Podcasts about American Bar Association

Our guest on the podcast today is Sally Balch Hurme. Sally is the author of Checklist for My Family: A Guide to My History, Financial Plans and Final Wishes, as well as several other books. She worked at AARP for 23 years and has written more than 20 law review articles on topics related to elder law. She has also served on the boards of the National Guardianship Association and the Center for Guardianship Certification, where she helped develop standards for guardians and reform guardianship policies and procedures. Before moving to AARP, she was a partner in a private law firm and held several other legal roles. She also served as an adjunct professor at the George Washington University Law School, teaching elder law for eight years. She received her BA from Tulane University and her JD cum laude from the Washington College of Law at American University.Episode Highlights00:00:00 Working at the American Bar Association, AARP, and as a Caregiver00:06:15 How to Get Started in Eldercare Planning00:08:15 Final Wishes, Finding Your Roots, and Key Documents00:26:31 Designated Beneficiaries and Medication Tracking00:33:38 Home Deeds and The Power in Power of Attorney00:39:48 Cleaning Up Digital Assets Sally Hurme BooksChecklist for My Family: A Guide to My History, Financial Plans and Final WishesThe ABA/AARP Checklist for Family Caregivers: A Guide to Making It ManageableMore From MorningstarBeth Pinsker: Lessons From ‘My Mother's Money'Inherited IRAs: What to Know About Taxes, RMDs, and MoreHow to Tackle Estate-Planning Basics in 7 StepsIf you have a comment or a guest idea, please email us at TheLongView@Morningstar.com.Follow Christine Benz (@christine_benz), Amy Arnott (@AmyCArnott1), and Ben Johnson (@MstarBenJohnson) on X. Visit Morningstar.com for new research and insights from Christine, Ben, and Amy. Subscribe to Christine's weekly newsletter, Improving Your Finances.If you want more Morningstar podcasts, check out The Morning Filter and Investing Insights. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Dawn Porter is an acclaimed American documentary filmmaker and founder of Trilogy Films, known for her storytelling on social justice, history, and cultural icons. Her celebrated documentaries, including Trapped, John Lewis: Good Trouble, and The Lady Bird Diaries, air on platforms like HBO, Netflix, Amazon, Apple, CNN, PBS and others. Another film from Porter's recent work, Luther: Never Too Much, highlights the life and legacy of Luther Vandross. Produced with Sony Music Entertainment, Jamie Foxx's Foxxhole, and Colin Firth's Raindog Films, this intimate portrayal of the Grammy-winning artist was recently released in theaters and premiered on CNN/MAX on January 1, 2025. Her recent work, The Sing Sing Chronicles won the Best Documentary Emmy at the 46th annual News & Documentary Emmy Awards. Porter's achievements are widely recognized. A three-time Sundance film festival Alum, her film Gideon's Army was nominated for an Emmy and an Independent Spirit Award and won the prestigious Ridenhour Prize as well as the American Bar Association's Silver Gavel Award. Trapped also earned a Silver Gavel, as well as a Peabody Award and the Sundance Special Jury Prize for Social Impact Filmmaking, while John Lewis: Good Trouble won the 2021 NAACP Image Award. She received the Critics' Choice Impact Award in 2022 and Gracie Awards in both 2022 and 2023. Recently, Porter was awarded the National Humanities Medal by former President Joe Biden, elected to the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, and received the IDA Career Achievement Award. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Dawn Porter is an acclaimed American documentary filmmaker and founder of Trilogy Films, known for her storytelling on social justice, history, and cultural icons. Her celebrated documentaries, including Trapped, John Lewis: Good Trouble, and The Lady Bird Diaries, air on platforms like HBO, Netflix, Amazon, Apple, CNN, PBS and others. Another film from Porter's recent work, Luther: Never Too Much, highlights the life and legacy of Luther Vandross. Produced with Sony Music Entertainment, Jamie Foxx's Foxxhole, and Colin Firth's Raindog Films, this intimate portrayal of the Grammy-winning artist was recently released in theaters and premiered on CNN/MAX on January 1, 2025. Her recent work, The Sing Sing Chronicles won the Best Documentary Emmy at the 46th annual News & Documentary Emmy Awards. Porter's achievements are widely recognized. A three-time Sundance film festival Alum, her film Gideon's Army was nominated for an Emmy and an Independent Spirit Award and won the prestigious Ridenhour Prize as well as the American Bar Association's Silver Gavel Award. Trapped also earned a Silver Gavel, as well as a Peabody Award and the Sundance Special Jury Prize for Social Impact Filmmaking, while John Lewis: Good Trouble won the 2021 NAACP Image Award. She received the Critics' Choice Impact Award in 2022 and Gracie Awards in both 2022 and 2023. Recently, Porter was awarded the National Humanities Medal by former President Joe Biden, elected to the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, and received the IDA Career Achievement Award. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – America turns to the courtroom for nearly every conflict, but the consequences reach far beyond lawyers and judges. From Supreme Court cases on surveillance, gun rights, and sports to the American Bar Association's grip on legal education, a deeply litigious culture reshapes everyday life and raises urgent constitutional questions for the nation...

Many of us did not know about USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development) until it came under scrutiny by the White House's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in its recent cost-cutting efforts. USAID is—or was—the principal U.S. agency to extend assistance to countries recovering from disaster, trying to escape poverty, and engaging in democratic reforms.  While the constitutionality of DOGE's actions effectively curtailing USAID's efforts work their way through the courts, we invite you to hear a personal perspective from someone whose work was primarily funded by USAID and who experienced first-hand the impact of USAID's rule of law programs around the world during the past 30 years.  Mary Noel Pepys will provide an overview of her pro bono work in former communist countries, where she served as the rule of law liaison for the American Bar Association's Central European and Eurasian Law Initiative. She will discuss the challenges of assisting nations in their transition from communism to democracy, including efforts to strengthen the rule of law and promote judicial independence.  Mary Noel Pepys is a senior attorney specializing in the rule of law, specifically international legal and judicial reform. Since 1993 she has helped emerging democracies develop justice systems that ensure the protection of citizens' human rights, equal treatment of all individuals before the law, and a predictable legal structure with fair, transparent and effective government institutions. You can learn more about Pepys's international work at pepysinternational.com, which will serve as a backdrop of her presentation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – America turns to the courtroom for nearly every conflict, but the consequences reach far beyond lawyers and judges. From Supreme Court cases on surveillance, gun rights, and sports to the American Bar Association's grip on legal education, a deeply litigious culture reshapes everyday life and raises urgent constitutional questions for the nation...

The NFL has been ignoring one of its biggest trends. What is it? Jesus and prayer! We explain. Florida becomes the 2nd state to push back on the American Bar Association stronghold. The US suspends visas from 75 countries until the books are more balanced, Google showed 13-year-olds how to disable parental controls and then changed their policy, and highlights from year one of Trump!

     Slam The Gavel welcomes back Wren Byrd to the podcast. Wren was last on the podcast Season 5, Episode 213. Today we discussed what has changed in regards to the system and how parents are treated, especially during litigation. We also discussed why there is no enforcement of laws ALREADY in place.     Wren brought up the book, "The Family Law Professional's Field Guide to HIGH CONFLICT LITIGATION; Dynamics, Not Diagnoses by Benjamin D. Garber, PhD, Dana Prescott, JD, LMSW, PhD and Chris Mulchay, PhD. The American Bar Association is endorsing it. Where can this lead while training judges to do the right thing by all families and their children?To Reach Wren Byrd:  info@foundingmoms.orgSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook:  https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/  YouTube:  https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536  Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com   https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited.  Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/

This Day in Legal History: Marbury v. MadisonOn January 20, 1803, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Marbury v. Madison, a case that began as a minor dispute over an undelivered judicial commission and ended by redefining American constitutional law. The story traces back to the final days of the Adams administration, when outgoing President John Adams rushed to appoint Federalist judges before Thomas Jefferson took office. John Marshall, then serving simultaneously as Secretary of State and incoming Chief Justice, sealed the commissions but failed to deliver several of them. One of the would-be judges, William Marbury, petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus to force Jefferson's Secretary of State, James Madison, to hand over the commission.The case placed Marshall in a precarious position, as he was being asked to rule on a problem he had helped create. Marshall first held that Marbury had a legal right to his commission and that the law ordinarily provided a remedy when such rights were violated. He then turned to the Judiciary Act of 1789, which appeared to grant the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus. Marshall concluded that this provision conflicted with Article III of the Constitution, which strictly limits the Court's original jurisdiction. Rather than ordering Madison to act, Marshall declared that the statute itself was unconstitutional.By denying Marbury his commission while simultaneously asserting the power to strike down an act of Congress, Marshall executed a strategic legal maneuver that avoided a direct confrontation with the executive branch. The Court emerged stronger despite losing the immediate case. In explaining why the Constitution must prevail over conflicting statutes, Marshall articulated the principle of judicial review. That reasoning transformed the Supreme Court from a relatively weak institution into the ultimate interpreter of constitutional meaning.The U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear a challenge to a Hawaii law that restricts carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the owner's explicit permission. The case was brought by three licensed concealed-carry holders and a local gun rights group after Hawaii enacted the law in 2023. Under the statute, individuals must have clear verbal or written authorization, including posted signage, before bringing a handgun onto most business premises. A lower federal court initially blocked the law, but the Ninth Circuit later ruled that the measure likely complies with the Second Amendment.Hawaii has argued that the law appropriately balances gun rights with property owners' authority to control access to their premises. The challengers contend that the rule effectively prevents lawful gun owners from engaging in everyday activities such as shopping, dining, or buying gas. The challengers are supported by the Trump administration, which claims the law severely burdens the practical exercise of Second Amendment rights. The Supreme Court declined to review other portions of the law involving bans in sensitive places like beaches and bars.The dispute unfolds against the backdrop of the Court's recent expansion of gun rights, particularly its 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which recognized a right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense. That decision also reshaped how courts evaluate gun regulations by focusing on historical analogues rather than modern policy goals.US Supreme Court to hear challenge to Hawaii handgun limits | ReutersA federal judge has allowed Dominion Energy to resume construction on its $11.2 billion offshore wind project off the coast of Virginia, marking another courtroom loss for President Donald Trump's efforts to curb offshore wind development. Judge Jamar Walker of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that Dominion could restart work while it continues to challenge a stop-work order issued by the Interior Department. That order had halted several offshore wind projects based on newly cited, classified national security concerns related to radar interference.Walker found that the government's suspension was overly sweeping as applied to Dominion's project and emphasized that the cited security risks related to turbine operations, not ongoing construction. Earlier in the week, other offshore wind developers had secured similar rulings, allowing their projects to move forward despite the administration's objections. Dominion has already invested close to $9 billion in the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project, which is expected to supply electricity to hundreds of thousands of homes. The company said it would focus on safely resuming construction while continuing to pursue a long-term resolution with federal regulators.The decision underscores the legal and financial stakes for the offshore wind industry, as project delays can threaten multi-billion-dollar investments. At the same time, lawsuits challenging federal actions and the administration's opposition to offshore wind continue to create uncertainty for the sector. Several states, particularly along the East Coast, view offshore wind as critical to meeting growing energy demand and reducing emissions as electricity use increases.US judge allows Dominion offshore wind project to restart, another legal setback for Trump | ReutersFlorida has joined Texas in scaling back the American Bar Association's role in determining which law school graduates may sit for the state bar exam. In a 5–1 decision, the Supreme Court of Florida ruled that the ABA will no longer serve as the sole accrediting body for Florida bar eligibility, though graduates of ABA-accredited schools will remain eligible. The court said it plans to allow graduates of law schools approved by other federally recognized accrediting agencies to take the bar, even though no such agencies currently specialize in law school accreditation.The court framed its decision as an effort to expand access to affordable legal education while protecting academic freedom and nondiscrimination. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis praised the move, criticizing the ABA as overly partisan and arguing it should not control entry into the legal profession. The ABA responded that the ruling reaffirms state authority over licensing and said it would continue to promote the value of national accreditation standards.Florida's decision follows a similar move by the Supreme Court of Texas, which recently announced plans to develop its own criteria for approving non-ABA law schools. Other states, including Ohio and Tennessee, are also reviewing their accreditation rules. These developments come amid escalating conflict between the ABA and President Donald Trump's administration, which has taken steps to reduce the organization's influence across multiple areas, including judicial nominations and legal education.Within the ABA, the controversy has prompted internal reforms aimed at reinforcing the independence of its law school accreditation arm. One Florida justice dissented, warning that abandoning exclusive reliance on the ABA was an unnecessary and risky departure from a system that had functioned well for decades.Florida joins Texas in limiting ABA's law school oversight role | ReutersIn my column for Bloomberg Tax this week, I argue that the Internal Revenue Service's partnership audit program has effectively been dismantled under the second Trump administration, with specialized auditors fired, pushed out, or leaving altogether. These weren't ordinary revenue agents but highly trained experts who understood the most complex partnership structures and could spot abuse hidden deep inside tiered entities. Once that kind of institutional knowledge walks out the door, it can't simply be rebuilt by restoring funding later. There is no meaningful private-sector substitute for this expertise, and when these specialists leave government, they often stop doing enforcement work entirely.I explain that this collapse isn't just a federal tax problem—it's a looming state budget issue. High-income states that rely heavily on progressive income taxes are especially vulnerable when wealthy taxpayers shift income through opaque pass-through structures. For decades, states have relied on federal audits and enforcement as a backstop, but that dependency has now become a serious liability. I suggest that states step into the vacuum by hiring former IRS partnership specialists and building dedicated partnership audit units within their own revenue departments.With relatively modest investment, states could recover revenue that would otherwise vanish into complex and lightly monitored structures. I also propose a multistate enforcement compact that would allow states to share audit resources, staff, and findings, creating a decentralized alternative to federal enforcement. The core message is that while federal capacity has been allowed to wither, the expertise still exists—and states may be the last institutions capable of preserving it.IRS Partnership Audit Brain Drain Is an Opportunity for States This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

You're listening to American Ground Radio with Louis R. Avallone and Stephen Parr. This is the full show for January 19, 2026. 0:30 A church service in St. Paul, Minnesota was violently disrupted—and this wasn’t activism or a protest gone too far. It was a warning. In this explosive segment, we break down the shocking invasion of a house of worship by far-left agitators, the terror it caused for families and children, and why this moment signals a growing threat to religious freedom in America. We unpack how the First Amendment actually works, why “hands up, don’t shoot” was invoked inside a church despite being a proven falsehood, and how comparing this disruption to Jesus “flipping tables” completely misses the truth of Scripture. From ancient Rome to Soviet Russia to modern-day China, history shows what happens when mobs or governments decide which beliefs are acceptable—and why the Founders put freedom of worship at the very top. 9:30 Plus, we cover the Top 3 Things You Need to Know. On Sunday, anti-ICE agitators stormed a church in Minneapolis, mid service. President Trump is suing JP Morgan Chase bank for de-banking him. Elon Musk has made his largest political donation in a US Senate Campaign Ever. 12:30 Get Performlyte from Victory Nutrition International for 20% off. Go to vni.life/agr and use the promo code AGR20. 13:00 We break down the meaning of “debanking” — and why it should alarm anyone who claims to oppose oligarchy, fascism, or unaccountable power. What sounds like a boring financial term is actually a quiet but devastating weapon: banks cutting people off from basic financial services not for fraud or criminal behavior, but for holding the “wrong” political views. No warning. No due process. No appeal. 16:00 We got a question in for our American Mamas: Teri Netterville and Kimberly Burleson. Is modeling still a real career in the age of Instagram, influencers, and AI? From Melania Trump’s supermodel past to today’s social-media-driven fame, we break down how the industry has completely flipped. Runway models may still walk the catwalk, but many admit they’re broke. Meanwhile, Instagram models and influencers—with filters, cosmetic surgery, and massive followings—are the ones actually making money, getting brand deals, and shaping culture. But is this shift healthier… or worse? We dig into body image, “body positivity,” filters, Ozempic, and the hypocrisy of woke celebrity culture that preached self-love—until a miracle weight-loss drug showed up. Whether it’s runway modeling or social media influencing, tying your livelihood to your appearance comes at a cost. If you'd like to ask our American Mamas a question, go to our website, AmericanGroundRadio.com/mamas and click on the Ask the Mamas button. 23:00 We circle back to the Minneapolis church that was stormed by left-wing ICE protesters—and this time the conversation gets even more alarming. What started as agitators chanting “hands up, don’t shoot” inside a house of worship quickly turns into something far more dangerous: elected officials openly encouraging more churches to be targeted. 26:00 Florida just dropped a legal bombshell—and it could permanently reshape legal education in America. We break down the Florida Supreme Court’s decision to strip the American Bar Association of its monopoly power over law school accreditation, a role the ABA has held nationwide for decades. Why does this matter? Because the court says the ABA stopped acting like a neutral standards body and started acting like a political enforcer—pushing DEI mandates and ideological compliance instead of merit-based legal training. Florida’s ruling opens the door for alternative accrediting bodies and puts access, affordability, academic freedom, and non-discrimination back at the center of legal education. And Florida isn’t alone. Texas has already kicked the ABA out entirely, placing accreditation authority directly under the state Supreme Court. Now other conservative states like Ohio and Tennessee are lining up to follow suit, setting the stage for a clear red-state vs. blue-state divide in how future lawyers are trained. 32:00 Get Prodovite Plus from Victory Nutrition International for 20% off. Go to vni.life/agr and use the promo code AGR20. 32:30 Your car isn’t just getting you from point A to point B anymore—it’s quietly tracking you the entire way. We break down how modern vehicles have become rolling surveillance machines, recording your location history, driving habits, and even who’s riding with you—and yes, automakers can legally sell much of that data. We dig into a new push in Congress to put drivers back in control. Representative Eric Burlison and Senator Mike Lee have reintroduced the Auto Data Privacy and Autonomy Act, a bill designed to give vehicle owners the right to see what data is being collected, stop the tracking, delete stored information, and opt out of having their personal driving data sold. 35:30 On Martin Luther King Jr. Day, we go back to something you don’t hear quoted nearly enough—a powerful early-1960s sermon from Dr. King on the Good Samaritan and the limits of government power. Long before today’s culture wars, MLK warned that laws can enforce justice, but they can’t manufacture compassion, morality, or love. We connect King’s words to a hard truth facing America right now: the Constitution assumes a moral people—it doesn’t create one. You can outlaw theft, but you can’t legislate empathy. You can regulate behavior, but you can’t command the heart. As King put it, “man-made laws assure justice, but a higher law produces love.” 39:30 We take a hard look at Hollywood hypocrisy after Ellen DeGeneres—now living comfortably on an $18 million farm in England—publicly praised the activists who stormed a church during a live worship service. We break down why this wasn’t “peaceful protest,” but intimidation and trespass, and why nobody gets hurt for simply protesting—you get hurt when you confront police, disrupt worship, or violate the rights of others. 41:30 And we finish off with a celebrity and philanthropist who will make you say, "Whoa!" Follow us: americangroundradio.com Facebook: facebook.com / AmericanGroundRadio Instagram: instagram.com/americangroundradioSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Steve Fretzin and Chris Earley discuss:Treating consistency as the real competitive edgeBuilding trust through authenticity over achievementMatching platforms to where your audience already livesPlaying the long game of value before promotion Key Takeaways:Showing up every day with content is not a tactic but the game itself. One post a day over time compounds into trust, visibility, and separation. Most lawyers will not endure the discipline, which is precisely why it works.Audiences respond more to struggle, growth, and honesty than polished wins. Sharing mistakes, personal history, and lessons humanizes the professional brand. Credibility grows faster when vulnerability comes before accomplishment.Effective content starts by knowing who you serve and where they spend their attention. B2B audiences tend to gather on LinkedIn, while B2C clients live elsewhere. Posting everywhere is fine, but focus belongs where attention already flows.Education, insight, and generosity must outweigh direct selling over time. Promotion works only after value has been delivered consistently and visibly. Your brand strengthens when service leads and asks follow. “I think the practitioner should be posting, if you really want to get serious, once a day on LinkedIn… One post. Can you do that for a year and stick with that? I've done that for like four or five years, and the flywheel just expands." —  Chris Earley Check out my new show, Be That Lawyer Coaches Corner, and get the strategies I use with my clients to win more business and love your career again. Ready to go from good to GOAT in your legal marketing game? Don't miss PIMCON—where the brightest minds in professional services gather to share what really works. Lock in your spot now: https://www.pimcon.org/ Thank you to our Sponsor!Rankings.io: https://rankings.io/ Ready to grow your law practice without selling or chasing? Book your free 30-minute strategy session now—let's make this your breakout year: https://fretzin.com/ About Chris Earley: Christopher Earley is a Boston-based personal injury attorney and founder of Earley Law Group Injury Lawyers, where he has devoted nearly two decades to advocating for injury victims and standing up to powerful insurance companies. He holds a J.D. from New England Law (2004) and is admitted to practice in Massachusetts. Chris is also an accomplished author of multiple consumer guides, a legal columnist for the American Bar Association and Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, and a frequent speaker on law firm business topics. His work has earned recognition, including multiple Massachusetts Super Lawyer honors. Beyond law, he serves his community through youth sports coaching and local partnerships, all while emphasizing clear communication, client education, and relentless advocacy. Connect with Chris Earley:   Website: https://www.chrisearley.com/Justia Lawyers: https://lawyers.justia.com/lawyer/christopher-earley-1335943YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/ChrisEarleyLawTwitter: https://twitter.com/chrisearleylawFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/Law-Offices-of-Christopher-Earley-104980886333/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/earleylawgroupinjurylawyers/ Connect with Steve Fretzin:LinkedIn: Steve FretzinTwitter: @stevefretzinInstagram: @fretzinsteveFacebook: Fretzin, Inc.Website: Fretzin.comEmail: Steve@Fretzin.comBook: Legal Business Development Isn't Rocket Science and more!YouTube: Steve FretzinCall Steve directly at 847-602-6911 Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it. 

Stories we're following this morning at Progress Texas:The Texas chapter of the American Federation of Teachers has filed a lawsuit against the Texas Education Agency and Commissioner Mike Morath over their efforts to smear and fire teachers over comments made on social media about Charlie Kirk: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/06/us/american-federation-teachers-charlie-kirk-lawsuit.htmlPotentially derailing the mobility of future Texas J.D.'s, the Texas Supreme Court has officially removed oversight by the American Bar Association over Texas law schools: https://www.keranews.org/news/2026-01-06/texas-supreme-court-ends-american-bar-association-law-school-accreditationDonald Trump, incensed at Laredo Congressman Henry Cuellar's apparent lack of gratitude for Trump's pardon late last year, has endorsed one of Cuellar's Republican challengers: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/trump-endorses-tano-tijerina-running-against-democrat-henry-cuellar-rcna252686Texas Big Oil has been largely silent on Trump's ideas that they'll invest in the "rebirth" of Venezuelan oil production - it's a huge and risky investment, and the market's not demanding more supply at the moment: https://www.texastribune.org/2026/01/07/texas-trump-venezuela-oil/...Besides, petroleum is still poisoning our planet - and Texas has become a primary source of that poison: https://grist.org/energy/texas-clears-the-way-for-petrochemical-expansion-as-experts-warn-of-health-risks/Early voting in the March primary starts in mere weeks, on February 17 - the time to research your ballot is right now: ⁠https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2026/texas-march-2026-primary-ballot/?_bhlid=7d8eca3d2a16adc7c9b44185414443fa32be6d84⁠See the full list of 2026 races and candidates, courtesy of Lone Star Left, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠HERE ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠HERE⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.Check out our web store, including our newly-expanded Humans Against Greg Abbott collection: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://store.progresstexas.org/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Progress Texas is expanding into both broadcast radio - including a new partnership with KPFT-FM in Houston - and into Spanish language media! Make a tax-deductible contribution to our radio initiative HERE, and to our Spanish expansion HERE.Thanks for listening! Our monthly donors form the backbone of our funding, and if you're a regular, we'd like to invite you to join the team! Find our web store and other ways to support our important work at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://progresstexas.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen watching courtrooms turn into battlegrounds for America's future, but here we are in early January 2026, and President Donald Trump's legal wars are heating up like never before. Just days ago, on Tuesday, January 6, SCOTUSblog reminded us of that historic New York Times Company v. Sullivan case from 1964, where the Supreme Court protected the press from libel suits—timely now as tensions simmer between Trump and media outlets. But that's history; the real fireworks are exploding right now.Picture this: the Supreme Court is gearing up for its January 12 argument session in Washington, D.C., with seven massive cases, several straight from Trump's playbook. Axios reports that top of the list is Trump v. Barbara, where the justices could rule any moment on his executive order slashing birthright citizenship. Trump wants to deny U.S. citizenship to kids of undocumented immigrants born here, challenging over a century of 14th Amendment precedent. Businesses like Costco, Revlon, Bumble Bee Foods, and Ray-Ban makers are suing over another bombshell—Trump's tariffs. In Learning v. Trump, they're fighting his national emergency declaration that slapped billions in duties on imports without Congress's okay. Trump boasted on Truth Social it's the "most case ever," but a loss could mean refunding over $100 billion. Then there's Trump v. Slaughter, pitting Trump against Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook and FTC's Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Slaughter, whom he fired for clashing with his policies. The court will decide if he can boot independent agency heads, smashing 90-year-old protections.Just Security's litigation tracker paints an even wilder picture of chaos in lower courts. In D.C.'s federal district court, Taylor v. Trump challenges Executive Order 14164, where Attorney General Pam Bondi shuffled death row inmates to ADX Florence supermax under Trump's public safety push—plaintiffs scream due process violations. The National Association of the Deaf sued Trump, Chief of Staff Susan Wiles, and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt for axing ASL interpreters at White House briefings, claiming First and Fifth Amendment breaches. Law firms aren't safe either: Susman Godfrey out of Texas hit back at an executive order yanking their security clearances for opposing Trump; Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale face similar retaliation suits in D.D.C., alleging viewpoint discrimination. The American Bar Association sued over yanked grants from the Office on Violence Against Women, calling it payback for their stances. Even Rep. Eric Swalwell's in the mix with Swalwell v. Pute, targeting Trump's criminal arrest pushes.Politico says grand juries are Trump's new nightmare—refusing indictments left and right on his aggressive policies, from protester crackdowns to immigrant roundups. U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan blasted prosecutors for "rushed" cases with weak evidence. And in a wild international twist, CBS News covered ousted Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and wife Cilia Flores arraigned Monday in Manhattan's federal courthouse before Judge Alvin Hellerstein. Whisked by helicopter from Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center under heavy security, Maduro pled not guilty to narco-terrorism, cocaine smuggling, and weapons charges—facing life in prison—while insisting he's still Venezuela's president.The Supreme Court's emergency docket, like in 25A312, keeps deferring stays till January arguments, per their own filings. Lawfare's tracker logs non-stop national security suits against Trump's moves. It's a legal whirlwind, listeners, with the high court poised to reshape everything from guns in Wolford v. Lopez against Hawaii's private property ban, to conversion therapy fights in Miles v. Salazar.Thanks for tuning in, listeners—come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Winter truck wrecks are on the rise and too many families are blindsided when disaster strikes on icy roads. In this episode of After the Crash, host Ashley and Board-Certified Truck Accident Attorney David Craig break down why winter is one of the deadliest times on Indiana highways, especially when it comes to semi-trucks and commercial vehicles.David shares:✔️ Why speed is the number one cause of winter truck crashes✔️ What federal trucking regulations require during snow, ice, and low visibility✔️ How the CDL manual defines “extreme caution” and how often truckers ignore it✔️ What you can do to stay safe on the road✔️ Why some truck drivers are unprepared or unqualified for winter conditions✔️ The importance of having emergency gear in your vehicle✔️ Real crash cases caused by winter weather and driver errorDavid Craig is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy (Accredited by the American Bar Association). This is a distinction held by only a select group of attorneys nationwide.

 American Democracy Minute Radio News Report & Podcast for Jan. 2, 2026Brian is gone today, but we've posted a still-timely report from September 2025.  Happy New Year!American Bar Association Report Recommends Major Democracy Reforms to Boost Confidence in Elections & Reduce Partisan PolarizationThe American Bar Association has issued a final report and recommendations from its ABA Task Force for American Democracy. The report calls for major reforms to elections, civics education and the role of lawyers in defending constitutional governance.Today's LinksArticles & Resources:American Bar Association - American Bar Association releases final report of the ABA Task Force for American DemocracyAmerican Bar Association - Full Report of the ABA Task Force for American DemocracyTask Force for American Democracy  - Website, Task Force Members, Listening SessionsTask Force for American Democracy - Papers & Resources Groups Taking Action:American Bar AssociationRegister or Check Your Voter Registration:U.S. Election Assistance Commission – How to Register And Vote in Your StatePlease follow us on Facebook and Bluesky Social, and SHARE! Find all of our reports at AmericanDemocracyMinute.orgWant ADM sent to your email?  Sign up here!Are you a radio station?  Find our broadcast files at Pacifica Radio Network's Audioport and PRX#News #Democracy  #DemocracyNews #ABA #DemocracyReform #AmericanDemocracy #CivicsEducation

Board Certified Truck Accident Attorney David Craig exposes a serious danger: medically unfit truck drivers.In this episode of After the Crash, David talks with Dr. David Fletcher, a double board certified physician in occupational and preventive medicine. They explain how unqualified medical examiners clear unsafe drivers to operate 40-ton trucks.✔️ Why some examiners shouldn't be certifying drivers✔️ Sleep apnea, BMI, and crash risks✔️ How the system fails families✔️ What skilled trucking lawyers investigate✔️ How expert insight reveals the truthDavid Craig is Board Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy and accredited by the American Bar Association, meeting the highest standards in ethics, experience, and legal skill.

What can truck drivers learn from someone who delivers worldwide in one night?In this special holiday episode of After the Crash, Board Certified Truck Accident Attorney David Craig sits down with the world's most efficient delivery expert to talk about the highs, lows, and hazards of modern logistics. From avoiding driver-facing cameras to navigating snowstorms and tight deadlines, this guest has seen and done it all without missing a beat.✔️ How weather, time pressure, and fatigue affect safety✔️ The rise of dash cams and surveillance in trucking✔️ What delivery drivers face across climates and continents✔️ How kindness and patience make a real impact on the roadIt's a lighthearted conversation packed with serious insights about delivery safety, logistics strain, and the realities truckers face every day. Whether you're in the transportation industry or just curious how things get delivered on time, this episode delivers something for everyone.Key takeaway: Delivery is about more than speed; it's about safety, awareness, and care for others.—David Craig is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy (Accredited by the American Bar Association).—If you or someone you know has been involved in a truck crash, don't wait.Visit https://ckflaw.com or call 1-800-ASK-DAVID for experienced legal help.—Why Listen to After the Crash?Navigating the aftermath of a trucking accident can feel overwhelming, but you don't have to face it alone. This podcast is designed to educate and empower victims and their families, helping you make informed decisions about your future.—Learn About the Firm:At Craig, Kelley & Faultless, LLC, we've dedicated over 30 years to fighting for trucking accident victims. From preserving evidence to holding negligent trucking companies accountable, our mission is to protect your rights and secure the justice you deserve.—Download Semitruck Wreck for FREE:https://www.ckflaw.com/truck-accident-ebook/Follow Us on Socials:Website: https://www.ckflaw.comFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/ckflawLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/craig-kelley-&-faultless-attorneys-at-lawContact Us:Email: info@ckflaw.comPhone: 1-800-ASK-DAVID#TruckDriverSafety #TruckingAccidents #AfterTheCrashPodcast #LogisticsUnderPressure #DeliveryDriverChallenges #HolidayLogistics #ChristmasDeliveries #WinterDrivingHazards

The Context of White Supremacy welcomes Camilo Eugenio Lund-Montaño live from Puerto Rico. Gus intends to find out right quick of Lund-Montaño is classified as a White person. White reading Evelyn Williams' Inadmissible Evidence in the Katherine Massey Book Club, Gus was struck by her commentary on the influx of White lawyers during the so called Civil Rights Movement. Williams was suspicious of their presence and wondered if their primary objective was to bolster their White reputations by representing “militant” negroes or if they were in some way connected to the widespread COINTELPRO campaigns of subversion to undermine attempts to Produce Justice. This led Gus to find Lund-Montaño's report: Out of Order: Radical Lawyers and Social Movements in the Cold War. This work examines the history of mostly White lawyers involvements with numerous non-white people and campaigns during the 1900s. It highlights how the National Lawyer's Guild, the American Bar Association, and the field of law in general was - and remains - overwhelmingly White and insufficiently concerned with countering Racism or aiding non-white attorneys and judges. It's noteworthy that NLG switched their focus to issues of sexism/White Women in the middle of the so called Civil Rights Movement. Nigh on 2026, White females are the growing majority of law school students, while black dudes represent one of the tiniest groups allowed to practice law. #RevJimJones #DrMarcusFoster INVEST in The COWS – http://paypal.me/TheCOWS Cash App: https://cash.app/$TheCOWS CALL IN NUMBER: 720.716.7300 CODE 564943#

This Day in Legal History: West Coast HotelOn December 16, 1936, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, a case that would become a cornerstone in constitutional law and mark a significant turning point in the Court's approach to economic regulation. At issue was the constitutionality of Washington State's minimum wage law for women, which had been challenged by the West Coast Hotel Company after Elsie Parrish, a maid, sued for back wages.The case arrived during a period when the Court had consistently struck down New Deal-era economic regulations, relying on a broad interpretation of “freedom of contract” under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Earlier cases like Lochner v. New York had enshrined a judicial skepticism toward government interference in labor and wage arrangements.However, in Parrish, the Court's posture shifted. The eventual decision, handed down in 1937, upheld the minimum wage law, effectively signaling the end of the so-called Lochner era. The majority reasoned that the state had a legitimate interest in protecting the health and well-being of workers, particularly vulnerable low-wage employees.Justice Owen Roberts, who had previously sided with the Court's conservative bloc, voted with the majority—his move later came to be known as “the switch in time that saved nine,” as it followed President Roosevelt's controversial proposal to expand the Court.The decision validated broader governmental authority to regulate the economy, and it cleared the path for many New Deal policies to take root. It also marked a recalibration in the balance between individual economic liberty and the public interest.West Coast Hotel remains a landmark case in US constitutional history, exemplifying how judicial interpretation can evolve in response to changing social and economic realities.The 2025 tax-and-spending law introduced an overtime tax deduction that was billed as relief for overworked, working-class Americans. But the reality shaping up for the 2026 filing season is far more complicated—and far less beneficial—than its political framing suggested. The deduction does not exempt overtime pay from taxation; instead, it offers a narrow, post-withholding deduction that workers must calculate themselves, often without support from their employers or sufficient guidance from the IRS.The structure of the deduction is flawed: it only applies to the “half” portion of time-and-a-half pay and is capped at $12,500. For lower-wage workers to take full advantage, they must clock extraordinary amounts of overtime—something not feasible for many. Meanwhile, employers are actively disincentivized from helping employees understand or claim the benefit. If they report eligibility and make an error, they could face legal penalties, while doing nothing carries no risk. The system thus favors inaction and leaves employees to fend for themselves.Without clear W-2 guidance or safe harbor rules, the deduction becomes accessible primarily to those with tax professionals or payroll tools—functioning as a quiet subsidy for the well-advised. For others, it's a bureaucratic maze with limited reward. To prevent administrative failure, the IRS should at least provide a legal safe harbor for employers and model W-2 language. A more ambitious fix would be a flat-rate standard deduction for eligible workers, reducing complexity. Until then, this “relief” policy punishes transparency, discourages compliance, and places the greatest burden on those with the fewest resources.Trump Overtime Tax Break More a Political Tagline Than Tax ReliefDonald Trump filed a lawsuit in federal court in Miami seeking up to $10 billion in damages from the BBC, alleging defamation and violation of Florida's unfair trade practices law. The suit stems from an edited segment in a BBC Panorama documentary that combined parts of Trump's January 6, 2021 speech—specifically his calls to “march on the Capitol” and to “fight like hell”—while omitting language where he encouraged peaceful protest. Trump claims the edit falsely portrayed him as inciting violence and caused substantial reputational and financial harm.The BBC had previously admitted to an error in editing, apologized publicly, and acknowledged the clip could give a misleading impression. However, the broadcaster argues that there is no legal basis for the lawsuit. UK officials have backed the BBC's position, saying it has taken appropriate steps. Despite this, Trump's legal team claims the broadcaster has shown no real remorse and continues to engage in what they describe as politically motivated misrepresentation.The documentary in question aired before the 2024 U.S. presidential election and triggered significant fallout for the BBC, including the resignations of its top two executives. While the program did not air in the U.S., it was available via BritBox—a BBC-controlled streaming service—and possibly distributed in North America through licensing deals with Canadian firm Blue Ant Media.Legal experts say Trump faces a high bar in U.S. courts under First Amendment standards. He must prove not only that the edited content was false and defamatory, but also that the BBC acted with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth. The BBC may argue that the content was substantially accurate and did not materially harm Trump's reputation. Other networks, including CBS and ABC, previously settled defamation claims with Trump after his 2024 election victory.Trump seeks up to $10 billion in damages from BBC over editing of January 6 speech | ReutersU.S. law school enrollment surged 8% in 2025, reaching a 13-year high with 42,817 first-year students, according to new data from the American Bar Association. The increase follows an 18% rise in law school applicants and continues a multi-year upward trend, fueled by a mix of economic uncertainty, political intensity, and a growing interest in legal careers. The sluggish job market for college graduates, coupled with the centrality of legal issues during Donald Trump's second presidential term, has contributed to renewed interest in law degrees.A significant number of prospective students also cited personal and social motivations. A survey of 15,000 LSAT takers found rising interest in using law degrees to “help others” and “advocate for social justice,” with both reasons seeing double-digit percentage increases over last year. The pool of LSAT test-takers has grown as well, signaling likely continued enrollment growth in 2026.Some elite law schools, including Harvard, enrolled their largest first-year classes in over a decade. However, the long-term outlook remains uncertain. Legal employment has been strong in recent years, with the class of 2024 posting record job placement, but experts warn that advances in artificial intelligence could reduce demand for new associates—particularly at large firms offering high salaries. Smaller sectors like government and public interest law may struggle to absorb excess graduates if hiring slows.US job market, politics fuel 8% surge in law school enrollment | ReutersDonald Trump's controversial plan to build a $300 million, 90,000-square-foot ballroom on the White House grounds is facing its first legal challenge in federal court. The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued Trump and several federal agencies, alleging that the demolition of the East Wing to make way for the ballroom violated multiple preservation laws and bypassed required reviews. The group is seeking a temporary restraining order to halt ongoing construction, citing irreversible damage to the historic structure.Since returning to office in January, Trump has made high-profile aesthetic changes to the White House, including installing gold accents in the Oval Office and converting the Rose Garden lawn into a patio modeled after Mar-a-Lago. But the scale and visibility of the ballroom project has drawn particularly intense criticism, especially as heavy machinery was seen dismantling the 120-year-old East Wing.The lawsuit argues that no president, including Trump, has the unilateral authority to alter protected parts of the White House without following procedures involving public input and reviews by agencies like the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts.The administration defended the project as lawful, citing historical precedent and presidential authority to modify the executive residence. It emphasized that above-ground construction was not scheduled to begin until April, rendering emergency relief unnecessary. Still, the National Trust contends that public consultation and proper approvals are not optional and must be upheld regardless of the project's timeline or presidential status.Trump's $300 million White House ballroom makeover faces day in court | ReutersA federal judge has ruled that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) must extend the deadline for states to implement new immigration-related restrictions on food aid benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The decision, issued by U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai in Oregon, came in response to a lawsuit brought by 21 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia. The states argued they were not given adequate time or clarity to comply with the new rules, which were tied to President Donald Trump's domestic policy legislation passed in July.The USDA had initially set a November 1 deadline for states to comply with the restrictions, which limit SNAP benefits to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. However, the guidance issued on October 31 created confusion by implying that some lawful residents—such as those who entered the U.S. as asylees or refugees—were ineligible, contrary to what the law allowed. The USDA later revised the guidance, but still maintained the November 1 deadline.Judge Kasubhai extended the grace period for compliance until April 9, finding the original deadline arbitrary and harmful to state budgets. He noted that the USDA's sudden guidance rollout undermined states' ability to respond and eroded trust in federal-state cooperation. The ruling blocks the USDA from penalizing states that don't meet the earlier deadline while the lawsuit proceeds.USDA must give states more time to implement new food aid restrictions, judge rules | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

G.C. Murray II, Esq., is an acclaimed attorney, executive coach, and the author of A Greater Change: A Nonprofit Guidebook. Honored by the American Bar Association and the National Bar Association for his integrity and leadership, he offers a unique blend of legal insight and communication strategy. In this conversation, G.C. shares how his background in law gives him unique insights into PR, how to manage your reputation in the AI era, and the loneliness problem in the C-suite. Key Takeaways:- How law and PR are related- The problem of C-suite loneliness- Reputation management in the AI eraEpisode Timeline:1:20 The challenges of running a company out of Indonesia2:50 What's happening at Association GC?3:50 How does his law experience help with PR communications?6:15 Why emotion matters in court7:15 Lawyers who have really impressed G.C.9:35 G.C.'s relationship with his father, a judge10:05 How can brands manage their reputation in the AI era?11:30 How to fix your problems before they start13:30 How AI is muddying our perception of reality15:00 Why C-suite loneliness is a big problem17:00 How to move off the plateau19:30 The art of listening22:00 Being likable23:45 G.C.'s thought leadership philosophyThis episode's guest:• G.C. Murray II, Esq. on LinkedIn • Association.Law• G.C. Murray II, Esq. on FacebookSubscribe and leave a 5-star review: https://pod.link/1496390646Contact Us!•Join the conversation by leaving a comment!•Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn!Thanks for listening! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Randy Schaffer is a criminal defense attorney. He received his Bachelor's Degree from the University of Texas in 1970 and earned his JD from the University of Texas School of Law in 1973. Licensed to practice before the US Supreme Court, multiple US Courts of Appeals, multiple US District Courts, and the Texas State Courts, he is a member of the American Board of Criminal Lawyers, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, Harris County Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, American Bar Association, and Houston Bar Association. He has written numerous articles and papers that have been published and spoken at seminars for various organizations in addition to being featured in many newspapers and magazines. Randy and his wife Mollie have two sons and live in Houston, Texas.

It's been a whirlwind few days in Washington, and if you've been following the court trials involving Donald Trump, you know the intensity hasn't let up one bit. Let me jump right into the heart of it, because November 2025 has unfolded with major courtroom drama that's kept the political world riveted.Just weeks ago, Donald Trump's legal teams found themselves before the Supreme Court. The docket for case 25-250, now consolidated with another major suit, set arguments for the first week of November—exactly when crowds gathered outside the Supreme Court building and the eyes of the nation shifted to DC. The consolidated cases stemmed from decisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and involved Trump as petitioner, with V.O.S. Selections, Inc., and several states as respondents. For the federal government, arguments were delivered by D. John Sauer, the Solicitor General, while Neal K. Katyal spoke for the private parties and Benjamin N. Gutman for the state parties.These cases focused on conflicts arising from Trump administration executive orders and the use of federal authority. One hotly debated issue centered on the attempted federalization of the Oregon National Guard, a move contested on grounds of state law and constitutional authority. Lawfare's coverage pointed out the complexity: Judge Cobb's earlier opinion clarified federal authority but stopped short of granting the mission powers Trump's administration sought. As for the emergency motions, everything hinged on the pending Supreme Court decision involving Illinois v. Trump, keeping parts of these cases temporarily on hold.More controversy erupted just days before arguments, when a coalition of nonprofits and municipal governments sued the Trump administration for suspending Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits for November 2025. As Lawfare reported, the litigation tracker was practically overflowing—with over two hundred seventy cases still awaiting rulings, legal challenges to Trump's executive actions flooded the judiciary.The tension ratcheted up further when, according to Politico, President Trump called for several Democratic lawmakers to be arrested and tried for “seditious behavior” after they released a video urging public protest. These remarks shocked Capitol Hill and fueled even fiercer political divisions while legal experts debated whether such accusations had any real standing under federal sedition laws.Just Security's own litigation tracker highlighted yet another legal wrinkle: a new policy from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, barring law firms from representing clients in active litigation against Trump administration policies. The American Bar Association responded swiftly with a federal suit, calling the policy a clear violation of legal norms and a blow to independent counsel rights.And, in an unexpected development, a federal court permanently blocked Trump's executive order to dismantle a federal agency for America's libraries, as the American Library Association announced last Friday. That ruling capped the week's legal rollercoaster and drew praise from advocates for public services.So, listeners, the court trials involving Donald Trump haven't just been about one issue—they've covered everything from the scope of federal authority to separation of powers, sedition, and executive overreach. Each ruling and every new filing continues to shape the legal landscape and will have lasting impacts on governance and American democratic norms.Thank you for tuning in. Make sure to come back next week for more updates on high-stakes court drama. This has been a Quiet Please production—for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Madelaine Weiss is a Harvard-trained Licensed Psychotherapist, Mindset Expert, and Board-Certified Executive, Career, and Life Coach who helps high-achieving professionals master their minds so they can sustain—and truly enjoy—success across every area of life.She is the co-author of The Handbook of Stressful Transitions Across the Lifespan and the author of the acclaimed new release Getting to G.R.E.A.T.: 5-Step Strategy for Work and Life.Continuing her mission to support leaders both at work and at home, Madelaine is launching What's Your Story?, a personal development workbook for children and the adults who care about them. Her expertise in this space is rooted in her past roles as Chair of the School Business Partnership and as a parenting educator for the Massachusetts court system.Madelaine also brings deep organizational experience to her work, having served as a group mental health practice administrative director, a corporate Chief Organizational Development Officer, and an associate director of an educational resource program at Harvard Medical School.As a sought-after corporate trainer, she has designed and delivered programs for organizations including Harvard Medical School, the American Bar Association, Legal Services Corporation, AARP, MedSense, Harvard Law School Association, the International Association of Business Communicators, the National Association of Realtors, the DC Academy of General Dentistry, the Wharton Innovation Summit, and the Bureau of National Affairs.Madelaine's insights have been featured on NBC, Bold TV, and FOX5, and she is a frequent guest expert on leading podcasts, including Major, Lindsey & Africa's Erasing the Stigma. Her writing has appeared in Thrive Global, Authority Magazine's Editors List, UpJourney, and My Perfect Financial Advisor.

It's Friday, November 7, 2025, and if you've been following the frontlines of American political drama, you already know the courtroom battles around Donald Trump have been nothing short of astonishing this week. Let me take you inside the swirl of legal action, where the stakes are national, the personalities unyielding, and the implications huge. Just two days ago, on November 5, the United States Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. was the stage for a rare and urgent oral argument in the consolidated cases known as Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc. The Court squeezed this into its November 2025 session, emphasizing the extraordinary speed and significance. In the packed chambers, Solicitor General D. John Sauer, famed litigator Neal K. Katyal, and Oregon's Solicitor General Benjamin Gutman all took turns at the lectern. Their arguments delved into Trump administration policies, including the contentious use of executive authority and the administration's aggressive approach to what Trump's lawyers called “national interest” actions. According to the Supreme Court docket, these cases rose on lightning-fast petitions and were consolidated due to their overlapping constitutional questions and the urgency voiced by both petitioners and respondents.But that wasn't the only court battle with Trump at the center. Over at the Federal District Courts, the legal action buzzed just as intensely. The Brennan Center for Justice has reported that Donald Trump is simultaneously facing three active federal prosecutions, and, for those who recall, in May 2024, he was actually convicted of felonies in New York.The new front this week? Several lawsuits target orders that President Trump signed earlier this year. One major case making waves is American Bar Association v. Trump, where legal groups allege that Trump's orders specifically targeted law firms for actions the administration considered to be against the “national interest.” These orders, signed in March and April, resulted in penalties like stripping security clearances and terminating government contracts with those firms. It's sparked nothing less than a constitutional confrontation over executive power and civil liberties. Just Security's litigation tracker says the case is awaiting a major ruling that could reshape how presidents wield authority against perceived opponents.Meanwhile, voting rights have come to the fore in cases such as Democratic National Committee v. Trump and League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump. The heart of the battle is Trump's order mandating documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration and threatening to cut federal funding to states that don't comply. Civil rights groups and a coalition of states, including California and Washington, claim these moves violate both the separation of powers and federal voting law. Federal courts have, at least for now, temporarily blocked these orders, but hearings and filings have kept the courtroom jostling at a high boil all week.That is only a glimpse, because every filing, every oral argument, and every judicial decision right now seems to push U.S. politics deeper into uncharted water. The legal landscape around Donald Trump is shifting by the day. Thanks for tuning in, and be sure to come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

David Lee Windecher is a trailblazing criminal defense attorney, author, and activist in the social justice movement to end mass incarceration, reduce recidivism and redress racial inequity in the criminal justice system. In his autobiography The American Dream / HiSstory in the Making, David shares the harsh realities of growing up as an impoverished immigrant on the streets of Miami-Dade County. He was arrested 13 times and spent over 7 months incarcerated as a juvenile. He dropped out of high school and joined a gang for protection. His street name was Red. David endured the brutal climate of the lawlessness on the streets by both criminals and the police. All the while he dreamed of becoming a lawyer and fighting for those who don't have the resources to pay for justice. David began his path to self-rehabilitation when he earned his GED in March of 1998 and took his first academic steps toward his childhood dream of becoming a lawyer. He graduated Summa Cum Laude from American Intercontinental University in Fort Lauderdale, Florida in 2005 and earned his Juris Doctorate degree from John Marshall Law School in Atlanta, Georgia in 2012. David was admitted to the Georgia Bar in 2012 and the Florida Bar in 2014. David is a member of the Georgia and Florida Court of Appeals, the Georgia and Florida Supreme Court, the Northern District of Georgia United States District Court and the American Bar Association. David specializes in criminal defense, juvenile law, and expungement procedures. In 2022 the National Football League awarded him with the Inspire Change Changemaker Award.   Related Links:  Rehabilitation Enables Dreams - https://www.stoprecidivism.org/ Lester Tate – http://www.akintate.com/ Robin Frazer Clark – https://www.gatriallawyers.net/ See You In Court – https://seeyouincourtpodcast.org To learn more about the Georgia Civil Justice Foundation, visit https://fairplay.org  

In episode 586 of Lawyerist Podcast, learn how lawyers can help safeguard democracy by defending the rule of law and protecting judicial independence. In this episode, Stephanie Everett talks with Bill Bay, Immediate Past President of the American Bar Association, about why these issues transcend politics and define the integrity of the legal profession. Together, they discuss how every lawyer can lead with grace, model civil discourse, and stand up for fairness, equality, and due process.   Learn how you can join the ABA's fight for the rule of law here: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/rule-of-law/  Listen to our previous episodes about Leadership & Advocacy in Law:   Episode 490: “How to Build a Powerhouse Firm with Internal Talent, with Ryan McKeen” Apple | Spotify | LTN  Episode 560: “Stop Doing Everything Yourself! Unlock Your Law Firm's True Potential, with Leticia DeSuze” Apple | Spotify | LTN  Episode 576: “How Sponsorship, Empathy, and Failure Shape Great Leaders, with Michael Cohen” Apple | Spotify | LTN    Have thoughts about today's episode? Join the conversation on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and X!  If today's podcast resonates with you and you haven't read The Small Firm Roadmap Revisited yet, get the first chapter right now for free! Looking for help beyond the book? See if our coaching community is right for you.    Access more resources from Lawyerist at lawyerist.com.  Chapters / Timestamps:   0:00 – Introduction  1:00 – Law as Political, Not Partisan  4:40 – Sponsor Break: Tabs3  11:13 – Meet Bill Bay  12:20 – What the Rule of Law Means  14:40 – Threats to Justice & the Profession  21:55 – How Lawyers Can Take Action  23:40 – Grace & Civility in Practice  29:05 – Hope for the Next Generation  34:20 – Call to Action & Closing Thoughts   

Welcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking here.Yesterday, Southern California Edison (SCE), the utility whose power lines may have started the devastating Eaton Fire, announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program. Under the program, people affected by the fire can receive hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in compensation, in a matter of months rather than years—but in exchange, they must give up their right to sue.It should come as no surprise that SCE, in designing the program, sought the help of Kenneth Feinberg. For more than 40 years, often in the wake of tragedy or disaster, Feinberg has helped mediate and resolve seemingly intractable crises. He's most well-known for how he and his colleague Camille Biros designed and administered the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. But he has worked on many other headline-making matters over the years, including the Agent Orange product liability litigation, the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Trust, the multidistrict litigation involving Monsanto's Roundup weed killer—and now, of course, the Eaton Fire.How did Ken develop such a fascinating and unique practice? What is the most difficult aspect of administering these giant compensation funds? Do these funds represent the wave of the future, as an alternative to (increasingly expensive) litigation? Having just turned 80, does he have any plans to retire?Last week, I had the pleasure of interviewing Ken—the day after his 80th birthday—and we covered all these topics. The result is what I found to be one of the most moving conversations I've ever had on this podcast.Thanks to Ken Feinberg for joining me—and, of course, for his many years of service as America's go-to mediator in times of crisis.Show Notes:* Kenneth Feinberg bio, Wikipedia* Kenneth Feinberg profile, Chambers and Partners* L.A. Fire Victims Face a Choice, by Jill Cowan for The New York TimesPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fourth episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, October 24.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.I like to think that I've produced some good podcast episodes over the past three-plus years, but I feel that this latest one is a standout. I'm hard-pressed to think of an interview that was more emotionally affecting to me than what you're about to hear.Kenneth Feinberg is a leading figure in the world of mediation and alternative dispute resolution. He is most well-known for having served as special master of the U.S. government's September 11th Victim Compensation Fund—and for me, as someone who was in New York City on September 11, I found his discussion of that work profoundly moving. But he has handled many major matters over the years, such as the Agent Orange product liability litigation to the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster Victim Compensation Fund. And he's working right now on a matter that's in the headlines: the California wildfires. Ken has been hired by Southern California Edison to help design a compensation program for victims of the 2025 Eaton fire. Ken has written about his fascinating work in two books: What Is Life Worth?: The Unprecedented Effort to Compensate the Victims of 9/11 and Who Gets What: Fair Compensation after Tragedy and Financial Upheaval. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Ken Feinberg.Ken, thank you so much for joining me.Ken Feinberg: Thank you very much; it's an honor to be here.DL: We are recording this shortly after your 80th birthday, so happy birthday!KF: Thank you very much.DL: Let's go back to your birth; let's start at the beginning. You grew up in Massachusetts, I believe.KF: That's right: Brockton, Massachusetts, about 20 miles south of Boston.DL: Your parents weren't lawyers. Tell us about what they did.KF: My parents were blue-collar workers from Massachusetts, second-generation immigrants. My father ran a wholesale tire distributorship, my mother was a bookkeeper, and we grew up in the 1940s and ‘50s, even the early ‘60s, in a town where there was great optimism, a very vibrant Jewish community, three different synagogues, a very optimistic time in American history—post-World War II, pre-Vietnam, and a time when communitarianism, working together to advance the collective good, was a prominent characteristic of Brockton, and most of the country, during the time that I was in elementary school and high school in Brockton.DL: Did the time in which you grow up shape or influence your decision to go into law?KF: Yes. More than law—the time growing up had a great impact on my decision to give back to the community from which I came. You've got to remember, when I was a teenager, the president of the United States was John F. Kennedy, and I'll never forget because it had a tremendous impact on me—President Kennedy reminding everybody that public service is a noble undertaking, government is not a dirty word, and especially his famous quote (or one of his many quotes), “Every individual can make a difference.” I never forgot that, and it had a personal impact on me and has had an impact on me throughout my life. [Ed. note: The quotation generally attributed to JFK is, “One person can make a difference, and everyone should try.” Whether he actually said these exact words is unclear, but it's certainly consistent with many other sentiments he expressed throughout his life.]DL: When you went to college at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, what did you study?KF: I studied history and political science. I was very interested in how individuals over the centuries change history, the theory of historians that great individuals articulate history and drive it in a certain direction—for good, like President Kennedy or Abraham Lincoln or George Washington, or for ill, like Adolf Hitler or Mussolini. And so it was history that I really delved into in my undergraduate years.DL: What led you then to turn to law school?KF: I always enjoyed acting on the stage—theater, comedies, musicals, dramas—and at the University of Massachusetts, I did quite a bit of that. In my senior year, I anticipated going to drama school at Yale, or some other academic master's program in theater. My father gave me very good advice. He said, “Ken, most actors end up waiting on restaurant tables in Manhattan, waiting for a big break that never comes. Why don't you turn your skills on the stage to a career in the courtroom, in litigation, talking to juries and convincing judges?” That was very sound advice from my father, and I ended up attending NYU Law School and having a career in the law.DL: Yes—and you recount that story in your book, and I just love that. It's really interesting to hear what parents think of our careers. But anyway, you did very well in law school, you were on the law review, and then your first job out of law school was something that we might expect out of someone who did well in law school.KF: Yes. I was a law clerk to the chief judge of New York State, Stanley Fuld, a very famous state jurist, and he had his chambers in New York City. For one week, every six or seven weeks, we would go to the state capitol in Albany to hear cases, and it was Judge Fuld who was my transition from law school to the practice of law.DL: I view clerking as a form of government service—and then you continued in service after that.KF: That's right. Remembering what my father had suggested, I then turned my attention to the courtroom and became an assistant United States attorney, a federal prosecutor, in New York City. I served as a prosecutor and as a trial lawyer for a little over three years. And then I had a wonderful opportunity to go to work for Senator Ted Kennedy on the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington and stayed with him for about five years.DL: You talk about this also in your books—you worked on a pretty diverse range of issues for the senator, right?KF: That's right. For the first three years I worked on his staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee, with some excellent colleagues—soon-to-be Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer was with me, noted litigator David Boies was in the office—and for the first three years, it was law-related issues. Then in 1978, Senator Kennedy asked me to be his chief of staff, and once I went over and became his chief of staff, the issues of course mushroomed. He was running for president, so there were issues of education, health, international relations—a wide diversity of issues, very broad-based.DL: I recall that you didn't love the chief of staff's duties.KF: No. Operations or administration was not my priority. I loved substance, issues—whatever the issues were, trying to work out legislative compromises, trying to give back something in the way of legislation to the people. And internal operations and administration, I quickly discovered, was not my forte. It was not something that excited me.DL: Although it's interesting: what you are most well-known for is overseeing and administering these large funds and compensating victims of these horrific tragedies, and there's a huge amount of administration involved in that.KF: Yes, but I'm a very good delegator. In fact, if you look at the track record of my career in designing and administering these programs—9/11 or the Deepwater Horizon oil spill or the Patriots' Day Marathon bombings in Boston—I was indeed fortunate in all of those matters to have at my side, for over 40 years, Camille Biros. She's not a lawyer, but she's the nation's expert on designing, administering, and operating these programs, and as you delve into what I've done and haven't done, her expertise has been invaluable.DL: I would call Camille your secret weapon, except she's not secret. She's been profiled in The New York Times, and she's a well-known figure in her own right.KF: That is correct. She was just in the last few months named one of the 50 Women Over 50 that have had such an impact in the country—that list by Forbes that comes out every year. She's prominently featured in that magazine.DL: Shifting back to your career, where did you go after your time in the Senate?KF: I opened up a Washington office for a prominent New York law firm, and for the next decade or more, that was the center of my professional activity.DL: So that was Kaye Scholer, now Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer. What led you to go from your career in the public sector, where you spent a number of your years right out of law school, into so-called Biglaw?KF: Practicality and financial considerations. I had worked for over a decade in public service. I now had a wife, I had three young children, and it was time to give them financial security. And “Biglaw,” as you put it—Biglaw in Washington was lucrative, and it was something that gave me a financial base from which I could try and expand my different interests professionally. And that was the reason that for about 12 years I was in private practice for a major firm, Kaye Scholer.DL: And then tell us what happened next.KF: A great lesson in not planning too far ahead. In 1984, I got a call from a former clerk of Judge Fuld whom I knew from the clerk network: Judge Jack Weinstein, a nationally recognized jurist from Brooklyn, the Eastern District, and a federal judge. He had on his docket the Vietnam veterans' Agent Orange class action.You may recall that there were about 250,000 Vietnam veterans who came home claiming illness or injury or death due to the herbicide Agent Orange, which had been dropped by the U.S. Air Force in Vietnam to burn the foliage and vegetation where the Viet Cong enemy might be hiding. Those Vietnam veterans came home suffering terrible diseases, including cancer and chloracne (a sort of acne on the skin), and they brought a lawsuit. Judge Weinstein had the case. Weinstein realized that if that case went to trial, it could be 10 years before there'd be a result, with appeals and all of that.So he appointed me as mediator, called the “special master,” whose job it was to try and settle the case, all as a mediator. Well, after eight weeks of trying, we were successful. There was a master settlement totaling about $250 million—at the time, one of the largest tort verdicts in history. And that one case, front-page news around the nation, set me on a different track. Instead of remaining a Washington lawyer involved in regulatory and legislative matters, I became a mediator, an individual retained by the courts or by the parties to help resolve a case. And that was the beginning. That one Agent Orange case transformed my entire professional career and moved me in a different direction completely.DL: So you knew the late Judge Weinstein through Fuld alumni circles. What background did you have in mediation already, before you handled this gigantic case?KF: None. I told Judge Weinstein, “Judge, I never took a course in mediation at law school (there wasn't one then), and I don't know anything about bringing the parties together, trying to get them to settle.” He said, “I know you. I know your background. I've followed your career. You worked for Senator Kennedy. You are the perfect person.” And until the day I die, I'm beholden to Judge Weinstein for having faith in me to take this on.DL: And over the years, you actually worked on a number of matters at the request of Judge Weinstein.KF: A dozen. I worked on tobacco cases, on asbestos cases, on drug and medical device cases. I even worked for Judge Weinstein mediating the closing of the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long Island. I handled a wide range of cases where he called on me to act as his court-appointed mediator to resolve cases on his docket.DL: You've carved out a very unique and fascinating niche within the law, and I'm guessing that most people who meet you nowadays know who you are. But say you're in a foreign country or something, and some total stranger is chatting with you and asks what you do for a living. What would you say?KF: I would say I'm a lawyer, and I specialize in dispute resolution. It might be mediation, it might be arbitration, or it might even be negotiation, where somebody asks me to negotiate on their behalf. So I just tell people there is a growing field of law in the United States called ADR—alternative dispute resolution—and that it is, as you say, David, my niche, my focus when called upon.DL: And I think it's fair to say that you're one of the founding people in this field or early pioneers—or I don't know how you would describe it.KF: I think that's right. When I began with Agent Orange, there was no mediation to speak of. It certainly wasn't institutionalized; it wasn't streamlined. Today, in 2025, the American Bar Association has a special section on alternative dispute resolution, it's taught in every law school in the United States, there are thousands of mediators and arbitrators, and it's become a major leg in law school of different disciplines and specialties.DL: One question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter you are most proud of?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the hardest matter you've ever had to deal with?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter that you're most well-known for?” And I feel in your case, the same matter is responsive to all three of those questions.KF: That's correct. The most difficult, the most challenging, the most rewarding matter, the one that's given me the most exposure, was the federal September 11 Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, when I was appointed by President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft to implement, design, and administer a very unique federal law that had been enacted right after 9/11.DL: I got chills as you were just even stating that, very factually, because I was in New York on 9/11, and a lot of us remember the trauma and difficulty of that time. And you basically had to live with that and talk to hundreds, even thousands, of people—survivors, family members—for almost three years. And you did it pro bono. So let me ask you this: what were you thinking?KF: What triggered my interest was the law itself. Thirteen days after the attacks, Congress passed this law, unique in American history, setting up a no-fault administrator compensation system. Don't go to court. Those who volunteer—families of the dead, those who were physically injured at the World Trade Center or the Pentagon—you can voluntarily seek compensation from a taxpayer-funded law. Now, if you don't want it, you don't have to go. It's a voluntary program.The key will be whether the special master or the administrator will be able to convince people that it is a better avenue to pursue than a long, delayed, uncertain lawsuit. And based on my previous experience for the last 15 years, starting with Agent Orange and asbestos and these other tragedies, I volunteered. I went to Senator Kennedy and said, “What about this?” He said, “Leave it to me.” He called President Bush. He knew Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was his former colleague in the U.S. Senate, and he had great admiration for Senator Ashcroft. And so I was invited by the attorney general for an interview, and I told him I was interested. I told him I would only do it pro bono. You can't get paid for a job like this; it's patriotism. And he said, “Go for it.” And he turned out to be my biggest, strongest ally during the 33 months of the program.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.You talk about this in your books: you were recommended by a very prominent Democratic politician, and the administration at the time was Republican. George W. Bush was president, and John Ashcroft was the attorney general. Why wouldn't they have picked a Republican for this project?KF: Very good question. Senator Kennedy told both of them, “You better be careful here. This is a very, very uncertain program, with taxpayer money used to pay only certain victims. This could be a disaster. And you would be well-advised to pick someone who is not a prominent friend of yours, who is not perceived as just a Republican arm of the Justice Department or the White House. And I've got the perfect person. You couldn't pick a more opposite politician than my former chief of staff, Ken Feinberg. But look at what he's done.” And I think to Senator Kennedy's credit, and certainly to President Bush and to John Ashcroft's, they selected me.DL: As you would expect with a program of this size and complexity, there was controversy and certainly criticism over the years. But overall, looking back, I think people regard it widely as a huge success. Do you have a sense or an estimate of what percentage of people in the position to accept settlements through the program did that, rather than litigate? Because in accepting funds from the program, they did waive their right to bring all sorts of lawsuits.KF: That's correct. If you look at the statistics, if the statistics are a barometer of success, 5,300 applicants were eligible, because of death—about 2,950, somewhere in there—and the remaining claims were for physical injury. Of the 5,300, 97 percent voluntarily accepted the compensation. Only 94 people, 3 percent, opted out, and they all settled their cases five years later. There was never a trial on who was responsible in the law for 9/11. So if statistics are an indication—and I think they are a good indication—the program was a stunning success in accomplishing Congress's objective, which was diverting people voluntarily out of the court system.DL: Absolutely. And that's just a striking statistic. It was really successful in getting funds to families that needed it. They had lost breadwinners; they had lost loved ones. It was hugely successful, and it did not take a decade, as some of these cases involving just thousands of victims often do.I was struck by one thing you just said. You mentioned there was really no trial. And in reading your accounts of your work on this, it seemed almost like people viewed talking to you and your colleagues, Camille and others on this—I think they almost viewed that as their opportunity to be heard, since there wasn't a trial where they would get to testify.KF: That's correct. The primary reason for the success of the 9/11 Fund, and a valuable lesson for me thereafter, was this: give victims the opportunity to be heard, not only in public town-hall meetings where collectively people can vent, but in private, with doors closed. It's just the victim and Feinberg or his designee, Camille. We were the face of the government here. You can't get a meeting with the secretary of defense or the attorney general, the head of the Department of Justice. What you can get is an opportunity behind closed doors to express your anger, your frustration, your disappointment, your sense of uncertainty, with the government official responsible for cutting the checks. And that had an enormous difference in assuring the success of the program.DL: What would you say was the hardest aspect of your work on the Fund?KF: The hardest part of the 9/11 Fund, which I'll never recover from, was not calculating the value of a life. Judges and juries do that every day, David, in every court, in New Jersey and 49 other states. That is not a difficult assignment. What would the victim have earned over a work life? Add something for pain and suffering and emotional distress, and there's your check.The hardest part in any of these funds, starting with 9/11—the most difficult aspect, the challenge—is empathy, and your willingness to sit for over 900 separate hearings, me alone with family members or victims, to hear what they want to tell you, and to make that meeting, from their perspective, worthwhile and constructive. That's the hard part.DL: Did you find it sometimes difficult to remain emotionally composed? Or did you, after a while, develop a sort of thick skin?KF: You remain composed. You are a professional. You have a job to do, for the president of the United States. You can't start wailing and crying in the presence of somebody who was also wailing and crying, so you have to compose yourself. But I tell people who say, “Could I do what you did?” I say, “Sure. There are plenty of people in this country that can do what I did—if you can brace yourself for the emotional trauma that comes with meeting with victim after victim after victim and hearing their stories, which are...” You can't make them up. They're so heart-wrenching and so tragic.I'll give you one example. A lady came to see me, 26 years old, sobbing—one of hundreds of people I met with. “Mr. Feinberg, I lost my husband. He was a fireman at the World Trade Center. He died on 9/11. And he left me with our two children, six and four. Now, Mr. Feinberg, you've calculated and told me I'm going to receive $2.4 million, tax-free, from this 9/11 Fund. I want it in 30 days.”I said to Mrs. Jones, “This is public, taxpayer money. We have to go down to the U.S. Treasury. They've got to cut the checks; they've got to dot all the i's and cross all the t's. It may be 60 days or 90 days, but you'll get your money.”“No. Thirty days.”I said, “Mrs. Jones, why do you need the money in 30 days?”She said, “Why? I'll tell you why, Mr. Feinberg. I have terminal cancer. I have 10 weeks to live. My husband was going to survive me and take care of our two children. Now they're going to be orphans. I have got to get this money, find a guardian, make sure the money's safe, prepare for the kids' schooling. I don't have a lot of time. I need your help.”Well, we ran down to the U.S. Treasury and helped process the check in record time. We got her the money in 30 days—and eight weeks later, she died. Now when you hear story after story like this, you get some indication of the emotional pressure that builds and is debilitating, frankly. And we managed to get through it.DL: Wow. I got a little choked up just even hearing you tell that. Wow—I really don't know what to say.When you were working on the 9/11 Fund, did you have time for any other matters, or was this pretty much exclusively what you were working on for the 33 months?KF: Professionally, it was exclusive. Now what I did was, I stayed in my law firm, so I had a living. Other people in the firm were generating income for the firm; I wasn't on the dole. But it was exclusive. During the day, you are swamped with these individual requests, decisions that have to be made, checks that have to be cut. At night, I escaped: opera, orchestral concerts, chamber music, art museums—the height of civilization. During the day, in the depths of horror of civilization; at night, an escape, an opportunity to just enjoy the benefits of civilization. You better have a loving family, as I did, that stands behind you—because you never get over it, really.DL: That's such an important lesson, to actually have that time—because if you wanted to, you could have worked on this 24/7. But it is important to have some time to just clear your head or spend time with your family, especially just given what you were dealing with day-to-day.KF: That's right. And of course, during the day, we made a point of that as well. If we were holding hearings like the one I just explained, we'd take a one-hour break, go for a walk, go into Central Park or into downtown Washington, buy an ice cream cone, see the kids playing in playgrounds and laughing. You've got to let the steam out of the pressure cooker, or it'll kill you. And that was the most difficult part of the whole program. In all of these programs, that's the common denominator: emotional stress and unhappiness on the part of the victims.DL: One last question, before we turn to some other matters. There was also a very large logistical apparatus associated with this, right? For example, PricewaterhouseCoopers. It wasn't just you and Camille trying to deal with these thousands of survivors and claimants; you did have support.KF: That's right. Pricewaterhouse won the bid at the Justice Department. This is public: Pricewaterhouse, for something like around $100 million, put 450 people to work with us to help us process claims, appraise values, do the research. Pricewaterhouse was a tremendous ally and has gone on, since 9/11, to handle claims design and claims administration, as one of its many specialties. Emily Kent, Chuck Hacker, people like that we worked with for years, very much experts in these areas.DL: So after your work on the 9/11 Fund, you've worked on a number of these types of matters. Is there one that you would say ranks second in terms of complexity or difficulty or meaningfulness to you?KF: Yes. Deepwater Horizon in 2011, 2012—that oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico blew up and killed about, I don't know, 15 to 20 people in the explosion. But the real challenge in that program was how we received, in 16 months, about 1,250,000 claims for business interruption, business losses, property damage. We received over a million claims from 50 states. I think we got probably a dozen claims from New Jersey; I didn't know the oil had gotten to New Jersey. We received claims from 35 foreign countries. And the sheer volume of the disaster overwhelmed us. We had, at one point, something like 40,000 people—vendors—working for us. We had 35 offices throughout the Gulf of Mexico, from Galveston, Texas, all the way to Mobile Bay, Alabama. Nevertheless, in 16 months, on behalf of BP, Deepwater Horizon, we paid out all BP money, a little over $7 billion, to 550,000 eligible claimants. And that, I would say, other than 9/11, had the greatest impact and was the most satisfying.DL: You mentioned some claims coming from some pretty far-flung jurisdictions. In these programs, how much of a problem is fraud?KF: Not much. First of all, with death claims like 9/11 or the Boston Marathon bombings or the 20 first-graders who died in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, at the hands of a deranged gunmen—most of the time, in traumatic death and injury, you've got records. No one can beat the system; you have to have a death certificate. In 9/11, where are your military records, if you were at the Pentagon? Where are the airplane manifests? You've got to be on the manifest if you were flying on that plane.Now, the problem becomes more pronounced in something like BP, where you've got over a million claims, and you wonder, how many people can claim injury from this explosion? There we had an anti-fraud unit—Guidepost, Bart Schwartz's company—and they did a tremendous job of spot-checking claims. I think that out of over a million claims, there may have been 25,000 that were suspicious. And we sent those claims to the Justice Department, and they prosecuted a fair number of people. But it wasn't a huge problem. I think the fraud rate was something like 3 percent; that's nothing. So overall, we haven't found—and we have to be ever-vigilant, you're right—but we haven't found much in the way of fraud.DL: I'm glad to hear that, because it would really be very depressing to think that there were people trying to profiteer off these terrible disasters and tragedies. Speaking of continuing disasters and tragedies, turning to current events, you are now working with Southern California Edison in dealing with claims related to the Eaton Fire. And this is a pending matter, so of course you may have some limits in terms of what you can discuss, but what can you say in a general sense about this undertaking?KF: This is the Los Angeles wildfires that everybody knows about, from the last nine or ten months—the tremendous fire damage in Los Angeles. One of the fires, or one of the selected hubs of the fire, was the Eaton Fire. Southern California Edison, the utility involved in the litigation and finger-pointing, decided to set up, à la 9/11, a voluntary claims program. Not so much to deal with death—there were about 19 deaths, and a handful of physical injuries—but terrible fire damage, destroyed homes, damaged businesses, smoke and ash and soot, for miles in every direction. And the utility decided, its executive decided, “We want to do the right thing here. We may be held liable or we may not be held liable for the fire, but we think the right thing to do is nip in the bud this idea of extended litigation. Look at 9/11: only 94 people ended up suing. We want to set up a program.”They came to Camille and me. Over the last eight weeks, we've designed the program, and I think in the last week of October or the first week of November, you will see publicly, “Here is the protocol; here is the claim form. Please submit your claims, and we'll get them paid within 90 days.” And if history is an indicator, Camille and I think that the Eaton Fire Protocol will be a success, and the great bulk of the thousands of victims will voluntarily decide to come into the program. We'll see. [Ed. note: On Wednesday, a few days after Ken and I recorded this episode, Southern California Edison announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program.]DL: That raises a question that I'm curious about. How would you describe the relationship between the work that you and Camille and your colleagues do and the traditional work of the courts, in terms of in-the-trenches litigation? Because I do wonder whether the growth in your field is perhaps related to some developments in litigation, in terms of litigation becoming more expensive over the decades (in a way that far outstrips inflation), more complicated, or more protracted. How would you characterize that relationship?KF: I would say that the programs that we design and administer—like 9/11, like BP, plus the Eaton wildfires—are an exception to the rule. Nobody should think that these programs that we have worked on are the wave of the future. They are not the wave of the future; they are isolated, unique examples, where a company—or in 9/11, the U.S. government—decides, “We ought to set up a special program where the courts aren't involved, certainly not directly.” In 9/11, they were prohibited to be involved, by statute; in some of these other programs, like BP, the courts have a relationship, but they don't interfere with the day-to-day administration of the program.And I think the American people have a lot of faith in the litigation system that you correctly point out can be uncertain, very inefficient, and very costly. But the American people, since the founding of the country, think, “You pick your lawyer, I'll pick my lawyer, and we'll have a judge and jury decide.” That's the American rule of law; I don't think it's going to change. But occasionally there is a groundswell of public pressure to come up with a program, or there'll be a company—like the utility, like BP—that decides to have a program.And I'll give you one other example: the Catholic Church confronted thousands of claims of sexual abuse by priests. It came to us, and we set up a program—just like 9/11, just like BP—where we invited, voluntarily, any minor—any minor from decades ago, now an adult—who had been abused by the church to come into this voluntary program. We paid out, I think, $700 million to $800 million, to victims in dioceses around the country. So there's another example—Camille did most of that—but these programs are all relatively rare. There are thousands of litigations every day, and nothing's going to change that.DL: I had a guest on a few weeks ago, Chris Seeger of Seeger Weiss, who does a lot of work in the mass-tort space. It's interesting: I feel that that space has evolved, and maybe in some ways it's more efficient than it used to be. They have these multi-district litigation panels, they have these bellwether trials, and then things often get settled, once people have a sense of the values. That system and your approach seem to have some similarities, in the sense that you're not individually trying each one of these cases, and you're having somebody with liability come forward and voluntarily pay out money, after some kind of negotiation.KF: Well, there's certainly negotiation in what Chris Seeger does; I'm not sure we have much negotiation. We say, “Here's the amount under the administrative scheme.” It's like in workers' compensation: here's the amount. You don't have to take it. There's nothing to really talk about, unless you have new evidence that we're not aware of. And those programs, when we do design them, seem to work very efficiently.Again, if you ask Camille Biros what was the toughest part of valuing individual claims of sexual-abuse directed at minors, she would say, “These hearings: we gave every person who wanted an opportunity to be heard.” And when they come to see Camille, they don't come to talk about money; they want validation for what they went through. “Believe me, will you? Ken, Camille, believe me.” And when Camille says, “We do believe you,” they immediately, or almost immediately, accept the compensation and sign a release: “I will not sue the Catholic diocese.”DL: So you mentioned there isn't really much negotiation, but you did talk in the book about these sort of “appeals.” You had these two tracks, “Appeals A” and “Appeals B.” Can you talk about that? Did you ever revisit what you had set as the award for a particular victim's family, after hearing from them in person?KF: Sure. Now, remember, those appeals came back to us, not to a court; there's no court involvement. But in 9/11, in BP, if somebody said, “You made a mistake—you didn't account for these profits or this revenue, or you didn't take into account this contract that my dead firefighter husband had that would've given him a lot more money”—of course, we'll revisit that. We invited that. But that's an internal appeals process. The people who calculated the value of the claim are the same people that are going to be looking at revisiting the claim. But again, that's due process, and that's something that we thought was important.DL: You and Camille have been doing this really important work for decades. Since this is, of course, shortly after your 80th birthday, I should ask: do you have future plans? You're tackling some of the most complicated matters, headline-making matters. Would you ever want to retire at some point?KF: I have no intention of retiring. I do agree that when you reach a certain pinnacle in what you've done, you do slow down. We are much more selective in what we do. I used to have maybe 15 mediations going on at once; now, we have one or two matters, like the Los Angeles wildfires. As long as I'm capable, as long as Camille's willing, we'll continue to do it, but we'll be very careful about what we select to do. We don't travel much. The Los Angeles wildfires was largely Zooms, going back and forth. And we're not going to administer that program. We had administered 9/11 and BP; we're trying to move away from that. It's very time-consuming and stressful. So we've accomplished a great deal over the last 50 years—but as long as we can do it, we'll continue to do it.DL: Do you have any junior colleagues who would take over what you and Camille have built?KF: We don't have junior colleagues. There's just the two of us and Cindy Sanzotta, our receptionist. But it's an interesting question: “Who's after Feinberg? Who's next in doing this?” I think there are thousands of people in this country who could do what we do. It is not rocket science. It really isn't. I'll tell you what's difficult: the emotion. If somebody wants to do what we do, you better brace yourself for the emotion, the anger, the frustration, the finger pointing. It goes with the territory. And if you don't have the psychological ability to handle this type of stress, stay away. But I'm sure somebody will be there, and no one's irreplaceable.DL: Well, I know I personally could not handle it. I worked when I was at a law firm on civil litigation over insurance proceeds related to the World Trade Center, and that was a very draining case, and I was very glad to no longer be on it. So I could not do what you and Camille do. But let me ask you, to end this section on a positive note: what would you say is the most rewarding or meaningful or satisfying aspect of the work that you do on these programs?KF: Giving back to the community. Public service. Helping the community heal. Not so much the individuals; the individuals are part of the community. “Every individual can make a difference.” I remember that every day, what John F. Kennedy said: government service is a noble undertaking. So what's most rewarding for me is that although I'm a private practitioner—I am no longer in government service, since my days with Senator Kennedy—I'd like to think that I performed a valuable service for the community, the resilience of the community, the charity exhibited by the community. And that gives me a great sense of self-satisfaction.DL: You absolutely have. It's been amazing, and I'm so grateful for you taking the time to join me.So now, onto our speed round. These are four questions that are standardized. My first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law in a more abstract sense.KF: Uncertainty. What I don't like about the law is—and I guess maybe it's the flip side of the best way to get to a result—I don't like the uncertainty of the law. I don't like the fact that until the very end of the process, you don't know if your view and opinion will prevail. And I think losing control over your destiny in that regard is problematic.DL: My second question—and maybe we touched on this a little bit, when we talked about your father's opinions—what would you be if you were not a lawyer?KF: Probably an actor. As I say, I almost became an actor. And I still love theater and the movies and Broadway shows. If my father hadn't given me that advice, I was on the cusp of pursuing a career in the theater.DL: Have you dabbled in anything in your (probably limited) spare time—community theater, anything like that?KF: No, but I certainly have prioritized in my spare time classical music and the peace and optimism it brings to the listener. It's been an important part of my life.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?KF: Well, it varies from program to program. I'd like to get seven hours. That's what my doctors tell me: “Ken, very important—more important than pills and exercise and diet—is sleep. Your body needs a minimum of seven hours.” Well, for me, seven hours is rare—it's more like six or even five, and during 9/11 or during Eaton wildfires, it might be more like four or five. And that's not enough, and that is a problem.DL: My last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?KF: Yes, I'll give you some career and life advice. It's very simple: don't plan too far ahead. People have this view—you may think you know what you want to do with your career. You may think you know what life holds for you. You don't know. If I've learned anything over the last decades, life has a way of changing the best-laid plans. These 9/11 husbands and wives said goodbye to their children, “we'll see you for dinner,” a perfunctory wave—and they never saw them again. Dust, not even a body. And the idea I tell law students—who say, ”I'm going to be a corporate lawyer,” or “I'm going to be a litigator”—I tell them, “You have no idea what your legal career will look like. Look at Feinberg; he never planned on this. He never thought, in his wildest dreams, that this would be his chosen avenue of the law.”My advice: enjoy the moment. Do what you like now. Don't worry too much about what you'll be doing two years, five years, 10 years, a lifetime ahead of you. It doesn't work that way. Everybody gets thrown curveballs, and that's advice I give to everybody.DL: Well, you did not plan out your career, but it has turned out wonderfully, and the country is better for it. Thank you, Ken, both for your work on all these matters over the years and for joining me today.KF: A privilege and an honor. Thanks, David.DL: Thanks so much to Ken for joining me—and, of course, for his decades of work resolving some of the thorniest disputes in the country, which is truly a form of public service.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 12. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects.Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; (3) transcripts of podcast interviews; and (4) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

In episode 586 of Lawyerist Podcast, learn how lawyers can help safeguard democracy by defending the rule of law and protecting judicial independence. In this episode, Stephanie Everett talks with Bill Bay, Immediate Past President of the American Bar Association, about why these issues transcend politics and define the integrity of the legal profession. Together, they discuss how every lawyer can lead with grace, model civil discourse, and stand up for fairness, equality, and due process.   Learn how you can join the ABA's fight for the rule of law here: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/rule-of-law/  Listen to our previous episodes about Leadership & Advocacy in Law:   Episode 490: “How to Build a Powerhouse Firm with Internal Talent, with Ryan McKeen” Apple | Spotify | LTN  Episode 560: “Stop Doing Everything Yourself! Unlock Your Law Firm's True Potential, with Leticia DeSuze” Apple | Spotify | LTN  Episode 576: “How Sponsorship, Empathy, and Failure Shape Great Leaders, with Michael Cohen” Apple | Spotify | LTN    Have thoughts about today's episode? Join the conversation on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and X!  If today's podcast resonates with you and you haven't read The Small Firm Roadmap Revisited yet, get the first chapter right now for free! Looking for help beyond the book? See if our coaching community is right for you.    Access more resources from Lawyerist at lawyerist.com.  Chapters / Timestamps:   0:00 – Introduction  1:00 – Law as Political, Not Partisan  4:40 – Sponsor Break: Tabs3  11:13 – Meet Bill Bay  12:20 – What the Rule of Law Means  14:40 – Threats to Justice & the Profession  21:55 – How Lawyers Can Take Action  23:40 – Grace & Civility in Practice  29:05 – Hope for the Next Generation  34:20 – Call to Action & Closing Thoughts    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of The PR Podcast, we sit down with G.C. Murray II, Esq. — an award-winning attorney, executive coach, and author of A Greater Change: A Nonprofit Guidebook. Recognized by both the American Bar Association and the National Bar Association for his ethics and leadership, G.C. brings a rare perspective from the world of law to the world of communications. He shares powerful lessons on protecting reputation under pressure and leading through storytelling with precision, trust, and empathy. The PR Podcast is a show about how the news gets made. We talk with great PR people, reporters, and communicators about how the news gets made and strategies for publicity that drive business goals. Host ⁠⁠Jody Fisher⁠⁠ is the founder of Jody Fisher PR and works with clients across the healthcare, higher education, financial services, real estate, entertainment, and non-profit verticals. Join the conversation on ⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠ at @ThePRPodcast. G.C. Murray: LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/gc2esqFacebook - https://www.facebook.com/gc2esqInstagram - https://www.instagram.com/gc2esq/Website - https://www.gc2esq.com https://www.association.law The PR Podcast: Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/ThePRPodcast/Twitter - https://x.com/ThePRPodcast1Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/theprpodcast_/TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@theprpodcast?

If there's anyone who proves that planning is a form of art, it's Susan Wetzel. Whether she's mapping out her one-, five-, or ten-year goals, or guiding clients through the legal maze of mergers and acquisitions, Susan doesn't wing it, she designs it. Every decision, every move, every cup of tea.Her brew of choice? Ginger turmeric tea for its bold, balanced, and quietly powerful impact, much like her approach to leadership and life.In this episode of Counsel Brew, Susan walks us through how she builds a career and a life by design. From her habit of printing every draft before she hits send (even emails!) to her meticulous approach to long-term planning, Susan shows us that being intentional doesn't mean being rigid…It means making room for what matters most.She also shares her deep commitment to the American Heart Association, where she channels her leadership beyond the boardroom, advocating for stronger, healthier communities with the same energy and focus she brings to her work.And because life's not all paper and plans, Susan lets us peek behind the scenes where Halloween and costumes reign supreme. From full-on costumes to an enthusiasm that could give the neighborhood kids a run for their candy, she reminds us that joy isn't just something to schedule in; it's something to celebrate.This episode is for the planners, the thinkers, and anyone who finds peace in a well-organized stack of paper, a perfectly steeped cup of tea, and a great costume idea waiting in the wings.

In this episode of French Insider, Sheppard Mullin immigration attorneys Greg Berk and Christine Doyle join host Inès Briand to discuss recent developments in U.S. immigration law and their impact on both individuals and employers.   What We Discussed in This Episode: What happened with the recent White House proclamation on H-1B visas? How does the White House intend to change wage preferences for the H-1B lotteries? How will the new "Gold Card" program impact Green Card applicants and the companies that employ them? What are some workplace enforcement trends we're seeing for employers in the U.S.? What should individuals know about entering the U.S. for business purposes? What should they know about searches and seizures of electronic devices at U.S. ports of entry? What are the current trends you're seeing regarding U.S. work visas? What options are available to someone interested in obtaining an investor-based visa or Green Card?   About Greg Berk Greg Berk is a partner in Sheppard Mullin's Labor and Employment Practice Group and leads the firm's immigration practice from its Orange County, California office. He is certified as a Specialist in Immigration and Nationality Law by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization and is the author of Immigration Checklists and Practice Pointers – A Desk Reference, published by the American Bar Association for general counsel and HR managers. With more than 25 years of experience, Greg advises clients on all aspects of U.S. immigration law. He helps employers across the globe hire and retain foreign executives and other highly skilled professionals critical to their U.S. operations, and also represents investors in E-2, L-1, and EB-5 matters.  He also counsels clients on I-9 compliance and a wide range of other immigration-related regulatory issues.   About Christine L. Doyle Christine L. Doyle is Special Counsel in the Labor and Employment Practice Group in the firm's Orange County office. She focuses her practice on immigration law, advising employers and their employees on a wide range of U.S. and global immigration matters. Christine has extensive experience managing employment-based immigrant and nonimmigrant visa petitions and regularly counsels clients on I-9 compliance and other aspects of workforce mobility and immigration strategy.   About Inès Briand Inès Briand is an associate in Sheppard Mullin's Corporate Practice Group and French Desk Team in the firm's Brussels office, where her practice primarily focuses on domestic and cross-border mergers and acquisition transactions (with special emphasis on operations involving French companies). She also has significant experience in general corporate matters and compliance for foreign companies settled in the United States. As a member of the firm's French Desk, Inès has advised companies and private equity funds in both the United States and Europe on mergers, acquisitions, commercial contracts and general corporate matters, including expansion of French companies in the United States.   Contact Information Greg Berk Christine L. Doyle  Inès Briand   Thank you for listening! Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE to the show to receive every new episode delivered straight to your podcast player every week. If you enjoyed this episode, please help us get the word out about this podcast. Rate and Review this show in Apple Podcasts, Deezer, Amazon Music, or Spotify. It helps other listeners find this show. This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not to be construed as legal advice specific to your circumstances. If you need help with any legal matter, be sure to consult with an attorney regarding your specific needs.

According tothe American Bar Association, between 120,000 and 200,000 young people residein various types of group homes, residential treatment centers, boot camps, orcorrectional facilities in the United States. Although the exact number ofprivate placements is uncertain, it is estimated that over 50,000 of theseyouth have been placed in such facilities privately by their parents. TheAssociation also reports that the “troubled teen” industry is a significantbusiness, receiving around $23 billion annually in public funds to supposedlyaddress the behavioral and psychological needs of vulnerable youth. Many ofthese residential facilities operate as for-profit organizations. The AmericanCommunity Survey indicates that approximately 17% of all children under the ageof 18 in the U.S. live in families below the poverty line, which means over 10million children are part of low-income families considered at-risk. The $23billion figure refers to congregate care facilities, which include wildernessand boot camps for youth with behavioral issues, residential treatmentprograms, hospitals, “therapeutic” boarding schools (also known as“academies”), behavior modification programs, and youth justice facilities. Dr. CoreyJentry, author of "Selling Sanity: The Troubled-Teen Industry, the InsaneProfits, and the Kids Who Pay the Price," is a survivor of this industryand holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the London School of Economics. Heexposes how troubled-teen programs, often marketed as providing help, can causelong-lasting harm. Jentrystates, “Most parents, educators, and even mental health professionals don'trealize that there's a multi-billion-dollar industry quietly profiting fromvulnerable kids. It's called the troubled-teen industry. Behind the glossybrochures and promises of healing, it often delivers abuse, coercion, andtrauma. I know this because I lived it. As a teenager, I was drawn into one ofthese programs. What I thought would be a lifeline quickly turned into a trap.I experienced manipulation, control, and abuse that left deep scars—experiencesthat countless other kids are still enduring today.” Today,Jentry helps families, educators, and advocates recognize warning signs,protect children, and advocate for meaningful reform—equipping people, with theknowledge to understand and challenge the systems that threaten vulnerableyouth. For moreinformation: https://www.jentryconsultingservices.com/LinkedIn: @CoreyRJentry,PhD Get theBook: https://www.amazon.com/Selling-Sanity-Troubled-Teen-Industry-Profits/dp/B0FLVCG4CV

On May 20, 2025, I presented live on the topic of AI and Alternative Fee Arrangements at the American Bar Association's AI and Virtual Law Summit. Here are the top 5 takeaways:* AI is Transforming Legal Practice EfficiencyThe adoption of AI, especially generative AI, is revolutionizing how legal work is done. Lawyers who move away from the billable hour and embrace efficiency—using AI to complete tasks faster—can actually increase profitability, as less time spent on tasks means more money under alternative fee arrangements.* The Subscription Model is a Profitable Alternative to Billable HoursMoving to a subscription or flat-fee model provides predictable revenue for lawyers and cost transparency for clients. This model incentivizes efficiency, reduces burnout, and fosters better client relationships, as lawyers are no longer penalized for working quickly.* The Latent Legal Market is a Huge OpportunityA significant portion of legal needs in the U.S. (up to 90%) go unmet by lawyers, representing a massive, underserved market. Alternative fee structures and AI-powered efficiency can help lawyers tap into this “blue ocean” of potential clients who need affordable, predictable legal services.* Using AI Ethically and Effectively is CriticalLawyers must use AI tools correctly—choosing the right tool for the right task, understanding the importance of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) for fact-based work, and being aware of data privacy and compliance issues. AI is a powerful assistant, but not a source of truth on its own.* Legal Practice is Evolving—Adapt or Be Left BehindThe legal industry is shifting toward technology-driven, client-centered models. Lawyers who embrace AI, alternative fee arrangements, and productized services will be better positioned for the future. The billable hour may eventually be seen as outdated or even unethical, so now is the time to adapt.__________________________Here's a link to the slide deck that goes with the presentation.Sign up for Paxton, my all-in-one AI legal assistant, helping me with legal research, analysis, drafting, and enhancing existing legal work product.Here's a link to purchase lifetime access to the recordings of My Shingle's AI Teach-In if you couldn't make it live.I've partnered with Pii to make it easy for you to purchase the hardware I use in my law firm: (1) Studio Setup; (2) Midrange Setup; (3) Highrange Setup.Get Connected with SixFifty⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, a business and employment legal document automation tool.Sign up for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Gavel⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, an automation platform for law firms.Check out my other show, the Law for Kids Podcast.Visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Law Subscribed⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to subscribe to the weekly newsletter to listen from your web browser.Prefer monthly updates? Sign up for the Law Subscribed Monthly Digest on LinkedIn.Want to use the subscription model for your law firm? Sign up for the Subscription Seminar waitlist at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠subscriptionseminar.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.Check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Mathew Kerbis'⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ law firm ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscription Attorney LLC⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Get full access to Law Subscribed at www.lawsubscribed.com/subscribe

About the Guest(s):Paula M. Jones has been practicing law for almost 25 years. After a decade at large international law firms, she opened her own practice in 2016.LinkedIn - Paula M Jones, EsqHer domestic estate work includes wills, trusts, powers of attorney, living wills and beneficiary designations. She employs marital, residuary, disclaimer, dynasty, asset protection, grantor-retained annuity and intentionally defective grantor trusts, as well as family corporations to protect and preserve assets for many generations. She represents trustees and beneficiaries of trusts in trust-related matters. Her Orphans' Court practice includes trust reformations, trust mergers and divisions, terminations, accountings and audits. She represents parties in negotiations to avoid fiduciary litigation.Her work with international clients includes efficient planning in regard to U.S. estate and gift taxation, qualified domestic trusts, residency determinations, tax treaty applications, pre-immigration planning for non-resident aliens coming to the United States, expatriation tax planning for residents and citizens leaving the United States, administration of estates of foreign individuals with U.S. property and other related matters. She has represented many individuals in regard to foreign account and asset compliance issues.Paula is currently an adjunct professor at Western New England University School of Law where she teaches International Estate Planning. She has guest lectured at Columbia University, Temple University School of Law's Masters of Laws Program and Rutgers University School of Law. She lectures frequently for organizations such as the American Immigration Lawyers Association, Society for Human Resource Management and the American Bar Association, as well as local estate planning councils.Paula has authored several articles in respected industry journals such as Trusts and Estates, AICPA's Tax Advisor and the ABA's Practical Tax Lawyer. In addition, she developed a workshop on estate planning basics, titled “Will Power: Wealthy or Not, Your Estate Matters.” The companion book was published by The Graduate Group.Paula is admitted to practice in the State of New York, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the State of New Jersey, the U.S. Tax Court and the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania.Episode Summary:In this episode of the Money Roots podcast, host Amy Irvine engages in an enlightening discussion with Paula Jones, the esteemed owner of Jones Estate Group. With a robust background in international and domestic estate law, Paula delves into the intricacies of cross-border estate planning. She offers valuable insights into the roles her firm plays in estate planning, particularly emphasizing the importance of having a qualified team comprising estate attorneys, financial planners, and immigration lawyers when considering dual citizenship or cross-border living.Throughout the podcast, Paula addresses key issues associated with holding assets across different countries and the complex scenarios faced by individuals with multinational ties. Her discussion includes an exploration of residency determinations, tax treaty applications, and the vital significance of qualified domestic trusts in safeguarding assets. Paula's practical advice caters to a growing audience interested in international living, offering concrete steps to ensure seamless estate planning while navigating diverse legal systems.Key Takeaways:Having a qualified team of advisors, including an estate attorney, financial planner, and immigration lawyer, is crucial for...

In this episode, we sit down with Michael J. Wynne, a partner at Gregor Wynne Arney, PLLC, who focuses on federal white-collar criminal defense, government and corporate investigations, and election law. A former federal prosecutor and a Texan by choice, Michael brings a unique perspective shaped by years on both sides of the courtroom. What makes his perspective so unique? Hit play to see for yourself… This conversation explores: How a bribe is defined according to U.S. law. What happens when someone is falsely accused of a white-collar crime. Legal cases that are on the rise in 2025. Michael served as an Assistant United States Attorney for twelve years, including time on the U.S./Mexico border. He focuses on public corruption, election law, financial crimes, health care fraud, and representing foreign nationals in U.S. litigation. He also partners with larger firms on select cases. Michael is active in the legal and civic communities, serving as a Director of the State Bar of Texas, President-Elect of the Downtown Houston Rotary Club, and a member of several professional organizations, including NACDL, TCDL, the Federal Bar Association, and the American Bar Association's Criminal Justice Section. You can follow along with Michael and his work on X @MichaelWynneLaw or contact him directly via email at mwynne@gwafirm.com.

In this episode of The Association Insights Podcast, we're continuing our Member Value Reimagined series with an eye-opening conversation about one of the most overlooked engagement tools in the association toolkit: audio.Host Meghan Henning sits down with Kevin C. Mitchell, Esq., CEO of Modio Information Group, to explore how narrated content and branded audio platforms are helping associations transform their member experience, extend the life of their publications, and even open up powerful new revenue streams.

Is your career stuck in a rut? Hear what it takes to carve a meaningful career in law, as host Michal “Mic” Rogson sits down with Jill Wine-Banks, a history making lawyer who served as the only woman on the Watergate prosecution team and left a trail of shattered glass ceilings throughout her career. Wine-Banks shares how she built her extraordinary career tackling organized crime, a corrupt president, and led military and state legal teams. She headed the American Bar Association, corporate legal departments, and went on to host influential podcasts, published an autobiography, and serves as a legal consultant and contributor for MSNBC. Feeling locked in place in your career? Wine-Banks offers motivational insights about taking risks, moving forward, and never settling for the status quo. What do you really want to do, and what's holding you back? Throughout her fascinating career, Wine-Banks continually accepted new challenges, broke down barriers, and reinvented herself over and over again. Resources:  iGen Politics podcast Just the Facts podcast Jill Wine-Banks, Wikipedia entry “The Watergate Girl: My Fight for Truth and Justice Against a Criminal President,” by Jill Wine-Banks “The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life,” by Erving Goffman, Amazon “Gideon's Trumpet: How One Man, a Poor Prisoner, Took His Case to the Supreme Court and Changed the Law of the United States,” by Anthony Lewis Assembly of Captive European Nations, Wikipedia American Bar Association American Bar Association Litigation Section

Is your career stuck in a rut? Hear what it takes to carve a meaningful career in law, as host Michal “Mic” Rogson sits down with Jill Wine-Banks, a history making lawyer who served as the only woman on the Watergate prosecution team and left a trail of shattered glass ceilings throughout her career. Wine-Banks shares how she built her extraordinary career tackling organized crime, a corrupt president, and led military and state legal teams. She headed the American Bar Association, corporate legal departments, and went on to host influential podcasts, published an autobiography, and serves as a legal consultant and contributor for MSNBC. Feeling locked in place in your career? Wine-Banks offers motivational insights about taking risks, moving forward, and never settling for the status quo. What do you really want to do, and what's holding you back? Throughout her fascinating career, Wine-Banks continually accepted new challenges, broke down barriers, and reinvented herself over and over again. Resources:  iGen Politics podcast Just the Facts podcast Jill Wine-Banks, Wikipedia entry “The Watergate Girl: My Fight for Truth and Justice Against a Criminal President,” by Jill Wine-Banks “The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life,” by Erving Goffman, Amazon “Gideon's Trumpet: How One Man, a Poor Prisoner, Took His Case to the Supreme Court and Changed the Law of the United States,” by Anthony Lewis Assembly of Captive European Nations, Wikipedia American Bar Association American Bar Association Litigation Section Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ben and Nathan dig into the ABA's decision to put Cooley Law School on probation and the broader issue of weak oversight in legal education. They also cover addenda for multiple LSAT scores, early acceptances, and retaking for better scholarships.⁠Study with our Free Plan⁠⁠Download our iOS app⁠Watch Episode 527 on YouTube0:28 - Cooley Law on Probation by the ABABen and Nathan react to the news that Cooley Law has been placed on probation by the American Bar Association for failing to meet bar passage standards. They question why the ABA continues to allow such programs to operate and highlight the risks for students who enroll in them. 24:45 - Addenda for LSAT retakesDemon student Sam asks about Michigan Law's recommendation that applicants submit an addendum if they've taken the LSAT three or more times. Nathan advises against volunteering information that could hurt an application and emphasizes that only your highest score matters.37:43 - Early Application Is KeyA Redditor reports being admitted to the University of Hawaii with a generous scholarship. Ben and Nathan use the example to remind applicants that applying early gives them the best shot at admissions and scholarships. 57:09 - Retaking a 173 for ScholarshipsDemon student Jack scored a 173 and wonders whether it's worth retaking. Ben and Nathan say yes, especially if he's targeting top schools. They advise him to wait another cycle and keep studying to become a stronger, more competitive applicant.1:06:20 - UGA Law Lets Undergrads Skip the LSATThe University of Georgia Law School now allows its undergraduates to apply using ACT or SAT scores instead of the LSAT. Nathan argues that this limits students to only UGA Law and weakens their scholarship leverage. Ben adds that the policy ultimately does a disservice to the students.1:12:41 - Georgetown Law Group InterviewDemon student Jeremiah describes a Georgetown group interview where participants analyzed a hypothetical applicant. Ben and Nathan break down how to handle this kind of exercise: play along with the scenario, and show reasonable judgment.1:20:11 - Personal Statement Gong ShowCasey takes the stage on the Personal Statement Gong Show, chasing Sophia's record of 34 lines.1:38:17 - Word of the Week: Dispositive“The panel directed counsel to focus oral argument on the dispositive issues.”Get caught up with our ⁠Word of the Week⁠⁠ library.

Alexandria (Lexi) Andresen Lutz is founder of the nonprofit Opt-Inspire, Inc., which is focused on empowering seniors, children, other vulnerable populations, and their caregivers to reduce scams and close the digital divide between generations.In her day job, Lexi serves as Senior Corporate Counsel at a Fortune 500 retail company, where she advises on privacy, cybersecurity, and AI. She currently serves in leadership roles in the American Bar Association and is Chair of the IAPP Boston chapter.References:* SIGN UP NOW for the Masters of Privacy NYC LIVE recording and networking event on Nov 6* Alexandria (Lexi) Lutz on LinkedIn* Opt Inspire* FBI: Internet Crime Report 2024* John Cavanaugh: Privacy as a grassroots movement (Masters of Privacy, June 2024)* Jeff Jockisch: AI-powered phishing attacks in the age of the Delete Act (Masters of Privacy, October 2023). This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.mastersofprivacy.com/subscribe

Stories we're following this morning at Progress Texas:The Trump administration has offered the University of Texas access to enhanced federal funding - if it agrees to a set of conditions that will accelerate the MAGA-fication of the 40 Acres: https://thedailytexan.com/2025/10/02/ut-system-to-review-proposal-from-trump-administration/...Academic experts see the adoption of this Trump "compact" as a dramatic capitulation to federal control: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/02/us/politics/trump-college-funding.html?unlocked_article_code=1.qU8.UTOI._IZAaVHmIUAQ&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShareAttorney General Ken Paxton and other GOP types are up in arms about accusations that TCU has cancelled a Turning Point event featuring an anti-trans activist - the school says it was never booked to begin with: https://www.keranews.org/texas-news/2025-10-02/texas-ag-paxton-to-investigate-tcu-over-turning-point-event-school-says-was-not-bookedThe Texas Supreme Court has decided that it will oversee Texas' law schools - instead of the nationally-established American Bar Association: https://www.tpr.org/news/2025-10-02/texas-supreme-court-breaks-with-american-bar-association-over-law-school-credentialsDisgraced megachurch pastor Robert Morris has pled guilty to multiple sex crimes against children - but he'll only serve 6 months in jail: https://apnews.com/article/texas-megachurch-pastor-sexual-abuse-oklahoma-0ca16aa31d9d8e5a810d1e1e3483dce4...Morris' victim says he didn't have the courage to face her and her family in the courtroom: https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/video/victim-speaks-exclusively-to-cbs-news-texas-after-gateway-church-founder-pleads-guilty-to-child-abus/Houston friends! Join Progress Texas in The Heights on Monday October 20 for our H-Town Hits Back live podcast taping event! Tickets and sponsorship opportunities are available now: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://act.progresstexas.org/a/houston2025event⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Thanks for listening! Our monthly donors form the backbone of our funding, and if you're a regular, we'd like to invite you to join the team! Find our web store and other ways to support our important work at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://progresstexas.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

In this Throwback episode, host Josh interviews patent attorney Rich Goldstein about the importance of intellectual property (IP) protection for businesses, especially e-commerce sellers. Rich explains the differences between copyrights, design patents, utility patents, and trademarks, highlighting why registering trademarks in China is crucial for those sourcing products there. They discuss how IP protection helps prevent copycats, increases business value, and is essential for a successful exit. Rich also shares actionable tips for building an IP strategy and recommends resources for further learning. The episode concludes with advice on connecting with top experts in the Amazon and e-commerce space.Chapters:Introduction to Rich Goldstein and His Background (00:00:00)Josh introduces Rich Goldstein, his experience, and his role in helping businesses obtain patent protection.Josh's IP Mistake and the Importance of Early Protection (00:01:39)Josh shares his mistake of not getting IP protection early and discusses the risks of product copying on Amazon.Copyrights vs. Design Patents for Product Protection (00:02:56)Rich explains the difference between copyrights and design patents, and when each is applicable for product protection.The Importance of Registering Trademarks in China (00:04:33)Discussion about the risks of not registering trademarks in China and the potential consequences for e-commerce sellers.Understanding Utility Patents (00:06:16)Rich explains what utility patents are, what they protect, and how they differ from design patents.Three Actionable IP Takeaways for Entrepreneurs (00:08:44)Josh summarizes three key IP action items: trademarks, patents, and the value of IP for business exits.The Value of an IP Budget and Learning About IP (00:10:25)Rich emphasizes budgeting for IP as a business grows and the importance of entrepreneurs educating themselves about IP.Recommended Thought Leaders in E-commerce (00:12:06)Rich shares names of influential people and groups in the e-commerce and Amazon seller space.Where to Find Rich Goldstein and His Resources (00:14:32)Rich provides information on where listeners can find his website, book, podcast, and event updates.Links and Mentions:Tools and WebsitesGoldstein Patent LawBooksThe ABA Consumer Guide to Obtaining a PatentPodcastsInnovations and Breakthroughs PodcastNotable Individuals and GroupsKevin KingBrandon YoungTitan GroupNorm FarrarDanny McMillanTranscript:Josh 00:00:00  Today, I'm excited to introduce to you Rich Goldstein, who is on a mission to connect, protect, and educate. He helps small businesses, startups, and in e-commerce and digital marketers and inventors in their quest to obtain patent protection. Along with his team of attorneys. He counsels individual inventors and startups regarding the best steps to take for patent protection and when patent protection is available. Over the past 28 years, he has obtained more than £2,000 for his clients. And Rich is the host of the Innovations and Breakthroughs podcast and is the author of The Consumer Guide to Obtaining a Patent, published by the American Bar Association. So Rich, welcome to the podcast.Rich 00:00:46  Thanks so much, Josh. Thanks. Thanks for the warm introduction. And and really great to be on your podcast.Josh 00:00:51  Rich, I'm happy to say that we are a part of that number of 2000 plus, you know, patent successful patterns that you've been able to obtain and counting. Right.Rich 00:01:03  And counting.Josh 00:01:03  Yep. So thank you for your help and helping us get some of those design patterns that we've received for our business.Josh 00:01:10  So rich. Absolutely is the man.Rich 00:01:12  Absolutely. My pleasure. It's really exciting to see kind of what we're creating there in your company in terms of, asset value and protection, you know, against competitors. So, it's really cool. And someday we'll, we'll do a, you know, a Harvard business case study of some kind, to, you know, to take a look at what we've created here. I think it's pretty awesome.Josh 00:01:39  Well, I think that's the hope for both you and I that we're creating some significant value in the long run. Now, Rich, I shared this on previous podcast episodes as I shared some of the mistakes that I've made along my journey. One of those mistakes that I've made was not getting IP protection whatsoever for many of our products for four years, right? We literally went for in our business for four years before, you know, you and I fortunately met. And you're like, dude, you've got to start doing something here. And we had a great conversation.Josh 00:02:13  And now that we started getting copyrights issued for all of our products and then design design patents for some of our products, it's allowed us to actually protect more of our products, because prior to that, as many sellers know, as soon as you launch a product on Amazon, it's months, you know, sometimes as quick as a month later, sometimes 3 to 6 months later, you've got somebody copying your idea and being able to have something to protect yourself and even potentially get some of those other people knocked off or, you know, shut down their listings, I think is essential, especially as Amazon and e-commerce in general becomes more and more competitive. Would you agree with that, Rich?Rich 00:02:56  Yeah, absolutely I agree, and it's funny you mentioned that, like, you, you could put something up there for a month and then you'll find the competition and it's, it's almost as if. Well, I mean, it is as if there are tools that say, you know, copy this or copy that.Rich 00:03:10  There are analytics tools that, that, that point people in the direction of you when you're doing well. And so it's it's almost as if you're the software telling people, copy this guy, you know, and and so it really is, important to create as much of a moat as possible around, around what you're doing to prevent other people from, from copying you. and, you know, it's interesting to, like, in your case, like, a lot of your products are kind of content oriented, that copyrights are an option. for a lot of product ideas, copyrights are not really an option. They don't really provide, you know, covers don't provide protection for ideas. They provide protection for content type expression and then design patents, which you mentioned. Two are for the ornamental appearance for a product. The the look of a product. and I'd say the design patents are an issue for a lot are not an issue or an option for a lot of, sellers. Like if you have a product that has a unique look to it, then design patents are a good way to prevent other people from knocking you off by making a product that looks just like yours.Rich 00:04:24  So, you know, they're both effective tools, for protecting you on Amazon. So, yeah, I agree with all of that.

My guest this week is Dolan Perkins-Valdez, the New York Times bestselling author of the novels “Wench,” “Bomb,” “Take My Hand,” and most recently, “Happyland.” Her books are all inspired by fascinating facets of American history that are in danger of being forgotten. They have earned awards from the NAACP, the Black Caucus of the American Library Association and the American Bar Association. And they've been named best books of the year by Goodreads users and Amazon editors. Dolan is a three-time nominee for a United States Artists Fellowship and an associate professor in the literature department at American University.We covered:Why she goes to the special archives in the library in any town she visitsWhy emails from readers are the best giftHow she recovers from book tourWhat teaching offers her (beyond benefits and a 401K)Her specific writing processThe handicraft that makes her “most at peace”Her pre-writing morning routineHow she measures her writing process (hint: it's not word count)Connect with Dolen on Instagram @dolenperkinsvaldezFor full show notes with links to everything we discuss, plus bonus photos!, visit katehanley.substack.com.Thank you for listening!And thanks to this week's sponsor, Aqua Tru. Visit aquatru.com and use code KATE to save 20% off a great countertop reverse osmosis water filter that I have been using and loving for years now. Comes with a 1-year warranty and a 30-day money back guarantee. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Holly Cook takes us through her career progression from the Army JAG Corps to the American Bar Association where she continues serving and advocating on issues that are in the public interest.

Jeh Johnson, former Homeland Security secretary, goes inside the American Bar Association taskforce he is leading, which just issued a new report on how to protect American democracy.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/tavis-smiley--6286410/support.

With as many as 120 million legal problems going unresolved in America each year, traditional lawyer-centered approaches to access to justice have consistently failed to meet the scale of need. But what if the solution is not just about providing more legal services — what if it lies in fundamentally rethinking who can provide legal help? In today's episode, host Bob Ambrogi is joined by two of the nation's leading researchers on access to justice: Rebecca Sandefur, professor and director of the Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics at Arizona State University and a faculty fellow at the American Bar Foundation, and Matthew Burnett, director of research and programs for the Access to Justice Research Initiative at the American Bar Foundation and an adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center.  They argue that the access to justice crisis is actually a crisis of democracy. As cofounders of Frontline Justice, they have been pioneering research on "justice workers" — community members trained to help their neighbors navigate legal issues. Their recent article in the South Carolina Law Review, “Justice Work as Democracy Work: Reimagining Access to Justice as Democratization,” makes a provocative case: When people cannot access their own law, democracy itself fails. They present compelling evidence from Alaska, where nearly 200 community justice workers now serve over 40 rural communities, achieving a 1-to-25 return on investment while dramatically expanding legal aid's reach. In today's conversation, Sandefur and Burnett discuss the mounting evidence for justice worker effectiveness, including research from the U.K. demonstrating that trained non-lawyers often outperform attorneys on specialized tasks. They also discuss recent breakthroughs — including unprecedented support from both the Conference of Chief Justices and the American Bar Association — and examine what obstacles remain.  Sandefur and Burnett challenge the legal profession's monopoly on law, arguing that regulatory capture has estranged Americans from their own justice system. They envision justice workers as agents of democratization, expanding not just who can access legal help, but who can participate meaningfully in working democracy.  Related episodes: On the latest LawNext: Sociologist Rebecca Sandefur on Enhancing Access to Justice. On LawNext: How A New Kind of Justice Worker Could Narrow the Justice Gap, with Nikole Nelson, CEO of Frontline Justice.  On LawNext: CEO Nikole Nelson Returns with An Update on Frontline Justice's Mission to Empower Justice Workers and Bridge the Justice Gap.   Thank You To Our Sponsors This episode of LawNext is generously made possible by our sponsors. We appreciate their support and hope you will check them out. Paradigm, home to the practice management platforms PracticePanther, Bill4Time, MerusCase and LollyLaw; the e-payments platform Headnote; and the legal accounting software TrustBooks. Briefpoint, eliminating routine discovery response and request drafting tasks so you can focus on drafting what matters (or just make it home for dinner). Paxton, Rapidly conduct research, accelerate drafting, and analyze documents with Paxton. What do you need to get done today?    If you enjoy listening to LawNext, please leave us a review wherever you listen to podcasts.  

"American democracy is under threat" was the starting point for a task force assembled by the American Bar Association two years ago. Their mission was to investigate the causes and potential solutions for this growing problem. Former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, who helped lead the initiative, joins Amna Nawaz to discuss the task force's findings. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

New episodes return in September! In this final encore episode for the month of August, you'll hear part two of a special crossover series with The Divorce and Beyond Podcast. This episode picks up where my conversation with Susan Guthrie left off: how to have the most difficult conversation of your life: “I want a divorce.”  To hear the first part of our conversation, be sure to visit Susan's website to listen. Throughout this episode, we talk about what happens after “the talk,”- everything from building your divorce team to understanding your options for mediation or litigation. Susan brings decades of experience and grounded wisdom to this conversation, making it a must-listen if you're preparing for what comes next. What you'll hear about in this episode: Why January is notoriously dubbed “divorce month”  The first thing you should do after you share with your spouse that you want a divorce The biggest fallacy in the divorce process  How to find the best path forward towards mediation Some approaches to divorce mediation and how to build a mediation team. A reasonable expectation of a timeline for your divorce.  Learn more about Susan Guthrie:  Susan Guthrie, nationally recognized as one of the Top Family Law and Mediation Attorneys in the country, has been helping individuals and families navigate separation and divorce for 30 years. Susan provides online divorce mediation and legal coaching services to select clients around the world. As a leading dispute resolution professional, Susan is honored to serve on the Executive Council of the American Bar Association's (ABA) Section of Dispute Resolution as the Membership Officer and to be a Co-Chair of the Mediation Committee. After a year and half of co-hosting the award-winning podcast, Breaking Free: A Modern Divorce Podcast, which reached over 3 million listeners, Susan recently launched her fresh and inspiring new podcast, The Divorce and Beyond Podcast with Susan Guthrie, Esq. which debuted on iTunes “Top Podcasts” List for self-help podcasts. Divorce & Beyond is focused on pulling back the curtain on the mysteries of the divorce process and bringing tips and resources to help people to thrive and shine in their new future beyond divorce. Susan has been featured in and on media outlets such as CNBC, Market Watch, News Nation,  Forbes, the ABA's Just Resolutions Magazine, Thrive Global, Medium, and many more. She is licensed to practice law in the States of California and Connecticut as well as before the Supreme Court of the United States. Resources & Links: Divorce RoadmapFocused Strategy Sessions with Kate The Divorce Survival Guide Resource BundlePhoenix Rising: A Divorce Empowerment CollectiveKate on Instagram @kateanthony_divorcecoachKate on FacebookThe D Word: Making the Ultimate Decision About Your Marriage Susan's website Susan on Instagram The Divorce and Beyond Podcast: WE NEED TO TALK: How to Have the Most Difficult Conversation of Your Life with Kate Anthony =================== DISCLAIMER:  THE COMMENTARY AND OPINIONS AVAILABLE ON THIS PODCAST ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL AND ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING LEGAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL ADVICE.  YOU SHOULD CONTACT AN ATTORNEY, COACH, OR THERAPIST IN YOUR STATE TO OBTAIN ADVICE WITH RESPECT TO ANY PARTICULAR ISSUE OR PROBLEM. Episode link: https://kateanthony.com/podcast/encore-episode-after-the-talk-how-to-prepare-for-your-divorce-with-susan-guthrie-esq/  

*Content warning: distressing topics, child abuse, death, child sex abuse, psychological and physical violence of children, cultic abuse, Institutional child abuse, ‘troubled teen industry', TTI, suicidal ideation, murder.  Season 24 of Something Was Wrong shares the harrowing truths of international Institutional Child Abuse (often called the ‘troubled teen industry') through powerful interviews with survivors of wilderness therapy programs, therapeutic boarding schools, and other institutions around the world.  These firsthand accounts expose an alarming pattern of abuse, neglect, and trauma disguised as treatment, alongside testimony from parents who entrusted these programs with their children. With expert insights from leading voices in the children's rights advocacy space and adolescent mental health, Season 24 explores how programs have operated in the shadows for decades and why their harmful practices continue today.  *Free + Confidential Resources + Safety Tips:  somethingwaswrong.com/resources    *Sources: Former student at Utah school for troubled teens backs claims of abuse made by Paris Hilton, FOX13, News Utah https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CSYxaQq8OE  Trails Carolina camper's death ruled a homicide, FOX8 WGHP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm97SeyZ8xg  Troubled teen school facing lawsuit over employee's alleged sexual misconduct, ABC4 Utah  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CD0a1PdiQU  Five Facts About the Troubled Teen Industry, American Bar Association  https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/resources/newsletters/childrens-rights/five-facts-about-troubled-teen-industry/   What You Need to Know About the Troubled Teen Industry, The Law Offices of Lisa Kane Brown https://lisakanebrown.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-troubled-teen-industry  *SWW S23 Theme Song & Artwork:  Glad Rags: https://www.gladragsmusic.com/  The S24 cover art is by the Amazing Sara Stewart Follow Something Was Wrong: Website: somethingwaswrong.com  IG: instagram.com/somethingwaswrongpodcast TikTok: tiktok.com/@somethingwaswrongpodcast  Follow Tiffany Reese: Website: tiffanyreese.me  IG: instagram.com/lookieboo

*Content warning: distressing topics, death, child abuse, child sex abuse, psychological and physical violence, cultic abuse, torture, addiction, humiliation, systemic abuse, religious abuse.  Maia Szalavitz's website:  maiasz.com/ Help at Any Cost: How the Troubled-Teen Industry Cons Parents and Hurts Kids here: maiasz.com/books/help-at-any-cost/  *Sources: Asheville Academy faces $45,000 in fines after state investigation into child safety violations, Spectrum Local News spectrumlocalnews.com/charlotte/supreme-court/news/2025/06/18/asheville-academy-violations  Asheville Academy Gives Up Its License Following Two Suicides in May, Asheville News asheville.com/news/2025/06/asheville-academy-gives-up-its-license-following-two-suicides-in-may/ Asheville Academy violated NC law, will face fines after child suicides report says, Yahoo News .yahoo.com/news/asheville-academy-violated-nc-law-184725552.html  BHAD BHABIE - Breaking Code Silence - Turn About Ranch abuse Dr. Phil | Danielle Bregoli youtube.com/watch?v=GteqbsYGv1I  Bhad Bhabie Says She Was Abused at Troubled-Teen Camp She Was Sent to by Dr. Phil: 'No Sympathy', People people.com/music/bhad-bhabie-says-she-was-abused-camp-she-was-sent-to-dr-phil  Breaking Code Silence Takes On the Troubled Teen Industry, Treatment Magazine treatmentmagazine.com/breaking-code-silence-takes-on-the-troubled-teen-industry/  A Death in the Desert, Los Angeles Times latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-01-15-tm-20285-story.html  Dr. Phil Has Responded To Bhad Bhabie's Allegations Of Abuse And Then She Replied With Another Video, BuzzFeed buzzfeed.com/ryanschocket2/dr-phil-responds-to-bhad-bhabie-allegations  Dr. Phil responds to 'Bhad Bhabie' claims of abuse at troubled teen camp, News Nation facebook.com/watch/?v=2501186526842381  Cults and the Law, ICSA articles3.icsahome.com/articles/cults-and-the-law The Cult that Spawned the Tough-Love Teen Industry, Mother Jones motherjones.com/politics/2007/08/cult-spawned-tough-love-teen-industry/ Ex-Counselor Convicted of Neglect, Desert News deseret.com/1996/11/7/19275546/ex-counselor-convicted-of-neglect/ Father Sues Challenger Over Daughter's Death, Desert News deseret.com/1991/7/24/18932325/father-sues-challenger-over-daughter-s-death/  Five Facts About the Troubled Teen Industry, American Bar Association  americanbar.org/groups/litigation/resources/newsletters/childrens-rights/five-facts-about-troubled-teen-industry/  Former North Star Counselor Sentences to a Year in Jail, Desert News deseret.com/1996/12/21/19284306/former-north-star-counselor-sentenced-to-a-year-in-jail/  Here's what Paris Hilton says about Utah in her new memoir, ‘Paris', The Salt Lake Tribune sltrib.com/news/2023/03/14/heres-what-paris-hilton-says-about/  House passes bill backed by Paris Hilton to reform youth treatment facilities, AP News apnews.com/article/paris-hilton-child-abuse-youth-facilities-congress-8729a53bbf17b25ae2726040ce3cc203  Jury Acquits Cartisano of All Charges, Desert News deseret.com/1992/5/28/18986401/jury-acquits-cartisano-of-all-charges-br/  Keeping 'Cult' Out of the Case, Cult Education Institute  culteducation.com/group/1274-straight-inc/19713-keeping-cult-out-of-the-case.html  KIDS Centers of America, Breaking Code Silence breakingcodesilence.org/kids-centers-of-america/ Lawsuit claims staff at former St. George youth center abused, impregnated teenage girls, KUTV kutv.com/news/local/lawsuit-claims-staff-at-former-st-george-youth-center-abused-impregnated-teenage-girls  Nine charged after teen's camp death, Tampa Bay Times tampabay.com/archive/1994/10/20/nine-charged-after-teen-s-camp-death/  One school with an alarming death rate has its alumni fighting for answers, The Independent the-independent.com/news/long_reads/new-york-hancock-school-overdose-death-suicide-education-america-a8531006.html   Paris Hilton's Powerful Speech in DC: Ending Abuse in the Troubled Teen Industry, Paris Hilton youtube.com/watch?v=HcHXWc7N2xc    Paris Hilton testifying today in Sacramento for bill aimed at ‘troubled teen industry', Los Angeles Times latimes.com/california/story/2024-04-04/paris-hilton-sacramento-california-bill-troubled-teen-industry-residential-treatment  The Program: Cons, Cults, and Kidnapping https://www.netflix.com/title/81579761 Rebecca Ehrlich vs. Kids of North Jersey, Inc., et al law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-published/2001/a4975-99-opn.html Residential treatment school closes in NC after deaths of 2 girls, AP News apnews.com/article/therapy-school-closes-north-carolina-asheville-academy-9854c3ca7cda11cc06f05d9fccef4112  Romney Cans Golden Goose Over Abuse, Radar Online radaronline.com/exclusives/2008/10/mitt-romney-robert-lichfield-php   Romney, Torture, and Teens, Reason Foundation reason.com/2007/06/27/romney-torture-and-teens  Senate report says US taxpayers help fund residential treatment facilities that put vulnerable kids at risk, OPB opb.org/article/2024/06/12/senate-report-us-taxpayers-fund-residential-treatment-facilities-that-put-vulnerable-kids-at-risk/  State investigation finds licensing violations at Asheville Academy amid student suicides, ABC 13 News wlos.com/news/local/asheville-academy-state-licensing-violations-student-suicides-north-carolina-department-health-human-services-mental-health-certification-section-report-letter-buncombe-county-weaverville  Survival program charged in death of Fla. teen-ager, Tampa Bay Times tampabay.com/archive/1990/08/15/survival-program-charged-in-death-of-fla-teen-ager The Synanon Case, IRS.gov https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicb90.pdf    Teen Torture Inc. Is the Latest Documentary to Explore Abuses at Youth Treatment Centers, Time time.com/6997172/teen-torture-max-abuse-documentary  This 1970s Cult Inspired Abusive Teen Rehabilitation Methods Still Used Today, Teen Vogue teenvogue.com/story/this-1970s-cult-inspired-abusive-teen-rehabilitation-methods-still-used-today   How the Brainwashing Label Threatened and Enabled the Troubled-Teen Industry, Journal of American Studies researchgate.net/publication/379883774_To_Use_This_Word_Would_Be_Absurd_How_the_Brainwashing_Label_Threatened_and_Enabled_the_Troubled-Teen_Industry  Troubled-teen industry oversight bill sails through Congress, NBC News yahoo.com/news/troubled-teen-industry-oversight-bill-222536418.html   The Troubled Teen Industry's Troubling Lack of Oversight, Penn Carey Law law.upenn.edu/live/news/15963-the-troubled-teen-industrys-troubling-lack-of  The Troubled Teen Industry Timeline unsilenced.org/troubled-teen-industry-timeline/ Virgil Miller Newton, Surviving Straight Inc. survivingstraightinc.com/MillerNewton/MillerNewtonTimeline.pdf  Unexpected Turn Of Events With Teen After Appearance On ‘Dr. Phil' youtube.com/watch?v=L_kiav0p5Iw  Utah Criminal Code le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter5/76-5-S206.html What You Need to Know About the Troubled Teen Industry, The Law Offices of Lisa Kane Brown lisakanebrown.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-troubled-teen-industry  WWASP, Unsilenced https://www.unsilenced.org/timeline/wwasp/  Why has the USA not ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?, medRxiv medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.09.05.24312304v2.full  Wyden Investigation Exposes Systemic Taxpayer-Funded Child Abuse and Neglect in Youth Residential Treatment Facilities, United States Senate Committee on Finance  finance.senate.gov/chairmans-news/wyden-investigation-exposes-systemic-taxpayer-funded-child-abuse-and-neglect-in-youth-residential-treatment-facilities  3 Plead Guilty to Negligence in Teen's Death, Desert News deseret.com/1996/9/28/19268520/3-plead-guilty-to-negligence-in-teen-s-death/  *SWW S24 Theme Song - U Think U by Glad Rags: https://www.gladragsmusic.com/  The S24 cover art is by the Amazing Sara Stewart