The High Court Report12 Nov 2025

Oral Argument: Rutherford and Carter v. United States | Retroactivity Rebellion

Overview

Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the consolidated cases Rutherford versus United States and Carter versus United States. These cases examine whether federal prisoners deserve relief based on changes Congress made to gun sentencing laws. Rutherford received 25 years for his second armed robbery—a sentence that would be only 7 years under today's laws. Congress eliminated brutal "stacking" penalties in 2018, but only for future defendants. Now Rutherford and Carter argue this massive disparity creates "extraordinary and compelling reasons" for sentence reductions. Can federal judges consider Congress's own recognition that old sentences were too harsh?

Oral Advocates:

For Petitioner (Rutherford): David Frederick, Washington, D.C.
For Petitioner (Carter): David O'Neil, Washington, D.C.
For Respondent (United States): Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

Timestamps:

[00:00:00] Argument Preview

[00:01:05] Argument Begins

[00:01:13] Petitioner (Rutherford) Opening Statement

[00:02:54] Petitioner (Rutherford) Free for All Questions

[00:14:00] Petitioner (Rutherford) Round Robin Questions

[00:30:04] Petitioner (Carter) Opening Statement

[00:33:35] Petitioner (Carter) Free for All Questions

[00:40:36] Petitioner (Carter) Round Robin Questions

[00:47:52] Respondent Opening Statement

[00:50:12] Respondent Free for All Questions

[01:19:10] Respondent Round Robin Questions

[01:19:24] Petitioner (Rutherford) Rebuttal

Det här avsnittet är hämtat från ett öppet RSS-flöde och publiceras inte av Podme. Det kan innehålla reklam.

Avsnitt(500)

Opinion Summary: Monsanto v. Durnell | Court Axes Roundup Cancer Suits

Monsanto Co. v. Durnell | Case No. 24-1068 | Docket Link: Here | Argued: April 27, 2026 | Decided: June 25, 2026Overview: Federal pesticide law blocks a Missouri cancer patient's failure-to-warn lawsu...

2 Juli 15min

Opinion Summary: Mullin v. Doe | No Judge. No TPS. No Way Back.

Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Doe, et al. | No. 25-1083 (consolidated with Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Miot, et al., No. 25-1084) | Docket: Here | ...

1 Juli 16min

New Opinions: June 30th | 3 Blockbusters End the Term

OVERVIEWThree opinions released June 30th, 2026 — the final day of the October 2025 Term — spanning birthright citizenship, transgender athletes in school sports, and political party campaign spending...

30 Juni 13min

Opinion Summary: Mullin v. Al Otro Lado | The Inch That Changed Immigration Law

Mullin, Secretary of Homeland Security, et al. v. Al Otro Lado, et al. | Case No. 25-5 | Docket Link: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-5.html | Argu...

30 Juni 14min

New Opinions: June 29th | Phones, the Fed, the FTC, and the Ballot Box

OVERVIEWFour opinions released June 29th, 2026 — one day, across digital privacy, presidential removal power at two federal agencies, and absentee ballot receipt deadlines.Two decisions split 6-3 alon...

29 Juni 18min

Opinion Summary: Wolford v. Lopez | Permission Slip Flopped

Wolford v. Lopez | Case No. 24-1046 | Docket Link: Here | Argued: January 20, 2026 | Decided: June 25, 2026Overview: After Bruen recognized the right to public carry, Hawaii required licensed gun carr...

29 Juni 13min

Opinion Summary: Blanche v. Lau | Seize Green Cards First and Prove Why Later

Blanche, Acting Attorney General v. Muk Choi Lau | Case No. 25-429 | Docket Link: Here | Argued: April 22, 2026 | Decided: June 23, 2026Overview: The Court addressed whether border officers must posse...

28 Juni 15min

Opinion Summary: Pung v. Isabella County | Small Debt, Tiny Check

Pung v. Isabella County | Case No. 25-95 | Docket Link: Here | Argued: 02/25/2026 | Decided: 06/23/2026Overview: A Michigan family lost their $194,400 home at a tax auction for $76,008 over a disputed...

27 Juni 19min