Show Notes
After puzzling over an interesting follow-up question about Pitchford v. Cain, we unpack a summary vacatur in Whitton v. Dixon. We then spend a while breaking down the latest developments in Allen v. Milligan line, in which we discuss the future of the Purcell principle and whether the Court should be unusually attentive to public appearances in election cases. We finish with Sripetch v. Jarkesy, where the Court rejects a requirement that the SEC prove victims suffered pecuniary loss before seeking disgorgement, with specific attention to the interesting Seventh Amendment question raised in Justice Thomas's concurrence. Key Topics [00:03:23] - Listener question on Pitchford v. Cain, AEDPA, and procedural default [00:08:12] - Whitten v. Dixon: summary vacatur in a capital case and harmless-error review [00:12:44] - Justice Thomas’s dissent and the critique of selective error correction [00:22:46] - Allen v. Milligan / Alabama redistricting and the stay of the lower court injunction [00:27:24] - The Court’s restatement of Milligan and discussion of “colorblind constitution” language [00:32:30] - Purcell, election timing, and whether the doctrine is really about federal court intervention [00:41:20] - Merits and legitimacy concerns in election-law cases [00:53:27] - SEC v. Sripetch and the disgorgement remedy [00:58:42] - Justice Thomas’s concurrence on disgorgement, equity, and the Seventh Amendment [01:03:36] - Broader implications for administrative law and jury-trial rights
More from Divided Argument
Two August per curiams find no one with standing to challenge the mail-ballot order or the White House ballroom—and a third drops while we're recording.
Cisco Systems v. Doe shuts the Alien Tort Statute door Sosa left open — pirates, ambassadors, and one Phoenix bar band excepted.
Hunter v. United States makes appeal waivers yield to "miscarriages of justice" — and nobody, including the Court, can quite say why.
We finally tackle the trans-sports cases and walk through the Court’s Equal Protection and Title IX analysis.
Rooker-Feldman, pronounced dead two decades ago, turns out to be alive — and the Court's formalists split right down the middle.