⚖ 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. Salas — 9th Cir. (Oct 19, 2026)

No. 25-3813 Argued October 19, 2026 Published October 23, 2026

The Ninth Circuit considers a car search underlying a conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. An officer in training said he saw a glass pipe during a traffic stop, but mistook it for a lawful marijuana accessory. The pipe was later identified as methamphetamine paraphernalia. The district judge credited the officer's testimony and upheld the search despite his mistaken understanding of the pipe. The defense will dispute the pipe's visibility and argue that the search must be judged on facts the officer actually understood at the time. The government will defend the search based on what a reasonable officer would have recognized. Probable cause to search means a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found. Under the automobile exception, probable cause can allow a car search without a warrant. California law adds another issue: specified lawful cannabis conduct cannot itself be a basis for detention, search or arrest. The argument also tests whether federal drug law can justify a search by state officers despite that state-law restriction.

United States v. Salas (No. 25-3813) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued October 19, 2026.

Sources
Argument audio — official Ninth Circuit recording:https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/media/2026/10/19/25-3813.mp3
Traffic stop, pipe testimony and search ruling — district suppression order, public court-text mirror:https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/67b16a01b0877d014964779d
Probable cause — Illinois v. Gates, Supreme Court majority, part III:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/462/213
Automobile exception and California cannabis limits — Sellers, court opinion, parts II–III:https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/2026/s287164.html
Federal enforcement and reserved state-law question — Steinman amended opinion, pages 36–38 and note 9:https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/11/13/23-1703.pdf

0:00
0:00