SCOTUS Opinion Summaries cover art

SCOTUS Opinion Summaries

SCOTUS Opinion Summaries

By: SCOTUS Oral Arguments
Listen for free

About this listen

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 Political Science Politics & Government World
Episodes
  • 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.

    Show More Show Less
    14 mins
  • 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.

    Show More Show Less
    11 mins
  • 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.

    Show More Show Less
    18 mins
No reviews yet
In the spirit of reconciliation, Audible acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.