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:

Seacor Marine, LLC v. GOL, LLC — 5th Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 03, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit considers a thirteen-million-dollar payment during Cox Operating's bankruptcy. GOL arranged for Cox to charter Seacor Marine's vessels. Seacor says part of the payment covered its pre-bankruptcy invoices; GOL says the payment bought continued services that Seacor did not provide. The district court entered summary judgment for GOL. Arthur R. Kraatz of Phelps Dunbar will represent Seacor. He will argue that GOL owed Seacor fiduciary duties and failed to apply the payment to its invoices. Seacor Marine, LLC v. GOL, LLC (No. 26-30021) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued September 2, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/26/26-30021_9-2-2026.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings/results?docket=26-30021 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-09-02 Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/results?docket=26-30021&group=flat Summary-judgment order — U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-laed-2_24-cv-02409/pdf/USCOURTS-laed-2_24-cv-02409-0.pdf Rule 59 order — U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-laed-2_24-cv-02409/pdf/USCOURTS-laed-2_24-cv-02409-1.pdf Federal Rules of Civil Procedure — U.S. Courts: https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/document/federal-rules-of-civil-procedure.pdf Fiduciary duty — Cornell Legal Information Institute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fiduciary_duty Fiduciary-duty precedent — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/18/18-20379-CV0.pdf Arthur R. Kraatz — Phelps Dunbar LLP: https://www.phelps.com/professionals/arthur-r-kraatz.html Arthur R. Kraatz firm confirmation — Louisiana State Bar Association: https://www.lsba.org/documents/publications/BarJournal/Journal-June-July-2024.pdf

Bien v. Union Pacific Railroad Company — 5th Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 03, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit considers whether James Bien's disability-discrimination suit against Union Pacific was dismissed too soon as untimely. Bien was removed from conductor work after failing color-vision testing in 2013, then passed another test in 2015. He says a related class action paused his filing deadline because he remained in its revised class; Union Pacific disagrees and also says his EEOC charge did not cover the 2015 events. Donald E. Uloth will represent Bien. He will ask the court to revive the suit. Bien v. Union Pacific Railroad Company (No. 26-40061) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued September 2, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/26/26-40061_9-2-2026.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings/results?docket=26-40061 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-09-02 Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/results?docket=26-40061&group=flat District-court order — U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-txed-4_25-cv-00074/pdf/USCOURTS-txed-4_25-cv-00074-0.pdf Federal Rules of Civil Procedure — U.S. Courts: https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/document/federal-rules-of-civil-procedure.pdf American Pipe v. Utah — U.S. Reports, Library of Congress: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep414/usrep414538/usrep414538.pdf Zaragoza v. Union Pacific — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/23/23-50194-CV0.pdf

Montenegro, et al. v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al. — 9th Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 03, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears three consolidated appeals over benzoyl peroxide, or BPO, acne products. Consumers allege that the defendants' products contain or degrade into benzene and are adulterated or misbranded under federal law. The district court dismissed the suits as preempted. Preemption asks whether federal law displaces state-law claims. R. Brent Wisner of Wisner Baum will represent the consumers. He will ask the court to revive the claims, arguing that state law merely enforces the same federal bans on adulterated and misbranded drugs. Montenegro, et al. v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al. (No. 24-6404 / 24-6431 / 24-6684) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 2, 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/2026/09/02/24-6404.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=24-6404&hearingDate=2026-09-02 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/calendar/calendar-day/?date=2026-09-02&loc=SF Consolidated-case calendar data — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://n76qzwo6zclpoahpmjr4buzwf40yjjly.lambda-url.us-west-2.on.aws/?date=2026-09-02&loc=SF Consolidated-case captions and defense position — filed Chamber brief: https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-Montenegro-v.-CVS-Pharmacy-Inc.-Ninth-Circuit.pdf District-court dismissal order — filed copy: https://s3.amazonaws.com/jnswire/jns-media/0d/ed/18433564/SOCAL_Acne_medications_dismiss_9-19-24.pdf Lead appeal docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/24-6404 21 U.S.C. § 379r — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section379r&num=0&edition=prelim Preemption — Cornell Legal Information Institute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/preemption 21 U.S.C. § 351 — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section351&num=0&edition=prelim Current good manufacturing practice — U.S. Food and Drug Administration: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/pharmaceutical-quality-resources/facts-about-current-good-manufacturing-practice-cgmp R. Brent Wisner — Wisner Baum: https://www.wisnerbaum.com/attorneys/r-brent-wisner/ Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://rf9ecr1p0i.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/opinions/search?q=24-6404 Memorandum search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://xcglumg9bj.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/memoranda/search?q=24-6404

Elite Precision v. ATF — 5th Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 03, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit hears Elite Precision Customs versus ATF. Federal law generally requires a handgun bought from an out-of-state dealer to be sent to a federally licensed dealer—an FFL—in the buyer's home state before the buyer takes possession. A Texas gun dealer, two out-of-state customers, and the Firearms Policy Coalition challenged those restrictions under the Second Amendment. The district court rejected the challenge and dismissed the case. Peter A. Patterson of Cooper and Kirk will represent the challengers. He will ask the court to reverse, arguing that the restrictions burden taking possession of a handgun and lack an adequate historical analogue. Elite Precision v. ATF (No. 25-11206) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued September 2, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/25/25-11206_9-2-2026.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings/results?docket=25-11206 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-09-02 Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/results?docket=25-11206&group=flat District-court order — U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-txnd-4_25-cv-00044/pdf/USCOURTS-txnd-4_25-cv-00044-0.pdf Brief of plaintiffs-appellants — filed copy: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/10076/attachments/original/1770235109/2026.02.04_026_Brief_of_Plaintiffs-Appellants_%28FPC%29.pdf Brief for appellees — filed copy: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/10076/attachments/original/1778095757/2026.05.06_040_Brief_of_Appellees.pdf 18 U.S.C. § 922 — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section922&num=0&edition=prelim Peter A. Patterson — Cooper & Kirk: https://www.cooperkirk.com/lawyers/peter-a-patterson/ Laura E. Myron court record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2026/09/25-5328-2190869.pdf Office of Legal Counsel — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/olc 28 C.F.R. § 0.25 — Cornell Legal Information Institute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/0.25

O'Dea, et al. v. Reckitt Benckiser, LLC — 9th Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 03, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears two consolidated appeals over acne treatments that consumers say formed benzene as their benzoyl peroxide degraded. The district court dismissed their suits as preempted by federal drug law. Preemption asks whether federal law displaces state-law claims. The consumers say their claims parallel federal manufacturing requirements; the manufacturers say no binding two-parts-per-million limit applies and federal law reserves enforcement to the FDA. Trenton Kashima will represent the consumers. He will ask the court to revive their claims. O'Dea, et al. v. Reckitt Benckiser, LLC (No. 25-3240 / 25-3271) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 2, 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/2026/09/02/25-3240.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-3240&hearingDate=2026-09-02 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/calendar/calendar-day/?date=2026-09-02&loc=SF RB Health appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-3240 Alchemee appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-3271 District-court dismissal order — FindLaw: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-cd-cal/117212600.html 21 U.S.C. § 379r — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section379r&num=0&edition=prelim 21 U.S.C. § 337 — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section337&num=0&edition=prelim 21 U.S.C. § 351 — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section351&num=0&edition=prelim Benzene contamination alert — U.S. Food and Drug Administration: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/pharmaceutical-quality-resources/fda-alerts-drug-manufacturers-risk-benzene-contamination-certain-drugs Preemption — Cornell Legal Information Institute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/preemption Trenton R. Kashima — Bryson Harris Suciu DeMay: https://brysonpllc.com/People/trent-kashima/ Trenton Ross Kashima — State Bar of California: https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/291405 David M. Zionts — Covington & Burling: https://www.cov.com/en/professionals/z/david-zionts David M. Zionts court record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca9-18-56256/pdf/USCOURTS-ca9-18-56256-0.pdf Res ipsa loquitur — Cornell Legal Information Institute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/res_ipsa_loquitur Sweeney v. Erving — U.S. Reports via GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-228/pdf/USREPORTS-228-233.pdf Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://rf9ecr1p0i.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/opinions/search?q=25-3240 Memorandum search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://xcglumg9bj.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/memoranda/search?q=25-3240 Companion opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://rf9ecr1p0i.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/opinions/search?q=25-3271 Companion memorandum search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://xcglumg9bj.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/memoranda/search?q=25-3271

Pedro L. Almonte Bueno v. Todd Blanche — 2d Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 02, 2026

Show notes

The Second Circuit considers whether a New York methamphetamine conviction matches the federal controlled-substance definition for immigration purposes. New York law refers to methamphetamine and its isomers; federal law generally limits isomer here to an optical isomer. Isomers have the same molecular formula but different atomic arrangements; optical isomers are mirror-image forms. Aaron J. Aisen of the Erie County Bar Association Volunteer Lawyers Project will represent Pedro L. Almonte Bueno. Pedro L. Almonte Bueno v. Todd Blanche (No. 24-3226 / 25-551) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued September 2, 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/24-3226,%2025-551.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/oral_arguments.html Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://www.huntcal.com/cal/eventview/USCA2/USCA2?yr=2026&id=784737713&v=d&d=2&m=9&s=l Appellate docket 24-3226 — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca2/24-3226 Consolidated appellate docket 25-551 — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca2/25-551 New York Public Health Law § 3306 — New York State Senate: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PBH/3306 21 U.S.C. § 802 — U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section802&num=0&edition=prelim United States v. Minter — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/OPN/21-3102_opn.pdf Mathis v. United States — Supreme Court of the United States: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/579BV.pdf Aaron J. Aisen appearance — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/SUM/24-2806_so.pdf Aaron Aisen staff listing — ECBA Volunteer Lawyers Project: https://ecbavlp.com/about/staff/ Imran R. Zaidi appearance — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/OPN/23-6837_opn.pdf Isomer definition — IUPAC: https://goldbook.iupac.org/terms/view/I03289 Enantiomer definition — IUPAC: https://goldbook.iupac.org/terms/view/E02069 Isomer reference — National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences: https://tools.niehs.nih.gov/srp/1/ResearchBriefs/PDFs/RB197_def2_508.pdf Isomerism reference — PubMed Central: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5869253/ Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions.html

W.H. v. Fort Bend ISD — 5th Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 02, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit considers whether student W.H. should take English and math in general classrooms or separate resource classes. In Texas, the parent-and-school team that develops the student's individualized education program and decides placement is called an ARD committee—short for Admission, Review, and Dismissal. A hearing officer approved a resource class for math but not English; the district court approved both. Mark S. Whitburn of Whitburn & Pevsner represents W.H. He will seek reversal, relying on W.H.'s progress and IDEA's preference for education alongside nondisabled students. W.H. v. Fort Bend ISD (No. 25-20361) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued September 2, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/25/25-20361_09-02-2026.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-20361 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-09-02 Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions?docket=25-20361 Memorandum and order — U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-txsd-4_24-cv-01515/pdf/USCOURTS-txsd-4_24-cv-01515-0.pdf Special-education hearing decision — Texas Education Agency: https://tea.texas.gov/about-tea/government-relations-and-legal/special-ed-due-process-hearings-2024/353-se-0823-fortbendisd.pdf 20 U.S.C. § 1412 — Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=%28title%3A20+section%3A1412+edition%3Aprelim%29 ARD committee guide — Texas Education Agency: https://spedsupport.tea.texas.gov/sites/default/files/2026-01/ard-101-introduction-slide-deck.pdf H.W. v. Comal Independent School District — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/21/21-50838-CV0.pdf E.R. v. Spring Branch Independent School District — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-20494-CV0.pdf Mark Whitburn — Whitburn & Pevsner: https://www.whitburnpevsner.com/mark-whitburn Meredith Prykryl Walker — State Bar of Texas: https://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?ContactID=293641&Section=Find_A_Lawyer&template=%2FCustomsource%2FMemberDirectory%2FMemberDirectoryDetail.cfm Meredith Prykryl Walker — Walsh Gallegos: https://walshgallegos.com/usrfiles/files/Attorney%20Bios/2026%20Atty%20Bios/Meredith_Prykryl_Walker_2026.pdf

Menjibar Coto, et al. v. Blanche — 9th Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 02, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears a petition by two citizens of Honduras challenging the denial of asylum and related relief. The argument focuses on how the agency evaluated evidence of persecution and whether women in Honduras can form a particular social group under asylum law. John W. Allured of the Law Offices of John W. Allured represents the petitioners. He will ask the court to grant the petition and send the case back. Menjibar Coto, et al. v. Blanche (No. 25-6322) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 2, 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/2026/09/02/25-6322.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-6322&hearingDate=2026-09-02 Argument calendar and case synopsis — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://n76qzwo6zclpoahpmjr4buzwf40yjjly.lambda-url.us-west-2.on.aws/?date=2026-09-02&loc=SF Appellate docket — PACER court record via Docket Alarm: https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/US_Court_of_Appeals_Ninth_Circuit/25-6322/Menjicar-Coto_et_al._v._Bondi/ John W. Allured firm record — U.S. Customs and Border Protection: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/2024-10/foia_log_march_2024.pdf Mark Alexander Rook court-bar record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/AttorneyBarAndECFStatus/rptN0046ActiveAttorneysr.pdf 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13 — Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-V/subchapter-B/part-1208/subpart-A/section-1208.13 Wakkary v. Holder — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/03/10/0571539.pdf Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo — Supreme Court of the United States: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf Murillo-Chavez v. Bondi — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/02/13/21-1422.pdf Matter of K-E-S-G- — Executive Office for Immigration Review: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1408366/dl?inline= Perdomo v. Holder — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/07/12/06-71652.pdf Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://rf9ecr1p0i.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/opinions/search?q=25-6322 Memorandum search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://xcglumg9bj.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/memoranda/search?q=25-6322

United States of America v. Austin — 2d Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 02, 2026

Show notes

The Second Circuit hears Eugene Austin's appeal from three conspiracy convictions arising from an investment fraud that caused over twelve million dollars in losses. He challenges tax evidence and the procedure and length of his eighteen-year sentence. Substantive reasonableness asks whether a sentence falls outside the range the trial judge could permissibly choose. Peter J. Tomao of the Law Office of Peter J. Tomao represents Austin. He will argue that the tax evidence was irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial, and that the judge relied on improper considerations and imposed an excessive sentence. Two days after argument, the court affirmed the judgment in a nonprecedential summary order. United States of America v. Austin (No. 25-1093) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued September 2, 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/25-1093.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/oral_arguments.html Appellate docket — PACER court record via Docket Alarm: https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/US_Court_of_Appeals_Second_Circuit/25-1093/United_States_of_America_v._Austin/ Criminal judgment — U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York: https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/New_York_Southern_District_Court/1--23-cr-00508/USA_v._Austin/docs/119.pdf?download=true Conviction record — U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/long-island-man-convicted-trial-participating-multimillion-dollar-cryptocurrency Sentencing record — U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/long-island-man-sentenced-18-years-prison-following-conviction-trial-defrauding Independent sentencing report — Decrypt: https://decrypt.co/316102/long-island-man-sentenced-to-18-years-for-12m-father-and-son-crypto-fraud Contemporaneous trial report — Inner City Press: https://www.innercitypress.com/sdny135hcastelaustinicp092324.html Peter J. Tomao profile — Law Office of Peter J. Tomao: https://www.tomaolaw.com/attorney-profile/ Peter J. Tomao listing — Federal Bar Council: https://www.federalbarcouncil.org/committees/central-islip-u-s-courthouse-committee/ Gall v. United States — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-552/pdf/USREPORTS-552-38.pdf United States v. Wynn — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca2-22-02875/pdf/USCOURTS-ca2-22-02875-0.pdf Summary order — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/SUM/25-1093_so.pdf Decision index — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions.html

McClanahan v. Noel — 5th Cir. (Sep 2, 2026) Sep 02, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews a First Amendment case from a 2017 Baton Rouge council meeting. The district court ruled that officials violated Michael McClanahan’s and Eugene Collins’s rights by removing them during public comment, but rejected Gary Chambers’s claim. Celia Cangelosi represents appellant Brandon Noel, now the mayor pro tempore. She will argue that dismissing the City-Parish ended the official-capacity case and that former council chair Scott Wilson enforced meeting rules, rather than set city policy. McClanahan v. Noel (No. 25-30614) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued September 2, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (public domain, 17 U.S.C. § 105): https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/25/25-30614_9-2-2026.mp3 Argument record — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings/results?docket=25-30614 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-09-02 District-court findings and conclusions — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-lamd-3_17-cv-01720/pdf/USCOURTS-lamd-3_17-cv-01720-2.pdf District-court jurisdiction ruling — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-lamd-3_17-cv-01720/pdf/USCOURTS-lamd-3_17-cv-01720-1.pdf Earlier jurisdiction opinion — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/21/21-30106.0.pdf Brandon Noel profile — City of Baton Rouge and Parish of East Baton Rouge: https://www.brla.gov/581/District-1---Mayor-Pro-Tempore-Brandon-N District-court judgment report — WAFB: https://www.wafb.com/2025/09/22/i-team-federal-judge-rules-ebr-metro-council-violated-citizens-rights/ District-court judgment report — WBRZ: https://www.wbrz.com/news/federal-judge-rules-ebr-metro-council-violated-rights-of-alton-sterling-protestors-at-2017-meeting William Brock Most counsel listing — Supreme Court of the United States: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-513.html Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/results?docket=25-30614

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Oral Arguments, with Context

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected