⚖ 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. Trenton Powell — 9th Cir. (Oct 16, 2026)

No. 25-3792 Argued October 16, 2026 Published October 17, 2026

The Ninth Circuit hears United States versus Powell. Trenton Powell was convicted of federal child-exploitation offenses involving sexual abuse images. The district court found that three charged photographs were taken inside his home and ordered his interest in the home forfeited to the government. This appeal concerns that property order, not his convictions. Criminal forfeiture takes property as part of a criminal sentence, rather than compensating a victim. Title Eighteen, Section Twenty-two Fifty-three covers property used to commit or promote specified offenses. The required legal connection between the property and the crimes is called a nexus. Powell's lawyer will argue that taking handheld-phone pictures indoors does not sufficiently connect the house itself to the offenses, and that uncharged abuse cannot substitute for that link. The government will maintain that the home's privacy and its role in bringing the victim there helped facilitate the charged offenses.

United States v. Trenton Powell (No. 25-3792) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued October 16, 2026.

Sources
Argument audio — official Ninth Circuit recording:https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/media/2026/10/16/25-3792.mp3
Background and ruling under review — D. Idaho, June 5, 2025, Doc. 198; not this appeal outcome:https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-idd-4_21-cr-00290/pdf/USCOURTS-idd-4_21-cr-00290-5.pdf
Criminal forfeiture statute — 18 U.S.C. § 2253:https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2253
Forfeiture procedure and third-party claims — Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2:https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_32.2
Excessive Fines Clause — United States v. Bajakajian, Supreme Court majority:https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/524/321/

0:00
0:00