Relitigated

In the season 2 finale we re-argue the Supreme Court case McCleskey v. Kemp . WM, a Black man, was sentenced to death for murder. On appeal, he submitted statistical evidence to show that the race of the victim (and, to a lesser extent, of the defendant) is associated with whether the defendant gets sentenced to death or not. The question before the court: does statistical evidence of racial dispa...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier . High school students wrote and edited articles as the staff for their school newspaper. One day, they found that their articles about divorce and teen pregnancy had been removed from their newest issue. The principal cut them because he thought they were “inappropriate.” That’s a violation of the First Amen...

In this special episode we bring you the first ever edition of Objection! The Relitigated Game Show . 3 of our justices, Sarah, Adam, and Preston, compete for points to see who will be crowned the official Chief Justice of Relitigated and earn the commemorative gavel. To make things spicy, contestants can object when they believe a colleague is wrong and wager points to get either a boost or a set...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Griggs v. Duke Power Company . In the wake of the Civil Rights Act prohibiting discrimination in employment, a major company changed its hiring and promotion policies and implemented alternate requirements. Black employees, who largely did not advance, complained of continuing discrimination. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigate...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Watts v. U.S . At a protest, a young man made a statement about getting the president in the sights of his rifle, and was convicted of threatening the life of the president. Was he, though? The question before the court: Was his statement actually a threat? Was it prohibited by the law?

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Berghuis v. Thompkins . A man is arrested, informed of his rights, and interrogated. But for two hours and 45 minutes of questioning, he is mostly silent. At trial he argued that he was exercising his right to silence under Miranda v. Arizona , and police should have stopped the interrogation. The Appeals Court thought so, too. The question before...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case North Carolina v. Butler. A man is arrested by the FBI, who gave him both a verbal and written notification of his rights. WB refused to sign a form indicating that he wished to waive his rights. Statements to the agents were included in evidence against him at trial. He was convicted, the North Carolina Supreme Court overturned the conviction, an...

In this episode, we speak with Dr. Paul Lombardo, Regents’ Professor and Bobby Lee Cook Professor of Law at Georgia State University. He is a historian and legal scholar who has written on eugenics, medical ethics, and Buck v. Bell . He tells us about Carrie Buck, those at the Virginia Colony who drove her case to the Supreme Court, and the impact of the Court’s decision. --- For more information...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell . A young woman was committed to an institution, due to the state’s concerns about her disability and vulnerability. After a formal legal proceeding, it is determined that she should be sterilized. The question before the court: is the law authorizing sterilization of a disabled person valid under the 14th Amendment?

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Colorado v. Connelly. A man walked up to a police officer who was minding his own business and announced that he wished to confess to a murder. The police repeatedly informed him of his rights, and he insisted upon making his statement. It turned out this man was experiencing acute symptoms of mental illness. The question before the court: did tak...

Hi there fans of Relitigated. It’s been a while, but we have great news! Our podcast returns with season 2 on July 2nd; just in time for Independence Day. Be ready for more jurisprudence and, as always, shenanigans. We might even have some surprise guests joining us this season. We’ve been hard at work and we can’t wait for you to hear what we have in store for you next. As always, we’d love to he...

In this episode we step down from the U.S. Supreme Court to visit the Georgia Court of Appeals. Here, we re-argue the case Christy Brothers Circus v. Turnage. An evening at the circus suddenly turned an unsuspecting audience member into part of the show. The question before the court: can a victim collect damages for emotional distress without physical injury?

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case United States v. Causby. A couple bought property, where they made their home and ran a chicken farm. Their property was less than half a mile away from an airfield, which the U.S. government began using. The family’s farm (and their nerves) were then destroyed by lots of large military aircraft flying less than 100 feet overhead day and night. Th...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case North Carolina v. Alford. HA was charged with First-Degree Murder, a capital offense in North Carolina. There was a lot of evidence against him, so his lawyer recommended he plead guilty. HA ultimately agreed to plead guilty to Second-Degree Murder, but when he went before the judge, HA testified he didn’t commit the crime and was only pleading gu...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Prince v. Massachusetts. Massachusetts  has adopted child labor laws prohibiting children from selling  periodicals on the street, and prohibiting adults from making children  work illegally. SP is a Jehovah’s Witness who would distribute religious  literature on the street. Her children and her niece begged and cried  to...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States. The U.S. is at war. CS took part in printing and mailing leaflets criticizing the war and the draft. The leaflets also encouraged young men to resist the draft. He was arrested and convicted of conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act. The question before the court: did CS’s conviction for criticizing the draft violate his...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case United States v. 95 Barrels, More or Less, Alleged Apple Cider Vinegar, Douglas Packing Company, Claimant. The Douglas Packing Company is selling a product that they have labeled as apple cider vinegar. However, the feds have an issue with the fact that sometimes the company presses fresh apples, and at other times they press dehydrated and rehydr...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Mapp v. Ohio. One evening, police arrived at the home of DM and demanded to be let in to conduct a search. After calling her lawyer, DM declined to allow police to enter her home without a search warrant. Police eventually broke down her door and searched her home despite not having a search warrant. DM was later tried and convicted for possession...

In this episode we re-argue the Supreme Court case Wolf v. Colorado. Police investigating illegal abortions searched a doctor’s office without a search warrant and took a log of patients. After interviewing his patients, police charged JW and others. The results of the search were used as evidence and JW was convicted. JW appealed his conviction. The question before the court: do 4th Amendment pro...

In this episode we re-argue the landmark case Weeks v. United States. Local law enforcement entered and searched FW’s home without a search warrant. At the same time, other officers arrested FW at work. Afterward, a federal marshal conducted a second search of FW’s home without a warrant. Using the evidence from the search, the prosecution secured a conviction against FW, who appealed his convicti...

In the pilot episode of the Relitigated Podcast, hosts Jarret and Nikki invite 3 friends on and re-argue Deshaney v Winnebago County DSS. TRIGGER WARNING: discussions of child abuse. As this is our first episode, we are still working through tuning our equipment and our delivery. There's some roughness here we sanded down in subsequent episodes, so we encourage you to stick around. That said, we a...