Dan Epps

So let's talk about what we're going to do today.

So this podcast, typically we make a real deep dive into some pretty nerdy technical areas of Supreme Court doctrine.

We

have an audience here full of pre-law students who maybe have not you know taking classes like fed courts and so the responsible thing to do uh would be to kind of dumb everything down um make it real simple hold people's hand uh and we are absolutely not going to do that so um buckle up uh no i'm going to make one attempt to do that in a minute

But let me just tell you what we're going to do.

So we're going to catch up a little bit on a few things from the shadow docket.

We're going to spend a good amount of time talking about a case called Olivier versus City of Brandon.

And maybe I'll...

tell you a little bit about what that case is in a minute.

But why don't we dig into the shadow docket first?

So I think we have one summary reversal and then a couple dissents from the denial of certiorari.

So summary reversal, Zorn versus Linton.

I think we could at least tell this audience what a summary reversal is.

And so you'd think that, you know, the lower courts get a fair amount of stuff wrong and, you know, in ways that, you know, are bad and hurt people.

And you'd think that would make sense for the Supreme Court to do this all the time.

But they now do it maybe, you know, just a couple times a term.

I didn't look up the most recent statistics, but it's very rare.

And they do so in a way that's kind of slanted.

I think that's a little unfair because it also extends to cases where someone tries to sue an FBI agent, things like that.

Yeah, so this has been something where the court has been criticized a lot.