Climate Change Goes Back to the Supreme Court -- Colorado Edition
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, the latest climate‑change tort suit filed by a local government against a fossil‑fuel producer. The Court not only adopted the petitioner’s question on whether federal law precludes state‑law claims for greenhouse‑gas damages, but also added a separate query on its own statutory and Article III jurisdiction. The case joins a growing docket of state‑law climate lawsuits that have been shunted between federal and state courts. A ruling could set a national precedent on the preemptive reach of the Clean Air Act and the viability of state‑level climate liability.
Litigation Breeds Litigation + Follow-Up to Lawsuit Against Pro-Palestinian / Anti-Semitic Protesters Outside Synagogue
A federal district court dismissed Marc Susselman’s lawsuit against the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission, holding that the case must proceed through the state disciplinary process. The court invoked Younger abstention and related precedents, finding Susselman failed to raise his constitutional...
Diversity (the Civil Procedure Kind) and Self-Identification
Judge Gerald McHugh held that a remote nonprofit’s public online identity determines its citizenship for diversity jurisdiction, rejecting the defendant’s claim of a separate private identity. The case, Sherman v. American Ass'n of Suicidology, hinged on a change in the...
A Conversation About the Endangerment Finding Rescission
In this episode of Andrew Revkin's "Sustain What" podcast, host Andrew Revkin discusses the EPA's controversial final rule rescinding the greenhouse‑gas endangerment finding, which underpins Clean Air Act regulation of emissions. He is joined by environmental attorney Sean Donohue, a...
An Edited Version Of Learning Resources
In this episode the host discusses his unconventional approach to Supreme Court opinions, focusing on a deep dive into the complex *Learning Resources* case, which produced seven separate opinions spanning over 170 pages. He explains how he edited the opinions—condensing...
Trump on the Supreme Court's Tariff Decision
In this episode, the host reviews President Donald Trump's reaction to the Supreme Court's ruling that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not permit tariff impositions. Trump lambasts the justices he deems disloyal, praises Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh...
Reptiles V. Plants & Dogs: Reptiles Lose
The episode dissects a recent Florida defamation case where New Moon Reptiles sued a Nevada resident for allegedly false social‑media claims that the company’s reptiles died due to unsafe shipping. The court denied the plaintiffs’ request for an ex parte...
From Prof. Jack Goldsmith (Harvard) on the Tariff Decision
In this episode, Professor Jack Goldsmith discusses the Supreme Court's recent tariff decision, focusing on how the justices applied the Major Questions Doctrine (MQD) to limit presidential authority over broad statutory delegations. He highlights the significance of three conservative justices...
I Got 99 Delegations, but a Tariff Ain't One
The episode dissects Justice Kagan's concurrence in the Supreme Court's recent tariff decision, highlighting how the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) lists nine verbs and eleven objects that combine into 99 distinct presidential powers, none of which include raising...
No Pseudonymity for Defendant in Computer Fraud and Abuse Act / Trade Secrets Case
In Grow Universe Inc. v. Doe, Judge Gregory Woods denied a defendant’s request to proceed anonymously in a lawsuit alleging unauthorized access to a Google business account, misappropriation of trade secrets, and account deletion under the Computer Fraud and Abuse...
No First Amendment Right to Force Government to Provide Live Feed of Macaques in Government Lab
The episode examines a recent Maryland federal court decision rejecting PETA's claim that it has a First Amendment right to compel the government to provide a continuous audio‑visual live feed of macaques used in a mental‑health research lab. The judge...
Free Speech Unmuted: Student Speech, Threats, and the First Amendment
In this episode, hosts Jane and the narrator dissect two recent First Amendment cases involving student speech at public universities: Damsky v. University of Florida, which upheld disciplinary action for speech containing violent references, and Christensen v. Ohio State University,...
The American Constitution Society Still Does Not Have A Competing Theory Other Than "Antitrumpism"
The episode critiques the American Constitution Society (ACS) for lacking a coherent constitutional theory beyond opposing Trump and originalism, highlighting President Phil Brest’s admission that the organization has no affirmative interpretive framework. It references Jeffrey Toobin’s NYT column exposing the...
No Retroactive Pseudonymization in Federal Court Under California "Safe at Home" Program
The episode examines recent federal and California court rulings on whether participation in California’s Safe at Home confidentiality program entitles litigants to retroactively redact or pseudonymize past federal filings. Judge Birotte’s decision in Smith v. Solomon underscores that federal courts...
"One Would Expect … Attorneys Believe They Bring Some Level of Value to Their Clients Beyond That of a Machine"
The episode examines a recent judicial reprimand of attorney Michael Policchio for filing briefs with fabricated, AI‑hallucinated citations, highlighting a broader pattern of similar errors in other cases. Judge Mark Dinsmore emphasizes that while technology can aid legal work, attorneys...