Notable—and quotable—Chicago lawyer Patrick Eckler joins us for a crash-course in Seventh Circuit paranoia (if you’re paranoid about jurisdictional questions at oral argument—which you really should be). A co-host of the Podium and Panel Podcast, Patrick gives a primer on how federal appellate judges look at things The Chicago Way and then explains how a recent oral argument went off the rails quite quickly. The resulting opinion about the Federal Arbitration Act and how it relates to Amtrak was pretty short, mostly because the lawyers seem to have forgotten they work for a railroad. Then Christie Hebert of IJ takes us on an up-and-down ride in the Eighth Circuit with a takings case (and a bit of Contract Clause thrown in) that despite its hopeful beginnings on appeal two years ago ends in a meaningless one-page opinion. Along the way she shares what she learned at the Supreme Court earlier this year in IJ’s property rights case, DeVillier. And, for those who can’t find such content anywhere else, there’s a spirited defense of Rule 12(c) motions.
Heights Apartments v. Walz (2022)
Heights Apartments v. Walz (D. Ct. 2023)
Heights Apartments v. Walz (2024)
Recent Episodes
Short Circuit 449 | Supreme Court Preview
Our annual Supreme Court term preview, this year from Wake Forest Law and released today, First Monday, the first day of the Supreme Court’s new […]
Listen NowShort Circuit 448 | Are Prediction Markets Legal?
We’ve all seen the ads for prediction markets, like Kalshi, and some of us have even placed bets with them. But are they actually “bets”? […]
Listen NowShort Circuit 447 | How Constitutional Are Your Claims?
We focus on a district court case that has appellate court explanatory power. As our special guest Professor Robert Steinbuch says, if you reside in […]
Listen NowShort Circuit 446 | SWAT Teams at the Supreme Court
Say a gaggle of police with military-grade toys fire a boatload of tear gas into a home and then run in and break a bunch […]
Listen Now