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:

Holtmeier, et al. v. Kappa Kappa Gamma Fraternity, et al. — 10th Cir. (Sep 14, 2026) Sep 27, 2026

Show notes

A 2022 vote at the University of Wyoming's Kappa Kappa Gamma chapter to admit a transgender woman leads to a dispute over the sorority's national membership rules. Some chapter members say leaders pressured the vote and used an improper ballot; those are allegations, not established findings. Members sued in 2023; after an initial dismissal and an appeal that ended for lack of appellate jurisdiction, three filed a second amended complaint. A Wyoming federal judge dismissed that complaint in 2025, ruling that Kappa's council could interpret an undefined bylaw term and that the pleaded claims did not justify intervention. This appeal asks whether the council merely interpreted 'woman' to include transgender women, as Kappa contends, or effectively changed the membership rule without a member vote, as the plaintiffs contend. The judges also probe the alleged voting irregularities and whether Kappa had to explain its policy to recruits. Holtmeier, et al. v. Kappa Kappa Gamma Fraternity, et al. (No. 25-8058) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued September 14, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Tenth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/oralarguments/25-8058.mp3 Argument listing and date — 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=09%2F27%2F2026 District court dismissal order — D. Wyoming (WyoFile mirror): https://wyofile.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/8_22_25-case-dismissed.pdf Appellate docket and counsel — Tenth Circuit (Justia mirror): https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca10/25-8058 Independent argument reporting — Courthouse News Service: https://www.courthousenews.com/sorority-sisters-ask-10th-circuit-to-revive-challenge-to-kappa-kappa-gammas-definition-of-woman/ Ohio nonprofit director authority — Ohio Revised Code § 1702.30: https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-1702.30 Ohio nonprofit regulations — Ohio Revised Code § 1702.11: https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-1702.11 Judicial noninterference — Ulliman v. Ohio High School Athletic Association: https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/2/2009/2009-ohio-3756.pdf Fraudulent inducement — Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems v. Mosley: https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/8/2010/2010-ohio-2886.pdf Angela Lavin — Wegman Hessler: https://wegmanlaw.com/attorney/angela-m-lavin/ Natalie McLaughlin — Vorys: https://www.vorys.com/event-grow-in-ohio-ohio-labor-and-employment-laws-what-companies-need-to-know

Antwine v. Burton — 10th Cir. (Sep 15, 2026) Sep 27, 2026

Show notes

Shirley Antwine appeals after a district court dismissed a lawsuit over her son Ernest's death. In August 2021, she called Oklahoma City police when Ernest tried to enter her home. Sergeant Robert Burton put him in a patrol car, drove him to a vacant lot near Sooner Road, and left him there. Minutes later, a vehicle struck and killed him. Shirley, representing his estate, says Burton ignored a serious medical need. The district court dismissed her federal claim under qualified immunity, a rule requiring both a constitutional violation and law clearly warning the officer that his conduct was unlawful. The judge decided only the second question: the law was not clear enough on the facts alleged. Now the Tenth Circuit will also hear about a different theory: whether Burton created the danger by moving Ernest to that location. Antwine v. Burton (No. 25-6109) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued September 15, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Tenth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/oralarguments/25-6109.mp3 Argument listing and date — 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=09%2F27%2F2026 District court's dismissal order — W.D. Oklahoma (Justia mirror): https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/oklahoma/okwdce/5%3A2023cv00359/121926/28/ Appellate docket and counsel entries — Tenth Circuit (Justia mirror): https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca10/25-6109 Independent incident reporting — Oklahoma Watch via Public Radio Tulsa: https://www.publicradiotulsa.org/local-regional/2023-07-05/man-in-mental-health-crisis-killed-by-passing-truck-after-okc-police-abandoned-him Qualified immunity — Supreme Court, Pearson v. Callahan: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-555/pdf/USREPORTS-555-223.pdf State-created danger — Tenth Circuit, Gray v. University of Colorado Hospital Authority: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/01018799871.pdf State-created danger — Tenth Circuit, Matthews v. Bergdorf: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/01019988045.pdf Kevin Kemper's law office — Chickasaw Nation Judicial Department directory: https://judicial.chickasaw.net/Bar-Association/Bar-Directory.aspx Stacey Felkner's firm biography — Collins, Zorn & Wagner: https://czwlaw.com/stacey-h-felkner/

United States v. Alan Lagunas — 8th Cir. (Sep 24, 2026) Sep 27, 2026

Show notes

The Eighth Circuit hears Alan Hernandez Lagunas's appeal from a federal illegal-reentry conviction. Federal prosecutors say he had been deported three times, was found in Iowa in 2025, and received a six-month prison sentence for returning. His lawyer says a 2013 removal order rested on an earlier Iowa carrying-weapons conviction that did not actually make him deportable. The lawyer says immigration counsel wrongly conceded that point instead of contesting it. Lagunas now seeks dismissal of the reentry charge by challenging that old removal order. The judges will ask whether he had other ways to challenge the order, and whether his lawyer's conduct made those avenues unavailable. United States v. Alan Lagunas (No. 26-1179) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, argued September 24, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Eighth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://media-oa.ca8.uscourts.gov/OAaudio/2026/9/261179.mp3 Argument listing and date — Eighth Circuit: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sessions.pl?yymm=202609&getOA=Select Case background and sentence — U.S. Attorney's Office: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdia/pr/mexican-native-sentenced-prison-illegally-reentering-united-states Government counsel background — U.S. Attorney's Office: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdia/pr/united-states-attorney-david-waterman-announces-southern-district-iowa-senior Illegal-reentry challenge rules — 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d): https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1326&num=0&edition=prelim Firearm removal ground — 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(C): https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1227&num=0&edition=prelim Federal firearm definition — 18 U.S.C. § 921(a): https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section921&num=0&edition=prelim Iowa weapons law — Iowa Code chapter 724 (2013): https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/2013/724.pdf Three mandatory conditions — Supreme Court, Palomar-Santiago: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r38_n648.pdf Categorical approach — Supreme Court, Descamps: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/570bv.pdf Ineffective-counsel reopening — Board of Immigration Appeals, Matter of Lozada: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/precedent-decisions-volume-19 Antique-firearm contrast — Iowa Supreme Court, State v. Rhodes: https://www.iowacourts.gov/courtcases/19912/embed/SupremeCourtOpinion

United States v. Lloyd Franklin — 8th Cir. (Sep 25, 2026) Sep 27, 2026

Show notes

The Eighth Circuit hears Lloyd Franklin's appeal from a federal crack-cocaine sentence in Iowa. Investigators' controlled purchases in the Quad Cities yielded more than five hundred grams of crack cocaine. A federal judge sentenced Franklin for a conspiracy to distribute the drug. The argument concerns a much larger quantity attributed to him at sentencing, based on a confidential source's account of earlier purchases. Franklin's lawyer will challenge the reliability of that account; the United States will defend the sentencing judge's finding. The appellate court will ask whether that drug-quantity finding was clearly erroneous. United States v. Lloyd Franklin (No. 26-1266) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, argued September 25, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Eighth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://media-oa.ca8.uscourts.gov/OAaudio/2026/9/261266.mp3 Argument listing and date — Eighth Circuit: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sessions.pl?yymm=202609&getOA=Select Case background and sentence — U.S. Attorney's Office: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdia/pr/two-davenport-co-conspirators-sentenced-federal-prison-cocaine-charges Presentence report — U.S. Sentencing Commission, § 6A1.2: https://guidelines.ussc.gov/apex/r/ussc_apex/guidelinesapp/guidelines?app_gl_id=%C2%A76A1.2 Reliability at sentencing — U.S. Sentencing Commission, § 6A1.3: https://guidelines.ussc.gov/apex/r/ussc_apex/guidelinesapp/guidelines?app_gl_id=%C2%A76A1.3 Drug quantity table — U.S. Sentencing Commission, § 2D1.1: https://guidelines.ussc.gov/apex/r/ussc_apex/guidelinesapp/guidelines?app_gl_id=%C2%A72D1.1 Drug-quantity review — Eighth Circuit, United States v. Myrick: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/24/07/232264P.pdf Sentencing hearsay — Eighth Circuit opinion: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/23/08/213524P.pdf

Aramark Services v. Aetna Life Ins — 5th Cir. (Sep 24, 2026) Sep 27, 2026

Show notes

Aramark funded employee health plans and hired Aetna to handle medical claims. Aramark alleges that Aetna paid improper claims and collected fees it should not have received. Aetna wants the dispute in arbitration, but their contract excludes claims for equitable relief. A Texas judge declined to halt the lawsuit for arbitration. The Fifth Circuit is now hearing the case en banc, after vacating an earlier three-judge opinion. The judges must decide who applies the contract's exception, and whether the money Aramark seeks is an equitable remedy or ordinary damages. Charles McCloud will argue for Aetna that the claim belongs in arbitration. Aramark Services v. Aetna Life Ins (No. 24-40323) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued September 24, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Fifth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/24/24-40323_9-24-2026.mp3 Argument listing — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings Argument calendar — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-09-24 Original complaint — Aramark v. Aetna: https://www.millerchevalier.com/sites/default/files/resources/General_Alerts/2023-12-22_Aramark-v-Aetna.pdf District-court arbitration order: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/texas/txedce/2:2023cv00446/225222/43/ Vacated panel opinion — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/24/24-40323-CV0.pdf En banc vacatur order — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/docs/default-source/cm-ecf/24-40323.pdf ERISA § 502, 29 U.S.C. § 1132 — U.S. Code: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:29%20section:1132%20edition:prelim) CIGNA Corp. v. Amara — Supreme Court opinion: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USREPORTS-563/USREPORTS-563-421/context Dicta — Cornell Legal Information Institute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/Dicta Charles Fowler biography — McKool Smith: https://www.mckoolsmith.com/professionals-Charles_Fowler Labor Department leadership: https://www.dol.gov/general/contact/leadership-team Jonathan Berry biography — Labor Department: https://beta.dol.gov/about/leadership/jonathan-berry

J.G.G. v. Donald Trump — D.C. Cir. (Sep 25, 2026) Sep 26, 2026

Show notes

The D.C. Circuit hears the government's appeal in J.G.G. v. Trump. In March 2025, U.S. officials sent 137 Venezuelan men to a prison in El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act without giving them a chance to challenge their removal first. Months later, the men were released to Venezuela in a prisoner exchange. A district judge found they were denied due process and ordered steps toward hearings, including help returning class members then in third countries who want to come back. The government disputes whether the court still has jurisdiction and whether that remedy goes too far. J.G.G. v. Donald Trump (No. 26-5074) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, argued September 25, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — D.C. Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/recordings/docs/2026/09/26-5074.mp3 Argument listing — D.C. Circuit: https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/recordings/bydate/2026/9 Appellate docket — D.C. Circuit via Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/cadc/26-5074 December 2025 district-court opinion: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2025cv00766/278436/215/0.pdf February 2026 district-court order: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2025cv00766/278436/247/0.pdf Case preview — ACLU (counsel for appellees): https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/d-c-circuit-to-hear-upcoming-arguments-on-trump-administrations-defiance-of-court-order-and-cecot-deportations-under-alien-enemies-act Lee Gelernt biography — ACLU: https://www.aclu.org/bios/lee-gelernt 28 U.S.C. § 2241 — Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:28%20section:2241%20edition:prelim) Heck v. Humphrey — Supreme Court opinion via Cornell LII: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/512/477 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 — U.S. Courts: https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/civil_federal_rules_pamphlet_dec_1_2023.pdf

Rasha Talafhah v. Robert Allison — 7th Cir. (Sep 24, 2026) Sep 26, 2026

Show notes

The Seventh Circuit hears Rasha Talafhah's appeal. At Illinois's Logan Correctional Center, she says officers held her down while medical provider Robert Allison searched her genitals for contraband without her consent. She sued over the search, bringing constitutional and Illinois medical-battery claims. After a jury trial, this appeal focuses on medical battery; the constitutional claims are no longer at issue. The lawyers will dispute whether the contact was harmful or offensive, and whether an Illinois medical-emergency exception could justify the lack of consent. Rasha Talafhah v. Robert Allison (No. 25-1520) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued September 24, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Seventh Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/external/ef.25-1520.25-1520_09_24_2026.mp3 Argument listing — Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/oralArguments/oar.jsp?amonth=09%2F2026&aMonth=List+case%28s%29 Talafhah initial merit-review order — Central District of Illinois: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/illinois/ilcdce/3:2017cv03194/70783/9/0.pdf Talafhah jury-trial notice — Florida Supreme Court filing: https://acis-api.flcourts.gov/courts/68f021c4-6a44-4735-9a76-5360b2e8af13/cms/case/8fcfc9c4-8ac0-495a-86df-db0224af0278/docketentrydocuments/bcd699a2-b8e2-47f3-ab77-afd8abca76a6 Talafhah jury-trial confirmation — Central District of Illinois filing: https://trellis.law/doc/district/12371408/andrews-v-rauner Illinois Pattern Civil Jury Instruction 105.07: https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/b6021d1e-d1fb-4c90-b4b7-48bbb0251570/IL_IPI_Civil.pdf Moriarity v. Rockford Health Systems — Illinois appellate court: https://www.illinoiscourts.gov/Resources/d83814fb-e9b4-4854-8b73-a73cf2a8f26a/2041205.pdf Curtis v. Jaskey — Illinois appellate court: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/il-court-of-appeals/1193712.html

United States v. Pena — 10th Cir. (Sep 17, 2026) Sep 26, 2026

Show notes

The Tenth Circuit hears Solomon Peña's appeal. Peña lost a New Mexico state House race in 2022. In the following weeks, gunfire struck the homes of four state and local officials around Albuquerque. A federal jury convicted him for directing the shootings, including interference with federally protected election activity and related gun offenses; he received an eighty-year sentence. Nicholas Hart of Harrison and Hart will argue for Peña that Congress's election power cannot reach retaliation against state officials after voting ended. The judges also ask whether the election-interference convictions are legally crimes of violence needed for the gun counts. That question turns on what the law required the jury to find, not merely how violent the shootings were. United States v. Pena (No. 25-2090) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued September 17, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Tenth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/oralarguments/25-2090.mp3 Argument 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=09%2F26%2F2026 Appellate docket and counsel — Tenth Circuit: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca10/25-2090 Peña post-trial order — District of New Mexico: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-nmd-1_23-cr-00748/pdf/USCOURTS-nmd-1_23-cr-00748-18.pdf Verdict and sentence — U.S. Attorney's Office: https://www.justice.gov/usao-nm/pr/eighty-year-sentence-former-candidate-who-orchestrated-shootings-and-murder-hire-after Independent case report — Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/d8fab1b29248579ba855c96f3b41fd68 Federally protected activities, 18 U.S.C. § 245: https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/18/245 Firearm offenses, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c): https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/18/924 United States v. Taylor — Supreme Court: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1459_n7ip.pdf Issues on appeal — Federal Public Defender, District of Kansas: https://ks.fd.org/sites/ks/files/media-library/issues-pending-20260402.pdf Nicholas Hart — Harrison & Hart: https://www.harrisonhartlaw.com/ William Connor Winn — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca4-24-04039/pdf/USCOURTS-ca4-24-04039-0.pdf

United States v. Clarke — 7th Cir. (Sep 25, 2026) Sep 26, 2026

Show notes

The Seventh Circuit hears Taquan Clarke's appeal after a jury convicted him of a cocaine-distribution conspiracy and using a gun to kill Kevin Hood during a drug offense. In July 2017, Clarke and Devontae Martin went armed to Hood's car wash in Gary, Indiana. Hood fled, Martin struggled with him outside, and Clarke shot Hood in the head. The prosecution said the men went there to take cocaine from Hood, but Clarke disputes that he knew of any drug plan. Vanessa Malone, counsel for Clarke, will argue that the evidence did not establish his knowing participation in a drug conspiracy. The judges also probe a variance: when the government charges one broad conspiracy but may have proved a narrower one, a conviction generally stands unless that difference prejudiced the defendant. United States v. Clarke (No. 25-2236) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued September 25, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Seventh Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/external/dab.25-2236.25-2236_09_25_2026.mp3 Argument listing — Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/oralArguments/oar.jsp?amonth=09%2F2026&aMonth=List+case%28s%29 Clarke appeal docket and counsel — Seventh Circuit: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca7/25-2236 Clarke post-trial order — Northern District of Indiana (mirror): https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/659ccbf4329ade459749239b United States v. Martin — Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/OpinionsWeb/processWebInputExternal.pl?Path=Y2024%2FD12-02%2FC%3A23-3086%3AJ%3AScudder%3Aaut%3AT%3AfnOp%3AN%3A3299507%3AS%3A0&Submit=Display United States v. Tate — Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/OpinionsWeb/processWebInputExternal.pl?Path=Y2024%2FD04-03%2FC%3A22-2060%3AJ%3ARipple%3Aaut%3AT%3AfnOp%3AN%3A3190764%3AS%3A0&Submit=Display Clarke verdict and sentence — U.S. Attorney's Office: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndin/pr/gary-man-sentenced-480-months-prison Joseph P. Falvey — U.S. Attorney's Office: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndin/pr/south-bend-man-sentenced-98-months-prison-controlled-substance-offense

United States v. Mentzer — 10th Cir. (Sep 16, 2026) Sep 26, 2026

Show notes

Bruce Mentzer's federal case arose from stalking conduct involving a gun. He pleaded guilty to a firearm count with a five-year guideline sentence, but the judge imposed thirty years. Ann Taliaferro of Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat will argue for Mentzer that the judge did not give enough notice or explain the much longer term. A departure uses a specific Guidelines provision to move outside the range; a variance relies on broader statutory sentencing factors. Rule 32(h) requires notice of some departures, so which route the judge took matters. Mentzer also argues that the judge failed to weigh his acceptance of responsibility and other mitigating evidence. United States v. Mentzer (No. 25-3132) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued September 16, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — Tenth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/oralarguments/25-3132.mp3 Argument 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=09%2F26%2F2026 Appellate docket and counsel — Tenth Circuit: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca10/25-3132 Mentzer sentencing issues — Federal Public Defender, District of Kansas: https://ks.fd.org/sites/ks/files/media-library/issues-pending-20260402.pdf Firearm guideline, § 2K2.4 — U.S. Sentencing Commission: https://www.ussc.gov/guidelines/2025-guidelines-manual/annotated-2025-chapter-2-e-k Departures and variances — U.S. Sentencing Commission: https://www.ussc.gov/guidelines/primers/departures-and-variances Criminal Rule 32 — Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure: https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/document/federal-rules-of-criminal-procedure.pdf Sentencing factors, 18 U.S.C. § 3553 — U.S. Code: https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/18/3553 Ann Marie Taliaferro — Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat: https://www.brownbradshaw.com/our-firm/ann-marie-taliaferro Duston J. Slinkard — U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Kansas: https://www.justice.gov/archives/usao-ks/staff-profile/meet-us-attorney-slinkard

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Oral Arguments, with Context

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected