Supreme Court team recaps the action in cases about double jeopardy, redistricting, uranium, and the First Amendment featuring parings like Gorsuch and Ginsburg in one case and a 3-3-3 vote breakdown in another.Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.Listen and subscribe to Cases and Controversies from your mobile device: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/cases-and-controversies/id1142321960?mt=2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Apple Podcasts</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/bloomberg-law/cases-and-controversies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://overcast.fm/itunes1142321960/cases-and-controversies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Overcast</a>|<a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/0vIrW1JIDHzyVMgGSi9eUQ" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Spotify</a>

Double Jeopardy and Quirky Lineups: Weekly Recap

President Donald Trump has floated the idea of aiding farmers with a $12 billion package amid the recent barrage of U.S. tariffs — a clear anticipation of the tariffs’ impact on U.S. jobs. Agricultural groups like the American Farm Bureau Federation have criticized the surge in U.S. tariffs, saying Chinese retaliatory tariffs will likely hurt U.S. farmers. Automobile companies are also caught in the crosshairs: foreign companies with operations in the U.S., such as Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. and Kia Motors Corporation, said the added tariffs pose a risk to U.S. workers, according to the Association of Global Automakers. Will the Trump administration’s tariff actions live up to Trump’s campaign promises? For this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies, Bloomberg Law international trade reporter Dave Sebastian speaks with Celeste Drake, a trade and globalization specialist at AFL-CIO, and William Hoagland, senior vice president at the Bipartisan Policy Center. Follow Dave on Twitter: @depsebastian.

President Donald Trump has floated the idea of aiding farmers with a $12 billion package amid the recent barrage of U.S. tariffs — a clear anticipation of the tariffs’ impact on U.S. jobs. Agricultural groups like the American Farm Bureau Federation have criticized the surge in U.S. tariffs, saying Chinese retaliatory tariffs will likely hurt U.S. farmers. Automobile companies are also caught in the crosshairs: foreign companies with operations in the U.S., such as Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. and Kia Motors Corporation, said the added tariffs pose a risk to U.S. workers, according to the Association of Global Automakers. Will the Trump administration’s tariff actions live up to Trump’s campaign promises? For this episode of Cases &amp; Controversies, Bloomberg Law international trade reporter Dave Sebastian speaks with Celeste Drake, a trade and globalization specialist at AFL-CIO, and William Hoagland, senior vice president at the Bipartisan Policy Center. Follow Dave on Twitter: @depsebastian.

Will Trump's Tariffs Live Up to His Campaign Promises?

We know Donald Trump's presidency has been unconventional. That's true for his clemency grants, too.Trump's gotten a quicker start on that score than his recent predecessors. And he's also bucked the norm of waiting for recommendations from the Justice Department's pardon attorney before granting pardons and commutations. The president also has generated controversy not just with his pardon process—or lack thereof—but with who's received them. Recipients include lawbreaking ex-sheriff Joe Arpaio and conservative provocateur Dinesh D'Souza. In the latest episode of Cases and Controversies, Bloomberg Law's Jordan Rubin and Kimberly Robinson break down Trump's clemency practices.

We know Donald Trump's presidency has been unconventional. That's true for his clemency grants, too. Trump's gotten a quicker start on that score than his recent predecessors. And he's also bucked the norm of waiting for recommendations from the Justice Department's pardon attorney before granting pardons and commutations. The president also has generated controversy not just with his pardon process—or lack thereof—but with who's received them. Recipients include lawbreaking ex-sheriff Joe Arpaio and conservative provocateur Dinesh D'Souza. In the latest episode of Cases and Controversies, Bloomberg Law's Jordan Rubin and Kimberly Robinson break down Trump's clemency practices.

The Trump Pardon Podcast

Investigations into President Donald Trump will be front and center at the U.S. Supreme Court on March 31, when the justices are scheduled to hear arguments over whether Congressional committees and Manhattan prosecutors can get their hands on the president’s financial records—including his tax returns.The much-anticipated dispute comes to the high court as coronavirus concerns sweep the nation, prompting uncertainty over how the notoriously old-fashioned institution—which doesn’t livestream arguments and has multiple members in their 80s—will handle the proceedings.On March 12, the court closed to the public until further notice “out of concern for the health and safety of the public and Supreme Court employees.”However, the building “will remain open for official business,” the court added. It’s unclear at this point whether health concerns will affect arguments scheduled for the two-week session starting March 23.For now, anyway, the court’s official business includes oral arguments in multiple cases—Trump v. Mazars, Trump v. Deutsche Bank, and Trump v. Vance—stemming from several Trump-related subpoenas.To break down the historic, politically-charged issue, Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin are joined by Supreme Court litigators who filed amicus briefs in these cases: Virginia Solicitor General Toby Heytens and Weil, Gotshal &amp; Manges partner Zack Tripp.

Investigations into President Donald Trump will be front and center at the U.S. Supreme Court on March 31, when the justices are scheduled to hear arguments over whether Congressional committees and Manhattan prosecutors can get their hands on the president’s financial records—including his tax returns.The much-anticipated dispute comes to the high court as coronavirus concerns sweep the nation, prompting uncertainty over how the notoriously old-fashioned institution—which doesn’t livestream arguments and has multiple members in their 80s—will handle the proceedings.On March 12, <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/supreme-court-building-closing-to-public-on-health-concerns" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">the court closed to the public</a> until further notice “out of concern for the health and safety of the public and Supreme Court employees.”However, the building “will remain open for official business,” the court added. It’s unclear at this point whether health concerns will affect arguments scheduled for the two-week session starting March 23.For now, anyway, the court’s official business includes oral arguments in multiple cases—<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/19-715.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Trump v. Mazars</a>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/19-760.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Trump v. Deutsche Bank</a>, and <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/19-635.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Trump v. Vance</a>—stemming from several Trump-related subpoenas.To break down the historic, politically-charged issue, Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin are joined by Supreme Court litigators who filed amicus briefs in these cases: Virginia Solicitor General <a href="https://www.oag.state.va.us/divisions/solicitor-general" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Toby Heytens</a> and Weil, Gotshal &amp; Manges partner <a href="https://www.weil.com/people/zachary-tripp" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Zack Tripp</a>.

Trump Financial Subpoena Cases: SCOTUS Deep Dive

This week's episode features former Assistant to the Solicitor General Elaine Goldenberg, who is now in the D.C. office of Munger, Tolles &amp; Olson. Goldenberg and co-hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin break down arguments over partisan gerrymandering, administrative power, and race in the criminal justice system—and explain how Supreme Court advocacy can cause you to hear voices in your head.And, of course, they discuss the biggest news of the sitting: Justice Thomas speaks!Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin.Guest: Elaine Goldenberg.Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

This week's episode features former Assistant to the Solicitor General Elaine Goldenberg, who is now in the D.C. office of Munger, Tolles &amp; Olson. Goldenberg and co-hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin break down arguments over partisan gerrymandering, administrative power, and race in the criminal justice system—and explain how Supreme Court advocacy can cause you to hear voices in your head.And, of course, they discuss the biggest news of the sitting: Justice Thomas speaks!Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin.Guest: Elaine Goldenberg.Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

Deep Dive: Thomas Speaks!

Elaine Goldenberg

The last Supreme Court oral arguments of 2019 are in the books, the first opinion of the term is out, and litigation over subpoenas investigating President Trump is knocking at the high court's door.In this deep dive recap of the December session, Munger, Tolles &amp; Olson partner Elaine Goldenberg joins "Cases and Controversies" hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin to break down some of the session's biggest arguments—on the Second Amendment and Obamacare—and the first opinion of the term in a debt collection case that could have implications in other areas of the law.They also take on the denial of the closely-watched petition in the Adnan Syed "Serial" case, as well as high-profile litigation over subpoenas into Trump's financial information and the high court's blocking of his administration's attempt to resume federal executions—for now, anyway.

The last Supreme Court oral arguments of 2019 are in the books, the first opinion of the term is out, and litigation over subpoenas investigating President Trump is knocking at the high court's door. In this deep dive recap of the December session, Munger, Tolles &amp; Olson partner Elaine Goldenberg joins "Cases and Controversies" hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin to break down some of the session's biggest arguments—on the Second Amendment and Obamacare—and the first opinion of the term in a debt collection case that could have implications in other areas of the law. They also take on the denial of the closely-watched petition in the Adnan Syed "Serial" case, as well as high-profile litigation over subpoenas into Trump's financial information and the high court's blocking of his administration's attempt to resume federal executions—for now, anyway.

December Recap With Guest Elaine Goldenberg: SCOTUS Deep Dive

The U.S. Supreme Court heard its last batch of oral arguments for the 2018 term-- including the highly anticipated census dispute in which congressional apportionment and hundreds of billions of dollars hang in the balance. Law professor Leah Litman joins "Cases and Controversies" to chat about that and other happenings at the court's April sitting. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Guest: Leah Litman, University of California, Irvine. Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch. 

The U.S. Supreme Court heard its last batch of oral arguments for the 2018 term-- including the highly anticipated census dispute in which congressional apportionment and hundreds of billions of dollars hang in the balance. Law professor Leah Litman joins "Cases and Controversies" to chat about that and other happenings at the court's April sitting. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Guest: Leah Litman, University of California, Irvine. Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

Sentencing and the Census: Deep Dive

The Supreme Court justices just wrapped up the latest action-packed argument session which featured heated disputes on the fate of both abortion access and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.The two-week session included arguments over challenges to a Louisiana law requiring hospital admitting privileges for abortion providers and a challenge to the structure of the bureau that’s long been a target of conservatives.The Constitutional Accountability Center’s Brian Frazelle, who filed a brief supporting the consumer protection bureau, joins hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin to break down the crucial case that could impact a wide range of government agencies.The hosts also break down the latest 5-4 opinions, court line-standing controversies, and Chief Justice John Roberts’ latest rare public statement defending judicial independence.

The Supreme Court justices just wrapped up the latest action-packed argument session which featured heated disputes on the fate of both abortion access and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.The two-week session included arguments over challenges to a Louisiana law requiring hospital admitting privileges for abortion providers and a challenge to the structure of the bureau that’s long been a target of conservatives.The Constitutional Accountability Center’s <a href="https://www.theusconstitution.org/staff/brian-r-frazelle/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Brian Frazelle</a>, who filed a brief supporting the consumer protection bureau, joins hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin to break down the crucial case that could impact a wide range of government agencies.The hosts also break down the latest 5-4 opinions, court line-standing controversies, and Chief Justice John Roberts’ latest rare public statement defending judicial independence.

Abortion, CFPB, and Immigration: SCOTUS Deep Dive

But Bloomberg Law’s Supreme Court team will break down the action in opinions that were released on Monday, including decisions on career criminals, patents, and offshore rig workers.The justices also granted review for next term in five cases and rejected a notable one challenging indefinite detention at Guantanamo Bay.Countdown: There have been 45 cases decided so far this term with 24 more to go.Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin.Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.Listen and subscribe to Cases and Controversies from your mobile device: Via Apple Podcasts | Via Stitcher | Via Overcast|Via Spotify

But Bloomberg Law’s Supreme Court team will break down the action in opinions that were released on Monday, including decisions on career criminals, patents, and offshore rig workers.The justices also granted review for next term in five cases and rejected a notable one challenging indefinite detention at Guantanamo Bay.Countdown: There have been 45 cases decided so far this term with 24 more to go.Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin.Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.Listen and subscribe to Cases and Controversies from your mobile device: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/cases-and-controversies/id1142321960?mt=2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Apple Podcasts</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/bloomberg-law/cases-and-controversies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://overcast.fm/itunes1142321960/cases-and-controversies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Overcast</a>|<a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/0vIrW1JIDHzyVMgGSi9eUQ" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Spotify</a>

Lots More Opinions to Go: Weekly Recap

As the U.S. Supreme Court enters the "flood season"—that time of the year when the justices try to get out all the outstanding opinions before wrapping up the term at the end of June—Cases and Controversies will bring you weekly updates of the latest happenings at One First Street.This week, hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin discuss the three cases the justices handed down, including Justice Brett Kavanaugh's first solo cross-over vote to give the liberal justices a victory in a 5-4 antitrust case.They also discuss the growing chasm between the court's conservative and liberal blocs over the death penalty, which was exposed this week in unusual dueling opinions in a previously decided matter.With 32 decisions down and 37 left to go, stay tuned for more Cases and Controversies.Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin.Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.Listen and subscribe to Cases and Controversies from your mobile device:Via Apple Podcasts | Via Stitcher | Via Overcast | Via Spotify

As the U.S. Supreme Court enters the "flood season"—that time of the year when the justices try to get out all the outstanding opinions before wrapping up the term at the end of June—Cases and Controversies will bring you weekly updates of the latest happenings at One First Street.This week, hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin discuss the three cases the justices handed down, including Justice Brett Kavanaugh's first solo cross-over vote to give the liberal justices a victory in a 5-4 antitrust case.They also discuss the growing chasm between the court's conservative and liberal blocs over the death penalty, which was exposed this week in unusual dueling opinions in a previously decided matter.With 32 decisions down and 37 left to go, stay tuned for more Cases and Controversies.Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin.Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.Listen and subscribe to Cases and Controversies from your mobile device:<a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cases-and-controversies/id1142321960" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Apple Podcasts </a>| <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/bloomberg-law/cases-and-controversies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Stitcher </a>| <a href="https://overcast.fm/itunes1142321960/cases-and-controversies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Overcast</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/0vIrW1JIDHzyVMgGSi9eUQ" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Spotify</a>

The Death Penalty Wars: Weekly Recap

The justices issued four new opinions in argued cases June 3, including yet another 5-4 decision with an nontraditional lineup.Last week, it was Clarence Thomas crossing over to join the liberals in a 5-4 class action decision. The week before that, it was Neil Gorsuch in a tribal matter. And the week before that, Brett Kavanaugh handed the liberals a victory in a divided antitrust suit.This week, it's Ruth Bader Ginsburg's turn. Bloomberg Law breaks down the 5-4 sentencing case in which she joined four of her conservative colleges, as well as the other three cases.Countdown: There have been 42 cases decided so far this term with 27 more to go.Listen and subscribe to Cases and Controversies from your mobile device: Via Apple Podcasts |Via Stitcher |Via Overcast|Via Spotify

The justices issued four new opinions in argued cases June 3, including yet another 5-4 decision with an nontraditional lineup.Last week, it was Clarence Thomas crossing over to join the liberals in a 5-4 class action decision. The week before that, it was Neil Gorsuch in a tribal matter. And the week before that, Brett Kavanaugh handed the liberals a victory in a divided antitrust suit.This week, it's Ruth Bader Ginsburg's turn. Bloomberg Law breaks down the 5-4 sentencing case in which she joined four of her conservative colleges, as well as the other three cases.Countdown: There have been 42 cases decided so far this term with 27 more to go.Listen and subscribe to Cases and Controversies from your mobile device: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/cases-and-controversies/id1142321960?mt=2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Apple Podcasts</a> |<a href="https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/bloomberg-law/cases-and-controversies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Stitcher</a> |<a href="https://overcast.fm/itunes1142321960/cases-and-controversies" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Overcast</a>|<a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/0vIrW1JIDHzyVMgGSi9eUQ" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Via Spotify</a>

The Crossover Term: Weekly Recap

A Texas district attorney says a convicted murderer shouldn't be executed, due to his intellectual disability. But the Texas state court disagreed, and now the case of Bobby James Moore is back at the U.S. Supreme Court after he already won a case there in 2017. The justices will discuss whether to take up his latest case at their Jan. 4 conference. Bloomberg Law reporters Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin unpack the twists and turns in the fascinating case on the latest episode of Cases and Controversies. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

A Texas district attorney says a convicted murderer shouldn't be executed, due to his intellectual disability. But the Texas state court disagreed, and now the case of Bobby James Moore is back at the U.S. Supreme Court after he already won a case there in 2017. The justices will discuss whether to take up his latest case at their Jan. 4 conference. Bloomberg Law reporters Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin unpack the twists and turns in the fascinating case on the latest episode of Cases and Controversies. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

Tricky Texas Death Penalty Case Back at SCOTUS

The justices return to the high court bench Monday for their first oral arguments of 2020. Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin preview the cases, including the fallout from 2013's "Bridgegate" scandal and an age discrimination suit that could have reverberations beyond employment discrimination. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin.Producer: RJ Jewell.

The justices return to the high court bench Monday for their first oral arguments of 2020.  Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin preview the cases, including the fallout from 2013's "Bridgegate" scandal and an age discrimination suit that could have reverberations beyond employment discrimination. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Producer: RJ Jewell.

'Bridgegate,' Age Discrimination: SCOTUS Sneak Peek

President Trump’s appointment of Matthew Whitaker as acting Attorney General has prompted a “constitutional crisis,” says Tom Goldstein, the veteran U.S. Supreme Court lawyer and publisher of SCOTUSblog, who is challenging Whitaker's appointment at the high court in an unusual motion. Bloomberg Law reporters Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin speak to Goldstein and Steve Vladeck, the constitutional scholar at the University of Texas who argues the temporary appointment was legal. They discuss Goldstein’s motion, other pending challenges percolating in the courts, and the effect of Trump's Dec. 7 nomination of William Barr to take over Whitaker's role full-time. Goldstein maintains that, even if Barr is confirmed by the Senate, Whitaker's appointment will still have had disastrous consequences, including for law enforcement and national security. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

President Trump’s appointment of Matthew Whitaker as acting Attorney General has prompted a “constitutional crisis,” says Tom Goldstein, the veteran U.S. Supreme Court lawyer and publisher of SCOTUSblog, who is challenging Whitaker's appointment at the high court in an unusual motion. Bloomberg Law reporters Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin speak to Goldstein and Steve Vladeck, the constitutional scholar at the University of Texas who argues the temporary appointment was legal. They discuss Goldstein’s motion, other pending challenges percolating in the courts, and the effect of Trump's Dec. 7 nomination of William Barr to take over Whitaker's role full-time. Goldstein maintains that, even if Barr is confirmed by the Senate, Whitaker's appointment will still have had disastrous consequences, including for law enforcement and national security. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Producer: Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch.

Deep Dive, Attorney General Edition: Constitutional Crisis?

The U.S. Supreme Court hears the last arguments of 2019 the week of Dec. 9, with an eclectic set of issues before the justices ranging from capital punishment to the latest Obamacare-related tussle.They'll hear a dispute at the intersection of criminal law and immigration, a case that could impact patent litigation, and a complaint from health insurance companies that the government still owes them—big time, to the tune of $12 billion.Also up for argument are cases from Arizona death row, a technical sentencing puzzle, and an international child custody dispute.

The U.S. Supreme Court hears the last arguments of 2019 the week of Dec. 9, with an eclectic set of issues before the justices ranging from capital punishment to the latest Obamacare-related tussle. They'll hear a dispute at the intersection of criminal law and immigration, a case that could impact patent litigation, and a complaint from health insurance companies that the government still owes them—big time, to the tune of $12 billion. Also up for argument are cases from Arizona death row, a technical sentencing puzzle, and an international child custody dispute.

Obamacare, Patents, Death Penalty: SCOTUS Sneak Peek

The best podcast episodes on romantic relationships. Episodes talk about the 5 love languages, intimacy, and the taboo topics of sexual desires and infidelity. This topic is a deep dive into the science and complexities that face us in our relationships with others. Add episodes you're interested into your queue below!

Best Episodes on Relationships & Love

The best philosophy podcast episodes. Asking questions about how to live a better life, what it means to be and do good, to the idea of God. This topic includes episodes that bring about important questions that everyone should be asking themselves. Add episodes you're interested into your queue below!