Government

Oral Arguments, with Context

Real court arguments, crisp audio, with context. Court recordings can be difficult to follow, and many suffer from poor audio quality. This podcast enhances the audio, provides a brief introduction to each case, and explains legal concepts that may be unfamiliar to some listeners. We hope these enhancements make oral argument recordings easier to understand, more accessible, and more enjoyable to listen to. Recordings come from the courts’ own public releases; Supreme Court timing is derived locally from the Court’s official transcript and audio.

Latest Episodes:

USA v. Ramirez — 9th Cir. (Sep 14, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears a government appeal in an illegal-reentry case. The defendant was charged with returning to the United States unlawfully after removal. He was convicted, but the district court later granted a judgment of acquittal, set aside the conviction, and dismissed the indictment. The government appealed. Venue means the legally proper geographic location for a trial, a question separate from guilt or innocence. Preponderance of the evidence means that a fact is more likely true than not. Rule twenty-nine allows a defendant to ask the trial judge for acquittal when the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction. USA v. Ramirez (No. 25-957) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 14, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Ninth Circuit court original: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/media/2026/09/14/25-957.mp3 Recording and argument date — Ninth Circuit archive: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-957&hearingDate=2026-09-14 Charge, prior order and appeal — Ninth Circuit case calendar synopsis: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/calendar/calendar-search?input-search-case=25-957 Venue and acquittal motions — Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure18 and29: https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/document/federal-rules-of-criminal-procedure.pdf Venue distinguished from criminal culpability — Smith v. United States (2023): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-1576_e29g.pdf Evidence sufficient to sustain conviction — Justice Manual9-27.220: https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-27000-principles-federal-prosecution Preponderance definition — Judge Vratil’s jury instructions: https://www.ksd.uscourts.gov/jury-instructions-vratil Preponderance definition — 2 C.F.R. §180.990 (public text copy): https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/2/180.990

Dang v. Blanche — 9th Cir. (Sep 14, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears an immigration dispute prompted by a governor's pardon. The petitioner asked immigration authorities to reopen his removal proceedings and end the case on the basis of that pardon. The agency denied the request, so he sought review in the court of appeals. A motion to reopen ordinarily must be filed within ninety days of a final removal order. Equitable tolling can excuse lateness when its requirements are met; it is not an automatic extension. Dang v. Blanche (No. 25-2795) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 14, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Ninth Circuit court original: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/media/2026/09/14/25-2795.mp3 Recording and argument date — Ninth Circuit archive: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-2795&hearingDate=2026-09-14 Case background and argument date — Ninth Circuit calendar synopsis: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/calendar/calendar-search?input-search-case=25-2795 Reopening deadline — 8 U.S.C. §1229a(c)(7): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title8/html/USCODE-2024-title8-chap12-subchapII-partIV-sec1229a.htm Equitable tolling and sua sponte reopening — Bonilla v. Lynch (2016), amended judicial opinion: https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/12-73853/12-73853-2016-10-20.pdf?ts=1476983202 Statutory motions and separate own-motion power — Reyes Mata v. Lynch (2015), judicial opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/576/14-185/case.pdf

American Academy of Pediatrics v Kennedy — 1st Cir. (Oct 6, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

A dispute over who advises the government on vaccines reaches the First Circuit. In June 2025, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. removed all seventeen members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and began appointing replacements. Known as ACIP, the committee advises the CDC on vaccine recommendations. Medical groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, sued over changed COVID vaccine recommendations for children and pregnant women, and expanded their challenge to the committee's membership. They say the replacement committee violates the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires fairly balanced membership in light of the committee's perspectives and functions. In March 2026, a federal judge in Massachusetts paused thirteen appointments, challenged committee votes, and a separate change to the childhood immunization schedule as preliminary relief in the lawsuit. This appeal challenges the appointment pause, not those other pauses. Matthew Zorn will argue for the government that the court reviewed actions outside the Administrative Procedure Act and imposed an unauthorized remedy. American Academy of Pediatrics v Kennedy (No. 26-1503) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, argued October 6, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — First Circuit (original clips the judge's final closing word after all advocacy ends): https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/oralargs/26-1503_20261006.mp3 Case and argument date — First Circuit October2026 recording list: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/doar/results/2026-10 Preliminary relief and underlying facts — signed March16,2026 district-court order (public judicial PDF copy): https://clearinghouse-umich-production.s3.amazonaws.com/media/doc/168702.pdf Plaintiffs' claims and committee replacement — filed third amended complaint, Nov5,2025: https://www.apha.org/getContentAsset/c0f8c3a1-46e3-4640-a191-d5bf911bc653/7ca0dc9d-611d-46e2-9fd3-26a4c03ddcbb/251105_AAP_v_Kennedy_3rd-Amended.pdf?language=en Appeal scope and Matthew Zorn — filed government brief, Jun17,2026 (Georgetown public copy): https://litigationtracker.law.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/American-Academy-of-Pediatrics_2026.06.17_DEFENDANTS-OPENING-BRIEF.pdf Committee replacement — HHS June9,2025 announcement: https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/hhs-restore-public-trust-vaccines-acip.html ACIP's function — CDC committee explanation: https://www.cdc.gov/acip/about/index.html Fairly balanced membership — 5 U.S.C. §1004 (official2024 Code edition): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title5/html/USCODE-2024-title5-partI-chap10-sec1004.htm Agency review — 5 U.S.C. §704 (official2024 Code edition): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title5/html/USCODE-2024-title5-partI-chap7-sec704.htm Agency review — 5 U.S.C. §705 (official2024 Code edition): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title5/html/USCODE-2024-title5-partI-chap7-sec705.htm Agency review — 5 U.S.C. §706 (official2024 Code edition): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title5/html/USCODE-2024-title5-partI-chap7-sec706.htm Standing and redressability — FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (2024): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-235_n7ip.pdf

USA v. James — 9th Cir. (Sep 17, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears the United States versus Tre James. Jamie Yazzie disappeared from the Navajo Nation in 2019. Her remains were found on the neighboring Hopi Reservation in November 2021. A federal jury convicted James, her boyfriend, of first-degree murder and domestic violence against three other women. He received a life sentence. His appeal asks whether those convictions should stand. Rule 404(b) generally bars using other acts merely to show bad character and guilt, but may permit them for a different purpose, such as motive or intent. Rule 403 still permits exclusion if unfair prejudice substantially outweighs the evidence's value in proving the case. USA v. James (No. 24-5871) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 17, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Ninth Circuit (original ends during the next-case announcement, after this argument was submitted): https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/media/2026/09/17/24-5871.mp3 Argument date and case — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=24-5871&hearingDate=2026-09-17 Conviction appeal synopsis — Ninth Circuit calendar: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/calendar/calendar-search?input-search-case=24-5871 Jury verdict and case background — U.S. Attorney, Arizona: https://www.justice.gov/usao-az/pr/pinon-man-found-guilty-murder-missing-navajo-woman Sentence — U.S. Attorney, Arizona: https://www.justice.gov/usao-az/pr/convicted-murderer-sentenced-life-prison-murder-missing-navajo-woman Independent sentencing and background report — Anita Snow, Associated Press: https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/jamie-yazzie-boyfriend-navajo-woman-sentenced.amp Other-act evidence — Federal Rule of Evidence 404: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_404 Unfair prejudice — Federal Rule of Evidence 403: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_403 Other-act evidence safeguards — Huddleston v. United States, pages 691–692: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep485/usrep485681/usrep485681.pdf

Michael Washington v. Daviess County Hospital — 7th Cir. (Sep 16, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The Seventh Circuit hears Michael Washington versus Daviess County Hospital. Washington, a nursing-home resident, brought a civil-rights lawsuit under federal nursing-home law. He alleged that staffing deficiencies violated his rights as a resident. The district court dismissed his complaint, concluding that the federal resident-rights provisions did not themselves guarantee certain staffing levels. It also ruled that other provisions he invoked did not create individual rights enforceable through a civil-rights suit. The argument asks where those enforceable rights come from, and when an allegation of too few staff can support such a claim. Michael Washington v. Daviess County Hospital (No. 25-3054) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued September 16, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/external/cm.25-3054.25-3054_09_16_2026.mp3 Argument date and case listing — Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/oralArguments/oar.jsp?amonth=09%2F2026&aMonth=List+case%28s%29 Earlier Washington rulings cited in Hersberger — district court, pages 6 and 9: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-insd-1_25-cv-01250/pdf/USCOURTS-insd-1_25-cv-01250-0.pdf Nursing-home rights and Washington litigation — Missouri Law Review: https://lawreview.missouri.edu/finding-the-lightning-medina-v-planned-parenthood-south-atlantic-and-the-search-for-rights-creating-language-in-spending-power-legislation/

Oasis Capital, LLC, Appellant v. Nason, Yeager, Gerson, Harris & Fumero, P.A., et al. — 11th Cir. (Oct 2, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The Eleventh Circuit hears Oasis Capital versus the Nason Yeager law firm and Brian Bernstein. Oasis financed companies through convertible promissory notes—debts that can be turned into shares of stock. Oasis says its lawyers failed to file paperwork protecting its security interests, and sued for malpractice, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. The lawyers deny wrongdoing. After a trial, Oasis brought this appeal. The dispute concerns responsibility for filing a U C C one financing statement, and the difference between negligent legal work and a broken contractual promise. A U C C one is a public notice that a creditor claims a security interest in a borrower's property. Oasis Capital, LLC, Appellant v. Nason, Yeager, Gerson, Harris & Fumero, P.A., et al. (No. 25-11504) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued October 2, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Eleventh Circuit: https://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/oral_argument_recordings/25-11504_10022026.mp3 Argument date and listing — Eleventh Circuit: https://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?page=0 Earlier financing dispute and allegations — district court, February 2024: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-flsd-9_22-cv-81913/pdf/USCOURTS-flsd-9_22-cv-81913-2.pdf Trial and appeal filing entries — public court docket: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca11/25-11504 Convertible-note definition — separate company-filed note example, not this lawsuit: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1446159/000117184320000799/exh_102.htm Financing statements as public notice — North Dakota Secretary of State: https://www.sos.nd.gov/business/lien-filings-ucc/lien-overview Financing statements and collateral — Maryland filing office: https://egov.maryland.gov/SDAT/UCCFiling/FAQ.aspx

United States v. Schear — 10th Cir. (Sep 30, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The Tenth Circuit hears United States versus Schear. Wyoming investigators were watching Wade Schear in a drug investigation. In June 2024, they tracked a Volkswagen he drove to Colorado and back. After the car developed mechanical trouble, a deputy stopped it near Chugwater; a drug dog alerted, and the search found methamphetamine. Federal prosecutors later obtained a drug-trafficking conviction. This appeal challenges the vehicle search, focusing on the reliability of an informant and the government's warrant justification. You will hear references to Leon, the Supreme Court case about the good-faith exception to excluding evidence. The exception can allow evidence obtained in objectively reasonable reliance on a search warrant later found invalid. It does not excuse knowingly or recklessly misleading a judge, or reliance on a warrant obviously lacking support. United States v. Schear (No. 25-8043) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued September 30, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Tenth Circuit: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/oralarguments/25-8043.mp3 Argument date and case listing — Tenth Circuit: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/oralargument/search-results?field_oa_hearing_date_value%5Bmin%5D%5Bdate%5D=08%2F01%2F2026&field_oa_hearing_date_value%5Bmax%5D%5Bdate%5D=10%2F02%2F2026 Investigation and federal trial background — U.S. Attorney, Wyoming: https://www.justice.gov/usao-wy/pr/gillette-man-sentenced-25-years-federal-prison-trafficking-methamphetamine Earlier investigation and vehicle stop — independent court report: https://cowboystatedaily.com/2024/08/20/turns-out-the-cops-were-already-tracking-wyoming-mans-alleged-vw-meth-bug/ Appeal issues — Kansas Federal Public Defender: https://ks.fd.org/sites/ks/files/media-library/issues-pending-20260402.pdf Good-faith warrant reliance — Leon, Supreme Court majority: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/468/897/ Objective good faith and limits — Herring, Supreme Court majority: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-513.ZO.html

LUMA Energy v. Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority — 1st Cir. (Oct 6, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The First Circuit hears LUMA Energy versus Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority. LUMA operates Puerto Rico's electricity transmission and distribution network under a contract with the utility and the Public-Private Partnerships Authority. The authority raised six disputes over the performance of LUMA. The contract sends technical disputes to an independent expert; other disputes go through mediation and potentially litigation. LUMA rejected the authority's technical classification and sued in the federal debt-restructuring case of PREPA to require mediation first. Judge Laura Taylor Swain found that she had jurisdiction, but declined to hear the case, leaving litigation to Puerto Rico's Commonwealth court. LUMA appeals that decision. The argument concerns abstention: choosing not to exercise jurisdiction, rather than lacking the power to hear a case. PROMESA is the federal law governing this debt-restructuring process. Comity means respect for other courts' authority. David Horniak, of DLA Piper, will ask for federal adjudication. The partnerships authority will defend the judge's discretion to leave a local contract dispute to the Commonwealth court. LUMA Energy v. Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (No. 26-1081) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, argued October 6, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — First Circuit: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/oralargs/26-1081_20261006.mp3 Argument date and case listing — First Circuit: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/doar/results/2026-10 Contract dispute and P3A position — filed opposition, Doc. 33: https://document.epiq11.com/document/getdocumentbycode?docId=4513230&projectCode=PR1&source=DM Background and abstention decision — Judge Swain, Doc. 65: https://cdn.noticel.com/2025/12/19195210/Decision-Swain-sobre-demanda-de-LUMA-por-disputas-de-la-AAPP-19-diciembre-2025.pdf Appeal and LUMA counsel — filed notice, Doc. 67 (main filing): https://document.epiq11.com/document/getdocumentsbydocket/?docketId=1203172&docketNumber=67&projectCode=PR1&source=DM Independent contract background — Oversight Board statement: https://oversightboard.pr.gov/fomb-statement-p3a-vs-luma/ PROMESA abstention provision — 48 U.S.C. § 2169: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/48/2169 Comity in bankruptcy abstention — 28 U.S.C. § 1334(c)(1): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1334 Abstention and comity — Quackenbush, Supreme Court majority: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-244.ZO.html

United States v. Jamari Edwards — 7th Cir. (Sep 29, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The Seventh Circuit hears United States versus Edwards. Edwards pleaded guilty to three Chicago carjackings and related gun charges. In one carjacking, he shot a driver in the leg after forcing him out of his car. He received twenty-two years in prison and appealed the criminal judgment. Supervised release is a period of court supervision after prison, with conditions the person must follow. Restitution is court-ordered compensation to crime victims. United States v. Jamari Edwards (No. 25-2658) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued September 29, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/external/gw.25-2658.25-2658_09_29_2026.mp3 Argument date and case listing — Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/oralArguments/oar.jsp?amonth=09%2F2026&aMonth=List+case%28s%29 Admitted facts and plea — filed plea agreement, N.D. Illinois Doc. 35: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/media/1397451/dl?inline= Prosecution case account and sentence — U.S. Attorney, Northern District of Illinois: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/man-sentenced-22-years-prison-carjacking-three-vehicles-chicago Independent court-files reporting — CWB Chicago (Sep 12, 2025): https://cwbchicago.com/2025/09/anti-violence-worker-22-years-for-shooting-man-during-violent-carjacking-spree.html Appeal and counsel appearances — public copy of clerk entries: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca7/25-2658 Supervised release — 18 U.S.C. § 3583: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3583 Post-prison supervision — Johnson, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/529/694/ Criminal restitution — 18 U.S.C. § 3663A: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3663A Restitution definition — Hughey, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/495/411/ Plain-error review — United States v. Olano, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/507/725/ Plain-error review — Puckett v. United States, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/129/ Independent review of legal questions — Salve Regina, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/499/225/ De novo review — Ornelas, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/517/690/

United States v. Terry Brooks — 2d Cir. (Sep 30, 2026) Oct 08, 2026

Show notes

The Second Circuit hears United States versus Brooks. According to prosecutors, Terry Brooks fired at a man in the Bronx; the bullet hit a woman nearby. Brooks received a ten-year prison sentence, which he is appealing. A criminal-history score helps determine the advisory sentencing range. PSR means the probation office's presentence report. United States v. Terry Brooks (No. 25-2373) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued September 30, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/audio/25-2373,%2026-121.mp3 Argument date and case listing — Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/oral_arguments.html Prosecution case account and sentence — U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/new-york-man-sentenced-10-years-connection-2023-shooting-using-ghost-gun Independent firsthand sentencing report — Inner City Press (Sep 22, 2025): https://innercitypress.com/sdny9garnettbrooksicp092225.html Appeal and counsel appearances — public copy of clerk entries (25-2373): https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca2/25-2373 Consolidated appeal and counsel appearances — public copy of clerk entries (26-121): https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca2/26-121 Presentence report — Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_32 Criminal history and sentencing range — Rosales-Mireles, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/585/16-9493/ Plain-error review — United States v. Olano, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/507/725/ Plain-error review — Puckett v. United States, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/129/ Independent review of legal questions — Salve Regina, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/499/225/ De novo review — Ornelas, Supreme Court opinion: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/517/690/

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Oral Arguments, with Context

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected