⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

Real court arguments, crisp audio, with context.

Court recordings can be difficult to follow, and many suffer from poor audio quality. This podcast enhances the audio, provides a brief introduction to each case, and explains legal concepts that may be unfamiliar to some listeners.

We hope these enhancements make oral argument recordings easier to understand, more accessible, and more enjoyable to listen to.

Apple Podcasts Spotify YouTube /feed.xml Open RSS Status

United States v. Trung Nguyen — 1st Cir. (Nov 2, 2026)

No. 25-1562 Argued November 2, 2026 Published November 3, 2026

The First Circuit hears United States versus Trung Nguyen. The prosecution arose from cash-to-Bitcoin conversions through a business called National Vending. Nguyen was convicted of operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business and money laundering. At trial, the judge excluded a proposed defense expert. Nguyen sought a new trial, saying that exclusion had undermined his defense; the request was denied. Expert testimony must be relevant and reliable, and the trial judge screens whether it qualifies. Abuse-of-discretion review gives that judge latitude; an appeals court does not simply replace the trial judge's assessment with its own. A vagueness challenge asks whether a law gives ordinary people fair notice of prohibited conduct and adequate standards against arbitrary enforcement. Bradford Keene will speak for Nguyen.

United States v. Trung Nguyen (No. 25-1562) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, argued November 2, 2026.

Sources
Argument audio — official First Circuit recording:https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/oralargs/25-1562_20261102.mp3
Case and argument date — official First Circuit index:https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/doar/results/2026-11
Case background and verdict — U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Massachusetts:https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/danvers-man-convicted-money-laundering-and-operating-unlicensed-money-transmitting
Defense new-trial request — Law360 contemporaneous public case coverage:https://www.law360.com/cases/648355b872d83d05532b8632/articles
Expert testimony — Federal Rule of Evidence 702:https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702
Expert reliability and review — Supreme Court, Kumho Tire:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/97-1709.ZO.html
Expert-evidence review — Supreme Court, General Electric v. Joiner:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-188.ZO.html
Fair notice — Supreme Court, Johnson v. United States:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/13-7120
Fair notice — Supreme Court, FCC v. Fox Television Stations:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/10-1293
Counsel appearance — appellate docket, public mirror:https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca1/25-1562

0:00
0:00