What do Institute for Justice attorneys think about the law? Listen into their roundtable conversations where they give their unrehearsed and “unpublished” opinions on matters beyond the federal courts of appeals. From the latest Supreme Court cases to legal history to trial tactics, IJ attorneys have much to share and (politely, but spiritedly) disagree with each other about.
All content for Unpublished Opinions is the property of Institute for Justice and is served directly from their servers
with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.
What do Institute for Justice attorneys think about the law? Listen into their roundtable conversations where they give their unrehearsed and “unpublished” opinions on matters beyond the federal courts of appeals. From the latest Supreme Court cases to legal history to trial tactics, IJ attorneys have much to share and (politely, but spiritedly) disagree with each other about.
It’s the latest episode of Unpublished Opinions, a Short Circuit podcast (but not actually Short Circuit). This is the podcast where Institute for Justice attorneys talk about the legal world beyond the federal courts of appeals. Diana Simpson and Josh Windham drop in to dialogue and diatribe about quite a few subjects you may—or may not—have your own opinions about. These include legal fictions, stare decisis, the vintage of the incorporation doctrine, and the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Acheson Hotels v. Laufer (that’s the Americans with Disabilities Act case about mootness and standing--or should it be standing and mootness?).
Acheson Hotels v. Laufer
Richard Dietz, Factories of Generic Constitutionalism
Mazzone & Tecimer, Interconstitutionalism
General Law and the Fourteenth Amendment
Unpublished Opinions
What do Institute for Justice attorneys think about the law? Listen into their roundtable conversations where they give their unrehearsed and “unpublished” opinions on matters beyond the federal courts of appeals. From the latest Supreme Court cases to legal history to trial tactics, IJ attorneys have much to share and (politely, but spiritedly) disagree with each other about.
