⚖ 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

Center for Biological Diversity, et al. v. Sportsmen's Alliance Foundation, et al. — 9th Cir. (Oct 13, 2026)

No. 25-5109 Argued October 13, 2026 Published October 14, 2026

The Ninth Circuit hears whether the Fish and Wildlife Service lawfully refused to restore federal protection to western gray wolves. Wolves had recovered after federal protection, and Congress removed protections from most Northern Rocky Mountain wolves in 2011. Many wolves outside the Northern Rockies already had federal protection; the petitions sought protection for the broader western population. In 2021, Idaho and Montana relaxed wolf-hunting rules, prompting conservation groups to request a new federal listing. The agency assessed western wolves as a distinct population segment, or D P S: a separate, biologically important population that can qualify for protection rather than the whole species. In February 2024, it found listing was not warranted, pointing to genetic connections and models showing wolves could withstand heavier killing. The groups sued in Montana, saying the agency failed to adequately assess small populations, state hunting policies, and areas where wolves had not fully returned. In August 2025, the district court set aside the refusal and sent the case back for new analysis, while leaving the agency's population-boundary decisions intact. The federal government and hunting organizations, including Sportsmen's Alliance, seek reversal. They will argue that the court disregarded scientific expertise and wrongly demanded recovery in unoccupied former habitat. Conservation groups will defend the order, arguing that the agency overlooked important evidence and risks outside the strongest populations. The Act defines an endangered species as one in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. So a large core population does not end the inquiry: the dispute is how to assess other important areas and their future threats.

Center for Biological Diversity, et al. v. Sportsmen's Alliance Foundation, et al. (No. 25-5109) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued October 13, 2026.

Sources
Argument audio — official Ninth Circuit recording; starts during a seating instruction before the full case call; all advocacy and court closing preserved:https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/media/2026/10/13/25-5109.mp3
Case and argument date — official Ninth Circuit recording archive:https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/cases/streams-videos/archive?case=25-5109&hearingDate=2026-10-13
Background and challenged ruling — D. Mont. Doc. 98, August 5, 2025; public court-order copy:https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/montana/mtdce/9%3A2024cv00086/77085/98/0.pdf?ts=1754474297
Hunting organizations' appeal and parties — filed Doc. 100, August 6, 2025; public copy:https://sportsmensalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/NRM-II-Wolf-SAF-Notice-of-Appeal-Dkt-100.pdf
Challenged agency decision — February 7, 2024 gray-wolf finding, 89 FR 8391:https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-02-07/pdf/2024-02419.pdf
Endangered, threatened and distinct population segment definitions — 16 U.S.C. 1532, official 2024 Code text:https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title16/html/USCODE-2024-title16-chap35-sec1532.htm
Legal interpretation and prior precedent — Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, official Supreme Court opinion:https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf

0:00
0:00