Podcast
Supreme Court Opinions
Hosted by SCOTUS Opinions · EN
Hear the opinions from the United States Supreme Court presented in their entirety, but with citations omitted. This podcast is not affiliated with the United States Supreme Court or its staff in any way.
37episodes
Episodes
Newest firstAll episodes
Wolford v. Lopez
6d ago01:21:12Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Wolford v Lopez.In this case, the court considered this issue: Does a law that makes it a crime for a licensed concealed carry permit holder to bring a handgun onto private property open to the public—such as a store or restaurant—unless the property owner gives “express authorization” violate the Second Amendment?The case was decided on June 25, 2026. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →Monsanto v. Durnell
6d ago01:09:39Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Monsanto v Durnell.In this case, the court considered this issue: Does the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempt a label-based failure-to-warn claim where EPA has not required the warning?The case was decided on June 25, 2026. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →Mullin v. Doe
6d ago00:57:51Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Mullin v Doe.In this case, the court considered this issue: Did the Trump administration lawfully end the Temporary Protected Status program for Syrian nationals? The case was decided on June 25, 2026. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →Mullin v. Al Otro Lado
6d ago01:22:45Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Mullin v Al Otro Lado.In this case, the court considered this issue: Does a noncitizen who is stopped on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border “arrive in the United States” within the meaning of Immigration and Nationality Act?The case was decided on June 25, 2026. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Doe
1w ago00:51:34Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Cisco Systems, Inc.v Doe.In this case, the court considered this issue: Does either the Alien Tort Statute or the Torture Victim Protection Act allow a judicially-implied private right of action for aiding and abetting?The case was decided on June 23, 2026.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Corporación Cimex, S. A.
1w ago00:43:10Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Exxon Mobil Corp. v Corporación Cimex, S. A.In this case, the court considered this issue: Does the Helms-Burton Act abrogate foreign sovereign immunity in cases against Cuban instrumentalities, even if the parties do not satisfy an exception under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act?The case was decided on June 23, 2026. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →Blanche v. Lau
1w ago00:34:28Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Blanche v. Lau. In this case, the court considered this issue: To remove a lawful permanent resident who committed an offense listed in Section 1182(a)(2) and was subsequently paroled into the United States, must the government prove that it possessed clear and convincing evidence of the offense at the time of the lawful permanent resident’s last reentry into the United States?The case was decided on June 23, 2026.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →Pung v. Isabella County
1w ago00:35:08Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Pung v Isabella County.In this case, the court considered these issues:1. When the government takes property for tax debt, does the Fifth Amendment require compensation based on the property’s true fair market value, or only on the lower amount it sold for at a tax foreclosure auction?2. Does the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause prohibit the government from seizing and keeping a property worth far more than the small tax debt owed on it?The case was decided on June 23, 2026. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →Landor v. Louisiana Dept of Corrections and Public Safety
1w ago01:01:33Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Landor v Louisiana Dept of Corrections and Public Safety.In this case, the court considered this issue: May an individual sue a government official in his individual capacity for damages for violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (R-L-U-I-P-A)?The case was decided on June 23, 2026.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →McCarthy v. Hernandez
1w ago00:14:15Tap to summarizeWelcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in McCarthy v Hernandez.In this case, the Supreme Court considered whether the Second Circuit properly granted habeas relief under AEDPA (28 U.S.C. §2254(d)(1)) by holding that the state trial court's response to a jury note on confession attenuation violated clearly established federal law from Missouri v. Seibert.The case was decided on June 22, 2026. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Transcribe →