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:

Vaughn, Jr. v. Klamath County Fire District No. 1 — 9th Cir. (Aug 6, 2026) Aug 07, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit considers whether it may immediately review a denial of qualified immunity entered during a civil rights trial. Teresa Vaughn's estate alleges that paramedics Cody Engler and Alex Dustin increased the danger to her during a COVID-related breathing emergency by discouraging ambulance transport and canceling additional responders. A two-week trial ended with a deadlocked jury and a mistrial. Engler appealed the judge's earlier refusal to grant judgment as a matter of law. The threshold issue is whether that ruling fits the narrow collateral-order exception to the rule that appeals ordinarily wait for final judgment. Vaughn, Jr. v. Klamath County Fire District No. 1 (No. 25-4210) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 6, 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/2026/08/06/25-4210.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-4210&hearingDate=2026-08-06 District court summary-judgment order — Justia: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/oregon/ordce/1%3A2022cv00161/165107/79/ District court Rule 50(b) order — Justia: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/oregon/ordce/1%3A2022cv00161/165107/217/ Ninth Circuit appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-4210 Mitchell v. Forsyth — U.S. Supreme Court: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/472/511/ Jay Beattie — Lindsay Hart: https://lindsayhart.com/Jay-Beattie Jay Beattie — Super Lawyers: https://profiles.superlawyers.com/oregon/portland/lawyer/jay-w-beattie/c3d1e1d7-1a6a-45cd-8e93-1fd1226d63ce.html Nadia Dahab — Sugerman Dahab: https://sugermandahab.com/contact/ Nadia Dahab — Oregon State Bar: https://www.osbar.org/members/localbars.asp Published-opinion search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ Memorandum-disposition search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/memoranda/

NW Energy Coalition v. Bonneville Power Administration — 9th Cir. (Aug 6, 2026) Aug 07, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears a direct challenge by five Northwest energy and conservation groups to the Bonneville Power Administration's policy to pursue Markets Plus, a day-ahead electricity market. The court must first decide whether the policy is final enough, and its consequences imminent enough, for judicial review. The groups say Bonneville acted without satisfying the Northwest Power Act or conducting the environmental review required by NEPA. Bonneville responds that it adopted only a business direction, not a binding commitment to join. NW Energy Coalition v. Bonneville Power Administration (No. 25-4278) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 6, 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/2026/08/06/25-4278.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-4278&hearingDate=2026-08-06 Oral-argument calendar — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/calendar/calendar-week/?date=2026-08-06&loc=SE Day-Ahead Market Policy — Bonneville Power Administration: https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/projects/day-ahead-market/20250509-dam-final-policy.pdf Day-Ahead Market Record of Decision — Bonneville Power Administration: https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/publications/records-of-decision/2025-rod/rod-20250509-day-ahead-market-policy.pdf Petitioners' opening brief — Ninth Circuit filing: https://www.rtoinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/2025.11.03-Opening-Brief-FINAL.pdf Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-4278 Published-opinion search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ Memorandum-disposition search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/memoranda/

McGuffin v. Karcher — 9th Cir. (Aug 6, 2026) Aug 07, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit considers whether four individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity before trial in Nicholas McGuffin's civil rights suit. McGuffin was convicted of manslaughter in Leah Freeman's death. An Oregon court later vacated the conviction after finding that the state had failed to disclose exculpatory DNA evidence, and the charges were dismissed. The district court found factual disputes over claims that investigators fabricated, withheld, or destroyed evidence and denied summary judgment. Qualified immunity protects officials from damages unless they violated a clearly established constitutional right. Sarah Henderson will argue for the defendants that the district court defined the rights too generally and failed to assess each appellant's conduct separately. Loevy and Loevy partner David Owens will argue for McGuffin and his daughter that the appeal asks the court to reweigh disputed facts it cannot review before trial. McGuffin v. Karcher (No. 25-2548) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 6, 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/2026/08/06/25-2548.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-2548&hearingDate=2026-08-06 District court summary-judgment order — Justia: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/oregon/ordce/3%3A2021cv01719/164179/274/0.pdf Ninth Circuit appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-2548 Oral-argument report — Courthouse News: https://courthousenews.com/oregon-police-officers-lobby-ninth-circuit-for-immunity-in-wrongful-conviction-case/ David B. Owens — Loevy + Loevy: https://www.loevy.com/attorneys/david-b-owens/ Carrillo v. County of Los Angeles — Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/08/26/12-57229.pdf Published-opinion search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ Memorandum-disposition search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/memoranda/

E.V. v. City of Covina — 9th Cir. (Aug 6, 2026) Aug 07, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit considers whether three Covina police officers have qualified immunity after fatally shooting Daniel Valdivia. Qualified immunity protects officers from civil liability unless they violated a clearly established constitutional right. The parties agree Valdivia pulled what appeared to be a handgun; they dispute its movement, when it left his hand, and what officers could perceive before and during the shots. The object was later identified as a BB gun. The panel later reversed the denial of immunity, finding the force reasonable even under the plaintiffs' version, and dismissed the City's appeal. E.V. v. City of Covina (No. 25-7151) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 6, 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/2026/08/06/25-7151.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-7151&hearingDate=2026-08-06 Argument video — Ninth Circuit official YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gif8-slblC8 Memorandum disposition — Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2026/08/12/25-7151.pdf Investigation report — California Department of Justice: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/ois/report/2024_08_Valdivia_AB1506_Report.pdf Report release — California Department of Justice: https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/california-department-justice-releases-report-officer-involved-shooting-daniel-0 Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-7151 District-court docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/cacdce/5%3A2023cv01562/894044 Benjamin S. Levine — State Bar of California: https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/342060 Benjamin Levine counsel filing — C.D. Cal. (Justia copy): https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/california/cacdce/5%3A2025cv01541/975399/18/0.pdf Appellate jurisdiction outline — Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/uploads/guides/appellate_jurisdiction_outline/Appellate%20Jurisdiction%20Outline%2012.09%20-%20no%20links.htm Published-opinion search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ Memorandum-disposition search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/memoranda/

City of Calimesa v. Everest Reinsurance Company — 9th Cir. (Aug 6, 2026) Aug 07, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears an immediate appeal in a contract dispute between the City of Calimesa and Everest Reinsurance. The city is suing to enforce performance bonds tied to public improvements for a commercial development. Everest says related agreements violate California Government Code section 1090's ban on financial conflicts and may be avoided under section 1092. The question is which deadline controls: section 1092's four years from discovery, or ninety days for challenges to development and subdivision decisions under sections 65009 and 66499.37. Darren Grzyb of Chiesa Shahinian and Giantomasi will argue for Everest that the statutes can be reconciled or should go to the California Supreme Court. Steven Nguy of Richards, Watson and Gershon will argue for the city that the ninety-day land-use limits are more specific and bar the counterclaims. City of Calimesa v. Everest Reinsurance Company (No. 25-7356) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 6, 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/2026/08/06/25-7356.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-7356&hearingDate=2026-08-06 Current appellate docket — PACER entries mirrored by Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-7356 Calimesa project and performance-bond facts — California FPPC: https://lunar.fppc.ca.gov/content/dam/fppc/documents/advice-letters/2025/25102.pdf California Government Code § 1090: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=1090. California Government Code § 1092: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=1092. California Government Code § 65009: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=65009. California Government Code § 66499.37: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=66499.37. Darren Grzyb — CSG Law: https://www.csglaw.com/people/darren-grzyb/ Steven Nguy — Richards, Watson & Gershon: https://www.rwglaw.com/practices-municipal-public-agency-law Steven Nguy firm corroboration — official Ninth Circuit opinion: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca9-17-17144/pdf/USCOURTS-ca9-17-17144-0.pdf Published-opinion search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ Memorandum-disposition search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/memoranda/

Bandy v. Move, Inc. — 9th Cir. (Aug 6, 2026) Aug 07, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit considers whether it can hear an immediate appeal after a trial judge compelled arbitration, dismissed the suit without prejudice, but said the dismissal would function like a stay. A stay pauses a case; a final dismissal normally ends it. That distinction controls whether the appeals court can hear the case. Real estate agents who bought Move's lead-generation service also argue that they never accepted an arbitration clause sent later by email. Move says the email completed the contract and made its written terms controlling. The panel later dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge did not intend a final decision. Bandy v. Move, Inc. (No. 25-2095) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 6, 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/2026/08/06/25-2095.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-2095&hearingDate=2026-08-06 Memorandum disposition — Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2026/08/13/25-2095.pdf District-court order — Central District of California: https://app.midpage.ai/document/james-bandy-v-move-inc-1000432183000 District-court docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/cacdce/2%3A2024cv10492/950449 Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-2095 Case report — HousingWire: https://www.housingwire.com/articles/plaintiffs-in-lead-gen-fraud-suit-against-move-forced-into-arbitration/ Michael Traylor — State Bar of California: https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/136814 Michael Traylor counsel filing: https://assets.inman.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Complaint_03092022.pdf Adam G. Unikowsky — Jenner & Block: https://www.jenner.com/en/people/adam-g-unikowsky Adam G. Unikowsky counsel filing — U.S. Supreme Court: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-942/265575/20230427160550983_Tingley%20Proof%20of%20Service.pdf Published-opinion search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ Memorandum-disposition search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/memoranda/

Calderon v. Blanche — 9th Cir. (Aug 5, 2026) Aug 06, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit hears Rolando Alberto Calderon's challenge to the denial of his motion to reopen removal proceedings so he can seek protection under the Convention Against Torture. Calderon contends he will likely be detained and tortured if returned to El Salvador; the Attorney General responds that the immigration agency applied the right standard and reasonably denied reopening. Six days after argument, the court granted Calderon's petition, vacated the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision, and sent the motion back for reconsideration. Calderon v. Blanche (No. 25-6153) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 5, 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/2026/08/05/25-6153.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-6153&hearingDate=2026-08-05 Memorandum disposition — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2026/08/11/25-6153.pdf Case docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-6153

Stewart v. City of Tacoma — 9th Cir. (Aug 5, 2026) Aug 06, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit considers whether Tacoma itself can be liable after police seized and destroyed industrial hemp they believed was marijuana. Aaron Stewart and Tierra Harvest say the city had a custom of destroying suspected contraband without testing, notice, or a hearing. Tacoma says one discretionary incident is not a municipal policy and that state regulations allowed the destruction. Under Monell, a city is liable only when its own policy or custom causes a constitutional violation. The panel later affirmed the judgment for Tacoma, holding that Stewart had not established municipal liability. Stewart v. City of Tacoma (No. 25-4271) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 5, 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/2026/08/05/25-4271.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-4271&hearingDate=2026-08-05 Memorandum disposition — Ninth Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2026/08/12/25-4271.pdf Summary-judgment order — Western District of Washington: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/washington/wawdce/3%3A2023cv05786/325924/131/0.pdf Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-4271 Decision report — Law360: https://www.law360.com/criminalpractice/articles/2512796/9th-circ-won-t-revive-hemp-co-s-2-75m-destruction-suit Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30 — U.S. District Court: https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/_assets/_documents/_forms/_legal/frcpweb/FRC00033.HTM Rule 30(b)(6) explanation — U.S. Department of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/oip/citizens-resp-ethics-wash-v-us-doge-serv-no-25-511-2025-wl-1392836-ddc-apr-15-2025-cooper-j Robert L. Sirianni Jr. — Brownstone Law: https://www.brownstonelaw.com/attorneys/robert-l-sirianni-jr-esq/ Robert L. Sirianni Jr. counsel filing — U.S. Supreme Court: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-581/120933/20191031142027444_Dovin%20Petition--PDFA.pdf Michelle Yotter counsel filing — Washington Courts: https://www.courts.wa.gov/content/petitions/1044950%20City%20of%20Tacoma%2C%20et%20al.%20%20Answer%20to%20Amicus.pdf Published-opinion search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ Memorandum-disposition search — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/memoranda/

Rohani v. Rubio — 9th Cir. (Aug 5, 2026) Aug 06, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit considers whether consular nonreviewability—the doctrine that ordinarily prevents courts from reviewing visa denials—also blocks a challenge to an alleged government-wide policy. The plaintiffs include former members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who were denied visas or entry, and relatives in the United States. They allege that officials categorically applied terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds to service before the Guard's 2019 terrorist designation, without considering knowledge, intent, or individual circumstances. The district court dismissed the case. Adam Boyd of Gibbs Houston Pauw will argue that the plaintiffs challenge an unlawful policy and seek a lawful process, not review of individual denials. For the government, Victoria Turcios will argue that no reviewable policy is plausibly alleged and that the claims cannot be separated from the individual decisions. Rohani v. Rubio (No. 25-4628) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 5, 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/2026/08/05/25-4628.mp3 Argument listing — Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-4628&hearingDate=2026-08-05 District court dismissal order — Justia: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/washington/wawdce/2%3A2024cv00389/332780/59/0.pdf Appellate docket — Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/25-4628 Adam Boyd profile — Gibbs Houston Pauw: https://www.gibbshoustonpauw.com/about-ghp/attorneys/adam-boyd/ Adam Boyd directory profile — AILA: https://ailalawyer.com/english/AttorneyDetail.aspx?A=112452&P=56194

T.W. v. Echtenkamp — 9th Cir. (Aug 4, 2026) Aug 04, 2026

Show notes

The Ninth Circuit reviews an Eighth Amendment civil-rights claim arising from alleged sexual misconduct at Oregon's MacLaren Youth Correctional Facility. T.W. accuses his former mental-health counselor, Emily Echtenkamp, of sexual advances and other sexualized conduct while he was in custody. At the pleading stage, the district court denied Echtenkamp's motion to dismiss on qualified-immunity grounds. The appeal asks whether existing law gave her fair warning that the alleged conduct violated the Eighth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit has not yet ruled. T.W. v. Echtenkamp (No. 25-5777) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 4, 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/2026/08/04/25-5777.mp3 Argument listing — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-5777&hearingDate=2026-08-04 Opinion search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/opinions/ Memorandum search — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/decisions/memoranda/ Appellate docket — Docket Alarm (PACER-derived): https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/US_Court_of_Appeals_Ninth_Circuit/25-5777/T.W._v._Echtenkamp_et_al/ District-court docket — Docket Alarm (PACER-derived): https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/Oregon_District_Court/3--24-cv-01326/T._W._v._Echtenkamp_et_al/ Independent report — KATU: https://katu.com/news/local/three-more-lawsuits-allege-sexual-abuse-at-oregon-youth-correctional-facilities Chen-Chen Jiang — Schroeter Goldmark & Bender: https://sgb-law.com/our-team/chen-chen-jiang Hong (Chen-Chen) Jiang identity record — GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-waed-2_22-cv-00159/pdf/USCOURTS-waed-2_22-cv-00159-2.pdf

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Oral Arguments, with Context

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected