Podcast appearances and mentions of brennan center

The executive branch has amassed tremendous power, challenging the constitutional balance among branches of government. This year alone, the president has ignored the laws passed by Congress to fire leaders of independent agencies without cause, freeze the spending of appropriated funds, and deploy the military as a domestic police force.Supporters of vast presidential power have a name for this: the unitary executive. It's the idea that the Constitution gives the president full personal control over the executive branch and wide latitude to act unilaterally. While legal scholars debate its scope, the theory in its most expansive form envisions a king-like president largely unconstrained by Congress or the courts. An embrace of this theory by the executive branch and Supreme Court could carry far-reaching consequences for American democracy. This conversation among experts examines the modern presidency, the origins of the unitary executive theory, and its implications for the future of checks and balances.Speakers:Samuel Breidbart, Counsel, Brennan Center Democracy ProgramJane Manners, Associate Professor of Law, Fordham University School of LawJulian Davis Mortenson, James G. Phillipp Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law SchoolCristina Rodríguez, Deputy Dean and Leighton Homer Surbeck Professor of Law, Yale Law SchoolModerator: Wilfred U. Codrington III, Walter Floersheimer Professor of Constitutional Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of LawIf you enjoy this program, please give us a boost by liking, subscribing, and sharing with your friends. If you're listening on Apple Podcasts, please give it a 5-star rating. Recorded on August 5, 2025, and produced in partnership with State Court Report.Keep up with the Brennan Center's work by subscribing to our weekly newsletter, The Briefing: https://go.brennancenter.org/briefing

Substack’s Ken Klippenstein examines the time the FBI paid him a visit. The Brennan Center’s Michael Waldman details their new report on how Trump is trying to rig the midterms with a number of extreme proposals.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Polling shows that many of President Donald Trump's policies are not popular, and the Republican party would likely lose control of Congress after mid-terms. But according to The Brennan Center, Trump is taking steps to avoid that outcome — by undermining the midterm election in a number of ways.

This week on The Bulletin, Mike and Clarissa discuss Texas Democrats' decision to flee the state, Israel's culpability in Gaza's famine, and the exit of Southern Baptist leader Brent Leatherwood from the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Then, Clarissa talks with author and former Obama speechwriter David Litt about developing an unlikely friendship with his brother-in-law and what it looks like to cultivate relationships across differences.  GO DEEPER WITH THE BULLETIN: Read David's book, It's Only Drowning: A True Story of Learning to Surf and the Search for Common Ground Join the conversation at our Substack. Find us on YouTube. Rate and review the show in your podcast app of choice. ABOUT THE GUESTS:  David Litt is a New York Times bestselling author and a semi-finalist for the James Thurber Prize for American Humor. A former senior speechwriter for President Barack Obama, David was described as "the comic muse for the president" for his work on the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Since leaving the White House, he's written for The New York Times, The Atlantic, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe, TIME, and The Guardian, among others, and served as a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. David appears frequently on CNN and MSNBC and continues to write speeches and jokes for major political figures, Fortune 500 CEOs, leading philanthropists, and NFL quarterbacks. David was the head writer/producer for Funny Or Die D.C. from 2016 to 2018 and has toured dozens of cities as a live storyteller with The Moth.    ABOUT THE BULLETIN: The Bulletin is a twice-weekly politics and current events show from Christianity Today moderated by Clarissa Moll, with senior commentary from Russell Moore (Christianity Today's editor in chief) and Mike Cosper (director, CT Media). Each week, the show explores current events and breaking news and shares a Christian perspective on issues that are shaping our world. We also offer special one-on-one conversations with writers, artists, and thought leaders whose impact on the world brings important significance to a Christian worldview, like Bono, Sharon McMahon, Harrison Scott Key, Frank Bruni, and more. The Bulletin listeners get 25% off CT. Go to https://orderct.com/THEBULLETIN to learn more. “The Bulletin” is a production of Christianity TodayProducer: Clarissa MollAssociate Producer: Alexa BurkeEditing and Mix: Kevin MorrisMusic: Dan PhelpsExecutive Producers: Erik Petrik and Mike Cosper Senior Producer: Matt Stevens Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Sixty years ago, Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law one of the most transformative bills in United States history - the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  Michael Li joins Lindsay Langholz to take stock of the VRA's impact on American democracy, the real wins pro-democracy advocates are still able to achieve in spite of an increasingly hostile Supreme Court, and what the future holds for this critical law.Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.orgHost: Lindsay Langholz, Senior Director of Policy and Program, ACSGuest: Michael Li, Senior Counsel, Brennan Center for JusticeLink: Growing Racial Disparities in Voter Turnout, 2008–2022, Brennan Center for JusticeGuest: A New Cycle of Texas Gerrymandering: Your Questions Answered, Bolts MagazineGuest: The Supreme Court Just Signaled Something Deeply Disturbing About the Next Term, by Rick HasenGuest: The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act Fact Sheet, The Brennan Center for JusticeVisit the Podcast Website: Broken Law Podcast Email the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.org Follow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Bluesky | LinkedIn | YouTube -----------------Broken Law: About the law, who it serves, and who it doesn't.----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of American Constitution Society 2025.

Desde abril, hay zonas militarizadas en la frontera donde el ejército anunció que los soldados desplegados tendrán “poderes ampliados” que les permiten detener a inmigrantes y otras personas, y acusarlas de invadir propiedad militar del Ejército, la Fuerza Aérea o la Armada. Esto puede llevar a cargos penales adicionales y penas de prisión. Así que para hablar sobre como se ha militarizado la frontera, como funcionaba antes y las implicaciones de este cambio, invitamos a Kira Romero-Craft, quien es miembro del departamento de comunicaciones y estrategia del Brennan Center.

The American Democracy Minute Radio News Report & Podcast for Aug. 4, 2025Redistricting Week:  Why Do We Redistrict Our Voting District Maps Every 10 Years, and How is it Done?We're spending this week going back to the basics of redistricting, including what makes a fair voting map, and what qualifies as gerrymandering.  What is redistricting, why is it necessary?Some podcasting platforms strip out our links.  To read our resources and see the whole script of today's report, please go to our website at https://AmericanDemocracyMinute.orgToday's LinksArticles & Resources:U.S. Congress - ArtI.S2.C3.1 Enumeration Clause and Apportioning Seats in the House of RepresentativesLeague of Women Voters US - Redistricting League of Women Voters US - Video - What is Redistricting?Brennan Center for Justice - The Fight for Fair MapsAmerican Redistricting Project - Redistricting Process by StateAll About Redistricting - Redistricting 101 - Where are the Lines Drawn?Groups Taking Action:Represent.Us,  League of Women Voters US, Common Cause US, Redistricting Data HubRegister or Check Your Voter Registration:U.S. Election Assistance Commission – 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 #Gerrymandering #Redistricting #FairMaps #RacialGerrymandering

Law enforcement officers working in plain clothes or undercover is nothing new. What is new is that some officers are now hiding their faces behind masks and refusing to show identification. Following a surge in arrests by armed, masked federal immigration agents in unmarked cars, some California Democrats are backing a new bill in Congress that would bar officials from covering their faces while conducting raids unless the masks were required for their safety or their health. What's led to the rise of masked policing? And is this what law enforcement should look like in a democracy? Former FBI agent Mike German, a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, joins USA TODAY's The Excerpt to dig into those questions and more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

President Trump has ordered cuts to the Department of Education and federal education funding. The brunt of these cuts will likely fall on low-income communities. The president is also demanding changes to school services and curricula, including the elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. State courts and constitutions stand in the president's way. States are required by their constitutions to provide a  public education, and many must meet certain standards, teach certain curricula, and provide student services. In cases where these state obligations conflict with the administration's orders, both state and federal judges may be called on to decide whether state law provides a bulwark against harmful federal policies. This conversation among experts explores how the Trump administration's actions have affected schools, how schools are responding, and how court fights over education policy may play out. Speakers:John B. King Jr., Former U.S. Secretary of Education; Chancellor of the State University of New YorkAaron Saiger, Professor of Law, Fordham UniversityMartha Dalton, Journalist, The Atlanta Journal-ConstitutionModerator: Alicia Bannon, Director, Brennan Center Judiciary Program; Editor in Chief, State Court ReportIf you enjoy this program, please give us a boost by liking, subscribing, and sharing with your friends. If you're listening on Apple Podcasts, please give it a 5-star rating. Recorded on July 15, 2025, and produced in partnership with State Court Report.Keep up with the Brennan Center's work by subscribing to our weekly newsletter, The Briefing: https://go.brennancenter.org/briefing

Listen to the rest of this premium episode by subscribing at patreon.com/knowyourenemy.Over July 4th weekend, the Department of Justice and FBI put out a memo essentially declaring "case closed" on the matter of Jeffrey Epstein, the well-connected sex criminal and pedophile who died (apparently) by suicide in federal custody in 2019. No more files. No more questions. He killed himself and that's that. This was quite the reversal from an administration stacked with figures — like FBI director Kash Patel and his deputy Dan Bongino — who built their celebrity in MAGA circles by ginning up the Epstein conspiracy and demanding his case files be released. In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi had said the the Epstein client list was "sitting on her desk for review." Now the White House says no such list exists. And Trump wants everyone to stop talking about it.As all this unfolded, a number of listeners wanted the KYE take on the Epstein story—so here it is. We recount some of the most salient details of the case for the uninitiated, then offer our takes on what we think really is going on, and, perhaps more importantly, assess how this might affect Trump's second term: how serious the breach between Trump and the MAGA movement is, the possible consequences of administration officials spinning stories about Hillary's emails (still!) instead of doing their actual jobs, the ongoing attacks on the basic functions of the federal government, Trump's spectacular, open corruption, and, as we all pay attention to the crisis of the day, what sending tens of billions in new funding to ICE will mean for our country.Sources:Emily Davies, Perry Stein, Jeremy Roebuck and Kadia Goba, "Trump fumes as Epstein scandal dominates headlines, overshadows agenda," Washington Post, Jul 27, 2025.Khadeeja Safdar & Joe Palazzolo, "Jeffrey Epstein's Friends Sent Him Bawdy Letters for a 50th Birthday Album. One Was From Donald Trump," Wall St. Journal, July 17, 2025Sadie Gurman, Annie Linskey, et al, "Justice Department Told Trump in May That His Name Is Among Many in the Epstein Files," Wall St. Journal, July 23, 2025Jacob Weindling, "FBI Deputy Director Takes Mental Health Day Over Trump's Epstein Betrayal," Splinter, July 11, 2025Lauren-Brooke Eisen, "Budget Bill Massively Increases Funding for Immigration Detention," Brennan Center, July 3, 2025Julie Turkewitz, "Convicted Murderer Released by Trump From Venezuelan Prison Is Free in U.S." New York Times, July 24, 2025.Glenn Thrush & Julian E. Barnes, "Gabbard's Attacks on Obama Put the Attorney General in a Tough Spot," New York Times, July 24, 2025Miriam Waldvogel, "Rogan Hits Patel Over Epstein Claims: 'Doesn't Make Any Sense,'" The Hill, July 25, 2025

The end of the 20th century saw the rise of mass incarceration as well as originalism, the idea that judges must interpret the Constitution according to its supposed original intent. In a new book, Justice Abandoned: How the Supreme Court Ignored the Constitution and Enabled Mass Incarceration, legal scholar Rachel Barkow highlights the conflict between the two. Using six Supreme Court cases, she shows how mass incarceration is at odds with the Constitution's text and original meaning. In this event, Barkow and former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, who spent eight years overseeing federal prosecutions in Manhattan, discuss what the cases in Justice Abandoned teach us about today's Supreme Court, including the long-term ramifications of sacrificing the liberty guaranteed by the Constitution in the name of public safety.If you enjoy this program, please give us a boost by liking, subscribing, and sharing with your friends. If you're listening on Apple Podcasts, please give it a 5-star rating. Speakers:Rachel Barkow, Charles Seligson Professor of Law, Faculty Director of Zimroth Center on the Administration of Criminal Law, NYU School of LawPreet Bharara, Former U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York; Partner, WilmerHaleModerator: Hernandez Stroud, Senior Fellow, Brennan Center Justice ProgramRecorded on June 05, 2025.In Justice Abandoned, Rachel Barkow exposes how the Supreme Court's embrace of originalism helped erode constitutional protections and fuel mass incarceration — a must-read for anyone who cares about our Constitution and criminal justice reform. You can find the book here.Keep up with the Brennan Center's work by subscribing to our weekly newsletter, The Briefing: https://go.brennancenter.org/briefing

Matthew and Eleanor are joined by Kareem Crayton, from the Brennan Center for Justice, to look more closely at Texas' rare midcyle redistricting.

This term, the Supreme Court  addressed some of the biggest challenges in its history, with a president determined to break through the constitutional limits of executive power and the Court's own public approval near all-time lows. Did the justices stand up for the Constitution on the biggest issue facing the country, the extraordinary executive power grab? Against this backdrop, the justices handed down rulings in key cases affecting millions of people's lives, including access to health care, education, and political representation and the power of federal courts to issue nationwide injunctions. Whether you follow the Court closely or are looking to understand its role in our system of checks and balances, this discussion will provide essential context for how the Court is working today. Speakers:Joyce Vance, Distinguished Professor of the Practice of Law, University of Alabama School of Law; Senior Fellow, Brennan Center for JusticeCecillia Wang, National Legal Director, ACLUKim Wehle, Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of LawModerator: Alicia Bannon, Director, Brennan Center Judiciary Program and Kohlberg Center on the U.S. Supreme CourtIf you enjoy this program, please give us a boost by liking, subscribing, and sharing with your friends. If you're listening on Apple Podcasts, please give it a 5-star rating. Recorded on July 09, 2025.Keep up with the Brennan Center's work by subscribing to our weekly newsletter, The Briefing: https://go.brennancenter.org/briefing

Republicans' freshly passed spending bill sets aside $45 billion just to expand immigration detention centers. And a number of private companies are poised to profit from the surge in funding. On the show today, Deirdre Conlon, co-author of the new book “Immigration Detention Inc" explains how immigration detention became dominated by private companies, how local economies have become entangled with the business of detention, and how Trump's spending law changes everything.Plus, we'll celebrate a listener's cross-country move. And, a reminder to try being a local tourist.Here's everything we talked about today:"Trump got $170 billion for immigration. Now he has to enact it." from Politico "We Asked Trump's Former Prisons Chief How $45 Billion Will Reshape Immigrant Detention" from Mother Jones"Budget Bill Massively Increases Funding for Immigration Detention" from the Brennan Center for Justice"Trump administration seeks to turn mass deportations into an efficient business ‘like Amazon'" from PBS News"Unchecked Growth: Private Prison Corporations and Immigration Detention, Three Years Into the Biden Administration" from the ACLUGot a question for the hosts? Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

Republicans' freshly passed spending bill sets aside $45 billion just to expand immigration detention centers. And a number of private companies are poised to profit from the surge in funding. On the show today, Deirdre Conlon, co-author of the new book “Immigration Detention Inc" explains how immigration detention became dominated by private companies, how local economies have become entangled with the business of detention, and how Trump's spending law changes everything.Plus, we'll celebrate a listener's cross-country move. And, a reminder to try being a local tourist.Here's everything we talked about today:"Trump got $170 billion for immigration. Now he has to enact it." from Politico "We Asked Trump's Former Prisons Chief How $45 Billion Will Reshape Immigrant Detention" from Mother Jones"Budget Bill Massively Increases Funding for Immigration Detention" from the Brennan Center for Justice"Trump administration seeks to turn mass deportations into an efficient business ‘like Amazon'" from PBS News"Unchecked Growth: Private Prison Corporations and Immigration Detention, Three Years Into the Biden Administration" from the ACLUGot a question for the hosts? Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

Project 2025 is setting the stage for a sweeping transformation of American governance, promising changes that could reshape the federal landscape for years to come. Backed by the Heritage Foundation and a coalition of conservative advocacy groups, this policy blueprint is designed to consolidate executive power and implement a far-reaching conservative agenda from the first day of a new presidential administration.Central to Project 2025 is its intent to dramatically expand presidential authority over the executive branch. According to project advocates, the goal is to “place the entire executive branch under direct presidential control,” which would eliminate the traditional independence of agencies like the Department of Justice, FBI, Federal Communications Commission, and Federal Trade Commission. “All federal employees should answer to the president,” declared Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, reflecting the project's belief in a unitary executive theory where the president wields unprecedented control over federal administration. This vision calls for mass dismissal of top federal employees and replacing them with ideologically aligned appointees, a process that circumvents the usual need for Senate confirmation and could reshape federal agencies overnight.A concrete example of this agenda has already unfolded in the first months of the current administration. The Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, has been instrumental in executing proposals that have stunned even Project 2025's own architects. In rapid succession, agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Board and USAID have been dismantled. Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. report that over 280,000 federal workers and contractors across 27 agencies have been laid off or are planned to be laid off, reflecting an unprecedented overhaul of the civil service. Return-to-office mandates have been paired with reductions in federal office space, complicating the lives and careers of hundreds of thousands of workers who had adapted to remote work during the pandemic.Project 2025's scope also extends to emergency management and disaster response. The plan calls for shifting FEMA's emergency preparedness and response costs overwhelmingly onto states and localities, with the federal government restricting its contribution to catastrophic events only. “FEMA is overtasked, overcompensates for the lack of state and local preparedness and response, and is regularly in deep debt,” warns the Project 2025 blueprint. It also urges Congress to end federal preparedness grants, signaling a major reversal in longstanding disaster response policy.The plan proposes similar upheavals in the realm of public broadcasting, with investigations launched into National Public Radio and PBS and calls to reduce or eliminate federal funding for these institutions. In immigration and border security, Project 2025 recommends direct use of military personnel for arrest operations at the southern border—something not previously seen in U.S. policy—and a sharp reduction in refugee admissions.Criminal justice is another key battleground. The blueprint advises the Department of Justice to charge or remove elected local prosecutors who decline to pursue certain offenses, such as low-level marijuana or shoplifting cases. This unprecedented federal intervention would curtail local prosecutorial discretion and centralize decision-making in Washington. As the Brennan Center for Justice notes, this approach “would deter local prosecutors from using their discretion in making case-specific decisions, regardless of what policies they may have campaigned on.”Critics, from the American Civil Liberties Union to labor unions and public sector advocates, argue that these changes threaten civil liberties, the separation of powers, and the independence of federal employees. The ACLU contends that Project 2025 “is a federal policy agenda and blueprint for a radical restructuring of the executive branch,” warning that its implementation could erode longstanding civil rights and democratic norms.With executive actions rolling out across more than 20 federal agencies, as tracked by the Center for Progressive Reform, the debate over Project 2025's full impact is only just beginning. As milestones approach—the next round of agency reorganizations, legal challenges to mass layoffs, and pivotal congressional showdowns—the nation will be watching to see whether this vision for American government will ultimately endure or be checked by traditional safeguards.Thank you for tuning in. Come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

Project 2025 is more than a government reform blueprint; it's a sweeping bid to reshape the core of American governance. Developed by conservative think tanks, including the Heritage Foundation, Project 2025 lays out hundreds of pages detailing how a future administration—under President Trump, as recent events have confirmed—could consolidate executive power, overhaul federal agencies, and redefine the federal-state relationship.According to project documents, a foundational goal is to place the entire executive branch under direct presidential control. The plan would strip independence from agencies like the Department of Justice, the FBI, and regulatory bodies such as the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission. Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation stated that all federal employees should answer to the president, echoing the controversial unitary executive theory. This vision, bolstered by recent Supreme Court decisions, would make the White House the undisputed command center of federal authority.Concrete examples of this approach are already being seen. Project 2025 proposes that all senior State Department employees should be dismissed before January 2025, replaced with ideologically vetted appointees who could bypass Senate confirmation. Kiron Skinner, a former Trump administration official involved in the project, argues that most current State Department staff are too left-leaning for this new vision, though she couldn't cite a specific case of obstruction. This move signals a dramatic preference for loyalty over traditional expertise.Agency reforms and cutbacks are a central theme. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the U.S. Agency for International Development have been eliminated in the early months of Trump's second term, according to reporting from GovExec. Similarly, plans are underway to lay off over a quarter million federal workers and contractors across 27 agencies—part of a claimed $1 trillion in savings.Disaster response policy would see radical change as well. Project 2025 calls for a wholesale overhaul of FEMA's funding structure. The federal government would step back, covering only 25% of costs for smaller disasters and up to 75% for the most catastrophic events, compared to the current baseline of 75% minimum coverage. The project's authors argue FEMA is “overtasked” and advocate for ending all preparedness grants to states and localities. “DHS should not be in the business of handing out federal tax dollars: These grants should be terminated,” state the project's recommendations.Other cultural and political flashpoints are also targeted. Brendan Carr, the FCC's head, announced investigations into NPR and PBS, questioning the content aired on their more than 1,500 member stations. According to The New York Times, this reflects Project 2025's skepticism toward publicly funded media.Criminal justice is slated for a dramatic pivot, too. The Brennan Center for Justice notes that Project 2025 proposes allowing the Department of Justice to charge or even remove local prosecutors who decline to pursue certain offenses, such as low-level marijuana possession or shoplifting. The authors argue this would address so-called “rule of law deficiencies,” but critics warn it could stifle local discretion and turn every district attorney into a policy subordinate of the federal government. For example, progressive prosecutors who favor treatment over incarceration for minor offenders would be at risk of losing their jobs under this policy approach.These proposed shifts, both sweeping and granular, have sparked fierce debate. Supporters argue Project 2025 will bring efficiency, accountability, and ideological consistency to Washington. Detractors warn of executive overreach, lost expertise, and risks to the fabric of American federalism. As one Heritage Foundation executive called it, the project is about using the machinery of government “to drive conservative change at every level.”The next key milestones are imminent. With the administration rapidly implementing pieces of the Project 2025 playbook, forthcoming legal challenges and agency restructurings will test both the feasibility and the resiliency of the current checks and balances. Observers across the political spectrum are watching closely: the fate of Project 2025's ambitions will shape not just policy, but the very structure of American democracy.Thank you for tuning in, and be sure to come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

Voting rights are the foundation of democratic governance. But recent changes in elections policies have disenfranchised millions of Americans, and the voting gap between White and minority voters is continuing to expand. Host Alex Lovit is joined by Sean Morales-Doyle. Morales-Doyle is the director of the Voting Rights and Elections Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/ensure-every-american-can-vote

BigTentUSA hosted a conversation with Attorney General William Tong (D-CT) and Attorney General Rob Bonta (D-CA), moderated by Michael Waldman, president and CEO, The Brennan Center for Justice. In the face of escalating federal overreach—from mass deportations targeting immigrant communities to the deployment of federal troops in Los Angeles without state consent—the role of state Attorneys General has never been more critical. As the Trump administration intensifies its crackdown on blue states, AGs are serving as a vital line of defense, challenging unconstitutional actions in the courts, protecting civil rights, and standing up for the rule of law. This conversation spotlights the strategic work of state AGs as they fight back against authoritarian tactics and safeguard the rights and freedoms of their constituents.About The SpeakersAttorney General William Tong (D-CT) is the 25th Attorney General to serve Connecticut since the office was established by the state constitution in 1897. He first took office in 2019 and is currently serving his second term.Attorney General Tong currently serves as Eastern Region Chair and Finance Chair of the National Association of Attorneys General. He also serves on the Executive Committee of the Democratic Attorneys General Association. Attorney General Tong previously practiced for 18 years as a litigator in both state and federal courts, first at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP in New York City and then at Finn Dixon & Herling LLP in Stamford. He served for 12 years as a State Representative in the Connecticut General Assembly, where he served as House Chairman of the Judiciary Committee as well as the Banking Committee. In 2006, he became the first Asian American elected to any state office in Connecticut history.Attorney General Rob Bonta (D-CA) was sworn in as the 34th Attorney General of the State of California in 2021, the first person of Filipino descent and the second Asian-American to occupy the position. Prior to serving in the Assembly, Attorney General Bonta worked as a Deputy City Attorney for the City and County of San Francisco, where he represented the City and County and its employees, and fought to protect Californians from exploitation and racial profiling.Born in Quezon City, Philippines, Attorney General Bonta immigrated to California with his family as an infant. He is the son of a proud native Filipino mother and a father who taught him the value of public service to his community.Michael Waldman is president and CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. A nonpartisan law and policy institute that works to improve systems of democracy and justice so they work for all, the Brennan Center is a leading national voice on voting rights, money in politics, criminal justice reform, and constitutional law. Waldman is a constitutional lawyer and writer who is an expert on the presidency and American democracy. He has led the Center since 2005. He was a member of the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States in 2021. His book, The Supermajority: How the Supreme Court Divided America, was published in 2023.Watch YouTube Recording Learn More: BigTentUSA This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit bigtentnews.substack.com

The violent attacks on legislators in Minnesota are a shocking reminder of the pervasive threats rising from political divisions. The Brennan Center for Justice finds the volume and severity of abuse directed at public officials is increasing, and is disproportionately directed at women and people of color. As officials in Minnesota and the rest of the nation grieve the recent tragedy, we'll look at the potential effect rising threats has on the willingness of Native Americans, and others, to hold public office. We'll also learn more about a theatrical production offered by a church in the Navajo border town Gallup, N.M. that has many Navajo citizens upset over insensitive portrayals of Navajo spiritual culture. GUESTS State Rep. Heather Keeler (Ihaƞktoƞwaƞ and Eastern Shoshone/DFL-MN 04A) Louvannina Tsosie (Navajo), witness, advocate of Navajo culture, and university student Carl Slater (Diné), Navajo Nation council delegate Samuel Strong (Red Lake), tribal secretary for the Red Lake Nation

The Lincoln Project’s Rick Wilson examines regime change and the potential for a new world war.The Brennan Center’s Michael Waldman details efforts to protect the vote in the midterms.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On June 7, President Trump asserted control over California's National Guard. In this episode, Professor Michael Ramsey of the University of San Diego School of Law and Liza Goitein of the Brennan Center join Jeffrey Rosen to explore the meaning of 10 U.S.C. 12406 and unpack California Governor Gavin Newsom's lawsuit challenging the legality of President Trump's actions.    Resources Michael Ramsey, “John Yoo on Presidential Authority to Use the National Guard,” The Originalism Blog (June 13, 2025)  Elizabeth Goitein, “Unpacking Trump's Order Authorizing Domestic Deployment of the Military,” The Brennan Center (June 10, 2025)  Elizabeth Goitein, “Preventing Use of National Guard to Evade Posse Comitatus Act,” Center for a New American Security (May 20, 2025) Newsom v. Trump, Northern District of California (June 12, 2025) Martin v. Mott (1827) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. ⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠. Support our important work. ⁠⁠⁠Donate

On the first day of his second term, President Trump issued an executive order purporting to strip U.S. citizenship from the children of undocumented immigrants. The order directly conflicts with the plain language of the 14th Amendment, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” And it defies more than a century of case law. The executive order was met with a wave of court rulings blocking its enforcement, and the Supreme Court has already heard arguments on the issue. What historical currents led to the ratification of the amendment's Citizenship Clause? How did courts interpret its guarantees in the decades following? And how do today's attacks on birthright citizenship relate to historical attempts to deny citizenship to people born and living in the United States?Speakers:Kate Masur, Professor of History, Northwestern UniversityMartha Jones, Professor of History, Johns Hopkins UniversityErika Lee, Bae Family Professor of History, Radcliffe Alumnae Professor, Harvard UniversityThomas Wolf, Director of Democracy Initiatives, Founder of Historians Council on the Constitution, Brennan CenterModerator: Kareem Crayton, Vice President for Washington, DC, Brennan CenterRecorded on June 11, 2025.Keep up with the Brennan Center's work by subscribing to our weekly newsletter, The Briefing: https://go.brennancenter.org/briefing

As we post this episode, Trump has sent Marines and Army National Guard troops to the streets, to try to quash protests by fellow citizens - the vast majority of them peaceful. Our guest Elizabeth Gotein, of the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice, has warned us before that any U.S. president could wield dozens of sweeping emergency powers to dismantle democracy, some so secret that members of Congress don't even know about them. We repeated Liz's episode last year and we're repeating it again: The crisis created by Trump and his allies is that serious.

A federal judge ruled that President Donald Trump's deployment of troops in Los Angeles was illegal before an appeals court quickly overturned it. A legal battle is now underway. On this week's On the Media, how President Trump has exaggerated crises to expand his presidential powers. Plus, a new documentary investigates who killed a Palestinian-American journalist.[01:00] Host Brooke Gladstone shares how to navigate the deluge of LA protest coverage – debunking fake footage, identifying distracting talking points, and more.[12:53] Brooke speaks with Elizabeth Goitein, Senior Director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, about President Trump's shocking memorandum authorizing the preemptive deployment of federal troops against protesters. Plus, how Trump has invoked emergency powers more than any other president, and what it means for American democracy.[32:47] Host Micah Loewinger sits down with Dion Nissenbaum, a former foreign correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, about the new documentary “Who Killed Shireen?” he produced for Zeteo, the media organization founded by former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan.  Further reading:“AI Chatbots Are Making LA Protest Disinformation Worse,” by David Gilbert“‘The Insurrection Act' by Any Other Name: Unpacking Trump's Memorandum Authorizing Domestic Deployment of the Military,” by Elizabeth Goitein“A Guide to Emergency Powers and Their Use,” by Elizabeth GoiteinWho Killed Shireen? by Dion Nissenbaum, Fatima AbdulKarim, Conor Powell at Zeteo'Who Killed Shireen?' Film Screening in Washington, DC on July 9 On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.

Over the past several days, the Trump administration has taken increasingly drastic steps in response to protest activity and unrest in Los Angeles — including federalizing 4,000 National Guard troops and sending hundreds of Marines, against the objections of California's state and local leadership. As events unfold on the ground in LA, and in the lead-up to further anticipated protests this weekend, Just Security and the Reiss Center on Law and Security hosted a YouTube Live event to examine the pressing legal and policy issues at stake. Notes: Watch the full June 12th, 2025 event on YouTube, here.Elizabeth Goitein: Senior Director, Liberty & National Security Program, Brennan Center for JusticeMary B. McCord: Visiting Professor of Law and Executive Director, Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, Georgetown Law; Member, Board of Directors, Just Security Steve Vladeck: Agnes Williams Sesquicentennial Professor of Federal Courts, Georgetown Law; Executive Editor, Just Security   Ryan Goodman: Anne and Joel Ehrenkranz Professor of Law and Faculty Co-Director, Reiss Center on Law and Security, NYU School of Law; Founding Co-Editor-in-Chief, Just Security Just Security's Civilian-Military Relations coverage. Just Security's Domestic Deployment of the U.S. Military coverage.  Just Security's Law Enforcement archives. 

6.10.2025 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: Hegseth Grilled Over $134M Calif. Guard Deployment, FL Sheriff-AG Clash, TX Voting Law & Cologne Butter The military deployment to manage California's anti-ICE protests is expected to cost $134 million. We'll show you how Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth got grilled during today's hearing on Capitol Hill. There's a showdown between a Black Florida sheriff and the state attorney general over the issue of prioritizing the arrest of immigrants. A new study by the Brennan Center for Justice reveals that Texas' 2021 voting law is making it significantly harder for Black and Brown communities to vote by mail. We'll speak with an expert about the implications as we head into the next election cycle. In North Carolina, a judge granted a $20 million default judgment against Saint Augustine's University, and we are hearing that layoffs are imminent as a result. In tonight's Marketplace segment, we'll spotlight Cologne Butter, a skincare line that offers body butters infused with cologne and perfume. #BlackStarNetwork partner: Fanbasehttps://www.startengine.com/offering/fanbase This Reg A+ offering is made available through StartEngine Primary, LLC, member FINRA/SIPC. This investment is speculative, illiquid, and involves a high degree of risk, including the possible loss of your entire investment. You should read the Offering Circular (https://bit.ly/3VDPKjD) and Risks (https://bit.ly/3ZQzHl0) related to this offering before investing. Download the Black Star Network app at http://www.blackstarnetwork.com! We're on iOS, AppleTV, Android, AndroidTV, Roku, FireTV, XBox and SamsungTV. The #BlackStarNetwork is a news reporting platform covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

June 10, 2025 - In advance of the 2026 state elections, state lawmakers and Gov. Kathy Hochul made some changes to the state's system of public financing of election campaigns. We address the impact of the changes with Marina Pino, a counsel with the Brennan Center's elections and government program.

When immigration raids began in the Los Angeles area last weekend, so did spontaneous protests. On Sunday, Trump federalized 2,000 California national guardsmen in response. While Trump stopped short of invoking the Insurrection Act, he claimed authority to send troops wherever ICE operations might be contested by mass demonstrations. Guest: Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Ethan Oberman, Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, Isabel Angell, and Rob Gunther. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When immigration raids began in the Los Angeles area last weekend, so did spontaneous protests. On Sunday, Trump federalized 2,000 California national guardsmen in response. While Trump stopped short of invoking the Insurrection Act, he claimed authority to send troops wherever ICE operations might be contested by mass demonstrations. Guest: Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Ethan Oberman, Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, Isabel Angell, and Rob Gunther. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When immigration raids began in the Los Angeles area last weekend, so did spontaneous protests. On Sunday, Trump federalized 2,000 California national guardsmen in response. While Trump stopped short of invoking the Insurrection Act, he claimed authority to send troops wherever ICE operations might be contested by mass demonstrations. Guest: Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Ethan Oberman, Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, Isabel Angell, and Rob Gunther. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

President Trump ordered the Pentagon to send around 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles in response to protests against immigration raids in the city. Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, explains the legal implications. Trump ignored California Gov. Gavin Newsom's objections to deploying the National Guard. The last time a president called in the National Guard without the governor's approval was in 1965 during the Selma march. Historian Julian Zelizer explains more. Then, John Ruskey calls the Mississippi River "a creative force" that sculpts the landscape and rejuvenates the people who experience it up close. But climate change is making that force stronger and more destructive. Here & Now's Chris Bentley took a canoe ride with Ruskey and reports on the future of the river.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Ali Velshi is joined by NBC News' Jacob Soboroff, Senior Director at Brennan Center for Justice Faiza Patel, Tennessee State Rep. Justin Jones, Lead Plaintiff in Texas Abortion Ban lawsuit Amanda Zurawski, Professor of Law at NYU Melissa Murray

The Alien Enemies Act is a war power granted to the president that has only been used four times in US history since its creation in 1798. It allows the president to order the detention and deportation of noncitizens from "enemy" nations during war, invasion, or predatory incursion. When it was created, the US had a very different understanding of Constitutional rights, including due process, than we do today. We talk about how the Alien Enemies Act has been used throughout history, and how Constitutional law has evolved since 1798. Helping us out is Liza Goitein. She is the senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program.  CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO THE SHOW AND CHECK OUT OUR NEW TOTE BAG!CLICK HERE: Visit our website to see all of our episodes, donate to the podcast, sign up for our newsletter, get free educational materials, and more!To see Civics 101 in book form, check out A User's Guide to Democracy: How America Works by Hannah McCarthy and Nick Capodice, featuring illustrations by Tom Toro.Check out our other weekly NHPR podcast, Outside/In - we think you'll love it!

Today on TechCrunch's Equity podcast, Rebecca Bellan caught up with  Daniel Weiner, director of the Brennan Center's Elections and Government Program, to break down what this means for startups, innovation, and democracy. Listen to the full episode to hear more about: How SpaceX, Palantir, and Anduril leveraged insider networks to win major defense deals. Changing ethics safeguards, and why that matters for founders entering government spaces. What this all means for fair competition and startups trying to break in. Equity will be back Friday with our weekly news round-up. Don't miss it! Equity is TechCrunch's flagship podcast, produced by Theresa Loconsolo, and posts every Wednesday and Friday.  Subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify and all the casts. You also can follow Equity on X and Threads, at @EquityPod. For the full episode transcript, for those who prefer reading over listening, check out our full archive of episodes here. Credits: Equity is produced by Theresa Loconsolo with editing by Kell. We'd also like to thank TechCrunch's audience development team. Thank you so much for listening, and we'll talk to you next time. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Dr. Vonda Wright sits down with writer, activist, and feminist Jennifer Weiss-Wolf, a leading voice in the fight for menstrual equity. Dubbed the “architect of the U.S. policy campaign to squash the tampon tax,” Jennifer is the author of Periods Gone Public and serves as VP at the Brennan Center for Justice. Her groundbreaking work has been featured in The New York Times, TIME, Cosmopolitan, MSNBC, and more. Together, they dive into how a local donation drive sparked Jennifer's national policy work, the cultural stigma surrounding menstruation, and the rise of the menstrual equity movement since 2015. They also unpack the critical need for accurate menopause education, public policy reform, and the long-lasting impact of the Women's Health Initiative's flawed messaging on hormone therapy. This conversation challenges outdated taboos and explores how both menstruation and menopause can serve as powerful starting points for advocating for women's health across every life stage.   ••• Connect with Jennifer Weiss-Wolf: Website: https://jenniferweisswolf.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jenniferweisswolf/ ••• Make sure to follow Dr. Vonda Wright: Instagram: @drvondawright Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@vondawright Tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@drvondawright LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/vonda-wright-md-ms-2803374 Website: http://www.DrVondaWright.com ••• If you enjoyed this episode, Subscribe to “HOT For Your Health” for more inspiring episodes. Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hot-for-your-health/id1055206993 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1Q2Al27D79jCLAyzp4hKBv?si=b62b374994884eed We'd love to hear your thoughts on this episode! Share your comments or join the discussion on social media using #HotForYourHealthPodcast.

From February 22, 2024: As a new report on the intimidation of state and local officeholders from the Brennan Center for Justice points out, “The January 6 insurrection at the Capitol seemed to mark a new peak in extremist intimidation targeting public officials. But it was hardly the only act of political violence to break the period of relative stability that followed the assassinations of the 1960s.” Citing the 2017 shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise, last year's hammer attack on Paul Pelosi, and many other cases, the report paints a troubling picture of today's climate of political violence in America. To talk through the report and its implications, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic and Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Maya Kornberg, a Research Fellow at the Brennan Center's Elections and Government Program and one of the report's authors. They discussed how Maya and her team surveyed so many state and local officials across a number of jurisdictions, the pervasive risks and threats those officeholders face, and how these threats are distorting U.S. democracy as a whole.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the first 100 days of his second term, President Trump issued more than 100 executive orders aimed at changing policy through executive authority alone. But has this flurry of orders led to meaningful change? Despite Trump's sweeping executive actions — ranging from imposing global tariffs and targeting major law firms to declaring an emergency at the southern border and attempting to end birthright citizenship — judges appointed from both parties are pushing back. Already, 46 challenges to executive orders are pending in court, with no clear victories for the administration in any of them. Listen to a recording of a conversation with our experts as they discuss what these three months have made clear about this administration's priorities, how the courts are responding, and what might lie ahead.Speakers: Elizabeth Goitein, Senior Director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security ProgramMichael Waldman, President and CEO of the Brennan CenterMax Boot, Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow for National Security Studies, Council on Foreign RelationsAndrew Rudalevige, Thomas Brackett Reed Professor of Government at Bowdoin CollegeAnd moderator Kareem Crayton, the Brennan Center's Vice President for Washington DCIf you enjoy this program, please give us a boost by liking, subscribing, and sharing with your friends. If you're listening on Apple Podcasts, please give us a 5-star rating. Recorded on April 30, 2025.Keep up with the Brennan Center's work by subscribing to our weekly newsletter, The Briefing: https://brennancenter.org/briefing

On the day President Trump took office, he revoked the Biden administration's executive order that imposed guardrails on the development and use of artificial intelligence technology. Since then, Vice President JD Vance and DOGE have pushed to integrate AI into critical government functions. But government use of AI raises important questions about data privacy and democratic integrity. Will the adoption of AI truly benefit Americans? How can we trust this process given the unprecedented role of tech billionaires in the new administration? And what might come next? Listen to the recording of a conversation with a leading technology journalist, former government AI leaders, and Brennan Center experts as they discuss the potential consequences and future of AI in the federal government.   Speakers: Vittoria Elliott, Platforms and Power Reporter, WiredFaiza Patel, Senior Director, Brennan Center Liberty and National Security ProgramSuresh Venkatasubramanian, Professor of Data Science and Computer Science, Brown UniversityModerator: Kareem Crayton, Vice President of Washington, DC, Brennan CenterIf you enjoy this program, please give us a boost by liking, subscribing, and sharing with your friends. If you're listening on Apple Podcasts, please give it a 5-star rating. Recorded on April 2, 2025.Keep up with the Brennan Center's work by subscribing to our weekly newsletter, The Briefing: https://go.brennancenter.org/briefing

The Trumpian inversion of reality was threaded into so many areas of the law and active litigation this week. Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern joins Dahlia Lithwick to discuss the apparent evaporation of judicial patience for Trump lawyers simultaneously claiming that a signal chat was not classified or subject to record preservation rules, AND the flights to El Salvador that were  filmed for posterity on arrival at a prison were in fact state secrets. Together, they also think through the likelihood of the Supreme Court stepping into the Alien Enemies Act case at this early stage by just taking the Trump administration at its word that those summary renditions were totally legal and constitutionally correct.  Next, Dahlia Lithwick talks to Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, about another Trumpian inversion of reality: his executive order titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”, which in fact is not about election integrity, but instead an extension of the Big Lie election theory that could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Trumpian inversion of reality was threaded into so many areas of the law and active litigation this week. Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern joins Dahlia Lithwick to discuss the apparent evaporation of judicial patience for Trump lawyers simultaneously claiming that a signal chat was not classified or subject to record preservation rules, AND the flights to El Salvador that were  filmed for posterity on arrival at a prison were in fact state secrets. Together, they also think through the likelihood of the Supreme Court stepping into the Alien Enemies Act case at this early stage by just taking the Trump administration at its word that those summary renditions were totally legal and constitutionally correct.  Next, Dahlia Lithwick talks to Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, about another Trumpian inversion of reality: his executive order titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”, which in fact is not about election integrity, but instead an extension of the Big Lie election theory that could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Trumpian inversion of reality was threaded into so many areas of the law and active litigation this week. Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern joins Dahlia Lithwick to discuss the apparent evaporation of judicial patience for Trump lawyers simultaneously claiming that a signal chat was not classified or subject to record preservation rules, AND the flights to El Salvador that were  filmed for posterity on arrival at a prison were in fact state secrets. Together, they also think through the likelihood of the Supreme Court stepping into the Alien Enemies Act case at this early stage by just taking the Trump administration at its word that those summary renditions were totally legal and constitutionally correct.  Next, Dahlia Lithwick talks to Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, about another Trumpian inversion of reality: his executive order titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”, which in fact is not about election integrity, but instead an extension of the Big Lie election theory that could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Harry talks with Michael Waldman, president and CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice, about the possibly imminent introduction by House of the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility” (SAVE) Act. The legislation, which passed the House last year but wasn't taken up in the Senate, would require every citizen registering or re-registering to vote to produce a birth certificate or passport in order to vote. It's defended as a way to ferret out voting by non-citizens, but that turns out to be a virtually non-existent problem, as does the casual charges by Trump and others of widespread voting fraud. The effect, and likely intent, of the legislation would be to disproportionately disenfranchise Democrats. Waldman explains the manifold problems the SAVE Act would engender, including huge headaches for state and local authorities.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Washington Roundtable speaks with with Michael Waldman, the president and C.E.O. of the Brennan Center for Justice, at N.Y.U. Law, to discuss the escalating attacks on the judiciary by  President Trump and his allies. If the Administration ignores a legitimate order from a federal judge, as it has come close to doing, what can the courts do in response? This week's reading: “Donald Trump, Producer-in-Chief,” by Susan B. Glasser “Why ‘Constitutional Crisis' Fails to Capture Trump's Attack on the Rule of Law,” by Isaac Chotiner “The Trump Administration Nears Open Defiance of the Courts,” by Ruth Marcus To discover more podcasts from The New Yorker, visit newyorker.com/podcasts. To send in feedback on this episode, write to themail@newyorker.com with “The Political Scene” in the subject line. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

As peace talks drag on, the crisis in Gaza gets worse and worse. It's now two weeks since Israel shut off electricity, food, fuel and medical supplies, in a bid to pressure Hamas to accept an extension of the preliminary ceasefire. Gavin Kelleher is the humanitarian access manager in Gaza for the Norwegian Refugee Council. He joins the show from Gaza City.  Also on today's show: Elizabeth Goitein, Senior Director, Liberty and National Security Program, Brennan Center for Justice; Noubar Afeyan, Co-Founder & Chairman, Moderna; Mary McCord, Former Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security, DOJ  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Nearly 300 Venezuelans are now in El Salvador after being deported from the U.S. without a hearing, despite a federal judge’s order blocking the move. The Trump administration says they are members of a notorious gang called Tren de Aragua and summarily deported them under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Katherine Yon Ebright, counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice, joins John Yang to discuss. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

First up, Ralph welcomes former FBI agent Mike German to discuss his new book (co-written with Beth Zasloff), Policing White Supremacy: The Enemy Within. Then, Ralph speaks to Dr. Bandy Lee about her psychological analysis of the second Trump presidency. Finally, Ralph talks about Trump's latest Congressional address.Mike German is a fellow with the Liberty and National Security program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School. He has worked at the ACLU and served sixteen years as an FBI special agent. He left the FBI in 2004 after reporting continuing deficiencies in the bureau's counterterrorism operations to Congress. He is the author of Thinking Like a Terrorist, Disrupt, Discredit, and Divide: How the New FBI Damages Our Democracy, and his latest book (co-authored with Beth Zasloff) is Policing White Supremacy: The Enemy Within.It's important to understand that the white supremacist movement is quite fractured and I refer to it in the book as the white supremacist and far right militant movement because it does have a number of different factions that have specific goals that in many cases differ from one another. But as a movement, essentially what they're looking for is a return to a legally-supported racial caste system where white people dominate without question and impunity to act violently towards anyone who would challenge that racial hierarchy.Mike GermanIt's fascinating because I think there's an assumption that many have that these white supremacists or far-right militant groups are Trump supporters, but I don't believe many of them are. They understand that right-wing populism, that those racist (I would have said “dog whistles” of previous administrations, but racist) rhetoric helps promote them and gives them media attention that allows them to recruit and expand their ranks. But they don't support Donald Trump. They don't support the Republican Party.Mike GermanYou have a situation now where these people that led the movement into a ditch on January 6th (and they had to scramble and all go underground and then slowly restore these groups) all of a sudden these people who led them into the ditch come out ofprison and want to be the leaders again.Mike GermanThere comes a time when the flattering of the citizens by rogue criminal politicians has got to be exposed for what it is. First, they flatter the citizenry, then they flummox the citizenry, then they fool the citizenry into supporting them. And the reaction to that has got to be: you'd better start doing your homework, voters, regardless who you vote for. You've got to spend more time on the records of these politicians, not their rhetoric.Ralph NaderDr. Bandy Lee is a medical doctor, a forensic psychiatrist, and a world expert on violence who taught at Yale School of Medicine and Yale Law School for 17 years before joining the Harvard Program in Psychiatry and the Law. She is currently president of the World Mental Health Coalition, an educational organization that assembles mental health experts to collaborate with other disciplines for the betterment of public mental health and public safety. She is the editor of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 37 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President and Profile of a Nation: Trump's Mind, America's Soul.This is a problem of mental pathology. That is why [Trump] has to place mental health labels on his opponents, why he has to call himself a stable genius, and why he has to take on the most powerful position on the planet (the US presidency). It is to hide his unfitness and his mental pathology. That's what it comes down to.Dr. Bandy Lee[Trump's] been in the public arena and influential positions for a decade now, but we have to address it in mental health terms. His goal is to alter reality and through threats, intimidation and co-optation, he has not only taken over the press and is in the process of buying it out, but he has also subdued…corrupted the Supreme Court and the Congress, and he has figured out that with the speed with which he is wreaking his havoc, by the time courts can respond, the agencies that held our society together will be gutted, closed, and changed forever.Dr. Bandy Lee Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson examines Elon’s profoundly dumb email to federal workers. The Brennan Center’s Michael Waldman details how to counter Trump’s offenses against judges.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Congress considered 158 bills that mention artificial intelligence over the past two years, according to a count by the Brennan Center for Justice. But zero comprehensive AI laws have been passed. There has been movement by states, however. In Tennessee, for example, the ELVIS Act, which protects voices and likenesses from unauthorized use by AI, became law in March. In Colorado, a law that takes effect in 2026 requires developers of high-risk AI systems to protect consumers from algorithm-based discrimination. But some who fund AI technology say a federal law is needed. That includes Matt Perault, head of AI policy at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.

Congress considered 158 bills that mention artificial intelligence over the past two years, according to a count by the Brennan Center for Justice. But zero comprehensive AI laws have been passed. There has been movement by states, however. In Tennessee, for example, the ELVIS Act, which protects voices and likenesses from unauthorized use by AI, became law in March. In Colorado, a law that takes effect in 2026 requires developers of high-risk AI systems to protect consumers from algorithm-based discrimination. But some who fund AI technology say a federal law is needed. That includes Matt Perault, head of AI policy at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.