When the United States Supreme Court announced it would be livestreaming oral arguments for the first time in history, UIC John Marshall Law School in Chicago tapped its in-house legal experts to provide post-argument discussions.
On May 12 and 13, UIC John Marshall Law School faculty members hosted virtual discussions engaging an online audience of admitted and current students, employees and Law School alumni.
On May 12, UIC John Marshall professor, media commentator and constitutional law expert Steven D. Schwinn led post-argument discussions about the oral arguments in Trump v. Mazars; Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG and Trump v. Vance. These cases focused on the power to subpoena the financial records of the president and garnered significant media attention because many have wondered for years whether the president would release his tax returns.
On May 13, Associate Dean and Professor of Law Arthur Acevedo summarized the parties’ chief arguments and the justices’ primary questions in Chiafalo v. Washington and Colorado Dept. of State v. Baca. These cases concerned “faithless electors” who cast electoral votes in 2016 contrary to the candidates they had been pledged to. The cases also raised questions about the effectiveness and future of the electoral college.
Because the issues in these cases were both important and complex, being able to hear from and interact with experts immediately after the live oral arguments provided the audience with a unique experience that many found valuable. At the end of each discussion, the chat box was filled with thanks to the professors for their time and expertise.
Due to the success and popularity of the discussions, additional SCOTUS events are scheduled to coincide with the Court’s expected decisions later this summer, and a SCOTUS preview series is being planned starting in September to discuss significant cases scheduled for argument during the October 2020 term.
