⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Seventh Circuit reviews Michael Nussbaum's federal habeas challenge to an Indiana child-molesting conviction. Nussbaum helped his wife run a home daycare attended by three girls. In 2012, after one girl reported seeing him abuse another, the two were forensically interviewed; neither disclosed abuse, and child services closed the case as unsubstantiated. A year later, both made abuse allegations, and a third girl later did too. At trial, recordings of the 2012 interviews could not be found. Nussbaum also wanted jurors to hear that one girl had viewed pornography, arguing this could explain her sexual knowledge, but the judge excluded that evidence. He says the missing recordings and exclusion denied him a fair trial. Under Section 2254, federal review asks whether the state decision unreasonably applied clearly established Supreme Court law or unreasonably determined the facts.

Michael Nussbaum v. Frank Vanihel (No. 24-1783) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued September 10, 2026.