SCOTUS Opinion Summaries Podcast Por SCOTUS Oral Arguments arte de portada

SCOTUS Opinion Summaries

SCOTUS Opinion Summaries

De: SCOTUS Oral Arguments
Escúchala gratis

Acerca de esta escucha

Listen to summaries of Supreme Court written opinions. Read by an automated voice. For any questions, comments, feedback, or ideas, please contact me at scotus.cases.pod@gmail.comCopyright 2025 SCOTUS Oral Arguments Ciencia Política Mundial Política y Gobierno
Episodios
  • Velazquez v. Bondi, Att'y Gen. | Case No. 23-929 | Opinion Date: 4/22/25
    Apr 22 2025

    The question presented is: When a noncitizen's voluntary-departure period ends on a weekend or public holiday, is a motion to reopen filed the next business day sufficient to avoid the penalties for failure to depart?

    The Supreme Court held: Under §1229c(b)(2), a voluntary-departure deadline that falls on a weekend or legal holiday extends to the next business day.

    Please note that the opinion date is April 22, 2025.

    Más Menos
    14 m
  • Cunningham v. Cornell University | Opinion Date: 4/17/25 | Case No. 23-1007
    Apr 17 2025

    The question presented is: Whether a plaintiff can state a claim by alleging that a plan fiduciary engaged in a transaction constituting a furnishing of goods, services, or facilities between the plan and a party in interest, as proscribed by 29 U.S.C. § 1106(a)(1)(C), or whether a plaintiff must plead and prove additional elements and facts not contained in the provision's text.

    The Supreme Court held: To state a claim under §1106(a)(1)(C), a plaintiff need only plausi­bly allege the elements contained in that provision itself, without ad­dressing potential §1108 exemptions.

    Más Menos
    11 m
  • FDA v. Wages and White Lion Investments, LLC | Date Decided: 4/2/25 | Case No. 23-1038
    Apr 2 2025

    The question presented in this case is: Whether the court of appeals erred in setting aside FDA's denial orders as arbitrary and capricious.

    The Supreme Court held: The Fifth Circuit’s conclusion that the FDA acted arbitrarily and capriciously in its adjudication of manufacturers’ premarket tobacco product applications is vacated because the FDA’s denial orders were sufficiently consistent with its predecisional guidance—as to scientific evidence, comparative efficacy, and device type—and thus did not run afoul of the change-in-position doctrine.

    Más Menos
    18 m
adbl_web_global_use_to_activate_T1_webcro805_stickypopup
Todavía no hay opiniones