84,000+ attorneys & devotees listening
Each episode opens a case file — landmark decisions, circuit splits, the arguments that almost weren't made. We move at the pace of a thriller and stop at every footnote that matters.
Our hosts are practicing attorneys and former clerks who've argued these issues. They disagree on the record. They cite the dissent. They tell you when the majority got it wrong.
"The kind of CLE credit you'd actually spend a Saturday morning on — if they gave credit for this."
Dawn research session — highlighters bleeding through photocopied opinions
142 episodes. Every one an argument worth having. Filter by legal area, case type, or season.
Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600
Police in Missouri developed a two-step interrogation technique to launder inadmissible confessions into admissible ones. The Supreme Court said no — but couldn't agree on why. Five justices, three rationales, one fractured precedent that lower courts are still trying to apply.
FTC v. Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563
Before big tech, there was big alarm. Grinnell controlled 87% of the central station protective services market and called it competition. The Court called it monopoly. The standard they wrote still governs every antitrust case filed today.
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555
Two wildlife biologists wanted to challenge a federal rule that would harm endangered species overseas. Scalia said they lacked standing — and rewrote the doctrine in the process. This episode is about who gets to sue the government, and why the answer matters more than the merits.
Train v. City of New York, 420 U.S. 35
Nixon impounded billions in congressionally appropriated funds. He claimed executive discretion. Congress claimed the Impoundment Control Act said otherwise. The Court never reached the constitutional question — but the political crisis it spawned reshaped the separation of powers.
Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246
A junk dealer picked up spent bomb casings from a government range, flattened them, and sold them for scrap. The government called it theft. Jackson called it a case about the soul of criminal law. The opinion he wrote became the foundation of every mens rea argument ever made in a federal court.
Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737
Black parents sued the IRS for granting tax exemptions to segregated private schools. The Court said they couldn't — not because they were wrong, but because the injury was too abstract. It's the case that taught a generation of civil rights lawyers to frame their complaints before they file them.
Highlighters bleeding through photocopied opinions. The coffee is still hot. The margin notes are illegible by 7 a.m.
"The brief is never the argument. The argument is what happens when someone disagrees with the brief."
Hosts debate mens rea over espresso. The best episodes start with an argument in the pre-roll.
"We stop when one of us changes their mind. That's usually around the third espresso."
Waveforms trimmed with the precision of redlining a brief. Every pause is intentional.
"The edit is where the episode becomes inevitable. Everything else is just raw material."
