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:

Ferreira v. Dosin — 2d Cir. (Sep 15, 2026) Sep 18, 2026

Show notes

The Second Circuit hears Ferreira versus Dosin. Jessie Ferreira is a sergeant in the Hastings-on-Hudson Police Department and was its only female supervisor. She alleges that male subordinates repeatedly undermined her authority, the chief failed to support her as he supported men, and the department promoted Robert Gagliardi—not her—to lieutenant in 2023. After she sued, she says the chief changed overtime rules for remote training and shift-bidding rules in retaliation. The district court dismissed her first complaint, allowed an amendment, then dismissed again before discovery, finding too little factual detail to plausibly infer sex discrimination, unequal treatment, or retaliation. The appeal asks whether Ferreira's allegations need only support a minimal inference of discrimination at the pleading stage, and whether the policy changes plausibly show retaliation. Ferreira v. Dosin (No. 26-228) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued September 15, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/audio/26-228.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/oral_arguments.html District-court opinion — Ferreira v. Dosin: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/7%3A2023cv10336/610961/35/ District-court judgment — Ferreira v. Dosin: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/7%3A2023cv10336/610961/38/0.pdf Appellate docket — Ferreira v. Dosin: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca2/26-228 Police staff — Village of Hastings-on-Hudson: https://www.hohny.gov/199/Staff Jonathan R. Goldman — Goldman Law: https://www.jrgoldmanlaw.com/about Richard S. Finkel — Bond, Schoeneck & King: https://www.bsk.com/people/richard-s-finkel

Costa Dondoni v Blanche — 1st Cir. (Sep 16, 2026) Sep 18, 2026

Show notes

The First Circuit reviews the Board of Immigration Appeals' refusal to return Kayo Felipe Costa Dondoni's removal case to an immigration judge. An immigration judge denied the asylum application filed by Dondoni and his family. By then, immigration officials had approved Dondoni for Special Immigrant Juvenile classification and granted deferred action. That classification can lead to permanent residence, but Dondoni must wait for an immigrant visa to become available before applying. He asked the Board to separate his case from his family's and send it back so a judge could consider pausing or ending his removal proceedings while he waited. The Board denied both motions. The appeal asks whether the Board answered the wrong question by treating those temporary docket-management options as a request for immediate permanent residence. Costa Dondoni v Blanche (No. 25-2103) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, argued September 16, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/oralargs/25-2103_20260916.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/doar/results/2026-09 Oral-argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/calendar.pdf?simple=True Case background and procedural order — U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts via GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-mad-1_25-cv-13438/pdf/USCOURTS-mad-1_25-cv-13438-0.pdf Current appellate docket — Justia (PACER-derived): https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca1/25-2103 Form I-485 instructions — U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-485instr.pdf Immigration Court Practice Manual — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/988061/dl Prima-facie standard — First Circuit opinion in Rivera-Medrano v. Garland: https://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/20-1667P-01A.pdf Michael B. Kaplan — Brooks Law Firm: https://brookslawfirm.com/michael-b-kaplan/

United States of America v. Scott — 2d Cir. (Sep 16, 2026) Sep 18, 2026

Show notes

The Second Circuit asks whether withheld evidence could have changed Napoleon Scott's guilty plea. Prosecutors accused Scott of trafficking Jane Doe on Brooklyn's Penn Track. After Scott was jailed, the government says his co-defendant, James Mangham, watched Jane Doe, tried to stop her from cooperating with police, and discussed retaliation. Scott pleaded guilty in December 2023 to sex-trafficking conspiracy under Section 1594(c). Scott says that before the plea, Mangham told prosecutors the men ran separate operations, recruited different women, and did not pay one another. The government gave those statements to Scott eight days before sentencing, not before his plea. Scott did not withdraw the plea and received 160 months, but later said he would have gone to trial if he had known. The appeal asks whether Mangham's statements were favorable and material under Brady—enough to create a reasonable probability of a different plea decision. United States of America v. Scott (No. 25-1587) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued September 16, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/audio/25-1587.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/oral_arguments.html Plea, sentence, and procedural order — U.S. District Court for the E.D.N.Y. via GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-nyed-1_22-cr-00156/pdf/USCOURTS-nyed-1_22-cr-00156-0.pdf Current appellate docket — Justia (PACER-derived): https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca2/25-1587 Independent case report — New York Daily News via Yahoo: https://www.yahoo.com/news/queens-pimp-napoleon-scott-weighed-131500155.html Sarah Kunstler — Law Offices of Sarah Kunstler and Beena Ahmad: https://kunstlerlaw.net/index.php/sarah-kunstler/ 18 U.S.C. § 1594 — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?edition=prelim&f=treesort&jumpTo=true&num=0&req=%28title%3A18+section%3A1594+edition%3Aprelim%29+OR+%28granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title18-section1594%29 18 U.S.C. § 3500 — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?edition=2023&num=0&req=granuleid%3AUSC-2023-title18-section3500 Brady v. Maryland — U.S. Reports via GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-373/pdf/USREPORTS-373-83.pdf United States v. Overton — Second Circuit opinion: https://openjurist.org/24/f4th/870/united-states-v-overton Fatico-hearing procedure — U.S. District Court for the E.D.N.Y. via GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-nyed-1_12-cr-00265/pdf/USCOURTS-nyed-1_12-cr-00265-2.pdf

McNellis v. Douglas County School District — 10th Cir. (Sep 17, 2026) Sep 18, 2026

Show notes

The Tenth Circuit returns to a religious-discrimination suit by Corey McNellis, a former assistant principal and athletic director at Ponderosa High School. In October 2020, the school announced a production of The Laramie Project, a play about the murder of gay college student Matthew Shepard. McNellis replied to a staff-wide email that he opposed the production and, identifying himself as Christian, offered to collaborate. Staff members complained that his messages were bullying, threatening, or discriminatory toward the L G B T Q community. The school placed him on leave, investigated, and fired him later that month. McNellis sued under Title Seven and Colorado law. In 2024, the Tenth Circuit revived his religious-discrimination claims at the pleading stage. After discovery, the district court granted summary judgment to the school, finding neither a reasonable inference of religious discrimination nor evidence that the school's reasons were pretextual. This second appeal asks whether the expanded record contains factual disputes that a jury must decide. McNellis v. Douglas County School District (No. 26-1020) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued September 17, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/oralarguments/26-1020.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/oralargument/search-results?field_oa_hearing_date_value%5Bmin%5D%5Bdate%5D=09%2F17%2F2026&field_oa_hearing_date_value%5Bmax%5D%5Bdate%5D=09%2F18%2F2026 Prior appellate opinion — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010111109434.pdf Summary-judgment order — U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado via GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-cod-1_22-cv-01636/pdf/USCOURTS-cod-1_22-cv-01636-1.pdf Current appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca10/26-1020 Independent case report — Colorado Politics: https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2022/09/06/douglas-county-school-district-asks-judge-to-dismiss-religious-discrimination-suit-brought-by-former-staffer-54b00f33-e713-5b7e-bb65-24a412b4fa72/ Spencer J. Kontnik — Kontnik Cohen: https://www.kontnikcohen.com/spencer-kontnik Jonathan P. Fero — Semple, Farrington, Everall & Case: https://semplelaw.com/team-member/jonathan-p-fero Sham-affidavit doctrine — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010111427516.pdf Sham-affidavit factors — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/01018255927.pdf Anderson v. Liberty Lobby — U.S. Reports: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep477/usrep477242/usrep477242.pdf

M J Nichols Company, Inc. v. Kristina Boardman — 7th Cir. (Sep 17, 2026) Sep 18, 2026

Show notes

The Seventh Circuit considers Wisconsin's personalized-plate rules under the First Amendment. In 2001, Michael Nichols received a Pontiac Trans Am plate displaying R, D, R, R, A, G, and E. After acquiring another Trans Am, he requested the same plate in 2019; the Wisconsin D M V denied it and added the text to its objectionable list. The D M V denied him again in 2023. Wisconsin law permits the department to reject text that may carry connotations offensive to good taste or decency. Nichols and his company sued, arguing that the rule facially discriminates by viewpoint. The district court held that personalized plate characters are government speech, so the Free Speech Clause did not apply, and ruled for the state. The appeal asks whether the characters convey private or government speech and, if they are private speech, whether Wisconsin's rule is constitutional. M J Nichols Company, Inc. v. Kristina Boardman (No. 26-1043) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued September 17, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/external/nv.26-1043.26-1043_09_17_2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit: https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/oralArguments/oar.jsp?amonth=09%2F2026&aMonth=List+case%28s%29 District court opinion — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-wiwd-3_24-cv-00566/pdf/USCOURTS-wiwd-3_24-cv-00566-0.pdf Complaint — Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty: https://will-law.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/01-2024-08-12-Complaint-1.pdf Case page and Lucas Vebber — Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty: https://will-law.org/nichols-v-dot/ Independent case report — State Bar of Wisconsin: https://www.wisbar.org/NewsPublications/InsideTrack/Pages/Article.aspx?ArticleID=31376&Issue=45&Volume=17 Personalized-plate criteria — Wisconsin Department of Transportation: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/dmv/vehicles/title-plates/pp-faq.aspx Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca7/26-1043 Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans — U.S. Reports: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/576BV.pdf Matal v. Tam — Supreme Court of the United States: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1293_1o13.pdf Shurtleff v. Boston — Supreme Court of the United States: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1800_7lho.pdf Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Defense Fund — U.S. Reports: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep473/usrep473788/usrep473788.pdf Clayton P. Kawski — State Bar of Wisconsin: https://marketplace.wisbar.org/SBWMarketplace/media/ProductFiles/Book-Files/AK0166Authors_FY24.pdf Clayton P. Kawski filing — Supreme Court of the United States: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-95/245755/20221103162339092_Ltr%20from%20Kawski%20to%20Clerk%20asking%20for%2030-day%20extension%20for%20BIO-1598021.pdf

United States v. Maurice Fitzgerald Alexander Jr. — 9th Cir. (Sep 17, 2026) Sep 18, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears Maurice Fitzgerald Alexander Junior's appeal from a federal sex-trafficking prosecution in Tucson. The case began after a fourteen-year-old girl called 911 in October 2021 and reported being trafficked for sexual exploitation. Investigators said Alexander had moved her through Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and Colorado, and forced her to make explicit images later used in online advertisements. A jury convicted him of sex trafficking a minor by force, fraud, or coercion; conspiracy; interstate transportation for criminal sexual activity; and producing child pornography. The district judge sentenced him to forty years in prison and lifetime supervision. On appeal, Alexander says his trial lawyer wrongly told him that not knowing the girl's age was a defense to one count. He argues that the bad advice cost him an early plea offer capped at ten years, and that the judge should have replaced counsel after their relationship broke down. He also challenges the evidence and an expert witness; the appeal remains pending. United States v. Maurice Fitzgerald Alexander Jr. (No. 24-5052) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 17, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/media/2026/09/17/24-5052.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=24-5052&hearingDate=2026-09-17 Argument metadata — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://oldrbx80f5.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/media/24-5052?hearingDate=2026-09-17 Federal verdict announcement — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/usao-az/pr/sex-offender-convicted-sex-trafficking-charges Federal sentencing announcement — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/usao-az/pr/sex-offender-sentenced-40-years-prison-sex-trafficking-charges Federal sentencing announcement — Homeland Security Investigations: https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/hsi-tucson-case-sends-sex-offender-prison-40-years Victim recovery and arrests — National Center for Missing & Exploited Children: https://www.missingkids.org/blog/2021/they-preyed-on-the-innocent Independent verdict report — Arizona Daily Independent: https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2024/05/30/tennessee-sex-offender-convicted-on-sex-trafficking-charges/ Amy B. Krauss — Arizona Supreme Court docket: https://apps.azcourts.gov/aacc/appella/ASC/CR/CR240102.pdf Criminal standards of review — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/uploads/guides/stand_of_review/II.%20Criminal%20Proceedings%202022.htm 28 U.S.C. § 2255 — U.S. House of Representatives: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=%28title%3A28+section%3A2255+edition%3Aprelim%29 Lafler v. Cooper — U.S. Supreme Court: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USREPORTS-566/USREPORTS-566-156 Strickland v. Washington — U.S. Supreme Court: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USREPORTS-466/USREPORTS-466-668 United States v. Velazquez — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/05/01/14-10311.pdf Published-opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://rf9ecr1p0i.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/opinions/search?q=24-5052 Memorandum search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://xcglumg9bj.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/memoranda/search?q=24-5052

United States v. David Hess — 4th Cir. (Sep 16, 2026) Sep 17, 2026

Show notes

The Fourth Circuit hears David Hess's appeal from convictions arising from his medical practice in Bridgeport, West Virginia. The DEA began investigating his prescribing in late 2018, and agents later searched the clinic and seized patient records and his iPhone. A jury convicted Hess on four counts of unlawfully distributing Adderall and one obstruction count tied to an attempted remote wipe of that phone. It acquitted him on sixteen other distribution counts, and the district judge sentenced him to two years in prison. The appeal asks whether the court correctly rejected a claim of juror bias, whether the DEA investigation was a pending agency proceeding under Section 1505, and whether the judge wrongly excluded evidence about the patient's later diagnosis or allowed the government's prescribing expert to testify. The case remains pending; the Fourth Circuit took it under advisement. United States v. David Hess (No. 25-4511) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, argued September 16, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/OAarchive/mp3/25-4511-20260916.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/oral-argument/oral-argument-audio-files Public brief index — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/DataBriefs.aspx?CASENUM=25-4511 District-court pretrial opinion — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-wvnd-1_23-cr-00018/pdf/USCOURTS-wvnd-1_23-cr-00018-0.pdf Federal indictment announcement — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndwv/pr/west-virginia-doctor-charged-illegal-prescribing-destroying-evidence Federal verdict announcement — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndwv/pr/doctor-convicted-improper-prescribing-adderall Federal sentencing announcement — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndwv/pr/harrison-county-doctor-sentenced-improper-prescribing-adderall Independent trial report — WV News: https://www.wvnews.com/business/bridgeport-west-virginia-doctor-goes-on-trial-on-allegations-he-prescribed-unlawfully/article_37d9caa6-f5d3-11ee-bf6c-07d72d0a3e92.html Independent verdict report — WV News: https://www.wvnews.com/business/fed-jury-convicts-bridgeport-west-virginia-doctor-on-4-felony-drug-prescribing-crimes-obstructing-acquits/article_da4f3f8c-fda8-11ee-93b3-73da86fa2375.html Independent sentencing report — WV News: https://www.wvnews.com/news/wvnews/doctor-gets-24-months-in-prison-for-drug-obstruction-convictions-in-northern-west-virginia/article_02cd67b2-081d-47dc-984c-7747c0af8ae8.html 18 U.S.C. § 1505 — U.S. House of Representatives: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?edition=prelim&num=0&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title18-section1505 United States v. Zeledon Hernandez — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/244665.P.pdf United States v. Williamson — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/234601.P.pdf United States v. Lawson — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/104831.P.pdf Remmer v. United States — U.S. Supreme Court: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USREPORTS-347/USREPORTS-347-227 McDonough Power Equipment v. Greenwood — U.S. Supreme Court: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USREPORTS-464/USREPORTS-464-548/context Isaac Forman — Hissam Forman Donovan Ritchie: https://www.hfdrlaw.com/Attorneys/isaac-forman Andrew Cogar — U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of West Virginia: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndwv/meet-us-attorney/senior-management-team Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca4/25-4511

Congressman Robert Onder v. Richard von Glahn — 8th Cir. (Sep 17, 2026) Sep 17, 2026

Show notes

The Eighth Circuit hears consolidated emergency appeals, Nos. 26-2797 and 26-2827, over which congressional map Missouri will use in the November 2026 election. Missouri used a new map, enacted in 2025 as House Bill 1, for the August primary. People Not Politicians submitted more than 300,000 signatures to put the map to a referendum. The Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the petition kept House Bill 1 from taking effect, so the state's 2022 map controls unless voters approve the new one. Congressman Bob Onder and other candidates and voters then sued in federal court. A district judge issued a fourteen-day temporary restraining order, or TRO, requiring Missouri to keep using the primary map; a TRO is an emergency order entered before a full merits decision. He reasoned that switching districts before the general election could disenfranchise voters and throw the election into confusion. The U.S. Supreme Court stayed that order while these appeals proceed. Now the Eighth Circuit must decide who has standing to appeal, whether the TRO is reviewable or moot, and whether changing maps after the primary violates Article I or equal protection. Congressman Robert Onder v. Richard von Glahn (No. 26-2797) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, argued September 17, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://media-oa.ca8.uscourts.gov/OAaudio/2026/9/262797.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sessions.pl?yymm=202609&getOA=Select Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/webcal/sep26spe1.pdf Missouri Supreme Court opinion and record — Supreme Court filing: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/26/26A304/423214/20260904224807207_Appendix%20Vol%201.pdf Federal temporary restraining order — Supreme Court filing: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/26/26A326/423669/20260909165829316_Appendix.pdf Supreme Court docket 26A326: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/26a326.html Brief of Richard von Glahn and People Not Politicians: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-09-15-Brief-of-intervenors-appellants.pdf Brief of Congressman Onder and the other plaintiffs: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-09-15-Brief-of-plaintiffs-appelleescross-appellants.pdf Brief of Missouri and Secretary Denny Hoskins: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-09-15-Brief-of-defendants-state-of-Missouri-and-Missouri-Secretary-of-State.pdf Independent report on the federal TRO — Roll Call: https://rollcall.com/2026/09/08/federal-judge-tro-missouri-map/ Independent report on the Supreme Court stay — Roll Call: https://rollcall.com/2026/09/10/republicans-scotus-bid-new-missouri-map/ Federal case record — Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse: https://clearinghouse.net/case/48434/ Charles W. Hatfield — Stinson: https://www.stinson.com/people-ChuckHatfield Marc H. Ellinger — Ellinger Bell: https://www.ellingerlaw.com/marcellinger.html Louis J. Capozzi III — Missouri Attorney General: https://ago.mo.gov/missouri-attorney-general-announces-impending-appointment-of-louis-j-capozzi-iii-as-solicitor-general/ Missouri referendum certificate — Missouri Secretary of State: https://www.sos.mo.gov/CMSImages/Elections/Petitions/2026-R004WebCert.pdf Independent report on the Missouri ruling — Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/5034c87f2161baa933ea337408e4c5b4

Nightingale v National Grid USA Service Company, Inc. — 1st Cir. (Sep 16, 2026) Sep 17, 2026

Show notes

The First Circuit hears Nightingale v. National Grid. Robert Nightingale says National Grid's debt collectors called his cellphone five times over four days in June 2018 while trying to collect an electricity debt. Massachusetts generally limits creditor-initiated debt-collection calls to two in seven days. Nightingale sued for himself and other Massachusetts consumers who received similarly frequent calls. A district judge refused to certify a class, and the First Circuit later revived Nightingale's individual claim and sent the certification question back. The judge again denied certification, finding that person-specific questions would predominate. Under Rule 23, predominance asks whether common questions outweigh individual ones enough for a class action to proceed fairly and efficiently. This appeal asks whether the judge abused his discretion by finding that company records could not resolve those individual questions without thousands of separate inquiries. Nightingale v National Grid USA Service Company, Inc. (No. 25-2121) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, argued September 16, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/oralargs/25-2121_20260916.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/doar/results/2026-09 2024 First Circuit opinion — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca1-23-01476/pdf/USCOURTS-ca1-23-01476-0.pdf 2020 district court order — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-mad-1_19-cv-12341/pdf/USCOURTS-mad-1_19-cv-12341-0.pdf 2023 district court order — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-mad-1_19-cv-12341/pdf/USCOURTS-mad-1_19-cv-12341-3.pdf 2025 renewed class-certification order — D. Mass.: https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/massachusetts/madce/1:2019cv12341/215954/145 Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca1/25-2121 Stephen F. Taylor — Lemberg Law: https://lemberglaw.com/about/team/stephen-taylor/ Brigid F. Cech Samole — Greenberg Traurig: https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/c/cech-samole-brigid-f

United States of America v. Dali — 2d Cir. (Sep 16, 2026) Sep 17, 2026

Show notes

The Second Circuit hears United States v. Dali. In November 2024, Svetlana Dali entered airport security at JFK through a lane used by airline crews, then boarded a Delta flight to Paris without a ticket or boarding pass. Flight staff discovered her before landing, and French authorities detained her on arrival. A Brooklyn jury later convicted her under the federal stowaway statute. At trial, Dali wanted to tell jurors that she believed she was being poisoned in the United States. The judge excluded that evidence. The appeal asks whether the statement could have offered another explanation for conduct the government used to show that Dali knowingly boarded without the airline's consent, or whether she gave up that theory when she disclaimed an insanity defense. The court must also consider whether any error affected the verdict. United States of America v. Dali (No. 25-1773) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued September 16, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/audio/25-1773.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/oral_arguments.html Criminal complaint — U.S. District Court, E.D.N.Y.: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/dali-complaint-edny.pdf Detention opinion and order — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-nyed-1_25-cr-00014/pdf/USCOURTS-nyed-1_25-cr-00014-0.pdf Defense motion in limine — U.S. District Court, E.D.N.Y.: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/svetlana-dali-defense-motion-limine-eastern-district-new-york.pdf Government motion in limine — U.S. District Court, E.D.N.Y.: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/svetlana-dali-government-motion-limine-eastern-district-new-york.pdf Appellate argument report — Courthouse News Service: https://www.courthousenews.com/stowaway-looks-to-jettison-conviction-for-sneaking-onto-paris-bound-plane/ Trial report — Courthouse News Service: https://www.courthousenews.com/fighting-for-flight-airplane-stowaway-defends-herself-against-federal-charges/ Conviction report — ABC News: https://abcnews.com/US/woman-found-guilty-stowing-delta-flight-new-york/story?id=122081320 Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca2/25-1773 18 U.S.C. § 2199 — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?edition=prelim&num=0&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title18-section2199 Siobhan C. Atkins — Federal Defenders of New York: https://www.federaldefendersny.org/siobhan-atkins

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Oral Arguments, with Context

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected