Episode # 66

Today on Legalese we are doing a deep dive into the pending Supreme Court Case SEC v Jarkesy. This case was one included in my Supreme Court Roundup video from October 2023, which included a very brief summary of the case and reviewed the Question Presented.

In my opinion, this case is shaping up to be the most interesting and most consequential among those I am covering for this term in my Supreme Court Roundup. Which is why today we’ll be giving this case the comprehensive attention it deserves. The Court is being asked to either reaffirm or vacate a decision by the Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals that found an internal SEC case brought against George Jarkesy as unconstitutional on three separate grounds.

Today we take a deep dive into the administrative state, the Fifth Circuit decision, the Supreme Court oral arguments and the scare-mongering untruths that are spreading by way of the corporate media and the Washington DC political class.

Show Notes - How The Administrative State Is Disputing Your Right To A Jury Trial

Subscribe to the Legale§e Newsletter You will get notifications for all new content, whether it’s articles, podcasts or videos!

Visit the Legale§e Podcast homepage to learn more about the show, get updates, contact me, buy my book, find links to my social media & more!

Follow

• Rumble
• Odysee
• YouTube
• Anchor
• Twitter
• Substack

Support

• PayPal.me
• Venmo
• Locals
• Contact Me

BUY MY NEW BOOK Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers Now Available on Amazon

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in areas of law, politics & culture.
Legale§e is a subscriber-supported project. Please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Episode # 65

Today on Legalese, we are discussing the case Moore v United States. This case, which was part of my 2023 Supreme Court Roundup was argued before the Court on December 5th, 2023.

There is a lot of new information that can be gleaned about this case from those arguments and so this video will be a summary of those arguments. Looking at the key issues raised and making some fairly certain predictions about the outcome of this case.

• Show Notes Page for This Episode - Moore Money, More Problems
• Go Read my Article about Moore v United States that I mention at the top of my video:

Subscribe to the Legale§e Newsletter You will get notifications for all new content, whether it’s articles, podcasts or videos!

Visit the Legale§e Podcast homepage to learn more about the show, get updates, contact me, buy my book, find links to my social media & more!

Follow

• Rumble
• Odysee
• YouTube
• Anchor
• Twitter
• Substack

Support

• PayPal.me
• Venmo
• Locals
• Contact Me

BUY MY NEW BOOK Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers Now Available on Amazon

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in areas of law, politics & culture.
Legale§e is a subscriber-supported project. Please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Understanding The Significance Of Ketanji Brown Jackson And Progressive Originalism

Episode #61

Today on Legalese we will be discussing the judicial philosophy of Progressive Originalism. What is it, what isn't it, how does it work and to what ends? Plus how does it compare with the other more common forms of Originalist judicial interpretation such as original public meaning or textualism?

Also we will be talking about the first Progressive Originalist on the Supreme Court. That is of course the Junior Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. I will be discussing some likely surprising reasons Ketanji Brown Jackson has the potential to become one of the most influential justices on the high court and why that's not necessarily a bad thing!

Follow and Support

Subscribe to the Legale§e Newsletter You will get notifications for all new content, whether it’s articles, podcasts or videos!

Visit the Legale§e Podcast homepage to learn more about the show, get updates, contact me, buy my book, find links to my social media & more!

Follow

• Rumble

• Odysee

• YouTube

• Anchor

• Twitter

• Substack

Support

• PayPal.me

• Venmo

• Locals

• Contact Me

BUY MY NEW BOOK
Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers Now Available on Amazon

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in areas of law, politics & culture.
Legale§e is a subscriber-supported project. Please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The History Of Qualified Immunity -The Slow Death Of Government Accountability

Episode # 64

Today on Legalese we are talking about the history of the qualified immunity doctrine.

We do a deep dive into constitutional law and common law to show just how ahistorical this doctrine is, having been invented out of nothing by the Supreme Court in the 1980’s. Show Notes - History Of Qualified Immunity

Subscribe to the Legale§e Newsletter You will get notifications for all new content, whether it’s articles, podcasts or videos!

Visit the Legale§e Podcast homepage to learn more about the show, get updates, contact me, buy my book, find links to my social media & more!

Follow

• Rumble
• Odysee
• YouTube
• Anchor
• Twitter
• Substack

Support

• PayPal.me
• Venmo
• Locals
• Contact Me

BUY MY NEW BOOK Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers Now Available on Amazon

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in areas of law, politics & culture.

Legale§e is a subscriber-supported project. Please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Qualified Immunity Turns Against Police (Blue On Blue Violence)

Episode # 63

Today on Legalese we will be discussing two truly outrageous cases in which cops were granted qualified immunity.

The first is a unique example of what I call "blue on blue violence". A term I coined to describe incidents in which police officers are both preparator and victim. In this case, one officer shot another in the back, paralyzing him. The hapless cop who carelessly shot him would get qualified immunity.

While this case is, of course, a tragedy for Officer Jamie Morales (the injured cop)— If we step back, we can see this case as potentially being a positive development. Perhaps more police need to become victims of their own standards and practices if we ever hope to demonstrate just how unjust and unequitable the qualified immunity doctrine truly is.

The second case is a truly shocking example of a citizen who did absolutely nothing wrong and yet found himself being followed home by a truly deranged sociopath, who proceeded to assault this man right in his driveway... Only to find out this deranged sociopath was a police officer. He would also get qualified immunity for this off-duty assault that was the result of a deranged cop with a volatile temper and zero impulse control engaging in one of the most extreme cases of road rage ever.

Show Notes - Qualified Immunity Turns On Police & Cops Get A Taste Of Their Own Medicine!

Subscribe to the Legale§e Newsletter You will get notifications for all new content, whether it’s articles, podcasts or videos!

Visit the Legale§e Podcast homepage to learn more about the show, get updates, contact me, buy my book, find links to my social media & more!

Follow

Rumble

Odysee

YouTube

Anchor

Twitter

Substack

Support

PayPal.me

Venmo

Locals

Contact Me

BUY MY NEW BOOK
Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers Now Available on Amazon

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in areas of law, politics & culture.
Legale§e is a subscriber-supported project. Please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Episode #59 Today on Legalese we will be discussing a major update to the Supreme Court's 2023 term. Earlier today the Court chose to grant cert on two big cases that offer a serious challenge to the doctrines of Chevron Deference and Qualified Immunity. In Relentless Inc. v Chamber Of Commerce we have a nearly identical case to the Loper Bright case the Court agreed to review back in May. Just like Loper, this case directly asks the Court to overturn Chevron Deference and revolves around a provision in the Magnuson-Stevens Act that supposedly coerces fishing vessels to not only to carry two federal officers onboard their boat AND pay those bureaucrats salary. One major difference is that, unlike Loper Bright, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson will not be recusing herself from the case, allowing the full court to weigh in on this challenge to Chevron Deference. In Gonzalez v. Trevino, the justices agreed to decide what kinds of evidence will meet the exception outlined in 2019’s Nieves v Bartlett. In Nieves v. Bartlett, this Court held that probable cause does not bar a retaliatory arrest claim against a “police officer” when a plaintiff shows “that he was arrested when otherwise similarly situated individuals not engaged in the same sort of protected speech had not been.” The question before the Court is whether the Nieves probable cause exception can be satisfied by objective evidence other than specific examples of arrests that never happened. On This episode we will discuss the backgrounds and facts of these two cases. Show Notes - Major Supreme Court Update Follow & Support Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter Legalese Homepage

“Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon Contact Me - Bob@legaleseshow.com Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.

Episode #58 Today I Legalese I will be discussing the cases that I will be covering in depth during the coming Supreme Court term for 2023-2024

Show Note Page for "Supreme Court Roundup 2023-2024 Term"

Follow & Support Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter - https://legaleseshow.com/ Legalese Homepage - https://www.legalesepodcast.com/ “Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BN93R9QX Contact Me - Bob@legaleseshow.com Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law. ►00:00 Introduction ►05:00 Dominance of First Amendment Cases ►05:36 Social Media & State Law ►06:30 Moody v Netchoice LLC ►08:55 Netchoice LLC v Paxton ►10:40 Social Media, State Action & The First Amendment ►12:55 O'Conner-Ratcliff v Garnier ►14:15 Lindke v Freed ►14:42 Vidal v Elster ►16:05 Devillier v Texas ►17:45 Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo ►24:10 SEC v Jarkesy ►30:42 Moore v United States ►33:55 United States v Rahimi ►36:55 Conclusion

Tags: Law,Constitution,Politics,legal theory,Moral Philosophy,Current Events,supreme court,first amendment,1A,social media,SB 7072,HB 20,administrative law,chevron,rahimi,2A,second amendment,7th amendment,5th amendment,takings clause

Episode #56 Today on Legalese we will be discussing a recent case out of the Sixth Circuit - 'Ingram v Wayne County' in which the Court held that when a car is seized under civil asset forfeiture, the owner has a constitutional right to a hearing within two weeks of the seizure. On top of that encouraging majority opinion, we also discuss the concurring opinion filed in this case by prominent conservative jurist Judge Amul Thapar that takes an even more striking and encouraging position. Show Notes Page "Sixth Circuit Smacks Down Civil Asset Forfeiture" - https://constitutionallaw.substack.com/p/episode-56-sixth-circuit-smacks-down Follow & Support Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter - https://legaleseshow.com/ Legalese Homepage - https://www.legalesepodcast.com/ “Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BN93R9QX Contact Me - Bob@legaleseshow.com Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.