On Demand Audio

SCOTUS Preview 2020 Part II: Constitutional and Civil Liberties

(1k+ reviews)

Produced on February 03, 2020

$ 59 Constitutional, Civil Rights, and Anti-Racism Library In Stock
Get started now

$299 / year - Access to this Course and 1,500+ Lawline courses

or

Course Information

Time 2h 2m
Difficulty Intermediate

Course Description

Join experienced constitutional practitioners Ameer Benno and Erica Dubno for Part II of Lawline’s fourth annual SCOTUS Preview, addressing several critical cases that are to be decided in the 2020 Term. In this course, Ameer and Erica will discuss the following upcoming constitutional and civil liberties cases:

  • Bostock v. Clayton County / Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda: Whether discrimination against an employee because of sexual orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination “because of . . . sex” within the meaning of Title VII.

  • R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. EEOC: Whether Title VII prohibits discrimination against transgender people based on (1) their status as transgender or (2) sex stereotyping. 

  • June Medical Services LLC v. Gee: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s decision upholding Louisiana’s law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at local hospital conflicts with the Supreme Court’s binding precedent in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.

  • Gee v. June Medical Services, LLC: (1) Whether abortion providers can be presumed to have third-party standing to challenge health and safety regulations on behalf of their patients absent a “close” relationship with their patients and a “hindrance” to their patients’ ability to sure on their own behalf; and (2) whether objections to prudential standing are waivable.

  • Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue: Whether it violates the religion clauses or the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution to invalidate a generally available and religiously neutral student-aid program simply because the program affords students the choice of attending religious schools.

  • Trump v. Mazars /Trump v. Deutsche Bank: (1) Whether congressional committees have statutory authority to issue subpoenas for President Trump's financial records; (2) whether a congressional subpoena is constitutional if the main purpose is law enforcement, and not legislative; and (3) whether there is any constitutional legislative purpose that would be furthered by the subpoenas.

Credit Information

After completing this course, Lawline will report your attendance information to {{ accredMasterState.state.name }}. Please ensure your license number is filled out in your profile to ensure timely reporting. For more information, see our {{ accredMasterState.state.name }} CLE Requirements page . After completing this course, {{ accredMasterState.state.name }} attorneys self-report their attendance and CLE compliance. For more information on how to report your CLE courses, see our {{ accredMasterState.state.name }} CLE Requirements FAQ .

Faculty

Erica Dubno

Fahringer & Dubno, Herald Price Fahringer PLLC

Erica T. Dubno worked with Herald Price Fahringer for 20 years. She is one of the National Trial Lawyers Top 100 Trial Lawyers. Erica Dubno has received awards for her appellate advocacy and, together with Mr. Fahringer, has drafted criminal and civil appeals in the federal Courts of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fourth, Eighth and Ninth Circuits, as well as the United States Supreme Court, and in the New York Court of Appeals.

She has co-authored numerous articles with Herald Fahringer, as well as book reviews for the New York Law Journal. Erica Dubno graduated from Oberlin College and Brooklyn Law School with honors. 



Ameer Benno

Benno & Associates P.C.

Mr. Benno is an appellate and constitutional law attorney.

He began his legal career as an Assistant District Attorney at the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, where he served in both the trial division and the appeals bureau. Upon leaving government service, Mr. Benno worked at a premier civil litigation law firm where he focused on civil rights matters in both state and federal courts. In 2009, Mr. Benno opened his own law practice.

Mr. Benno is admitted to the New York and Connecticut state bars, and is admitted to practice in the federal courts of the Southern, Eastern, Northern, and Western Districts of New York as well as the United States Courts of Appeal for the Second and Third Circuit. He is also admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court.

From 2006 through 2012, Mr. Benno was an adjunct professor at New York Law School, where he taught Appellate Advocacy and Legal Reasoning and Writing. Mr. Benno regularly lectures for bar associations and continuing legal education providers on topics having to do with constitutional law, appellate advocacy, and trial practice.

Mr. Benno has been selected for inclusion in New York Super Lawyers for the last 8 years in the areas of First Amendment and civil rights law.

Mr. Benno received his B.A. degree with honors from Johns Hopkins University, and his law degree from Cornell Law School.

You can reach Mr. Benno at abenno@ameerbenno.com or at (212) 227-9300. Follow him across social media at @AmeerBenno.

In addition to his membership in professional organizations, Mr. Benno is a civic leader. He is the president of the Merrick-Bellmore Jewish Community Council, the board of directors of the Merrick Jewish Centre, and as a member of the Nassau County Police Commissioner's Community Council for the 19th Legislative District. He is a member of the Nassau County Police Reserves, the Bellmore Kiwanis, the Bellmore Lions Club, and the Bellmore Historical Society. He proudly serves as a First Lieutenant in the JAG Corps of the New York Guard. 

Ameer is a graduate of the Johns Hopkins University and Cornell Law School. He lives in Bellmore, NY with his wife, Gayle, and three daughters.



Reviews

MK
mklaw2004@gmail.com K.

ok

TL
Thomas L.

Very informative presentation.

MB
Michael B.

very good.

JG
James G.

Really like these two attorneys and the way they analyze the cases.

SK
Stephen K.

These two presenters are terrific.

ML
Michael L.

Best course taken

AF
Andrew F.

Great for constitutional law studies.

MB
Michele B.

Excellent program by true experts in their fields.

KT
Kellie T.

interesting overview and discussion-thanks for taking the time to present

MP
Maria P.

I enjoy your programs. Please continue with your content on lawline.

DS
Danniela S.

Really great review. Thank you!

AL
Adrienne L.

Excellent presentations, interesting, thorough.

TC
Trevor C.

I freaking love these presenters. Great analysis and informative on complex issues before the S.Ct.

MZ
Meggan Z.

great information and I loved that they presented the information and gave both sides an equal voice in their presentation.

VV
Veronica V.

Fun!

LL
Lee L.

Great, interesting, and timely course. Thanks!

RC
Robert C.

Amazing! This team is great! I have been watching them for a few years! See you next year! Please and Thank you!

KO
Kimberlee O.

A bit outdated but very thorough

RB
richard b.

Fascinating.

EB
Edward B.

vey thorough presentation by two skilled individuals

CM
Cullen M.

Lively presentation. Timely information and analysis.

CH
Catherine H.

thank you, great program, and thanks for the great slides and materials

DJ
Denise J.

Well done.

MF
Martin F.

I look forward to next year's edition of this course (Part I and Part II).

SM
Sharmil M.

I love the background stories of the parties. I also love learning the specific questions that the justices asks during oral argument. Very interesting.

DB
Deborah B.

They are wonderful presenters. One of the best teams I've seen.

TL
terri l.

Excellent and informative program. Very well done.

AP
Anne P.

These two attorneys are by far the best in your entire program. They are so prepared and they are so knowledgeable. I highly recommend them!

RA
Rosalyn A.

Excellent presentation

BS
Bryan S.

One of the best CLEs available. Always worth watching.

BB
Bryan B.

Great presentation and discussion. Many thanks to the two presenters for a well organized and informative class.

JT
Jeffrey T.

Very well done

JM
Joshua M.

Such an excellent and even handed brief of cases. Loved it.

KE
Keri E.

In her presentation, both this session and the one on Masterpiece Bakery, Ms Dubno's statements are not objective. She projects a pro-religious stance that is not appropriate for a course that is intended to educate rather than advocate a particular point of view. She would be a much more effective presenter if she worked on improving her skills of presenting information in an objective manner.

JH
Jonathan H.

Super interesting!!

TD
Thea D.

Engaging

DG
Daniel G.

Both instructors were outstanding. They kept out of politics and simply provided exposition of the cases and law.

EB
eugene b.

I enjoyed this program both for its educative value and its historical perspective

MR
Marcia R.

Excellent clarity and organization for the subject matter. Neutral presentation of controversial divisive issues appreciated.

MD
Michael D.

excellent case analysis without taking sides. Unbiased analysis is important.

CC
Connie C.

Really enjoyed the teachers -- their comments were well thought-out and unbiased. Great points about the difficult questions faced by the Supreme Court in these cases.

EK
Eric K.

Good class

BS
Brian S.

A very informative and balanced presentation. Well done !

AM
Anne M.

Excellent presentation and analysis. Thanks to both wonderful presenters.

NF
Neil F.

Very good presentation.

JB
Julie A. B.

Good preview by experienced constitutional practitioners of critical constitutional and civil liberties cases to be decided in the SCOTUS 2020 Term.

PB
Patricia B.

Great presentations as always by this team!

LK
Lori K.

It was great to hear the discussion of the cases

BG
Beth G.

Really informative and well presented!

MW
Michael W.

insightful discussion of cases of legal and societal importance

AC
Annmarie C.

Very thorough presentation.

GJ
George J.

Great news of ways to look at the Court and politics.

SS
Samantha S.

Thank you great lecturers!

RS
Reese S.

Really enjoyed the banter between the speakers and their views on how these cases would be resolved.

EA
Eva A.

Very interesting discussions as to the potential outcome of the cases

DM
Donald L. M.

Good course for analysis of legal theories

CB
Carol B.

Great presenters!

PL
Peter L.

Detailed, compelling and even-handed presentation and analysis of pending Supreme Court cases, including underlying case law. Extremely well done.

JA
Judith A.

Fantastic faculty!

GD
Gregory D.

Excellent!

Load More