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:

Rosales v. Terrell — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews a district court's refusal to grant qualified immunity to two Alexandria, Louisiana police officers at the pleading stage. Qualified immunity can protect officials from damages unless they violate clearly established law. Mario Rosales and Gracie Lasyone allege that the officers stopped their car without reasonable suspicion, prolonged the stop to investigate drugs, searched Rosales, and prevented them from recording. The officers say videos attached to the complaint contradict key allegations and show traffic violations, consent, and reasonable safety measures. Rule 12(c) governs judgment on the pleadings. At this stage, the court accepts well-pleaded facts as true. But it may disregard allegations clearly contradicted by video. Misty Antoon will argue for Officer Samuel Terrell. Brad Calvit of Provosty, Sadler and deLaunay will argue for Officer Jim Lewis. Marie Miller of the Institute for Justice will ask the court to let the plaintiffs' claims proceed. Rosales v. Terrell (No. 25-30650) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 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/25/25-30650_08-03-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-30650 Order denying judgment on the pleadings — filed district court order: https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/District-Court-Order-Denying-MJPs-LA-Traffic-Stop.pdf Report and recommendation — U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana: https://app.midpage.ai/document/rosales-v-lewis-1000450722308 Complaint — filed district court complaint: https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/LA-Rosales-Traffic-Stop-Complaint.pdf Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca5/25-30650 Rule 12(c) and qualified-immunity standard — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/22/22-40196-CV0.pdf Pleading-stage video standard — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/24/24-10017-CV0.pdf Brad Calvit profile — Provosty, Sadler & deLaunay: https://www.provosty.com/attorneys/members/ Marie Miller profile — Institute for Justice: https://ij.org/staff/marie-miller-2/ Plaintiffs' case page — Institute for Justice: https://ij.org/case/louisiana-traffic-stop/ Fifth Circuit opinion search: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions?docket=25-30650

NexPoint v. Highland — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews an eight hundred twenty-six thousand dollar sanction against NexPoint Real Estate Partners, formerly H-C-R-E Partners, for pursuing a proof of claim in Highland Capital Management's bankruptcy. NexPoint says the record does not show bad faith or justify shifting Highland's later fees. Highland defends the finding and award. On August 14, 2026, the court affirmed, holding that clear and convincing evidence showed NexPoint filed and litigated the claim in bad faith and caused the fees that were shifted. NexPoint v. Highland (No. 25-11185) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 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/25/25-11185_8-3-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-11185 Published opinion — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/25/25-11185-CV0.pdf

McCain v. Mary Mahoney's — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit considers whether Todd McCain can pursue a proposed class action over seafood sold at Mary Mahoney's restaurant. McCain says he paid for local snapper but received cheaper imported fish. For Article III standing, he must plausibly allege that he personally lost money, not merely that other customers may have been deceived. Fishman Haygood appellate lawyer Tad Bartlett will argue for McCain that criminal plea and sentencing records make it reasonable to infer he was served mislabeled fish, and that the district court should have allowed an amended complaint. Balch and Bingham lawyer Matt McDade will argue for the restaurant defendants that the records do not connect any mislabeled delivery to McCain's meals. He will say McCain has not shown personal injury and that the proposed amendment would be futile, meaning it still would not establish federal jurisdiction. McCain v. Mary Mahoney's (No. 25-60663) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 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/25/25-60663_08-03-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings/results?from=2026-08-03&to=2026-08-03 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-08-03 District court order dismissing the complaint — Justia: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/mississippi/mssdce/1%3A2024cv00241/125773/72/ District court order denying reconsideration and amendment — Justia: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/mississippi/mssdce/1%3A2024cv00241/125773/84/ Related criminal case — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/enrd/case/united-states-v-mary-mahoneys-old-french-house-et-al Tad Bartlett profile — Fishman Haygood: https://www.fishmanhaygood.com/attorneys/tad-bartlett/ Tad Bartlett — Chambers USA: https://chambers.com/downloads/rankings/1175/louisiana.pdf Matt McDade profile — Balch & Bingham: https://www.balch.com/professionals/m/mcdade-matthew-w Matthew Ward McDade — Martindale: https://www.martindale.com/attorney/matthew-ward-mcdade-45949632/

Martinez v. Hidalgo County — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews summary judgment for Hidalgo County and two sheriff's deputies in a civil-rights lawsuit arising from the fatal shooting of Guillermo San Miguel Sanchez inside his home. His family says factual disputes over consent to enter and the threat he posed require a jury. The county and deputies say the body-camera record supports consent and that the use of deadly force was reasonable. Martinez v. Hidalgo County (No. 25-40464) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 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/25/25-40464_08-03-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-40464

Hughey v. Tippah County — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews judgment on the pleadings for Deputy Tommy Mason in an excessive-force suit. The question is whether the complaint can overcome qualified immunity when James Hughey could not remember the encounter and the appellant says key facts were known only to the officer. Qualified immunity shields an officer from civil liability unless the alleged facts show a constitutional violation of a clearly established right. After this argument, a divided panel affirmed. Judge Carolyn King dissented, saying the majority failed to credit the complaint and favorable inferences. Hughey v. Tippah County (No. 25-60232) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/25/25-60232_08-03-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-60232 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-08-03 Published opinion — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/25/25-60232-CV0.pdf Opinion listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions?docket=25-60232 District court opinion — Justia: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/mississippi/msndce/3%3A2018cv00004/40415/26/ Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca5/25-60232 Jim Waide — Waide & Associates: https://www.waidelaw.com/about-the-firm Jim Waide — federal court record: https://www.justice.gov/crt/about/app/briefs/vadie.pdf McKenzie Price — Jacks Griffith Luciano: https://www.jlpalaw.com/mckenzie-williamson-price McKenzie Price — Martindale: https://www.martindale.com/attorney/m-mckenzie-williamson-price-301308244/ Lance Martin — Martindale: https://www.martindale.com/attorney/lance-w-martin-300343396/ Lance Martin — Avvo: https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/39601-ms-lance-martin-4691420.html Decision summary — Texas Case Wire: https://texascasewire.com/civil-procedure/hughey-v-tippah-county-fifth-circuit-affirmed-qualified-immunity-because-the-complaint-lacked-facts-showing-excessive-force-or-a-clearly-established-violation/

Harward v. City of Austin — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews a district court's decision to abstain from Lake Austin homeowners' challenge to Austin's taxation of their properties. Pullman abstention lets a federal court step aside when unsettled state law could avoid or reshape a constitutional issue. The homeowners say Austin retroactively placed them in full-purpose jurisdiction without notice or a hearing; the city says annexation law must be resolved first. Christopher Johns of Johns & Counsel will seek reversal. Hannah Vahl of Austin's Law Department will defend the dismissal. Harward v. City of Austin (No. 25-50160) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 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/25/25-50160_08-03-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-50160 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-08-03 Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca5/25-50160 District court dismissal order — Justia: https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/texas/txwdce/1%3A2021cv00095/1121580/104 District court docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/texas/txwdce/1%3A2021cv00095/1121580 Prior Fifth Circuit opinion in the same litigation — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/22/22-50924-CV0.pdf Counsel identification in the prior appeal — Leagle: https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20231012084 Pullman abstention — U.S. Supreme Court opinion via Cornell LII: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/467/229 Texas Senate Bill 1844 enrolled text — Texas Legislature: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/89R/billtext/html/SB01844F.HTM Texas Senate Bill 1844 analysis — Texas Legislature: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/89R/analysis/pdf/SB01844H.pdf Chris Johns biography — Johns & Counsel: https://www.johnsandcounsel.com/chris-johns

Folks v. Sainato — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews a defense verdict in Jared Folks's civil rights suit against Plaquemines Parish deputy Vincenzo Sainato and Sheriff Gerald Turlich. Folks was arrested after a truck owned by his company struck a subdivision gate. Surveillance later confirmed that he was not the driver, and the charges were dismissed. A jury found Sainato not liable. The district court denied Folks's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, relief available only when no reasonable jury could reach the verdict, and his request for a new trial. Counsel for Folks will argue that the video left no reasonable basis for the verdict. Laura Rodrigue will argue for Sainato and Turlich that other evidence supported the jury's view. After this argument, the court affirmed, holding that the record supported the verdict and rejecting Folks's challenge to a mitigation of damages instruction. Folks v. Sainato (No. 25-30456) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 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/25/25-30456_8-3-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-30456 Opinion — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/25/25-30456.0.pdf Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions?docket=25-30456 District court order denying post-trial relief — Justia: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/louisiana/laedce/2%3A2023cv00643/259631/132/0.pdf Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca5/25-30456

Carpenter v. Twin City Fire — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit considers whether an employment-practices liability policy covers a judgment stemming from an employer's broken promise to pay Jeffrey Carpenter a stay bonus. The district court found coverage. Steve Knight of Chamberlain Hrdlicka will argue for insurer Twin City that the policy excludes the award as bonus or severance pay. Amy Gibson of Gibson Wiley will argue for Carpenter that it is covered back pay and was not triggered by termination. Carpenter v. Twin City Fire (No. 25-10679) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 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/25/25-10679_8-3-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-10679 Argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-08-03 Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca5/25-10679 District court coverage order — U.S. District Court via Justia: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/texas/txndce/3%3A2023cv00769/375353/67/ District court docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/texas/txndce/3%3A2023cv00769/375353 Federal and Fifth Circuit appellate rules — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/docs/default-source/forms-and-documents---clerks-office/rules/federalrulesofappellateprocedure.pdf Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28 — Cornell LII: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_28 Steve Knight biography — Chamberlain Hrdlicka: https://www.chamberlainlaw.com/attorneys-steven_knight.html Amy Gibson biography — Chambers: https://chambers.com/lawyer/amy-gibson-usa-5%3A26162299

Bozorgi v. Cassava Sciences — 5th Cir. (Aug 3, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews certification of a securities-fraud class against Cassava Sciences and three executives. Investors say Cassava misled the market about simufilam, its experimental Alzheimer's drug. Their class depends on showing that public information was reflected in Cassava's stock price, so reliance can be presumed for all investors. The defendants say the volatile stock behaved like a meme stock, and they also challenge the class-wide damages method. A later settlement raises a separate question: whether this interlocutory appeal should continue. Bozorgi v. Cassava Sciences (No. 25-50855) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 3, 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/25/25-50855_08-03-2026.mp3 Argument listing — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings/results?from=2026-08-03&to=2026-08-03 Argument calendar — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/court-calendars/sitting?d=2026-08-03 Appellate docket — PACER entries mirrored by Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca5/25-50855 Class-certification order — Western District of Texas: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-w-d-tex-aus-div/117603864.html Earlier district-court order — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-txwd-1_21-cv-00751/pdf/USCOURTS-txwd-1_21-cv-00751-0.pdf Cassava settlement disclosure — SEC Form 8-K: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001069530/000143774925038605/sava20251222_8k.htm Appellants' case discussion — Gibson Dunn: https://www.gibsondunn.com/securities-litigation-2025-year-end-update/ Amicus case page and brief — U.S. Chamber of Commerce: https://www.uschamber.com/cases/class-actions-and-mass-actions/bozorgi-v.-cassava-sciences-inc. Gregg Costa — Gibson Dunn: https://www.gibsondunn.com/lawyer/costa-gregg-j/ Joseph D. Daley — Robbins Geller: https://www.rgrdlaw.com/attorneys-results.html Joseph David Daley — State Bar of California: https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/185743 Decision search — Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions?docket=25-50855

Surface v. Pacillas — 5th Cir. (Aug 4, 2026) Aug 08, 2026

Show notes

The Fifth Circuit reviews summary judgment against two former El Paso police supervisors. After an internal investigation led to their arrests and terminations, they sued the city and its police chief for race discrimination and retaliation under federal civil rights laws. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants. Two days after this argument, the Fifth Circuit affirmed in an unpublished per curiam opinion, concluding that no rational jury could find for the plaintiffs on any claim. Surface v. Pacillas (No. 25-50786) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 4, 2026. Sources: Argument audio — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/25/25-50786_8-4-2026.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?docket=25-50786 Opinion — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/25/25-50786.0.pdf District court opinion — John Surface claims: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-w-d-tex-el-pas-div/117660791.html District court opinion — Adan Chavez claims: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-w-d-tex-el-pas-div/117660931.html Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca5/25-50786

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Oral Arguments, with Context

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected