Attorney RJ Dieken, Loki Esq Law, Montana

Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast)

Following what the Supreme Court is actually doing can be daunting. Reporting on the subject is often only done within the context of political narratives of the day -- and following the Court's decisions and reading every new case can be a non-starter. The purpose of this Podcast is to make it as easy as possible for members of the public to source information about what is happening at the Supreme Court. For that reason, we read every Opinion Syllabus without any commentary whatsoever. Further, there are no advertisements or sponsors. We call it "information sourcing," and we hope that the p...

Author

Attorney RJ Dieken, Loki Esq Law, Montana

Category

Government

Podcast website

scotuspodcast.com

Latest episode

Jul 1, 2026

Where to listen?

Podcasts in the app Replaio Radio Coming soon

Podcasts are coming to the app soon. Install now and be the first to see a whole new take on podcasts

Get it on Google Play Install for free Android 5M+ downloads · 4.8 rating iOS soon

Episodes

Galette v. New Jersey Transit (Sovereign Immunity) 04.03.2026

Send us Fan Mail In 1979, the New Jersey Legislature created the New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ Transit) as a “body corporate and politic with corporate succession” and constituted it as an “instrumentality of the State exercising public and essential governmental functions” but “independent of any supervision or control” by the New Jersey Department of Transportation. N. J. Stat. §27:25–4(a)....

MIRABELLI v. BONTA (TRANSGENDER AND FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION) 04.03.2026

Send us Fan Mail It's a ruling about procedure, but they'd like you to know how they believe the Court below should rule. That Free Exercise of Religion should Trump the State of California's right to tell Schools to withold knowledge of a students' decision to transition genders from the parents of that child. Support the show

Villareal v. Texas (Sixth Amendment right to counsel) 27.02.2026

Send us Fan Mail In a decision affirming the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the Supreme Court held that a trial court may, during an overnight recess that interrupts a defendant’s testimony, prohibit counsel from “managing” or shaping the defendant’s ongoing testimony without violating the Sixth Amendment. Drawing on Geders v. United States and Perry v. Leeke , the Court rejected the defendant’s...

GEO Group v. Menocal (Civil Procedure/Appealability) 26.02.2026

Send us Fan Mail Petitioner GEO Group operates a private detention facility in Aurora, Colorado, under a contract with U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Respondent Alejandro Menocal, a former detainee at the Aurora facility, initiated this class action, alleging GEO’s work policies for detainees violate a federal bar on forced labor and Colorado’s prohibition on unjust enrichment. G...

Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist (Civil Procedure and DIVERSITY JURISDICTION) 26.02.2026

Send us Fan Mail  Held: Because the District Court’s erroneous dismissal of Whole Foods did not cure the jurisdictional defect that existed when this case was removed to federal court, the Fifth Circuit correctly vacated the judg ment in Hain’s favor.  Support the show

Postal Service v. Konan (Sov. Immunity/FTCA) 25.02.2026

Send us Fan Mail The Fed Government retains sovereign immunity under the FTCA for intentional non-delivery of mail. Support the show

LEARNING RESOURCES, INC. v. TRUMP (President's Tariff Authority) 20.02.2026

Send us Fan Mail No one Authorized President Trump to impose these "Emergency" Tariffs under the IEEPA (International Emergency Economic Powers Act). Support the show

KLEIN v. MARTIN (AEDPA STANDARDS AGAIN) 28.01.2026

Send us Fan Mail The Court Below granted relief when it should have not. Judge Niemeyer of the 4th Circuit was the lone dissent--contending that the majority had defied AEDPA’s standard of review--the 84 year old Jurist with 36 years service on that court was correct. Support the show

Ellingberg v. United States (Restitution & Ex Post Facto Clause) 21.01.2026

Send us Fan Mail  The Court unanimously held that restitution imposed under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act is a form of criminal punishment, meaning it cannot be applied to conduct that occurred before the statute was enacted without violating the Ex Post Facto Clause. Although Ellingburg’s offense predated the MVRA, he was sentenced under it and ordered to pay restitution. The Eighth Circu...

CONEY ISLAND AUTO PARTS v. BURTON, (Bankruptcy, Civil Procedure, Void Judgement vs. Time Limits) 21.01.2026

Send us Fan Mail an appeal of a VOID judgement under federal rule 60 is still subject to the statutory text's "within a reasonable time" limit. Support the show

Doe v. Dynamic Physical Therapy, LLC 21.01.2026

Send us Fan Mail State Courts may not grant releif from FEDERAL causes of action by reference to state statute. Support the show

BOWE v. UNITED STATES 21.01.2026

Send us Fan Mail 1. The Court has jurisdiction because §2244(b)(3)(E) does not bar this Court’s review of a federal prisoner’s request to file a second or successive §2255 motion.  Pp. 5–19. (a) Section 2244(b)(3)(E) provides that the denial of authorization “to file a second or successive application” shall not be the subject of a certiorari petition.  That provision does not apply to federal pri...

BARRETT v. UNITED STATES (Hobbs Act Robbery/Blockburger Test) 16.01.2026

Send us Fan Mail Supreme Court refuses to assume that Congress intended to disregard Blockburger and allow someone to be convicted of two crimes in the same statute. Congress' clear intent here was to create two potential sentencing schemes, not allow someone to be convicted twice. Support the show

Case v. Montana (4a's Community Caretaker Exception) 16.01.2026

Send us Fan Mail Supreme Court Upholds Montana's Community Caretaker exception to the 4th amendment prohibition on warrantless searches. Support the show

Clark v. Sweeney (Party Presentation) 25.11.2025

Send us Fan Mail In Clark v. Sweeney , the Supreme Court reversed a Fourth Circuit decision that had granted habeas relief on a theory the petitioner never raised. A Maryland jury convicted Jeremiah Sweeney of second-degree murder, and his convictions were affirmed on appeal. In postconviction proceedings, Sweeney argued that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request voir dire of the fu...

Pitts v. Mississippi (Confrontation Clause) 25.11.2025

Send us Fan Mail The United States Supreme Court reversed a decision of the Mississippi Supreme Court upholding the use of a physical screen that prevented a four-year-old child witness from seeing the defendant during trial. Mississippi law mandates the use of such screens for child witnesses in abuse cases. Relying on that statute, the trial court permitted the screen without taking evidence or...

Goldey v. Field (Bivens / Excessive Force) 08.07.2025

Send us Fan Mail Goldey v. Fields PER CURIAM. In Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U. S. 388 (1971), this Court recognized an implied cause of action for damages against federal officers for certain alleged violations of the Fourth Amendment. The Court subsequently recognized two additional contexts where implied Bivens causes of action were permitted, neither of which was an Eighth...

Trump v. CASA, Inc. (Universal Injunction / Birthright Citizenship) 08.07.2025

Send us Fan Mail   Trump v. CASA, Inc.   Held: Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts. The Court grants the Government’s applications for a partial stay of the injunctions entered below, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue. Pp. 4– 26. ...

Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, Inc. (Appointments Clause) 05.07.2025

Send us Fan Mail Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, Inc. In 1984, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) created the U. S. Preventive Services Task Force, a body that formulates evidence-based recommendations regarding preventive healthcare services. Congress codified the Task Force’s role in 1999, establishing it as an entity within the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) i...

FCC v. Consumer Research (Nondelegation Doctrine) 04.07.2025

Send us Fan Mail FCC v. Consumers’ Research   The Communications Act of 1934 established the FCC and instructed it to make available to “all the people of the United States,” reliable communications services “at reasonable charges.” 47 U. S. C. §151. That objective is today known as “universal service.” The universal-service project arose from the concern that pure market mechanisms would leave so...

Mahmoud v. Taylor (LGBTQ+ Books / Parental Opt-Out) 04.07.2025

Send us Fan Mail Held: Parents challenging the Board’s introduction of the “LGBTQ+-inclusive” storybooks, along with its decision to withhold opt outs, are entitled to a preliminary injunction.  Read by Jeff  Barnum.  Support the show

Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton (Texas Pornography Regulation) 30.06.2025

Send us Fan Mail Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton  Texas, like many States, prohibits distributing sexually explicit content to children. In 2023, Texas enacted H. B. 1181, requiring certain commercial websites publishing sexually explicit content that is obscene to minors to verify that visitors are 18 or older. Knowing violations subject covered entities to injunctions and civil penalties....

Hewitt v. United States 30.06.2025

Send us Fan Mail Hewitt v. United States Before the First Step Act was enacted in 2018, federal judges were required to sentence first-time offenders convicted of violating 18 U. S. C. §924(c)—a law that criminalizes possessing a firearm while committing other crimes—to “stacked” 25-year periods of incarceration. The First Step Act eliminated this harsh mandatory minimum penalty. Section 403(b) of...

Medina v. Planned Parenthood (Medicaid Funding) 30.06.2025

Send us Fan Mail Median v. Planned Parenthood Held: Section 1396a(a)(23)(A) does not clearly and unambiguously confer individual rights enforceable under §1983.  Support the show

Riley v. Bondi (Immigration Removal) 27.06.2025

Send us Fan Mail Riley v. Bondi  The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sought to remove Pierre Riley, a citizen of Jamaica, from the United States under expedited procedures for aliens convicted of aggravated felonies. On January 26, 2021, the DHS issued a “final administrative review order” (FARO) directing Riley’s removal to Jamaica. Under 8 U. S. C. §1228(b)(3), aliens may petition courts o...

Listen to the Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) podcast in Replaio

Radio and podcasts in one app - free, with no sign-up. Install today and do not miss the launch

Get it on Google Play

Replaio is not a podcast publisher; show names, artwork and audio belong to their authors and are distributed through public RSS feeds.