A special edition of Short Circuit Live where the Institute for Justice teamed up with the Texas Observer for a conversation about how local governments increasingly are retaliating against those who call them to account. The event took place in Austin, Texas on September 4, 2024, and was subtitled “Picking the man and then searching the lawbooks: How local governments turn to their criminal codes to silence critics.” It brought together the Observer’s Gus Bova, IJ’s Anya Bidwell, Texas journalist Jason Buch, and Texas attorney David Gonzalez. The discussion mentions several high-profile examples of local-government retaliation from the last few years, including IJ’s Gonzalez v. Trevino and a case that the Supreme Court may soon also hear, Villarreal v. City of Laredo. The confluence of journalists, a civil rights lawyer, and an attorney who has worked as a Texas special prosecutor make for a wide-ranging exploration that we hope you enjoy. Gonzalez v. Trevino case page Villarreal v. City of Laredo en banc Right on Crime Over Ruled by Justice Gorsuch Texas Observer

An extremely sad case, especially for man’s best friend (dog-lover discretion is advised!), and a happy case for property rights. First, the Center for Judicial Engagement’s new Assistant Director, John Wrench, brings us the latest in wild Fifth Circuit qualified-immunity stories with a domestic disturbance check gone bad—so bad that an officer is alleged to have shot two non-threatening dogs. A silver lining is that the grant of qualified immunity was reversed on appeal. Then Betsy Sanz hops aboard to ride the rails. She tells us of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s recent decision that the word “railroad’ doesn’t magically turn everything it touches into a public use. It’s a big Fifth Amendment takings case that prevented the use of eminent domain to build a railroad that would only service one party. It also brings to light another railroad-takings case that IJ is litigating in Georgia. Ramirez v. Killian Wolfe v. Reading Blue Mountain Bound By Oath episode on Pennsylvania and coal IJ’s Georgia railroad eminent domain case From a Railway Carriage

The Fourth of July holds a central place in American history. The day patriots threw off the shackles of King George. Which is why it’s a little ironic that this year it’s the day the British are holding a general election to democratically chose their government. To cash in on this coincidence, this episode highlights some recent cases that reflect the heritage of 1776 and also Anglo-American relations of the present day. And, breaking our usual mold, we start with a case from the Supreme Court, SEC v. Jarkesy. Rob Johnson of IJ joins us to explain why this case is such a big deal for the right to a jury trial, and how the preservation of that right was one of the causes of the Revolution itself. Then, Andrew Ward of IJ tells a much more modern story of a burglary of a British diplomat’s Texas home. The burglar was caught and plead guilty. But he wasn’t pleased with a limitation on his right to “drink excessively.” Andrew tells the whole Fifth Circuit story, and also provides education on what exactly a “consul general” does these days. SEC v. Jarkesy US v. Woods Anthony’s piece “America is not British” British Constitution episode

The Institute for Justice has asked the Supreme Court to take a case challenging Kentucky’s Certificate of Need law (aka a “CON law”—very much a double entendre). Two attorneys in the case, Andrew Ward and Bob Belden, discuss how their clients simply want to provide home health care to their own immigrant community, why the law that prevents that violates the Constitution, and how the Sixth Circuit disagreed. There’s a lot of discussion about how the rational basis test turns out to not be so rational. Then the panel moves on to a property rights case, also in the Sixth Circuit, challenging “equity theft.” You’ll learn a few things about law versus equity and why theft by the government is still theft. Click here for transcript. RSVP for Short Circuit Live in NYC on 10/26 here! Tiwari v. Friedlander (Sixth Circuit) Tiwari v. Friedlander (cert petition) Hall v. Meisner Short Circuit 175

The Supreme Court has said that once the police find a reason to pull you over, they can pull you over—even if that’s not at all why they actually want to pull you over. Patrick Jaicomo joins us to discuss a tragic story from the Fifth Circuit where the court denied qualified immunity to an officer, but also questioned why the police should be allowed to conduct pretextual stops in the first place. We also police tactics that seem designed to turn the temperature up, not down. Then it’s off to the First Circuit where Anna Goodman tells us about standing and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Be sure to keep your standing from your merits while listening. Also, we close with a little bit about “cleaned up.” RSVP for Short Circuit Live in NYC on 10/26 here! Click here for transcript. Crane v. City of Arlington Laufer v. Acheson Hotels, LLC Novak v. City of Parma cert petition The Onion’s amicus brief in Novak “Cleaning Up Quotations” by Jack Metzler

Enjoy some intra-Ivy League ribbing with two Yale grads talking law and clerkships from deep inside New York’s oldest university. Short Circuit welcomes David Lat of Original Jurisdiction (f/k/a Article III Groupie) and Michael Yaeger of Carlton Fields and Empirical Justice. After some throat clearing about their alma mater being in the news quite a bit lately—and how for that reason maybe it’s a good thing David and Michael already got their clerkships in—we discuss their experiences working on the Ninth and Third Circuits. We then dive into some cases: David outlines a speech-and-licensing decision where IJ filed an amicus brief, Michael guides us through the weeds of a sentencing case applying the First Step Act, and your host lays out a sovereign immunity opinion involving state court staff where (unlike a certain recent case involving Texas courts) the government doesn’t win (plus—for interested listener(s)—there’s even some Younger abstention!). It’s the first half of a New York Short Circuit Live double header this month. As for the second, on October 26th, you’re invited! Click to RSVP below. RSVP for Short Circuit Live in NYC on 10/26 here! Click here for transcript. Tingley v. Ferguson U.S. v. Chen Courthouse News Service v. Gilmer IJ’s Diet Speech Cert Petition

What’s new in OT22? Quite a bit, it turns out. This is our sixth annual Short Circuit Live Supreme Court Preview from the University of North Carolina School of Law. Once again, the student Federalist Society chapter graciously asked us to visit and preview the upcoming term of the United States Supreme Court, with some lighthearted trivia, a deep dive into a couple cases already being heard by the Court, and a couple more that it might. As in past years, it’s Justin Pearson of IJ vs. Professor Andrew Hessick of UNC. One note for you listeners is that there’s questions from the crowd at the end (which were great!) but you can’t hear them on the podcast. However, don’t worry as our panelists helpfully repeat them for you. By the way, one of those questions comes from a mystery guest . . . National Pork Producers Council v. Ross Moore v. Harper Kokesch v. Florida Dept. of Health Moses v. United States Book by the Mystery Guest (that you should read!)

If a doctor says a prisoner needs to take his medication, and you’re a prison guard, you should give the prisoner his medication. A number of prison officials in Utah seem to have failed to do this for someone in detox, leading to his death. Does that violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments? Yes, said the Tenth Circuit, and the right is clearly established too, defeating qualified immunity. Tori Clark brings us this sobering case where, at least this time, the drunken logic of qualified immunity didn’t rear its ugly head. Also, we discuss what happens when you don’t pay your taxes and then sue about them. Turns out you can’t do that. You also might have your passport taken away. Which raises the question of whether you have a right to do that thing the passport is for—international travel. We pontificate about a Fifth Circuit case concerning taxes and a passport where there’s also a couple elephants in the room. Click here for transcript. Paugh v. Uintah County Franklin v. U.S. Register for Short Circuit Live in New York!

It’s the first Big Sky Short Circuit! Recorded in front of students at the University of Montana School of Law, we examine three cases from the Montana Supreme Court (or heading quickly toward it) from three eminent Montana attorneys. There’s cases on government immunity, racial balance on juries, and voting rights, intersecting with state law and the Montana Constitution. We also explore practicing in Big Sky Country and reforms the state supreme court might want to consider. The podcast was recorded in conjunction with a symposium of the Montana Law Review’s celebration of the 50th anniversary of the adoption of the Montana Constitution. Whether you’re interested in Montana itself, or just in state law principles and how state constitutions interact with the rest of our legal system, we hope you’ll enjoy this broad exploration of those topics. Click here for transcript. L.B. v. United States State v. Wellknown Montana Youth Action v. Jacobsen

When you sue the government for violating your rights do you first need the government’s permission? Unfortunately, the answer is usually “yes.” We look at a pair of recent cases that go in different directions on the issue, and this leads us to some pretty “deep thoughts” about where law comes from and what roles courts and legislatures have in finding remedies to address constitutional violations. The words “common law” come up much more than is generally common for the podcast. First Anya Bidwell explains how the Tenth Circuit denied a prisoner a chance to sue a prison guard based on a recent Supreme Court decision that effectively closed the door on new remedies when federal officials violate the Constitution. Then, in contrast, Ben Field details a case from the Michigan Supreme Court where the majority recognized a remedy for violations of the state constitution. In addition, the dissent says some interesting things about legal history that we explore. It’s often repeated that if there is a right there is a remedy too. We try to find out how true that actually is. Click here for transcript. Join us for Short Circuit Live in NYC on Oct 26! Silva v. U.S. Bauserman v. Unemployment Insurance Agency 50 Shades of Government Immunity

We all know that guests, like fish, begin to smell after three days, But what about short-term rental ordinances? We look at a pair of regulations from New Orleans and Jersey City. One the Constitution bids farewell to, but the other still stinks. Ari Bargil explains how the Fifth Circuit found the New Orleans scheme lacking under the dormant Commerce Clause. However, Erica Smith Ewing—after explaining how Jersey mayors shake down various industry groups—tells us how the Jersey City ordinance survived a trio of challenges, but at least sparked an interesting concurrence about the future of regulatory takings law. Come for the guests, stay for the fish. And you’ll learn a smidgen about Elizabethan author John Lyly as well. Click here for transcript. Hignell-Stark v. City of New Orleans Nekrilov v. City of Jersey City John Lyly, Euphues and His England Gideon Kanner, Making Laws & Sausages Register for Short Circuit Live in NYC!

Do you know your Indian Law from your Tribal Law? If not, Minnesota appellate attorney Scott Flaherty joins us to discuss a recent Seventh Circuit case where a Wisconsin band of the Ojibwe vindicated their treaty rights. Indian law is notoriously complicated with a lot of unsettling history, but Scott helpfully walks us through this latest chapter. Also, pursuing his white whale of Younger abstention, Sam Gedge of IJ details a refreshing rejection of that doctrine in the Fourth Circuit. Could this harpoon hit the spot? Captain Ahab himself also makes an appearance. Click here for transcript. Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Evers Jonathan R. v. Justice Younger v. Harris Episode on Younger v. Harris with Fred Smith Register for Short Circuit Live in New York! Scott Flaherty Sam Gedge Anthony Sanders

Property rights leads the way this week, with a little bit of intervention thrown in. Paul Avelar of IJ joins us to present a Sixth Circuit case where the owners committed the crime of landscaping their lawn without permission. He also discusses some recent goings on in the city of Nashville, Tennessee to do with home based businesses and code enforcement, including a recent ruling of the Tennessee Supreme Court. In addition, your host Anthony Sanders tells a tale of wine and intervention, also in the Sixth Circuit. Don’t worry, there wasn’t “an intervention” related to wine, but the intervenors who aren’t happy about wineries were able to intervene. Click here for transcript. See Short Circuit Live in New York on October 26! Stevens v. City of Columbus Wineries v. Township of Peninsula Shaw v. Nashville Code Snitching in Nashville (Radley Balko story)

Everybody knows that the government can’t take property from you just because it doesn’t like you. But what if the government says it actually wants to turn the property into a park even though everybody knows it’s because it doesn’t like you? Recently the Second Circuit said that was A-OK. We had on IJ’s Jeff Redfern, an attorney in the case, to talk about this example of eminent domain abuse and how it’s now potentially heading to the Supreme Court. It involves a family that wanted to build a hardware store and a town that did everything it could to stop them. After that we hear from Jason LaFond, a Texas litigator with some Texas-sized stories. Especially one from the Supreme Court of Texas, which recently ruled on whether it violated the Texas Constitution for the state legislature to get rid of some claims related to pandemic shutdowns and lost tuition. The case gets into originalism in state constitutions, how different constitutions in the same state relate to each other, and the continuing fallout of pandemic policy. Brinkmann v. Town of Southold Hogan v. SMU Cert Petition in Brinkmann Rational Basis with Economic Bite Ratification by Pauline Maier

We welcome Nolan Gray on this week, author of the new book Arbitrary Lines: How Zoning Broke the American City and How to Fix It. Nolan is a city planner, scholar, and writer on all things urban. And he has it out for “zoning,” that method city planners love so much where they separate land uses from each other and end up controlling the finest details of what people get up to on their own property. He joins us for a detailed journey through zoning’s history, how humans got along for so long without it, why it creates so many more problems than it solves, and why it’s become so much worse. Further, he explains why often what we think of as “zoning” is actually something else and that there are many land-use tools cities have that would work fine without it. Click here for episode transcript. Arbitrary Lines Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. Nolan Gray California YIMBY Anthony Sanders

A couple cases this week where federal courts, at least in part, paid attention to the right things. Joined by the leaders of IJ’s Project on Immunity and Accountability, Anya Bidwell and Patrick Jaicomo, we dig into a couple recent denials of qualified immunity. Patrick discusses a case from the Fifth Circuit where a sheriff’s deputy committed some extremely heinous acts while on a “welfare check.” There’s Fourth Amendment and due process claims, and they’re addressed in a rather unusual way. Then Anya flies us out to Honolulu for a building inspector who was very hard to please. It’s a racial discrimination appeal under a civil rights law that goes back to before the Fourteenth Amendment. But first Patrick tells us of his musical exploits on a home synthesizer. Click here for transcript. Tyson v. County of Sabine Toshikawa v. Seguirant Register for Short Circuit Live in NYC on October 26! Cert petition in Minnesota CSI (IJ case) Anya & Patrick’s article on Recalibrating Qualified Immunity Anya Bidwell Patrick Jaicomo Anthony Sanders

Georgia criminal defense attorney Andrew Fleischman joins us to talk about a unicorn. Yes, the Eleventh Circuit recently found a state prosecutor was not absolutely immune from a civil rights lawsuit, where a witness was arrested for not testifying . . . after he actually showed up to testify. This kind of case is extremely rare, and Andrew discusses how rare, and what its effect might be in a place like the Fulton County prosecutor’s office. Then it’s off to the Fifth Circuit where Alexa Gervasi of IJ discusses an absolutely tragic case where a prisoner dies and the guards are notgranted qualified immunity. Not quite a unicorn, but also a rare beast. Also, speaking of Fulton County, STICK AROUND TO THE END. Andrew educates us on why if the Fulton County District Attorney prosecutes former President Trump the case could be removed to federal court. And, he gives a prediction about whether that will happen. Click here for transcript. Kassa v. Fulton County Moore v. LaSalle Management Co. Bound By Oath episode on prosecutorial immunity (with Lara Bazelon) Removal statute for federal officials prosecuted in state court

The First Amendment protects your right to record the police. Yes, we already knew that, said the Tenth Circuit. Um, you did? Dan Alban presents a case where an officer blatantly tried to stop a vblogger from recording him by threatening to run him over, and where the court did a few interesting gymnastics in order to say what always should have been obvious. Quality immunity hijinks ensue, but with a happy ending. Then Jeff Rowes takes us to prison in the Fifth Circuit. Was a lawsuit there moot? Not this time, but concurring judge Jim Ho explains that courts say the M-word all too often. Irizarry v. Yehia Tucker v. Gaddis Alexa Gervasi & Anya Bidwell oped Sledge Hammer! intro

A town made it illegal to hold a sign. Anywhere. Really, just holding a sign is illegal. Sound like a First Amendment violation? That’s what we thought. And that’s what David Markese of the American Liberties Institute thought too. David joins us to discuss a recent Eleventh Circuit ruling in favor of his client after they took the town of Fort Myers Beach to court. Then it’s off to Texas to settle the great question, how the heck do you pronounce amicus curiae? After settling that once and for all IJ’s Dan Rankin explains that Tyson Foods can’t move a COVID-19 case to federal court just because it might have feared it was under arrest. Click here for transcript. Glenn v. Tyson Foods, Inc. LaCroix v. Town of Fort Myers Beach Background on Universal/Nationwide Injunctions David Markese Dan Rankin Anthony Sanders

Ever worked in a salt mine? It seems some non-union employees hadn't either when their boss joked that they might be sent to one. That wasn't funny to someone completely unconnected to the employer, who filed an unfair labor practice. Jared McClain joins us to discuss this funny case from the Third Circuit. And get a refresher on the open fields doctrine--and how it doesn't apply to seizures--from John Wrench as he tells us about a few not-very-well-looked-after cows. Click here for transcript.

Recorded live at UCLA, we're introducing a new study from the Institute for Justice: Constitutional G.P.A., is your Government Preventing Accountability? The study grades each state on how its citizens are able--or all too often, are not able--to hold government officials accountable when their rights are violated. It's also a research tool you can use yourself. Hosted by IJ attorney Anya Bidwell we hear about three recent cases through the prism of the study. They are presented by UCLA law professor (and Chief Conspirator at the Volokh Conspiracy) Eugene Volokh, President of the National Police Accountability Project Julia Yoo, and California civil rights attorney Nicholas Yoka. Feel free to follow along with us by checking out the interactive study here. Click here for transcript.

On a special Short Circuit, we sit down with Michael Bindas, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice and lead attorney in Carson v. Makin. There, the Supreme Court just ruled in favor of Michael’s clients and thousands of children whose parents now have additional options for their education. We talk to Michael about the underlying religious liberty and school choice issues, what it’s like to argue a case at the Supreme Court, and the future of school choice in the wake of this important victory. Somehow we also work bourbon and rye into the conversation. Transcript forthcoming.

It's just so easy these days to put a camera on a pole and record everything that happens in someone's front yard for eight months. So easy that we keep getting cases where that's exactly what the police do. Without a warrant. IJ attorney Josh Windham unpacks the latest, out of the First Circuit, Courier font and all. The judges don't agree, but the rest of us can that this issue is likely heading to the Supreme Court soon. Then Anthony Sanders tells a story from Indiana where its supreme court drew a line in the sand dunes about what its legislature can delegate. But it's not the "nondelegation doctrine" you've heard about. RSVP for Short Circuit Live and Constitutional G.P.A. on June 30, 2022 in Los Angeles! Click here for transcript.

We discuss a couple legal immunities, one listeners will be familiar with and one that’s pretty unknown. The second is being addressed by our special guest, Aliza Shatzman. She is the co-founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a new nonprofit whose mission is to ensure that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza had a harrowing experience as a law clerk and found that the laws that apply to other government employees often don’t extend to those in the judicial branch. She also presents a recent case from the Fourth Circuit about a judicial branch employee who brought a number of claims to try and get around sovereign immunity—and actually succeeded on a few of them. Then Kirby Thomas West of IJ discusses a Fifth Circuit case with terrible facts, but a good outcome on the qualified immunity front. Click here for the transcript.

Is “perceived speech” protected by the First Amendment? That straightforward question goes in a very complicated direction when a truck driver is fired from his government job. Christie Hebert of IJ joins us to explain this highly confusing tale from the Tenth Circuit. Then it’s pass-the-popcorn time with some Fifth Circuit drama, served up by IJ’s Rob Johnson. We heard in a recent episode about the objection to a transfer of venue in a challenge to a new rule about credit cards. Well, that same matter is already back at the Fifth Circuit concerning another attempt to transfer venue, replete with more intra-circuit squabbling. We also discuss forum shopping when it comes to nationwide injunctions. Avant v. Doke In re Chamber of Commerce (June 18, 2024) Short Circuit 319 Much Ado, Act III, Scene 1

Recording in front of a live audience at the 2022 Institute for Justice’s Law Student Conference, we look at some of the best, and some of the worst, from the Fourth Circuit. First, Justin Pearson explains why a restriction on “political” advertising on the side of buses was unconstitutional even though it recognized the side of a bus is not a “public forum.” Then, Michael Bindas gives us his best sommelier (or is it wino?) impersonation and discusses a tipsy opinion allowing North Carolina to prevent out-of-state retailers from shipping wine to the state’s consumers. It’s pretty much not what the Supreme Court has said about the dormant Commerce Clause and alcohol. RSVP to Constitutional GPA and Short Circuit Live at UCLA on Thursday, June 30th 2022! Click here for transcript.

A couple headline-grabbing, government-thumping constitutional-heavyweight cases coming at you this week. First, Rob Johnson explains how he filed a brief on the importance of the right to a jury trial when he checked the news to find the Fifth Circuit had just said the same thing in a different case. He details why this is a big deal (and a good deal) and not the end-of-humanity some people have been shouting about. Then, Dan Alban tells us of how the Eleventh Circuit just found almost all of Florida’s “social media law” unconstitutional, and why this isn’t really that surprising. Except for the fact that the Fifth Circuit has cryptically upheld Texas’s similar law. Also, it’s towel day. Click here for the transcript.

When is a case over? As you'll learn, that depends on a lot of weird stuff. IJ attorney Will Aronin walks us through the Ninth Circuit's recent decision on everybody's favorite bedtime reading, Rule 68 and offers of judgment. Seriously, it's an untapped resource of the federal courts with some counterintuitive traps for lawyers who don't read the rules. Then Jeff Redfern of IJ tells us about the latest chapter in mask lawsuits, this time from the Eighth Circuit. The court says part of the case (all of the case?) is moot, but with the pandemic it's hard to know with any finality. There's an invocation of Sisyphus that might not surprise you. Click here for transcript.

Short Circuit is proud to present to you Professor Marin Levy of Duke University School of Law. She is a top scholar on the federal judiciary, including its history, how it has evolved, and how it actually works. Plus, she’s educated the world about the federal (and state!) courts through the magic of Twitter threads. We talk to her about what’s so interesting about the federal courts (with some “short” remarks about the “circuit” courts) and how she got started Tweeting them. After that Kirby Thomas West of IJ tells us about a Second Circuit case where the government didn’t do enough to pass the First Amendment (at least for now) even though the plaintiff wasn’t the most sympathetic. And we go back to Marin to detail a Ninth Circuit case with an even less sympathetic party, but where the court overlooked the importance of some pretty intriguing issues, such as whether there’s a Fourth Amendment violation if the government comes in and copies all of your stuff. Register for IJ’s Judicial Engagement Forum on the Michigan Constitution. Click here for transcript.

A couple issues near-and-dear to many of your hearts this week: Money and Facebook. First, if you win a case against the government are you a "prevailing party" deserving of an attorneys fees award? North Carolina officials argued you're not if you do so well that the law you're challenging actually disappears. Luckily the Fourth Circuit shot that argument down. Alexa Gervasi explains. But meanwhile the Sixth Circuit shot down quite a lot of the First and Fourth Amendments when a police department took great vengeance upon a man with the audacity to . . . create a parody Facebook page. As Ari Bargil tells us, it's a case demonstrating why everyone hates lawyers. If you're in Michigan, sign up now for our May 20, 2022 forum on Judicial Engagement and the Michigan Constitution! Click here for transcript.

It's a First Amendment fiesta at Short Circuit this week! Tori Clark explains how in the Eighth Circuit it's hard to sue the government to protect your right to free speech when the law is privately enforced. And we're not talking about Texas here, but people not acting so nice in Minnesota. Further down the trail, things went a little berserk in Oregon, and a pro se legislator won himself another day in court in the Ninth Circuit. Sam Gedge has hunted through the briefs. If you're in Michigan come to our State Forum on Judicial Engagement and the Michigan Constitution! Friday, May 20, 2022 at noon. There's also a free lunch. RSVP here. Click here for transcript.

Suing the United States government is really hard. So hard that someone's family might not get to even if the government is at fault for that person dying in a flood. Adam Shelton explains why that luckily might not be true in this case, but all too often is. Then Diana Simpson walks us through a procedural pretzel of property rights preventing people from putting up homes. She also discusses some old cases you might not know about, but really should. Click here for transcript.

We focus in on two Latin words this week: habeas and mandamus. Both usually mean “you lose.” But things somehow turned out differently in the Fourth Circuit and Fifth Circuit. Hear the story of a man trapped in prison for a small drug sale for almost a decade who fights his way through the state and federal courts and wins himself a new trial. IJ’s Bob Belden tells that tale. And then there’s a story about guns, the Internet, speech, the differences between Texas and New Jersey, and transfer orders. Alexa Gervasi gets us up to speed on that saga. She also previews a new IJ case about a prosecutor working for a judge he practiced before. It’s as bad as it sounds. Click here for transcript.

Short Circuit Live returns with an all-star all-D.C. Circuit panel! IJ attorney Anya Bidwell hosts a discussion with three Supreme Court lawyers (and former D.C. Circuit clerks), Lisa Blatt, Kelsi Brown Corkran, and Paul Clement. They reminisce about their days clerking for D.C. Circuit judges and analyze three recent circuit opinions on liability under terrorism laws, executive privilege, and no-fly lists.

Some property owners sued an arm of the State of Louisiana for damages and won a $10 million judgment. Wow, that's real money! Except, because the lawsuit was in state court they can't collect on it unless the legislature gives it to them. Which it doesn't want to do. So the money isn't so real after all. They then went to federal court, but the Fifth Circuit gave them some bad news. IJ's Jeff Redfern explains. When we move to the Ninth Circuit, however, it's all smiles. The court said an antitrust case could move forward against members of the California Dental Board. Your host Anthony Sanders gives the latest in turning the antitrust laws on the most anticompetitive of them all, the regulators. Ariyan, Inc. v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans, https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/21/21-30335-CV0.pdf SmileDirectClub, LLC v. Tippins, https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/03/17/20-55735.pdf Bound By Oath podcast, https://shortcircuit.org/center-for-judicial-engagement/sc/14th-at-150-podcast/ Remedying the Loss of a Right, https://ij.org/cje-post/remedying-the-loss-of-a-right/ Jeff Redfern, https://ij.org/staff/jeffrey-redfern/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

It’s a Short Circuit Live, recorded at the Institute for Justice’s annual law student conference! Patrick Jaicomo is your host, and he brings along IJ’s Michael Bindas and Katrin Marquez to dig into two very different but thought-provoking decisions for the young legal minds in the “studio” audience (and yours too, of course, dear listener). First, Michael reports on a decision from the Eleventh Circuit that on its face is a standard insurance and indemnification case. But, Judge Newsom adds a concurrence that will take your mind to different—and artificial?—places. Should we be asking our new AI Overlords what the meaning of words are? The panel thinks it’s perhaps not insane to look into, as does the judge. Then, Katrin reports on another Eleventh Circuit case with a civil rights violation that was so obvious that the court denied qualified immunity even though there was no on-point precedent. Listener beware, though, as it involves the loss of a dog. It does portend, however, some Hope for the future. Snell v. United Specialty Ins. Co. Plowright v. Miami Dade County Hope v. Pelzer

Michigan lawyer and YouTube legal sensation Steve Lehto joins us this week. We talk a bit about his career as a broadcaster, consumer protection lawyer, and host of an internet show with 300,000 subscribers. Then we get into some language he never got to “play on the radio.” All because a few police officers threw a man out of a $3 county fair for wearing a t-shirt with a famous saying of the group NWA. Or at least that’s what the Sixth Circuit said in denying the officers qualified immunity. Also, our old friend Rob Peccola comes back with the latest in the landlord wars in Minneapolis, and how the Eighth Circuit didn’t see no takings.

Like owls? We've got owls. Two of them. But they don't like each other. Ben Field explains how the Ninth Circuit adjudicated with this Parliament of owls, and how a 12 gauge shotgun is involved. In addition, Evan Lisull tells a story of "chalking," the police, and the First Amendment. Both from another Ninth Circuit case, but also from his own brush with the law. Throw in some qualified immunity and admin law, and you've got a very festive St. Patrick's Day episode (minus anything Irish). Register for Short Circuit Live! Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., https://ij.org/event/scl/ Friends of Animals v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/03/04/21-35062.pdf Ballentine v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/03/08/20-16805.pdf Rivas-Villegas v. Cortesluna (case questioning circuits clearly establishing law), https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1539_09m1.pdf Ben Field, https://ij.org/staff/ben-field/ Evan Lisull, https://ij.org/staff/evan-lisull/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

As news followers over the last few years will know, grand jury records are super secret. But sometimes judges allow the word to get out, under certain narrow circumstances. Is one of them just that the records are old and historians find them interesting? Sorry, says the First Circuit, in the latest installment of a circuit split. Rob Frommer tells us all the history. Also, can the IRS get around the Administrative Procedure Act through some creative lawyering? No, says the Sixth Circuit. John Wrench walks us through a rhetorical lashing of our tax collectors. Finally, come see Short Circuit Live in DC on April 6, 2022! The link to RSVP and join us is here: https://ij.org/event/scl/ In re: Petition for Order Directing Release of Records, http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/20-1836P-01A.pdf Mann Construction, Inc. v. United States, https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/22a0041p-06.pdf Short Circuit Live at University of Georgia, https://shortcircuit.org/sc_podcast/124-live-at-uga-law/ Rob Frommer, https://ij.org/staff/rfrommer/ John Wrench, https://ij.org/staff/john-wrench/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

Wanna get mad? This week we've got you covered. Two cases where the government plays by different rules from the rest of us. First Jaba Tsitsuashvili explains how the 11th Circuit went out of its way to excuse the Department of Justice's failure to raise a legal argument to do with a traffic stop search that private attorneys would not get away with. And Josh House tells us what the 8th Circuit thinks about property when you don't pay property taxes. The result isn't pretty. Along the way, however, there's a few laughs and in the 11th Circuit case we hope you appreciate that "the dissent comes with receipts." United States v. Campbell, https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201610128.enb.pdf Tyler v. Hennepin County, https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/22/02/203730P.pdf https://ij.org/staff/joshua-house/ https://ij.org/staff/jaba-tsitsuashvili/ https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

Following in the footsteps of last week's Super Bowl halftime show, we're keeping it West Coast today. Two cases from the Ninth Circuit that are Very Ninth Circuit. First, Bob McNamara explains how the overbreadth doctrine invalidated a restriction on speech related to violating immigration law. Then, Joe Gay describes the many ways the court found an Oakland, California ordinance to be just fine constitutionally even though it forces people to pay a lot of money just to move back into their house. Nobody raps, but there are unintentional references to the Norwegian pop group a-ha. United States v. Hansen, https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/02/10/17-10548.pdf Ballinger v. City of Oakland, https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/02/01/19-16550.pdf Robert McNamara, https://ij.org/staff/robert-mcnamara/ Joe Gay, https://ij.org/staff/joe-gay/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

The Institute for Justice just issued a new report, 50 Shades of Government Immunity, about what happens when you go to state--not federal--court after the government violates your rights. The report grades every state for its access to justice as an alternative to the federal judiciary. Unfortunately, with just a couple exceptions, it doesn't paint a pretty picture. Two IJ attorneys, Anya Bidwell and Patrick Jaicomo, and Professor Alex Reinert of Cardozo Law, join Short Circuit to discuss the report and Professor Reinert's related research. You'll learn that while going to state court isn't nearly as easy as some at the U.S. Supreme Court assume it to be, there are prospects for reform as well. 50 Shades of Government Immunity, https://ij.org/report/50-shades-of-government-immunity/ New Federalism and Civil Rights Enforcement, https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1478&context=nulr Protecting Everyone's Constitutional Rights Act (IJ's model legislation), https://ij.org/legislation/protecting-everyones-constitutional-rights-act/ Alex Reinert, https://cardozo.yu.edu/directory/alexander-reinert Anya Bidwell, https://ij.org/staff/anya-bidwell/ Patrick Jaicomo, https://ij.org/staff/patrick-jaicomo/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

Divorce can be hard on the kids. Especially when the divorce was 40 years ago, the government doesn't believe it happened, and your U.S. citizenship depends on whether it did. New York litigator Alexandra Tseitlin joins Short Circuit to discuss an unusual immigration case she recently won in the Third Circuit. Also, ineffective assistance of counsel claims are difficult to win. But they're a bit easier when the lawyer is just obviously wrong about what the law means. Tori Clark of IJ walks us through a tragic story that got a bit better on appeal. And finally, we have a winner in our Most Beautiful Courtroom contest. We hope you don't mind speaking in the library. Jaffal v. ICE, https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203148p.pdf U.S. v. Freeman, https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/194104A.P.pdf Alexandra Tseitlin, https://www.tseitlinlaw.com/alexandra-tseitlin/ Tori Clark, https://ij.org/staff/tori-clark/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

Sometimes when the government does bad things to you it violates the Constitution. And sometimes it just violates the contract. Jeff Rowes explains the difference, and how things went down with a development scheme in the Fifth Circuit. Also, Will Aronin brings his expertise he learned as a trial lawyer to examine some junk science that has now been put on trial. Plus he details why it would be nice for a criminal defendant to know if a witness testifying against him is known to "stretch the truth." Preston Hollow Capital, LLC v. Cottonwood Development Corp., https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/21/21-50389-CV0.pdf O'Donnell v. Yezzo, https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/22a0026n-06.pdf Judge Jon Newman article on "En Banc," https://static.reuters.com/resources/media/editorial/20200714/IN%20BANC%20PRACTICE%20IN%20THE%20SECOND%20CIRCUIT%20THE%20VIRTUES%20OF%20RESTRAINT.pdf Jeff Rowes, https://ij.org/staff/jrowes/ Will Aronin, https://ij.org/staff/will-aronin/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

Is it "on bonk" or "n bank"? IJ lawyers disagree on how to pronounce a full court of appeals considering a case. But whatever your Latin/Old French skills, the en banc Fifth Circuit said some things about the Dallas County jail that even your crack team of experts can't understand. But Sam Gedge does his best to explain what might be going on, and how the court needlessly addressed his favorite topic, Younger abstention. But before that Bob Belden tells a story of a renegade sheriff sticking unauthorized anti-Halloween signs in rehabilitated sex offenders' yards. RSVP for our live event on the Georgia Constitution on February 4, 2022, https://ij.org/event/center-for-judicial-engagement-forum-on-the-georgia-constitution/ McClendon v. Long, https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202110092.pdf Daves v. Dallas County, https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/18/18-11368-CV2.pdf Rival "How to Pronounce 'En Banc'" Videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQexSbL8iDQ, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsnW2JDc0G8 Sam Gedge, https://ij.org/staff/sam-gedge/ Bob Belden, https://ij.org/staff/bob-belden/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

Ever wondered when the police can pull you over and what they can do once you stop? Then this episode brings news you can use through a couple recent traffic stop cases. Wesley Hottot reports on the Eighth Circuit's blessing of a stop supposedly brought on by some pretty smelly weed (although not everyone is convinced of the story). Then, your host Anthony Sanders tells us of a new development in Oregon where its high court has rejected the "automobile exception" to the requirement to get a warrant before a search. Also, please keep your nominations for the most beautiful federal circuit courtroom rolling in. Our listeners have demonstrated there's some architecturally fierce, yet lovely, competition out there. United States v. Shumaker, https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/12/203467P.pdf Oregon v. McCarthy, https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p17027coll3/id/9463/rec/2 Post on Oregon v. McCarthy, https://ij.org/cje-post/state-con-law-case-of-the-week-oregon-stops/ IJ's Project on the Fourth Amendment, https://ij.org/issues/ijs-project-on-the-4th-amendment/ Wesley Hottot, https://ij.org/staff/whottot/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

If you’re a fan of our furry friends (actual animals, that is) then this is the episode for you. First, we start with what’s important: What horses to pick in this weeks’ Belmont Stakes, the last leg of the Triple Crown, which will run (or ran, if you listen to this episode later on) in two days. IJ’s Brian Morris lends his horse sense to this question. Then he goes back to his Kentucky roots for a case about the first leg of the Triple Crown. A few gamblers would have won a lot of cash if a horse in a past Kentucky Derby had been disqualified on race day. But because the disqualification didn’t happen for nine months they got nothing. The Sixth Circuit said their case wasn’t a winner. Then we head south to the Fifth Circuit for a dog sniff case that isn’t about drugs but human trafficking. IJ’s Mike Greenberg is skeptical of the reasoning. He also lends his opinion to which states are placed in which reporters for their published opinions. It’s time for conference realignment! Mattera v. Baffert U.S. v. Martinez Short Circuit 209 (drug dogs and animal book) Short Circuit 271 (Brian mentions the Kentucky Derby) IJ amicus brief on legal marijuana and drug dogs

It's a new year but little is new with qualified immunity in the Fifth Circuit. Or is it? Easha Anand of the MacArthur Justice Center joins us to discuss a recent denial of qualified immunity in a police brutality case. IJ's Anya Bidwell joins in and reports on a couple other developments that demonstrate perhaps there's some "split second" thinking going on among those judges. Timpa v. Dillard Villarreal v. City of Laredo Harmon v. City of Arlington IJ's Gonzalez v. City of Castle Hills Easha Anand, MacArthur Justice Center Anya Bidwell Anthony Sanders

It's our 200th episode! We're taking this second century as an excuse to explore where Short Circuit came from and what it's done, both the podcast and the newsletter. We start things off at the very beginning with Short Circuit's editor and the podcast's original host John Ross. Then it's a blast-from-the-past with Clark Neily and Evan Bernick. We close things off with guest host Paul Sherman and Short Circuit Live host Anya Bidwell. You've heard how Spiderman and Batman came to be, but do you know what traumatic event led to Short Circuit? Ok, there's no radiation or mugging, but you will learn how reading way too many qualified immunity opinions can radicalize your worldview. Enjoy! Also, a quick update to the episode. None of us really remembered where the idea for the podcast actually came from, but further deep (and actual) research has revealed it was our sound engineer and producer Mark. Thank you! https://ij.org/staff/jross/ https://www.cato.org/people/clark-neily https://www.niu.edu/law/about/directory/bernick.shtml https://ij.org/staff/psherman/ https://ij.org/staff/anya-bidwell/ https://ij.org/staff/asanders/

In what may be the most obvious of examples of obvious constitutional violations, we discuss the right to not have the police put you in prison. Alexa Gervasi of IJ explains how this was too much even for qualified immunity to defeat, at least in the Third Circuit. And IJ's Ryan Wilson explains why a case involving a Greek boat accident can go forward in Boston. No, the captain's name was not Odysseus. Dave Kennedy Fellowship, https://www.ij.org/opportunities/students Litigation Fellowship, https://www.ij.org/opportunities/employment-opportunities/ Dennis v. City of Philadelphia, https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/192390p.pdf Curtis v. Galakatos, http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/20-1846P-01A.pdf For 25 Years, Jimmy Dennis Was on Death Row. Then One Day, He Wasn’t., https://www.phillymag.com/news/2021/02/06/jimmy-dennis-musician-death-row/ Alexa Gervasi, https://ij.org/staff/alexa-gervasi/ Ryan Wilson, https://ij.org/staff/ryan-wilson/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/