Two weeks into the term, the full Court is back on the bench and hearing oral arguments in their storied courtroom. Among the arguments this week was the death-penalty appeal of the Boston Marathon bomber. Your hosts discuss how in-person oral arguments are going, and some of the newly granted cases. Zack interviews George Mason professor Todd Zywicki and they talk about his career and his recent lawsuit against the university’s vaccine mandate. Lastly, Zack grills GianCarlo with some very surprising SCOTUS trivia.


A new SCOTUS term is right around the corner! Your hosts, GianCarlo and Zack, are primed and ready to follow along with you this year. But before it begins, they’ve got a preview of this term’s biggest cases delivered by two legendary Supreme Court advocates: former Solicitors General Paul Clement and Noel Francisco. Zack interviewed both of them at a Heritage event, and your hosts replay that discussion here.


After an epic sprint to the finish, the Court has wrapped up the term. The justices handed down two of the term’s biggest cases this week–the Arizona election-law case and the First Amendment challenge to California’s nonprofit donor disclosure rules. Your hosts unpack those and the other three cases of the week. GianCarlo also interviews Louisiana Solicitor General, Elizabeth Murrill, who recently won Edwards v. Vannoy at the Court. Lastly, GianCarlo tests Zack’s knowledge of the rate of agreement and disagreement between the justices this term. Can you guess how many unanimous opinions we got?


The Court is making it rain opinions on us—ten in one week! We got some of the big ones too including the NCAA antitrust case, the “Cussing Cheerleader” case, and a significant property rights case. Your hosts discuss those cases and all the rest, which involve warrantless entry into the home, the Appointments Clause, securities fraud, the standing doctrine, and Alaskan Native Corporations. Because there was so much to cover, your hosts didn’t interview anyone this week, but they did not skip trivia. Zack hits GianCarlo with trivia about Justice Steven Breyer’s life and career, and GianCarlo hits it out of the park. Can you keep up with our resident Justice Breyer expert?


The ball has finally dropped! This week we got two of the biggest cases of the term: California v. Texas, the latest challenge to Obamacare, and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, which concerns Catholic foster care services. Your hosts discuss those cases and the many others released this week. But if you thought this week was busy, hold on to your hats, because we have three opinion days next week. Zack interviews former United States Solicitor General Gregory Garre and learns what happens when you hit the Chief Justice of the United States with a tennis ball. Lastly, GianCarlo grills Zack with trivia about Indian tribes and SCOTUS.


The Supreme Court keeps up the pace with two opinion days a week. Your hosts discuss the three opinions this week, which involve the scope of Indian police jurisdiction, an immigration issue, and a very unique statutory interpretation case that answers the question how do you become a cyber criminal. GianCarlo interviews Joshua Prince, a junior associate at the law firm Schaerr Jaffe LLP to learn about how a young lawyer can start a career as an appellate advocate. Lastly, GianCarlo tries to stump Zack with trivia about the Justice’s educations, but ends up getting bested at his own game!


The Court had a calm and peaceful week taking no new cases and issuing three unanimous opinions in fairly technical cases. Your hosts explain all of those opinions, and then Zack has a fascinating discussion with Judge Douglas Ginsburg about his career, clerking for Justice Thurgood Marshall, and why he felt the need to escape the Harvard faculty even though he had just received tenure. Zack then grills GianCarlo about the inner workings of The Food Court–the Supreme Court’s cafeteria. Tune in to find out which Justice to blame if you don’t like the food!


With oral arguments over and the term on the home stretch, the Court is issuing opinions at high speed. But before they issued this week’s opinions, the Justices threw a curve-ball at court watchers by taking Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, a major abortion case that could see the court overturn or rein in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Your hosts discuss that case and the four opinions handed down this week. Among them, two major criminal procedure cases, one civil procedure case, and a stinging rebuke to the IRS for engaging in administrative shenanigans. Zack interviews Judge Randolph of the D.C. Circuit who shares a wealth of fascinating stories about his career and his many friends from the Circuit who went on to SCOTUS. Lastly, GianCarlo grills Zack with trivia about judicial attire.


It’s full steam ahead as the Court finishes up its second-to-last week of oral arguments for the term. Among the six cases argued this week, were two blockbuster First Amendment cases, one that may decide the meaning of “freedom of association,” and another that may decide whether schools can punish students for speech made outside of school. Your hosts discuss those arguments and more. GianCarlo explains the one opinion of the week, which is all about the meaning of the word “a,” and explains how it’s round two in the ongoing debate between Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh about the right way to do textualism. GianCarlo also interviews veteran advocate and Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr. Last up, Zack tries to stump GianCarlo with more strategic retirement trivia.


It was a very busy week at the Court with six oral arguments, three opinions, and a couple of noteworthy orders. GianCarlo discusses the Court’s order striking down a California COVID-19 restriction that discriminated against religious practice and a patent case with facts fit for an episode of Suits. Zack, meanwhile, discusses a case raising that all-important issue of whether and how the lawyers will get paid. Together your hosts explain this week’s opinions, which involve life without parole for juvenile murderers, Social Security administrative law judges, and the scope of the Federal Trade Commission’s enforcement powers. Zack interviews Judge Robert Luck of the Eleventh Circuit, and GianCarlo grills Zack with trivia about strategically timed SCOTUS retirements.


This week the Court issued a high-profile and very technical opinion in the copyright dispute between Google and Oracle. Your hosts break down the complicated issues in that case and cover other interesting orders from this week including an opinion by Justice Thomas about free speech and Big Tech that sparked a national conversation. Later on, Amy Swearer joins us again! This time, however, she’s in the hot seat as a guest and subject-matter expert to discuss the Supreme Court and the Second Amendment. Lastly, Zack quizzes GianCarlo with some trivia about the Justices’ pre-SCOTUS jobs.


It was a busy week for the court with a number of high-profile orders, three oral arguments, and three unanimous opinions. In orders this week, the Justices announced that they will take up an abortion case but only to resolve a procedural issue, and they also delivered a very predictable rebuke to the Sixth Circuit in a habeas case. Zack and GianCarlo discuss oral arguments with a special focus on the antitrust case that will decide whether the NCAA’s student-athlete compensation rules are lawful. The hosts also discuss the three opinions issued, which involve spam text messages, media conglomerates, and a water-rights fight between Florida and Georgia. GianCarlo interviews Judge Ada E. Brown of the Northern District of Texas and quizzes Zack with trivia about the Justices’ extracurricular activities.


This week the Court takes us back to our first year of law school with cases destined for the casebooks. Oral arguments this week involved a takings case that touches on first-year property and the “bundle of rights,” a Fourth Amendment case involving the “care-taking exception” to the warrant requirement, and a really unique case about tribal police. We also got two blockbuster opinions this week involving personal jurisdiction and the definition of a “seizure” for the Fourth Amendment. Your hosts unpack all of that, and more. GianCarlo also interviews John Wood, a veteran litigator, Justice Thomas clerk, and current Chief Legal Officer of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Last up, Zack grills GianCarlo with Fourth Amendment trivia. If he does well, all credit goes to Judge Pamela Harris who taught him criminal procedure.


This week, news that all of the Justices have received COVID-19 vaccines sparked a debate among advocates and law professors about remote vs in-person arguments. Zack fairly discusses both sides, while GianCarlo stakes out an aggressive position early on. GianCarlo also unpacks the one opinion this week, which answers the question: If the government violates your civil rights and you only ask for nominal damages, can you sue? The hosts jointly interview their new colleague, Sarah Parshall Perry, about the ripple effects of the Bostock decision. Lastly, the hosts play trivia and the theme is “Where in the world is Justice Carmen Sandiego?”

You can read two of Sarah’s recent pieces on the topics of our interview here and here.

This week the Court heard oral arguments in a voting rights case where Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich was both the petitioner and advocate. Zack unpacks that oral argument, and GianCarlo discusses the oral arguments in two other cases that involve challenges to patent and Social Security administrative law judges. This week also saw Justice Barrett issue her first majority opinion! GianCarlo interviews Eleventh Circuit Judge Britt Grant, and Zack quizzes GianCarlo with trivia about the justices’ educational backgrounds.

Follow us on Twitter and Instagram @scotus101 and send questions, comments, or ideas for future episodes to

The Court is back from its working recess and so are Zack and GianCarlo. Zack kicks off the show discussing the Court’s denial of two 2020 election lawsuits out of Pennsylvania. GianCarlo and Zack then discuss the three oral arguments of the week, and GianCarlo unpacks this week’s one opinion, which involves the Federal Tort Claims Act’s judgment bar. GianCarlo then interviews Ninth Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay. Last up, Zack proves he’s got a mind for comedy as GianCarlo quizzes him about the funniest fun-facts about SCOTUS.


For the first time in years, the Supreme Court issued surprise opinions during its February working recess. It issued an opinion in the Nazi art case and another in a case about railroads and retirement plans. Zack and GianCarlo discuss those as well as the newest case on the court’s docket, which will decide whether a corporation can use the federal government’s eminent domain power against a state government. Your hosts are joined this week by Judge Brantley Starr who discusses his journey to the bench and the influence his famous uncle had on his decision to become a lawyer. Lastly, Zack lobs some snowy-weather themed trivia at GianCarlo.


Going into its three week “working recess,” the Court was relatively quiet, issuing a few orders and one DIG. What’s a DIG? GianCarlo explains that, while Zack explains Munsingwear vacatur. GianCarlo then interviews Ninth Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke who shares his unusual path to law school and reveals why GianCarlo has dubbed him the modern-day Serranus Hastings. Finally, Zack holds his own in trivia about SCOTUS nicknames!


It was a quiet week at the court with no new grants or opinions, but we did have two interesting oral arguments. Zack and GianCarlo discuss those cases, and then GianCarlo interviews Fifth Circuit judge Jennifer Walker Elrod. She tells us about her career, her musical talent, and her continuing devotion to her undergraduate alma mater. Lastly, Zack throws some inauguration-themed trivia GianCarlo’s way.


We’re back from the holiday break and so is SCOTUS! This week we discuss orders that the Court issued in a capital-punishment case and an abortion case. Zack and GianCarlo also discuss this week’s oral arguments, which among other cases, involve a unique First Amendment issue with far-reaching implications. GianCarlo interviews Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who explains the link between Robert Bork, Thomas Sowell, and Top Gun’s Maverick. Lastly, GianCarlo tries to trick Zack with trivia about where many Supreme Court justices came from.