Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) cover art

Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast)

Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast)

Written by: Attorney RJ Dieken Loki Esq Law Montana
Listen for free

Following what the Supreme Court is actually doing can be daunting. Reporting on the subject is often only done within the context of political narratives of the day -- and following the Court's decisions and reading every new case can be a non-starter. The purpose of this Podcast is to make it as easy as possible for members of the public to source information about what is happening at the Supreme Court. For that reason, we read every Opinion Syllabus without any commentary whatsoever. Further, there are no advertisements or sponsors. We call it "information sourcing," and we hope that the podcast is a useful resource for members of the public who want to understand the legal issues of the day, prospective law students who want to get to know legal language and understand good legal writing, and attorneys who can use the podcast to be better advocates for their clients.

*Note this podcast is for informational and educational purposes only.

© 2026 Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) Political Science Politics & Government
Episodes
  • WEST VIRGINIA v. B. P. J. (Transgender Athletes, Title IX)

    WEST VIRGINIA v. B. P. J. (Transgender Athletes, Title IX)
    Jul 1 2026

    Send us Fan Mail

    1. Title IX allows schools to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex, and West Virginia has permissibly maintained female sports for biological females consistent with Title IX.

    Support the show
    Show More Show Less
    14 mins
  • TRUMP v. BARBARA (BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP) RJD Recoding

    TRUMP v. BARBARA (BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP) RJD Recoding
    Jul 1 2026

    Send us Fan Mail

    Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.

    Support the show
    Show More Show Less
    16 mins
  • National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) (Campaign Finance/Election Law)

    National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) (Campaign Finance/Election Law)
    Jul 1 2026

    Send us Fan Mail

    In NRSC v. FEC the Supreme Court granted Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to answer the question of whether the limits imposed by the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) on how much political parties can spend in direct coordination with their federal candidates violate the First Amendment.

    Held: FECA’s political party coordinated expenditure limits violate the First Amendment. Justice Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C.J., and Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Kagan, J. Filed a dissenting opinion in which Sotomayor and Jackson, JJ., joined.

    Read by Jake A. Leahy.

    Support the show
    Show More Show Less
    8 mins
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
No reviews yet