Podcast appearances and mentions of Brett Kavanaugh

This episode of High Society Radio is an absolute masterpiece of internet audio lore.We look back at Chris Stanley's unhinged musical legacy, dissecting how his classic mashup of Brett Kavanaugh Senate hearings remix "Automatic Still Is" (set to Avicii's Levels) becoming an underground internet sensation. The guys trace the audio's path from its original YouTube upload to viral SoundCloud edits, Spotify distribution, and the unexpected core demographics keeping the track alive today.Plus, Faga drops his unified "Peter Thiel Gay Theory," the guys analyze the corporate PR mechanics behind the Vatican, and we look at the dark future of content generation as AI bots officially destroy online media organic reach. To close it out, Stanley lays out his ultimate vision for transforming GaS Digital into the American WeChat—the all-in-one app for absolute comedy chaos.Drop a comment: Does Stanley's Kavanaugh EDM remix belong in the internet hall of fame? Subscribe for more NYC comedy!Air Date 6/11/26DON'T FORGET TO WATCH FAGA'S NEW SPECIAL "BURN AFTER SAYING" ON THE HSR YOUTUBE PAGE!⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxIHJU2LotU⁠⁠Support Our Sponsors!Body Brain Coffee: https://bodybraincoffee.com/ - Grab A Bag of Body Brain Coffee with Promo Code HSR20 to get 20% off!3rd Mic Harrington: https://3rdmicharrington.com/High Society Radio is 2 native New Yorkers who started from the bottom and didn't raise up much. That's not the point, if you enjoy a sideways view on technology, current events, or just an in depth analysis of action movies from 2006 this is the show for you.Chris Stanley is the on air producer for Bennington on Sirius XM.Chris Faga is a lifelong street urchin, a former head chef, county comitteman and supposed comedian.Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisFromBklynInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/chrisfrombklynEngineer: DomExecutive Producer: JorgeInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/themharrington/Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheMHarringtonSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

OA1270 - A good court thingie! A famous case from 1986 gave us the “Batson rule” that prevents the use of “peremptory strikes” to remove people from juries on the basis of race. To this day, racial discrimination in jury selection continues to be a problem. But the Supreme Court recently reinforced the on-going utility of Batson challenges in two decisions… written by Kavanaugh? Tune in to learn about the history and modern application of this important protection of our rights. Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965) Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994) Flowers v. Mississippi, 588 U.S. 284 (2019) Pitchford v. Cain, 608 U.S. ___ (2026) Batson “Justifications” Catherine M. Grosso & Barbara O'Brien, A Stubborn Legacy: The Overwhelming Importance of Race in Jury Selection in 173 Post-Batson North Carolina Capital Trials, 97 Iowa L. Rev. 1531 (2012). Shamena Anwar, Patrick Bayer, & Randi Hjalmarsson, The Impact of Jury Race in Criminal Trials, 127 Q.J. Econ. 1017 (2011). Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

It's Casual Friday on The Majority Report On today's program: Elon Musk is set to become the world's first billionaire as Space X launches its initial public offer today. A More Perfect Union explains how this sketchy IPO could destroy many people's 401(K) accounts. Heather 'Digby' Parton, columnist at Salon and publisher of the Hullabaloo blog, joins to recap the week's news. Topics include the war in Iran, midterm elections and more. In the Fun Half: CNN airs a compilation showing the 39 times that Donald Trump claimed that we a deal with Iran is imminent. Trillionaires Trump is now claiming that Strait of Hormuz has been open the whole time, but we just didn't know it because it was a secret. Shhhhh don't tell the Ayatollah. Department of Energy secretary Chris Wright admits under oath that he lied when he tweeted that the U.S. had successfully escorted an oil tanker through the Strait of Hormuz back in March. That kind of conflicts with Trump's claim that the strait has been open. Elissa Slotkin issues a press release stating that she believes that Michael Martin, a Trump pick for a U.S. district court, would be different from the president's other picks in that he will admit that Biden won the election in 2020 and that January 6 was an attack on the Capitol. Unfortunately for Slotkin, Martin answered those questions in the exact same fashion as all of Trump's other sycophantic nominees. Marco Rubio cites three examples of what make America so unique; our constitution, the moon landing and the UFC. We take a trip back to 2018 to watch Susan Collins on CNN promising that Bret Kavanaugh would not overturn Roe v Wade. All that and more. To connect and organize with your local ICE rapid response team visit ICERRT.com The Congress switchboard number is (202) 224-3121. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the AM Quickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today's sponsors: NUTRAFOL: Get $10 off your first month's subscription + free shipping at Nutrafol.com when you use promo code TMR10 DELETEME: Go to Leesa.com for the Early Access July 4th Sale 25% off PLUS get an extra $50 off with promo code MAJORITY SUNSET LAKE CBD: Use coupon code "Left Is Best" (all one word) for 20% off of your entire order at SunsetLakeCBD.com Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech On Instagram: @MrBryanVokey Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.  

Graham Platner is leading Susan Collins in one of the most important Senate races in the country, and instead of asking how Democrats can win the seat, half the party seems busy feeding its own candidate into the purity machine.We break down the allegations against Platner, what he has admitted, what he denies, and why the political background of his most prominent accuser matters. We also talk about the larger question Democrats keep refusing to answer: what exactly is the standard?Because Donald Trump has 34 felony convictions, was found civilly liable for sexual abuse, owes millions in defamation damages, and is still treated by Republicans as perfectly fit to govern. But Graham Platner, a Marine combat veteran and PTSD survivor running against Susan Collins, gets treated like an extinction-level event by his own party.Also in this episode: Trump cries election fraud while his own candidates are winning in California, Pete Hegseth's Pentagon slashes recognized faiths and leans harder into Christian nationalism, Republicans briefly flinch at a $1.8 billion weaponization slush fund before protecting the possibility of bringing it back, Trump's White House ballroom donors rake in billions in federal contracts, and the House moves to rename the Department of Defense the Department of War.It is corruption, hypocrisy, purity politics, and institutional cowardice all the way down.Keywords: Graham Platner, Susan Collins, Maine Senate race, 2026 Senate election, Democratic Party, Democratic purity test, purity politics, Trump corruption, Donald Trump, Democratic double standard, Graham Platner allegations, Susan Collins Maine, Maine primary, Senate Democrats, Chuck Schumer, John Fetterman, Bernie Sanders, Ro Khanna, Janet Mills, Project 2025, Heritage Foundation, Independent Women's Forum, Brett Kavanaugh, Trump felony convictions, E. Jean Carroll, Pete Hegseth, Department of War, Department of Defense, Christian nationalism, Pentagon religion policy, Trump election fraud claims, California primary, Xavier Becerra, Steve Hilton, Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Trump ballroom, White House ballroom donors, federal contracts, weaponization fund, Democratic leadership, We Saw the Devil, political podcast, left wing politics, anti corruption, authoritarianism, media hypocrisy, Democratic infighting, Susan Collins challenger, Graham Platner Maine SenateBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/we-saw-the-devil-unfiltered-political-analysis--4433638/support.Website: http://www.wesawthedevil.comPatreon: http://www.patreon.com/wesawthedevilDiscord: https://discord.gg/X2qYXdB4Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/WeSawtheDevilInstagram: http://www.instagram.com/wesawthedevilpodcast.

Megyn Kelly is joined by Sohrab Ahmari, U.S. editor of Unherd, and Sean Davis, CEO of The Federalist, to discuss shocking delays in California's vote-counting process that could still last weeks, governor candidate Steve Hilton and LA mayor candidate Spencer Pratt slowly losing ground as more late votes come in, concerns about election integrity and public trust, whether it's really possible for Nithya Raman to surpass Spencer Pratt in the mayor runoff, the latest New York Times report on allegations against Graham Platner, fallout from past controversies including a sexting scandal and Nazi tattoo, the latest NYT allegations about Platner's past relationships, the Democrat hypocrisy when it comes to Brett Kavanaugh and Platner, how past personal conduct should factor into political candidates, Karmelo Anthony's "imperfect self-defense" argument in the stabbing death of Austin Metcalf, the legal challenges facing Anthony's defense team, and more. Then James Patterson and Matt Eversmann, authors of "Rocket's Red Glare," join to discuss the threats facing the United States today, what a major attack on the homeland could look like, the sad decline in patriotism and the need to come together as a country, Patterson's journey from advertising executive to bestselling author, his humble beginnings growing up, and more.     Davis- https://thefederalist.com/ Ahmari-https://unherd.com/ Patterson- https://www.jamespatterson.com/ Eversmann- https://www.jamespatterson.com/titles/james-patterson/rockets-red-glare/9780316600118/   Supersure Insurance: Simplify your business insurance and get a free coverage report at https://Supersure.com/Megyn ARMRA: go to https://tryarmra.com/MEGYN to get 30% off your first subscription order The Wellness Company: Don't let a sudden illness derail your summer—secure your peace of mind and save $45 on a Medical Emergency Kit today by visiting https://UrgentCareKit.com/MK and using promo code MK. SimpliSafe: Visit https://simplisafe.com/MEGYN to claim 50% off any new system!     Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKelly Twitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShow Instagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShow Facebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow  Find out more information at:https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Steve Hayes is joined by Jonah Goldberg, Michael Warren, and John McCormack to discuss whether Donald Trump has become a lame duck president and reflect on McCormack's piece on Ben Sasse. The Agenda: —Republicans split on slush fund —Standing up to Trump —Bill Pulte as director of national intelligence —Learning from Ben Sasse —The original Remnant cohost —How to talk about death Show notes: —Ben Sasse's remarks during the Kavanaugh hearings —Thom Tillis and Scott Bessent on Bill Pulte —Thune and Cotton on Pulte —Ben Sasse's podcast Not Dead Yet —The Vanishing American Adult: Our Coming-of-Age Crisis—and How to Rebuild a Culture of Self-Reliance —Them: Why We Hate Each Other—and How to Heal The Dispatch Podcast is a production of ⁠The Dispatch⁠, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a nonpartisan perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including audio versions of all our articles and newsletters—⁠click here⁠. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member ⁠by clicking here⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I sit down with Sara Kavanaugh, Lynch Syndrome patient, part of Lynch Syndrome Awareness non profit, and Connect My Variant.  Sara is the overachiever in so many ways, including voiceover work, and being host of the Positive Gene Podcast.  We talk about potential solutions to getting the word out about Lynch Syndrome, positivity, and Nashville hot chicken.      

Jim Kavanaugh is the co-founder and CEO of WWT, one of the largest private companies in the country, with more than $20 billion in annual revenue and more than 12,000 employees. Jim joins Adam to share his journey - from Olympic soccer player to the Forbes 400 - and his best lessons and advice. Jim and Adam discuss a wide range of topics: leadership, personal and professional success, team building, accountability, humility, resilience, and much more.

The Court has been busy, and we somehow manage to cover a number of developments with unpredictable efficiency. We talk about the Court's latest summary reversal on the "party presentation principle"; Justice Kavanaugh's vindication of his law journal student note in Pitchford v. Cain; Rutherford and Fernandez, two related cases about the intersection of compassionate release and habeas; and the DIG in Hamm v. Smith, a case about capital punishment and intellectual disability. Along the way, we also get into backlash against a certain SCOTUS advocate's TED talk and further Alabama redistricting fallout.Key Topics[00:02:25] - The infamous tweet and TED talk[00:14:56] - Alabama redistricting developments[00:19:07] - Margolin v. National Association of Immigration Judges and the Court's renewed emphasis on the party presentation principle[00:29:02] - Pitchford v. Cain and Batson[00:35:56] - Justice Kavanaugh's Yale Law Journal note on Batson procedure and how it connects to the case[00:40:40] - Fernandez v. United States and Rutherford v. United States: compassionate release, retroactivity, and innocence claims[01:03:34] - Hamm v. Smith, the post-argument DIG, and the future of the Atkins ruleRelevant LinksSCOTUSblog: https://www.scotusblog.com/Divided Argument website: https://www.dividedargument.com/Divided Argument blog: https://blog.dividedargument.com/Divided Argument store: https://store.dividedargument.com/Ethan Lowen's article on interstate extradition: https://wlr.law.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1263/2026/04/4-Lowens-–-Camera-ready.pdf

Kimberly Atkins Stohr hosts #SistersInLaw to discuss the Trump administration's revenge prosecution of E. Jean Carroll, examining the motivations behind the investigation, the allegations against her, and the role of financial backers in her civil suit against the President.  Then, they expose the DOJ's prosecutorial misconduct in the Broadview Six case, review the vindictive prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and highlight the dangers of politicizing DOJ appointments.  They also explain the recent SCOTUS decision overturning the murder conviction of Terry Pitchford due to racial discrimination in the jury selection process, and the implications of Justice Kavanaugh's opinion on future cases.Remember to send in audio questions to SistersInLaw@politicon.com for the #Sisters to answer on their new companion podcast, SistersInLaw Sidebar!  It airs Wednesdays wherever you normally get your podcasts!Get the brand new ReSIStance T-Shirt, Mini Tote, and other #SistersInLaw gear at politicon.com/merch! Additional #SistersInLaw ProjectsCheck out Jill's Politicon YouTube Show: Just The FactsCheck out Kim's Newsletter: The GavelJoyce's new book, Giving Up Is Unforgivable, is now available, and for a limited time, you have the exclusive opportunity to order a signed copy here. Barb is going on a book tour!  You can also pre-order Barb's new book, The Fix. Her first book, Attack From Within, is now in paperback. Add the #Sisters & your other favorite Politicon podcast hosts on BlueskyGet your #SistersInLaw MERCH at politicon.com/merchWEBSITE & TRANSCRIPTEmail: SISTERSINLAW@POLITICON.COM or Thread to @sistersInLaw.podcastGet text updates from #SistersInLaw and Politicon. Mentioned By The #SistersPre-order Barb's new book, The Fix, and get tickets for her upcoming book tour!From Kim - At the Supreme Court, a small victory against racial discriminationFrom Joyce - E. Jean Carroll- Is DOJ investigating her, or not?Support This Week's SponsorsRidge Wallet:Upgrade your wallet today! Get up to 40% off @Ridge during their Father's Day Sale when you go to https://www.Ridge.com/SISTERS #RidgepodASPCA:You can get a $25 Amazon Gift Card when you enroll in an ASPCA Pet Health Insurance Plan using the link https://www.aspcapetinsurance.com/SISTERS.  Note: The ASPCA® is not an insurer and is not engaged in the business of insurance.Mint Mobile:Get premium wireless for just $15 per month at mintmobile.com/sistersPocket Hose: Text LAW to 64000 for your 2 free gifts with the purchase of any Pocket Hose Ballistic hose. By texting 64000, you agree to receive recurring automated marketing messages from Pocket Hose. Message frequency varies, and data rates may apply. Text STOP at any time to opt out. Text HELP for additional Information. No purchase required. Terms apply, available at http://PocketHose.com/termsFlamingo:Our listeners get the Flamingo Starter Set for just $7 at https://www.shopflamingo.com/SISTERSGet More From The #SistersInLawJoyce Vance: Bluesky | Twitter | University of Alabama Law | Civil Discourse Substack | MSNBC | Author of “Giving Up Is Unforgiveable”Jill Wine-Banks: Bluesky | Twitter | Facebook | Website | Author of The Watergate Girl: My Fight For Truth & Justice Against A Criminal President | Just The Facts YouTubeKimberly Atkins Stohr: Bluesky | Twitter | Boston Globe | WBUR | The Gavel Newsletter | Justice By Design PodcastBarb McQuade: barbaramcquade.com | Bluesky | Twitter | University of Michigan Law | Just Security | MSNBC | Attack From Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America

Welcome to Last Call, a look at the biggest stories Jim and Greg covered over the past week on the 3 Martini Lunch.This week they discuss former First Lady Jill Biden lying to us yet again about Joe Biden's condition in 2024, the attempted swatting of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass facing allegations of flouting election laws, and Virginia Democrats postponing their congressional campaigns.First, Jim and Greg hammer Jill Biden after her CBS News interview in which she claimed she thought President Joe Biden was having a stroke during his 2024 debate against President Trump. She also insisted she had never seen Biden in that condition before or after that night. Jim and Greg call out her lies as Mrs. Biden pushes her new book.Next, they condemn the latest threat targeting a U.S. Supreme Court justice after Justice Amy Coney Barrett was the target of an attempted swatting - sending police to a home under false pretenses. Thankfully, police quickly recognized the hoax before it escalated. Jim and Greg also reflect on how political violence and intimidation have continued to worsen since the attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh four years ago.Then, they react to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass holding a campaign event next to a ballot drop box while supporters submitted ballots during the event. Challenger Spencer Pratt has filed a complaint alleging Bass violated election laws. Jim and Greg explain why ballot drop boxes are a horrible idea and how candidates just don't seem to care if they are breaking election laws.Finally, they have fun noting several Virginia Democrats are quietly ending their congressional campaigns now that this year's elections will be held under the existing congressional map and not the egregiously gerrymandered map struck down earlier this month by the Virginia Supreme Court.Please visit our great sponsors:Fast Growing TreesBetter plants, better growing, and an extra 20% off with code MARTINI at https://FastGrowingTrees.com/Martini for a limited time; terms and conditions may apply.New episodes every weekday. 

Join Jim and Greg for the Friday 3 Martini Lunch as they react to Sen. Susan Collins clashing with Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner over the Iraq War, the attempted swatting of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham claiming Democrats don't need men's votes to win elections, and the unraveling of the Freedom 250 concert series on the National Mall.First, Jim and Greg break down the comments of Sen. Susan Collins and Democrat challenger Graham Platner after Platner accused Collins of voting to send him to die in Iraq. They applaud Collins for clearly correcting the record and welcome a Wall Street Journal column from the Purple Heart recipient whom Platner said he wished had died during the war.Next, they condemn the latest threat targeting a U.S. Supreme Court justice after Justice Amy Coney Barrett was the target of an attempted swatting - sending police to a home under false pretenses. Thankfully, police quickly recognized the hoax before it escalated. Jim and Greg also reflect on how political violence and intimidation have continued to worsen since the attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh four years ago.Then, they react to comments from New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, who told Democrats that if enough Democrat women vote, they won't need support from men to win elections. Jim and Greg consider what Lujan Grisham is really saying here and the massive media double standard that comes with it.Finally, they cringe as the majority of artists withdraw from an already lackluster lineup of Freedom 250 concerts on the National Mall starting next month. Jim and Greg have some fun discussing some of the names that were on the schedule but note how this news is also a reflection of how divisive our nation is right now.Please visit out great sponsors:OneSkinFor a limited time, try OneSkin with 15% off using code 3ML at https://oneskin.co/3MLPocket HoseFor a limited time, get two free gifts—a 360° rotating pocket pivot and a thumb drive nozzle—when you buy the Pocket Hose Ballistic; just text MARTINI to 64000, message and data rates may apply.New episodes every weekday. 

This Day in Legal History: Rhode Island Ratifies the Constitution, 1790On this day in 1790, Rhode Island became the thirteenth and final original state to ratify the United States Constitution, doing so by a margin of 34 to 32 at a convention in Newport. Rhode Island's hesitation had been considerable: the state refused to send delegates to the Philadelphia Convention in 1787, and twice rejected ratification in popular referenda — a curiously democratic method for refusing to join a constitutional union founded in part on the premise that pure direct democracy is dangerous. The state's small-farmer and debtor classes, the same constituencies that had backed the paper-money policies that horrified Madison, were deeply suspicious of a strong federal government that would constrain state-issued currency, ban impairment of debt contracts (Article I, Section 10), and override state-level debtor protections.Ratification finally came under the gun: Congress, frustrated by the foot-dragging, was openly threatening to treat Rhode Island as a foreign nation for tariff purposes, which would have devastated the Providence merchants. The convention's narrow margin reflected a hostile deal more than a meeting of constitutional minds.Importantly, Rhode Island's ratification was conditioned on a lengthy list of proposed amendments — many of them mirroring the Bill of Rights that James Madison had already shepherded through Congress in September 1789 and that would be ratified in December 1791. With Rhode Island in, the original Union was at last complete, and the practical question of whether the new federal government could function with one stubborn holdout fell away. The episode is a useful reminder that the constitutional founding was not so much a singular moment as a slow, contested, occasionally coerced bargain — one that ended in Newport on a humid Saturday in May.The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday handed down a narrow 5-4 ruling in Pitchford v. Cain, reviving a Mississippi death row inmate's challenge to the prosecutor's race-based use of peremptory strikes at his 2006 capital trial. Justice Kavanaugh, writing for a majority that included Chief Justice Roberts plus Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson, held that the Mississippi Supreme Court unreasonably applied Batson v. Kentucky's three-step framework for challenges to peremptory strikes.The Court found the trial judge accepted the prosecutor's race-neutral explanations without giving defense counsel a meaningful opportunity to argue that those reasons were pretextual, and the state appellate court compounded the error by treating that omission as a waiver. The prosecutor, Doug Evans, used four of his twelve strikes to remove four of the five Black prospective jurors, leaving a jury of eleven white jurors and one Black juror in a Mississippi county that was then roughly 40 percent Black.The Court leaned heavily on its 2019 Flowers v. Mississippi decision, which involved the same prosecutor and the same trial judge and had already found Evans's pattern of striking Black jurors discriminatory. Federal habeas relief was appropriate because the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act's deferential “no fair-minded jurist could agree” standard cannot rescue a state-court ruling that simply skips Batson's third step. Justice Gorsuch dissented, joined by Justices Alito, Thomas, and Barrett, arguing the record showed counsel chose silence rather than being denied an opportunity. The case now returns to the Fifth Circuit for further proceedings.Justices Revive Mississippi Death Row Inmate's Batson Claim | Law360Caesars Entertainment agreed Thursday to be acquired by Tilman Fertitta's privately-held Fertitta Entertainment in an all-cash deal valued at roughly $17.6 billion, including the assumption of approximately $11.9 billion of Caesars' outstanding debt. Shareholders will receive $31 per share, a 49 percent premium over Caesars' unaffected share price as of February 25, and the company will be delisted from Nasdaq upon closing. The agreement includes a go-shop period running through approximately July 11 — a Delaware deal-protection mechanism that lets the target board solicit competing bids without triggering a termination fee, and that helps insulate the sale process from a Revlon-flavored fiduciary-duty challenge by signaling the board actively tested the market after signing.Latham & Watkins and Skadden are representing Caesars (the latter on antitrust), White & Case is advising Fertitta, and Freshfields is counseling the Carano family, which holds a roughly 5 percent stake and will roll part of its equity into the combined entity. The combined company would control more than 60 casino resorts and over 200 retail sports betting locations under the William Hill brand. Antitrust review will be the inflection point given the overlap on the Las Vegas Strip — where Caesars operates eight properties — and across digital betting. Funding will come from Fertitta equity and committed debt financing arranged by a syndicate of ten banks.4 Firms Steer Fertitta's $17.6B Caesars Entertainment Buy | Law360The Department of Health and Human Services on Thursday finalized a long-awaited overhaul of the federal Independent Dispute Resolution process under the No Surprises Act of 2021, the statute that pulls most out-of-network billing fights out of the patient's hands and into a baseball-style arbitration between provider and payer. The headline change slashes the per-party administrative fee from $115 to $15 per case, undoing a sharp 2023 hike that providers had successfully challenged in the Eastern District of Texas as having been adopted without notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act.The rule also expands batching, so economically similar items and services can be bundled into a single arbitration, which the agency says will cut transaction costs and ease the chronic IDR backlog. HHS is also rolling out a centralized federal dispute portal and a payer registry intended to fix the persistent problem of providers being unable to identify which entity is actually on the hook in any given case. Reactions from physician and radiology groups have been mixed, with broad support for the fee cut but lingering concern that the qualifying payment amount methodology — the benchmark arbitrators must consider — still tilts the field toward insurers. APA Section 706 challenges to portions of the earlier IDR framework remain pending in the Fifth Circuit.US HHS finalizes rule to streamline dispute resolution under No Surprises Act | ReutersABC's New York affiliate WABC-TV filed an objection with the FCC on Thursday, calling Chairman Brendan Carr's April order requiring early license renewals for all eight ABC-owned stations an “unconstitutional” act of viewpoint-based retaliation barred by the First Amendment. WABC submitted its renewal under protest, arguing the agency has not demanded simultaneous early renewals from a commonly owned station group in more than fifty years and that the Media Bureau's stated rationale — possible violations of the Communications Act of 1934 and the FCC's nondiscrimination rules — is pretext for punishing disfavored editorial speech.The doctrinal hook is the Bantam Books line of cases through last term's NRA v. Vullo, which holds that government officials cannot use the implicit threat of regulatory sanction to coerce private intermediaries into suppressing protected expression. The order followed a separate FCC inquiry into whether “The View” has been violating the agency's equal-time rule for political candidates, and came against the backdrop of repeated White House demands that Disney fire Jimmy Kimmel. Democratic Commissioner Anna Gomez has openly urged Disney not to “flinch.”On the same day, the FCC issued a broader notice warning all broadcasters that licenses could be reviewed early if stations are deemed to be failing their statutory public-interest obligation — a posture that drops the question of broadcast licensing back into Red Lion-era First Amendment territory.FCC Targeting ABC Licenses To Punish Speech, Station Says | Law360 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

  OA1262 - How are a car accident in California, a tax fraud case in Nevada, and two bus accidents in New York and Pennsylvania all connected to the Dobbs abortion case? Find out on this week's accidental too-deep dive into state sovereignty. Jenessa read a bunch of extra cases just to be thorough, and accidentally uncovered Kavanaugh planting the seeds that would grow into the “egregiously wrong” “rule” for ignoring stare decisis. But also mostly we'll talk about the weird world of state sovereignty, Clarence Thomas being obnoxious and ahistorical while accusing everyone else of being ahistorical, and Sotomayor getting some peace for a change to write a pleasant little 9-0 decision about some non-partisan procedural legal nerdery that benefits injured plaintiffs. Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979) Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, 587 U.S. 230 (2019) Listen to oral arguments on Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-1299; Timestamp for Kavanaugh dropping the “egregiously wrong” bomb: 50:47 Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. 83 (2020), Kavanaugh concurrence Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022) Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp., 607 U.S. ___ (2026) The “major questions doctrine” Kavanaugh inception timeline: U.S. Telecom Association v. F.C.C., 855 F.3d 381, 422-423 (D.C. Cir 2017), Kavanaugh dissent Repeal of the Clean Power Plan, 84 Fed. Reg. 32520, 32529 (proposed Jul. 8, 2019) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. pt. 60). West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, 597 U.S. 697 (2022) Additional sources: Episodes 1229 & 1230 for an in-depth explanation of immunities, including state and federal sovereign immunity: “The complicated web of immunities that makes accountability so difficult” Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793) U.S. Const. amend. XI Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890) Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!  

Jon Herold and Chris Paul open on election night with the Kentucky Massie primary consuming the entire MAGA Twitter ecosystem. Jon walks through Trump's blistering True Social posts calling Massie the worst Republican congressman in history and threatening Lauren Boebert's seat, while both hosts make the principled case that the allegation op being run against Massie uses the exact same playbook as Kavanaugh and Stormy Daniels, and the community is failing its own standards. Chris Paul lays out his theory that Trump's endorsements in an era of fake elections are narrative disruption tools, not predictions of winners. From there the show gets philosophical, with Chris delivering his extended metaphor about systematic reality inversion and what it means to be the person correctly calling heads and tails when everyone around you has been conditioned backwards for life. Trump's "I don't think about American finances" Iran doubledown with Brett Baier gets a principled defense. The Twitter algorithm transparency post, the social incentive structure driving the entire influencer class, and Trump's comments on 500,000 Chinese students and the American university system all get their turns. The show closes on the CNN article about the Trump Hantavirus official who runs a YouTube show called Erection Connection.

Political rhetoric increasingly targets the Supreme Court's legitimacy, moving away from historic "comity" toward venomous attacks on nominees, as seen in the treatment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and recent term-limit legislative proposals. (3/16)1920 CA

SHOW SCHEDULE THE JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW, 5-15-26.1900 MT LOWE IN LA COUNTY.FActor Spencer Pratt uses "guerrilla marketing" and viral Lego ads to challenge Mayor Karen Bass over homelessness and slow fire recovery, while Portland faces similar urban decay from expanding tent encampments and addiction. (1/16)High-profile candidates like Xavier Becerra and Tom Steyer navigate a crowded field to replace Gavin Newsom, while outsider Steve Hilton gains traction as voters express frustration with rising costs and failing infrastructure. (2/16)Political rhetoric increasingly targets the Supreme Court's legitimacy, moving away from historic "comity" toward venomous attacks on nominees, as seen in the treatment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and recent term-limit legislative proposals. (3/16)President Trump's visit to Beijing reveals a global landscape in "shambles," with China facing internal military and economic troubles while the U.S. struggles to project a consistent and strong foreign policy. (4/16)Lancaster County exhibits a "K-shaped" economy where wealthy boomers continue spending despite high gasoline prices, while lower-income families struggle with inflation and a general slowdown in retail foot traffic and department stores. (5/16)Rome celebrates its 2,779th birthday as the Ministry of Culture plans museum expansions to handle over-tourism, while the Italian Navy deploys a new, multi-purpose combat ship to the Indo-Pacific region. (6/16)The upcoming Starship launch tests revolutionary Raptor 3 engines and heat shield tiles, as SpaceX explores new launch sites in Louisiana and negotiates with Google to place data centers in orbit. (7/16)Probes Europa Clipper and Juice provide a 360-degree view of an interstellar comet, while the Curiosity rover accidentally uncovers unique "brain terrain" and fluted rock formations after a drilling mishap on Mars. (8/16)Facing a total oil collapse, Cuba considers a U.S. aid offer for internet access while the state maintains Chinese listening stations and a tenuous military relationship with a distracted and entangled Russia. (9/16)The Rodriguez regime leverages lifted sanctions to stabilize power while slow-walking democratic transitions, frustrating an opposition that remains sidelined as new oil money potentially strengthens the existing repressive and criminal state apparatus. (10/16)Bolivian miners clash with police demanding President Paz's resignation, while Peru faces a high-stakes runoff between Keiko Fujimori and a leftist candidate, and Colombia grapples with worsening security under President Petro. (11/16)Prime Minister Philip Davis secures a landslide victory in the Bahamas, while Argentina sees a significant drop in monthly inflation under Javier Milei, leading major investment houses to lower the country's risk. (12/16)Prime Minister Mark Carney shifts toward increasing defense spending to 5%, acquiring sophisticated submarines to protect Arctic interests, and navigating "overwhelming contiguity" with the U.S. while maintaining a firm stance on Ukraine. (13/16)Successful private sector figures joining the Trump administration struggle with the rigid rules of government, finding it far more difficult to cut spending or fire employees than in the private sector. (14/16)Despite Javier Milei's free-market reforms, his decision not to dollarize leaves the peso unstable, creating investor skepticism about whether his policies will survive past the next election cycle against the Peronists. (15/16)The proposed Golden Dome missile shield could cost $1.2 trillion, sparking debate over whether the U.S. should prioritize space-based interceptors or address the immediate, low-cost threat of locally launched drones. (16/16)Note: corrected "gorilla marketing" → "guerrilla marketing" in 1/16.

Chuck Rocha and Mike Madrid break down the Supreme Court's landmark ruling on Section 2 of the 1964 Voting Rights Act... and what it means for Latino political power across America.Mike tried to sound the alarms on this ruling back in October. Now the bomb has gone off. With 56 Latino members of Congress and dozens of race-based districts in jeopardy, both Republicans and Democrats are about to learn a hard lesson about taking the Latino vote for granted.In this episode:Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act & racial redistricting explainedWhat this means for Latino and Black congressional seats across the countryTexas, Florida, & California redistrictingAre Latinos a partisan voting bloc?The Florida Senate race to watch: Alex Veneman vs. a Trump-backed RepublicanRecap of the White House Correspondents' Dinner & the scary security incidentCheck your emails: Latino Vote Summit — June 23rd in Washington, D.C.-Recorded April 29, 2026-Referenced in the episode:SCOTUSblog - In major Voting Rights Act case, Supreme Court strikes down redistricting map challenged as racially discriminatory: https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/04/in-major-voting-rights-act-case-supreme-court-strikes-down-redistricting-map-challenged-as-racia/Advocate - Inside Grindr's WHCD party, which was so packed it ran low on alcohol: https://www.advocate.com/politics/national/inside-grindr-whcd-party-Don't forget to like, share, and subscribe for more episodes of The Latino Vote Podcast!Watch our episodes on YouTube: www.youtube.com/@thelatinovotepodcastFind us on Substack: https://substack.com/@thelatinovotepodcastFollow us on X (formerly Twitter): https://twitter.com/TheLatino_VoteVisit our website for the latest Latino Vote news and subscribe to our newsletter: latinos.voteIf you want more of our discussions and behind the scenes please join our Patreon (www.patreon.com/thelatinovote) for exclusive content and opportunities!

SEASON 4 EPISODE 84: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (3:00) SPECIAL COMMENT: Back from a week off just in time to put the podcast on health hiatus...details within today's supersized edition. Plus, befitting the time off, some meta pictures on how Democrats should plan for what they want this country to look like on its 300th anniversary, if it lasts that long. Will we have jailed Trump and gotten back the money he took? Undone his damage? Eliminated the anachronistic idea that Wyoming should have as many senators as California? Let the Supreme Court continue to lie, cheat and steal the democracy from under us? As John Candy said in "Splash": Think big, be big, my friend. MORE IMMEDIATELY: Whaddya mean the Governor of Virginia hasn't been BRIEFED on the way to overturn her state's Supreme Court's usurpation of redistricting? Why the hell not Hakeem Jeffries? Anybody notice Trump is simply rotating the same three lies about Iran? Why are only independent journalists like Garrett Graff still covering the WHCD non-shooting when the New York Times is doing 31 paragraphs on the future of the dinner like anybody gave a crap? AND MOST IMPORTANTLY: stop saying Trump is painting everything GOLD. That color is not GOLD. It is the color of WEE WEE. Say it. Use the clinical terms, use the gutter terms. The gutter terms define this idiot president. Stop saying gold when you mean whizzzzzzzzzzzzzz. B-Block (56:00) ON THE PASSING OF TED TURNER: Hard to believe few of the obituaries mentioned how he also invented 7-day-a-week sports on national television. Or how Jane Fonda kept him from destroying himself in, like, 1982. One particularly harrowing saga had him telling the lowest ranking staffer at CNN's Washington Bureau which way, when he finally decided he'd do it, he'd do it. And this is said with admiration and affection for the man who created the place where I and so many of the figures of the last 45 years began our TV careers. C-Block (1:30:00) ALL TED ALL THE TIME: I was holding back until I was certain I wouldn't jinx him. My beloved first rescue dog, Ted, was up against it last fall. I took him to the University of Florida for life-saving open heart surgery and boy, did they! Eight hours on the table, eight hours of SICU, all for an eight pound dog and now - he's not even on any medications! It's a long story and I would insist it's worth hearing it. And if you have a dog (or know of one) moving from Mitral Valve Disease to Heart Failure, maybe this will provide you with hope - and an option.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last Branch Standing: A Potentially Surprising, Occasionally Witty Journey Inside Today's Supreme Court By: Sarah Isgur Published: 2026 416 Pages Briefly, what is this book about? A deep dive into the Roberts Court, with a historical framing of the Court as a whole. Two main themes run through the book.  First, while people want to evaluate the Court on the single axis of liberal vs. conservative, there is a second, perhaps more important axis that tracks the institutionalism of the justices—respect for precedent, maintaining the legitimacy of the Court, congressional deference, etc. Once you consider both axes, rather than a 6–3, Republican vs. Democratic Court, you get a 3–3–3 Court. Composed of (in Isgur's words): 1- The Deciders: Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett 2- The Conservative Honey Badgers: Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch 3- The Lonely Liberals: Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson Second, there's the idea of the Supreme Court as the Last Branch Standing, by which she means that it's the only branch of government that would be recognizable to the Founders. Which also means it's the one branch of government trying to hold a constitutional line. This is not a comment on Originalism or Textualism, this is a comment on the fact that the executive Branch has accumulated an enormous amount of power, while, conversely, the legislative branch does barely any legislation. As a consequence, much of what the Court does is designed as subtle encouragement for Congress to take back some of its power. What authorial biases should I be aware of?

Welcome to Callais-a-palooza, where Sarah Isgur and David French discuss Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court decision that struck down Lousiana's congressional map and allows Louisiana to draw a new map that will likely favor Republicans. The two read Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson's dissent, discussed whether the decision violates the Purcell principle, and answer listeners' questions about the decision. The Agenda:—Sarah's dad is unconstitutional—The 32-day question—The three Honey Badgers—Partisan gerrymandering on steroids—“Kavanaugh stops” and Callais—Listener questions! Show Notes:—David French on Race, Rights, Trump, and Faith—The University of Michigan Doubled Down on D.E.I. What Went Wrong? Order Sarah's book here. Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Justice Alito writes a scathing rebuttal to Justice Jackson's dissent in the Supreme Court's racial gerrymandering case and, in a few paragraphs supported by both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, exposes her for being a low IQ individual. Karen Bass rips Spencer Pratt's mayoral ambitions and tells him to take a civics class. But Pratt is gaining attention... and momentum. Does Bass know Pratt lost his home in those fires? Barack Obama says his TDS is affecting his marriage.     

Your favourite Aunties, Ak, Farrah and Nana are back with another packed episode, joined by comedian and presenter Dane Baptiste.AUNTYVENTION

A deep dive into the latest Supreme Court news, a couple of unusual shadow docket rulings, and a cross-ideological merits decision that raises classic questions about federal power, preemption, and how much weight lower courts should give to context.We open with reporting on leaked internal Supreme Court memoranda related to the 2016 stay of the Clean Power Plan, including what the documents may reveal, why the leak itself is so unusual, and whether timing and incomplete records change the story. We also discuss Justice Sotomayor's public apology after comments about Justice Kavanaugh, and what that moment says about judicial professionalism and public exchange.From there, we turn to some shadow docket happenings: a one-line summary reversal in a Texas redistricting case and a Fourth Amendment summary reversal out of the D.C. courts. Finally, we move to the merits docket and consider Hencely v. Fluor Corporation (24-924), a case involving federal contractor preemption and a terrorist attack in Afghanistan, where the Court narrows a (possibly infamous) Scalia opinion.Key Topics[00:05:32] - NYT leak of Supreme Court memoranda on the Clean Power Plan stay[00:10:13] - Whether document leaks are better than source-based leaks[00:21:30] - Justice Sotomayor's remarks about Justice Kavanaugh and her apology[00:27:27] - Summary reversal in Abbott v. LULAC and Texas redistricting[00:35:18] - D.C. Fourth Amendment summary reversal and reasonable suspicion[00:47:04] - Hensley v. Fluor Corp.: military contractor liability and preemption[00:52:48] - Little v. Barreme, general law, and the limits of contractor immunity

America has a left-wing violence problem, and the silence from the mainstream media is deafening. From three attempts on Donald Trump’s life to the targeting of Justice Kavanaugh and Steve Scalise, the pattern is undeniable. On today’s episode of The Scott Jennings Show, Scott masterfully breaks down how inflammatory rhetoric from politicians and news anchors has helped "marinate" a culture of violence on the Left. It’s time for accountability. Including interviews with Victoria Coates for a national security and Iran update Salena Zito to discuss politics and the national mood. Legal expert Elliot Williams on today's federal court appearance of the suspect in the WHCD attack Former Secret Service Deputy Director A.T. Smith on how safe are these political events? Rep. Beth Van Duyne to discuss the high-stakes work of the House Ways and Means Committee. Author of 'Rage and the Republic' Jonathan Turley Former Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli with an update from the VA Supreme Court hearing the legality of the Democratic redistricting referendum Join Scott Jennings weekdays from 1- 3 pm ET on the Salem News Channel https://scottjenningsshow.com/ SOCIAL MEDIA

While Trump Thrashes About, Iran's Leaders Can Afford to be Patient | The Blowback From Assassinating Heads of State | If the Law is to Bring Down a Lawless President, Impeachment is Much More Likely to Succeed Than the 25th Amendment backgroundbriefing.org/donate twitter.com/ianmastersmedia bsky.app/profile/ianmastersmedia.bsky.social linktr.ee/backgroundbriefing

12 - Allante McAuley has been thrown out of City Hall! But for what? We have exclusive footage of the ordeal and what transpired. Dom reacts to the explosive exchange. 1205 - What does Mike Foti have to say about Allante? 1210 - Side - all time villain 1220 - Your calls. 1230 - Kerri Urbahn, Legal editor and VP for Fox News, joins the show today. What does she have to say regarding the redistricting effort in Virginia? Is a shakeup in the SCOTUS on the horizon? How intense was Brett Kavanaugh's questioning when she was a part of Kavanaugh's team? What does Kerri think of the SPLC allegations? 1250 - We bring Allante McAuley on a little earlier today as we just can't wait to hear what he has to say. We revisit his comments and get his explanation as to why what he said was so infuriating to the crowd. 1 - We kick off this hour continuing with Allante. Will Philadelphia City Council try to override federal law? Where is the local GOP? How would Allante shake up the state committee? What is the big event on Monday? What was it like arguing with the council, the crowd, and the Sheriff at the same time? 110 - Stop stealing the fire hydrants! 115 - Mollie Hemingway, Editor-in-chief at The Federalist, Senior Journalism Fellow at Hillsdale, Fox News Contributor, and author of “Alito: The Justice Who Reshaped the Supreme Court and Restored the Constitution”, is here today. Dom is fascinated by Alito, so what can she tell us about what it's like being him? What is the difference between liberal and conservative Supreme Justices? What is so different about Alito in the way he judges cases? 120 - Why is a kid the only one with a hard hitting question for a politician? 135 - Has Trump misplayed the SCOTUS appointments during his tenure? 140 - Your calls. 150 - Will the Pope go on a ride along? 155 - 2 - Should the NFL Draft be treated like a holiday? What will the FCC do about the NFL? 205 - What are PA lawmaker's plans for affordability? Why is Dom not a fan of either side's proposals? 210 - More on the NFL. Your calls. 215 - Dom's Money Melody! 250 - The Lightning Round!

12 - Allante McAuley has been thrown out of City Hall! But for what? We have exclusive footage of the ordeal and what transpired. Dom reacts to the explosive exchange. 1205 - What does Mike Foti have to say about Allante? 1210 - Side - all time villain 1220 - Your calls. 1230 - Kerri Urbahn, Legal editor and VP for Fox News, joins the show today. What does she have to say regarding the redistricting effort in Virginia? Is a shakeup in the SCOTUS on the horizon? How intense was Brett Kavanaugh's questioning when she was a part of Kavanaugh's team? What does Kerri think of the SPLC allegations? 1250 - We bring Allante McAuley on a little earlier today as we just can't wait to hear what he has to say. We revisit his comments and get his explanation as to why what he said was so infuriating to the crowd.

This Day in Legal History: Sirhan Sirhan SentencedOn April 23, 1969, Sirhan Sirhan was formally sentenced to death for the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, a crime that had shaken the United States the previous year. The sentencing came after a highly publicized trial in Los Angeles, where prosecutors argued that the killing was deliberate and politically motivated. Evidence presented at trial included eyewitness accounts placing Sirhan at the scene and actively firing the fatal shots. His own recorded statements, which expressed hostility toward Kennedy, played a key role in establishing intent. The defense raised questions about Sirhan's mental state, but these arguments did not overcome the prosecution's narrative of premeditation.The jury ultimately found him guilty of first-degree murder, leading to the imposition of the death penalty under California law at the time. The sentence reflected both the gravity of the crime and the broader national trauma surrounding political assassinations in the 1960s. However, the legal status of capital punishment in California soon shifted dramatically. In 1972, the California Supreme Court decided People v. Anderson, which held that the death penalty as then applied violated the state constitution. As a result, Sirhan's sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, aligning his case with others affected by the ruling.The Sirhan case remains significant in legal history for its intersection with issues of political violence and criminal accountability. It also illustrates how broader constitutional developments can reshape individual sentences long after a trial concludes. Debates about his culpability and mental state have persisted, raising ongoing questions about the standards for criminal responsibility. At the same time, the case is frequently cited in discussions about the fairness and consistency of the death penalty. It stands as a reminder of how legal systems respond to acts that carry both criminal and profound national consequences.Anthropic has asked a federal court in California to rule in its favor in a copyright lawsuit brought by major music publishers, including Universal Music Group, over the use of song lyrics to train its AI chatbot, Claude. The company argues that its use of copyrighted lyrics qualifies as “fair use” because it is transformative, meaning the material was used to help the AI understand language rather than to reproduce songs. Anthropic claims this kind of use supports innovation across fields like science, business, and education.The publishers, including Concord and ABKCO, disagree and argue that the AI system can generate outputs that resemble or compete with their lyrics, potentially harming the market for original works. They originally filed the lawsuit in 2023, alleging that Anthropic copied lyrics from hundreds of songs by well-known artists without permission. This dispute is part of a broader wave of legal challenges against AI companies, including OpenAI, Microsoft, and Meta Platforms, over how training data is used.Anthropic is seeking summary judgment, which would allow it to win the case without a full trial if the judge agrees that its actions were legally protected fair use. The outcome could be highly influential, as courts are currently split on whether AI training on copyrighted material is permissible. The company also emphasizes that copyright law is intended to benefit the public by encouraging innovation, not just to compensate creators.At the center of the case is a key legal question: whether copying large amounts of copyrighted material to train AI systems can be considered transformative use under copyright law. This issue is likely to shape future rulings as similar cases continue to move through the courts.Anthropic seeks pivotal court win in music publisher lawsuit over AI training | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Labor has introduced a proposed rule to clarify when multiple employers can be held jointly responsible for wage and hour violations. The rule, titled Joint Employer Status Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Family and Medical Leave Act, and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, is designed to create a clearer and more consistent standard across federal law. Officials say the goal is to resolve conflicting interpretations among federal courts and make compliance easier for businesses.According to acting Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling, the proposal aims to both simplify regulations for employers and strengthen protections for workers. The rule would mark the agency's first formal guidance on joint employment since the prior regulation from an earlier administration was rescinded without replacement. Unlike that earlier version, the new proposal would apply to multiple statutes, including the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act.The Department believes a uniform standard will reduce confusion, encourage better business practices, and ensure workers can recover wages or benefits even if one employer fails to pay. Wage and Hour Division Administrator Andrew Rogers emphasized that clearer rules can improve enforcement and reduce litigation.The proposal is currently open for public comment through June 22 and follows earlier signals that the agency planned to revisit joint employer standards.BREAKING: DOL Unveils Joint Employer Rule Proposal - Law360The U.S. Supreme Court signaled that it may side with the Federal Communications Commission in a dispute over how the agency issues fines to wireless carriers. The case involves major companies like Verizon Communications and AT&T, which argued that the FCC's internal enforcement process violates their constitutional right to a jury trial. The fines stem from findings that the companies failed to properly protect customer location data, resulting in penalties totaling over $100 million.During oral arguments, several justices expressed doubt about the companies' claims, suggesting that the FCC's forfeiture orders are not final or binding unless enforced in court. This distinction appeared central, as it implies companies still have the option to challenge the penalties before a judge and jury. Justices, including Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson, compared the process to a legal choice—either accept the penalty or contest it through litigation.Some members of the Court, however, raised concerns about whether companies may feel pressured to comply due to uncertainty or reputational harm. John Roberts suggested the issue might be more about public perception than a direct legal burden, while Brett Kavanaugh questioned whether the FCC had been fully clear about the non-binding nature of its orders.The dispute comes amid broader scrutiny of federal agency power, especially following a 2024 decision limiting enforcement proceedings at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Despite that precedent, the justices did not appear ready to apply the same reasoning to the FCC's system. Lower courts had previously split on the issue, prompting Supreme Court review.A final decision is expected by late June and could clarify how far federal agencies can go in using internal processes to impose financial penalties.US Supreme Court leans toward FCC in clash with wireless carriers over fines | 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

1. Purpose of the Book The book aims to: Tell Clarence Thomas’s personal life story, especially his rise from extreme poverty. Explain his judicial philosophy and jurisprudence in plain, accessible language. It is based on approximately 9.5 hours of exclusive, one‑on‑one interviews between Ted Cruz and Justice Thomas. Cruz emphasizes that the book is written for non‑lawyers, including students and general readers. 2. Clarence Thomas’s Background and Life Journey Grew up in severe poverty in Pin Point, Georgia, raised primarily by his grandfather. Initially spoke a Gullah/Geechee dialect, not English. Experienced racism, hardship, family conflict, and personal struggles, including anger and a period of heavy drinking. Attended seminary with the intention of becoming a Catholic priest, later leaving due to disillusionment. Educated at Holy Cross College and Yale Law School. Underwent a major ideological transformation, moving from left‑wing Black Power activism to conservative principles over many years. 3. Professional Rise and Historic Achievements Faced career obstacles due to perceptions surrounding affirmative action. Worked under Republican Senator John Danforth, which became a turning point. Served in: The Reagan administration The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Appointed in 1991 as the second Black Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. On track to become the longest‑serving Supreme Court justice in U.S. history (by 2028). 4. Judicial Philosophy (“Going Further”) Thomas’s jurisprudence emphasizes: Originalism and the original meaning of the Constitution The belief that rights come from God/nature, not government A color‑blind Constitution Judicial restraint: judges should interpret and apply law, not create policy His opinions are intentionally plain‑spoken and accessible, reflecting his background and respect for ordinary citizens. The title Going Further reflects his tendency to push legal reasoning to its foundational principles rather than incremental change. 5. Confirmation Hearings and Public Attacks The book examines the 1991 confirmation hearings, including: Allegations by Anita Hill Intense political and media attacks Cruz draws parallels between Thomas’s hearings and later Supreme Court confirmations (e.g., Brett Kavanaugh). Thomas is portrayed as enduring racialized hostility and vilification because of his conservative views. 6. Legacy and Moral Example Clarence Thomas is presented as: A model of personal resilience, discipline, and principle Someone who maintained convictions despite decades of criticism Cruz argues Thomas would be widely celebrated if he were liberal, but instead has been marginalized. The book frames Thomas as a role model for principled living, not just for lawyers but for all Americans. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sean Spicer just dropped a bombshell: the liberal Supreme Court minority — Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Elena Kagan — is deliberately slow-walking the Voting Rights Act dissent so Republican states can't redistrict before the midterms. Meanwhile, Sotomayor apologized to Brett Kavanaugh for her class-warfare attack, KBJ went to Yale to trash her own court, and Clarence Thomas delivered one of the greatest speeches on the Declaration of Independence you'll ever hear. SHOP OUR MERCH: https://store.townhallmedia.com/ BUY A LARRY MUG: https://store.townhallmedia.com/products/larry-mug Watch LARRY with Larry O'Connor LIVE — Monday-Thursday at 12PM Eastern on YouTube, Facebook, & Rumble! Find LARRY with Larry O'Connor wherever you get your podcasts! SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/7i8F7K4fqIDmqZSIHJNhMh?si=814ce2f8478944c0&nd=1&dlsi=e799ca22e81b456f APPLE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/larry/id1730596733 Become a Townhall VIP Member today and use promo code LARRY for 50% off: https://townhall.com/subscribe?tpcc=poddescription https://townhall.com/ https://rumble.com/c/c-5769468 https://www.facebook.com/townhallcom/ https://www.instagram.com/townhallmedia/ https://twitter.com/townhallcomBecome a Townhall VIP member with promo code "LARRY": https://townhall.com/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In part one of Red Eye Radio with Gary McNamara and Eric Harley, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt slammed Democrats on Wednesday over mounting sexual assault allegations against former Rep. Eric Swalwell, questioning what they knew and why no one spoke out sooner. Swalwell announced Monday that he would step down from the House after four women came forward accusing the longtime congressman of assault. The mounting allegations, which ultimately derailed his political future, followed his decision to exit California's 2026 gubernatorial race just a day earlier. Also Justice Sonia Sotomayor apologizes for ‘hurtful' public comments about Brett Kavanaugh on immigration, millions across 1,000 miles in path of triple threat as parade of severe weather continues through weekend and comedian Dave Chappelle called out Republicans in a new interview with NPR, accusing members of the political party of “weaponizing” transgender jokes. For more talk on the issues that matter to you, listen on radio stations across America Monday-Friday 12am-5am CT (1am-6am ET and 10pm-3am PT), download the RED EYE RADIO SHOW app, asking your smart speaker, or listening at RedEyeRadioShow.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This episode is presented by Create A Video – Two of the liberal Supreme Court justices attack their conservative colleagues while Justice Clarence Thomas laments the rise of progressivism and decline of America's founding principles.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-kaliner-show--6946691/support.Subscribe to the podcast All the links to Pete's Prep are free!Get exclusive content here!Media Bias Check: GroundNews promo code!Advertising and Booking inquiries: Pete@ThePeteKalinerShow.com  

Shannon Bream reacts to the fallout from Justice Sonia Sotomayor's public apology after controversial remarks about Justice Brett Kavanaugh, noting that the Chief Justice may have intervened to avoid an escalating public dispute between justices. She also breaks down Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's Yale comments criticizing the Supreme Court's handling of emergency stays, explaining how the Court's interim docket functions and why it has become more active in recent years due to increased emergency litigation. The conversation then shifts to the Eric Swalwell controversy and how potential criminal allegations would be handled differently depending on state statutes of limitations, followed by broader discussion of congressional gridlock over funding battles between the House and Senate. The segment closes with speculation about a possible retirement of Justice Samuel Alito, with Bream noting factors such as his age, upcoming book release, and political timing concerns surrounding the Supreme Court balance. Hashtags: #ShannonBream #SupremeCourt #Sotomayor #KetanjiBrownJackson #EricSwalwell #Congress #GovernmentShutdown #SCOTUS #SamuelAlito #FoxNewsSunday #LegalNews #Politics

This episode explores the importance of leadership adaptability and culture in scaling a law firm. Brett Harrison shares insights on how effective leadership requires constant "leader shifts" recognizing when to pivot and how to lead proactively.We discuss that success isn't about doing everything faster but about being intentional with direction and decisions. Brett emphasizes the value of investing in staff, training, and fostering a culture where everyone feels they matter. This approach builds loyalty, improves operations, and ultimately boosts growth.For law firm owners and managing partners, the conversation offers practical advice on nurturing leadership, embracing change, and creating a cohesive team culture rooted in trust and continuous improvement.Today's episode is sponsored by Answering Legal. Click here to get started with your 400 minute free trial!  In this episode you'll learn:• The concept of leader shifts and why they matter How to foster a strong firm culture through staff engagement Why intentional direction beats speed in leadership The importance of training and empowering your team • How to balance growth with maintaining core valuesThis episode provides a valuable perspective on leadership and culture that can help you build a more resilient and motivated law firm. Chapters (00:00:00) - The Fear of Average(00:00:41) - Management Partners Podcast(00:01:27) - entrepreneur Brett Harrison on the journey of being an entrepreneur(00:03:08) - Steve Jobs on Leader Shocks(00:04:17) - Leadership and Character Shift(00:07:14) - "Utilizing Your Staff"(00:14:00) - Mental Ownership of the Law Firm(00:19:35) - Understanding the Value of Your Employees(00:24:27) - How to Manage a Staff's Goals(00:29:00) - Steve Jobs on Leading With a Vision(00:33:38) - Brett Wiseman on His Staff(00:36:22) - Optimal Performance(00:41:11) - How to Over Deliver on a Client's Expectations(00:42:30) - Expectations from a Marketing Company(00:47:27) - Brett Kavanaugh on His 2026 Plans

Today on The Gist, Sarah Isgur editor of SCOTUSblog and co-host of Advisory Opinions, joins to dismantle the media's most persistent myths about a strictly partisan Supreme Court. Drawing from her new book, Last Branch Standing, Isgur explains the reality of the 3-3-3 court, why institutionalists clash with "chaos muppets," and why Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh rarely vote together despite having identical conservative pedigrees. Plus, examining the political self-immolation of Eric Swalwell and questioning the dangerous reflex of using anti-Trumpism as a blanket ethical shield for gross misconduct. Produced by Corey Wara Video and Social Media by Geoff Craig Do you have questions or comments, or just want to say hello? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠thegist@mikepesca.com For full Pesca content and updates, check out our website at https://www.mikepesca.com/⁠ For ad-free content or to become a Pesca Plus subscriber, check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/ For Mike's daily takes on Substack, subscribe to The Gist List https://mikepesca.substack.com/ Follow us on Social Media:⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4_bh0wHgk2YfpKf4rg40_g⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/pescagist/ X https://x.com/pescami TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@pescagist To advertise on the show, contact ⁠⁠⁠⁠sales@amplitudemediapartners.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

VR28 - On this week's Vapid Response, we survey the fallout from California Congressman Eric Swalwell's recent exposure as a longtime sexual predator and ensuing swift exit from both the California governor's race and Congress itself. What does Swalwell's fall say about how our country's two political parties handle these kinds of allegations in 2026--and can we once again count on The Federalist to deliver the stupidest possible take on the situation? We then briefly revisit the single worst take on the allegations raised against Brett Kavanaugh during his 2018 confirmation process before paying tribute to the women who organized to bring Swalwell's many abuses of his power and privilege to light.

Sarah Isgur is one of the busiest people in legal media. She hosts the delightful Advisory Opinions podcast (on which I sometimes appear); serves as an editor of SCOTUSblog, the leading online outlet covering the Supreme Court; and appears regularly on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos. And now, as of yesterday, she's a first-time author.The thesis of Sarah's new book—Last Branch Standing: A Potentially Surprising, Occasionally Witty Journey Inside Today's Supreme Court—is deceptively simple: almost everything the media tells you about SCOTUS is wrong. The conventional 6-3 framing obscures far more than it reveals. And compared to Congress and the presidency, the Court is genuinely trying to do its job.In our wide-ranging conversation, we covered Sarah's unconventional path to legal media (she was inspired by Legally Blonde to apply to Harvard Law School, and was fired from the DOJ and CNN before reinventing herself at The Dispatch); her book's core argument, which will be controversial in some quarters; Justice Sotomayor's recent, pointed criticism of Justice Kavanaugh; and possible picks for the next Supreme Court justice and attorney general. Thanks to Sarah for joining me, and congratulations to her on the publication of Last Branch Standing—a must-read for anyone interested in the U.S. Supreme Court. 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

Sarah Isgur and David French revisit Stephen Colbert's favorite case, take a look at a rare biting word about Justice Brett Kavanaugh from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and dive into a circuit court extravaganza. –Sarah is on a book tour! –Sotomayor vs. Kavanaugh–Citizens United is not controversial–Is there a judicial pipeline?–The seals are ugly–Circuit Court Extravaganza: Bathtub gin, pronouns, and sparkling sports gambling Show Notes:–The case establishing corporate personhood–Home distilling ban struck down after 158 years–Seals of the Circuit Courts (and then some!)–Short Circuit's newsletter this week Order Sarah's book here. Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hans von Spakovsky joins to discuss an appeals court reconsidering legal challenges to the White House ballroom project, arguing opponents likely lack standing and noting long-standing bipartisan demand for expanded state dinner space. He also previews upcoming U.S. Supreme Court rulings, including a fast-tracked case on ending Temporary Protected Status for migrants. The conversation closes with reaction to reported public criticism from Sonia Sotomayor toward Brett Kavanaugh, raising concerns about growing tension and breakdown of collegiality inside the court. Hashtags: #HansVonSpakovsky #SupremeCourt #WhiteHouseBallroom #Sotomayor #Kavanaugh #SCOTUS #LegalAnalysis #TPS #ImmigrationLaw

Hour 2 centers on escalating geopolitical tension as U.S. operations tied to the Strait of Hormuz move forward following failed negotiations with Iran, driving oil spikes, market volatility, and speculation about broader military coordination. Discussion expands into strained relations with NATO allies and shifting U.S. foreign policy expectations, alongside criticism of Democratic figures pushing diplomacy-first approaches to Iran. The hour also features legal analysis with Hans von Spakovsky on White House construction litigation, Supreme Court case timing, and judicial tensions, plus commentary on public clashes within the court involving Sonia Sotomayor and Brett Kavanaugh. The closing segment, “In Other News,” shifts sharply into viral and cultural stories ranging from celebrity rehab updates to bizarre accidents, Gen Z entertainment trends, and social media behavior, blending global instability with lighter pop culture moments. Hashtags: #StraitOfHormuz #Iran #NATO #SupremeCourt #HansVonSpakovsky #Markets #InOtherNews #PopCulture #GenZ #Geopolitics

Hawk breaks down a clip from Steve Bannon's War Room featuring MAGA attorney Mike Davis, who repeatedly misrepresents what was actually before the court, falsely framing the case as being about undocumented immigrants and Chinese birth tourists rather than the actual constitutional question. Davis, who clerked for Neil Gorsuch and helped confirm both Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, is called out for being deliberately misleading to his audience despite clearly knowing better. The 14th Amendment states plainly that anyone born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen. No executive order can override that language. Meanwhile, Trump's gold citizenship cards, selling U.S. citizenship for $5 million, highlight the selective and racially motivated nature of his immigration agenda. SUPPORT & CONNECT WITH HAWK- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mdg650hawk - Hawk's Merch Store: https://hawkmerchstore.com - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@mdg650hawk7thacct - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hawkeyewhackamole - Connect on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mdg650hawk.bsky.social - Connect on Substack: https://mdg650hawk.substack.com - Connect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hawkpodcasts - Connect on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mdg650hawk - Connect on Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/mdg650hawk ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Content Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts- Listen to Hawk Podcasts On Your Favorite Platform:Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3RWeJfyApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/422GDuLYouTube: https://youtube.com/@hawkpodcastsiHeartRadio: https://ihr.fm/47vVBdPPandora: https://bit.ly/48COaTB

It's Friday, April 3rd, A.D. 2026. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus Pakistani Christian legislator's bill would end forced conversions to Islam On March 31st, a Pakistani Christian lawmaker introduced a bill to criminalize forced religious conversions to Islam with penalties of up to five years in prison, reports Morning Star News. Falbous Christopher submitted the Punjab Protection of the Rights of Religious Minorities Bill 2026 in a renewed attempt to address a long-standing human rights challenge affecting Pakistan's religious minorities, particularly Christian and Hindu women and underage girls. No doubt his bill was inspired by stories like Maira Shahbaz, a 14-year-old Christian girl, who was abducted and forced to convert to Islam and marry a Muslim man in April 2020. Micah 6:8 urges us “to act justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.”  Abduction of girls, forced conversion to Islam, and forced marriages are out of keeping with all three. Trump: We'll be free from Iranian wickedness and nuclear blackmail On Wednesday night, President Donald Trump addressed the nation with an update on “Operation Epic Fury,” the United States war with Iran. TRUMP: “We are on track to complete all of America's military objectives shortly. We're going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We're going to bring them back to the stone ages, where they belong. In the meantime, discussions are ongoing. “Regime change was not our goal. We never said regime change. But regime change has occurred because of all of their original leaders' deaths. They're all dead. The new group is less radical and much more reasonable. “Yet, if during this period of time, no deal is made, we have our eyes on key targets. If there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric-generating plants very hard and probably simultaneously. We have not hit their oil, even though that's the easiest target of all, because it would not give them even a small chance of survival or rebuilding. “They have no anti-aircraft equipment. Their radar is 100% annihilated. We are unstoppable as a military force. The nuclear sites that we obliterated with the B2 Bombers have been hit so hard that it would take months to get near the nuclear dust. “We have all the cards. They have none. They were the bully of the Middle East, but they're the bully no longer. Tonight, every American can look forward to a day when we are finally free from the wickedness of Iranian aggression and the specter of nuclear blackmail.” War Secretary Hegseth quoted from imprecatory Psalms On March 25th, War Secretary Pete Hegseth quoted from the imprecatory Psalms and invoked divine wrath against the enemies of the United States during introductory remarks he made at the first monthly prayer service at the Pentagon since the outbreak of the war in Iran, reported The Christian Post. Hegseth read from a military chaplain's prayer used ahead of the January 3rd, 2026 operation to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro which he implied was equally relevant in the battle against the leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Listen. HEGSETH: "Almighty God, who trains our hands for war and our fingers for battle, You who stirred the nations from the north against Babylon of old, making her land a desolation where none dwell: behold now the wicked, who rise against Your justice and the peace of the righteous. "Snap the rod of the oppressor, frustrate the wicked plans of the ungodly. By the blast of Your anger, let the evil perish. Let their bulls go down to slaughter, for their day has come; the time of their punishment. Pour out Your wrath upon those who plot vain things and blow them away like chaff before the wind." Psalm 17:13 says, “Rise up, LORD, confront them, bring them down; with your sword. Rescue me from the wicked.” Constitution expert predicts Supreme Court will affirm birthright citizenship Appearing on The Human Events podcast, Mike Davis, the founder of the Article III Project, predicted that the U.S. Supreme Court appears likely to affirm “birthright citizenship” for illegal aliens.  Listen. DAVIS: “I worry this is a 7-2 case.” JACK PROSOBIEC: “Wow!” DAVIS: “I worry that the only two justices who will have the courage to follow the law here are Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Sam Alito. I worry that the Chief Justice [John Roberts] and the three Trump justices [Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett] will join the three leftists [Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson]  who will always vote against President Trump. “The law is so crystal clear here. We the people, the sovereign citizens of America, get to decide who comes, who goes, get to decide who our fellow citizens are. We certainly did not give that away after the Civil War. “The 14th Amendment, the birthright citizenship clause, was to correct an egregious wrong with the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision that held that the freed slaves are not citizens. We fixed that with the 14th Amendment. There is a Supreme Court case that has extended that to lawful and permanent residents of the United States. “There is no way that the proponents of the 14th Amendment ever agreed to give birthright citizenship to illegal aliens!” If the Supreme Court does affirm birthright citizenship for illegal aliens it would be a major blow to both President Donald Trump's agenda and the Constitution. President Trump, first president to hear oral arguments, walked out Remarkably, President Trump heard the oral arguments in that birthright citizenship case in person, becoming the first sitting U.S. president ever to do so. At 11:20am on Wednesday, President Trump expressed his fury in a one-sentence post on Truth Social. “We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow “Birthright” Citizenship!” The Western Journal reported that on the day he took office in January 2025, President Trump issued an executive order directing that only children born to parents “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States are citizens, quoting from the Fourteenth Amendment. NASA launches Artemis II to travel around the moon And finally, on Wednesday night at 6:35pm Eastern, NASA launched the long-awaited Artemis II mission from Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida. Listen. ANNOUNCER 1: “Here we go. 10-9-8-7 RS 25 engines lift 4-3-2-1. Booster ignition and lift off. The crew of Artemis II now bound for the moon. Humanity's next great voyage begins.” ANNOUNCER 2: “Good roll pitch.” ANNOUNCER 3: “Houston now controlling the flight of Integrity on the Artemis II mission around the moon.” The crew — NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Christina Koch and Victor Glover, as well as Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen — were the first people to launch toward the moon since the Apollo 17 mission in 1972, more than 50 years ago, reported NBC News. However, they will not land on the lunar surface. Rather, the 10-day mission is designed as a step toward a landing in 2028, building a base on the moon, and eventually, toward NASA's goal of establishing a long-term presence on the moon. Living on the moon will involve inhabiting shielded, pressurized modules or underground lava tubes to protect against radiation, extreme temperatures, and toxic lunar dust. Among other issues for those who colonize the moon: How would they get power? How would they breathe? and How would they get food? Watch a live stream from the cockpit of Artemis II through a special link in our transcript today at www.TheWorldview.com. Close And that's The Worldview on this Friday, April 3rd, in the year of our Lord 2026. Follow us on X or subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com.  Plus, you can get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

Is your mindset holding you back from success? In today's episode, I sit down with Coach Justin Kavanaugh, a six-time Olympic coach and the founder of Sites at Scale, an agency that helps entrepreneurs build their personal brands. Coach Kav shares how you can shift your limiting mindset, conquer self-doubt, and step into your power.  As a coach to the second-fastest man of all time and a mentor to Olympic medalists, he knows the power of mindset and discipline. With over 20 years of experience, he's now using the same principles that lead athletes to success to empower business owners to unlock their full potential.  You'll hear how awareness, ownership, and action can accelerate your growth in life, career, and business. Join our conversation to discover how to embrace your unique identity, build an authentic personal brand, and take courageous action towards your goals. “Regret lives at the moment where your potential is, and your action stops.”  Justin Kavanaugh In This Episode: - The mindset to reinvent yourself to win - Awareness, ownership, and action framework - How courage builds confidence - Priming and scheduling for the best performance - Building an authentic personal brand - Overcoming the fear of being seen - Managing expectations and taking one step at a time - Using filters as training wheels - Game day uniform mindset - How real presence builds trust - Kav's power five daily alignment and a preview of his book About Justin Kavanaugh Justin Kavanaugh, known as Coach Kav, is a six-time Olympic coach, performance strategist, and CEO of Sites at Scale. With two decades of coaching elite athletes and advising business leaders, he helps people win the right way—with integrity, clarity, and mastery. His frameworks (WIN the Right Way, Every Day is Game Day, Live Your Telos) fuse Olympic principles with business success, empowering leaders to scale, perform, and build lasting legacies. Website: https://www.sitesatscale.com/  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/coachkav/  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/justin.kavanaugh.75/  Where to find me: IG: https://www.instagram.com/jen_gottlieb/    TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@jen_gottlieb     Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Jenleahgottlieb    Website: https://jengottlieb.com/    My business: https://www.superconnectormedia.com/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@jen_gottlieb

David French and Sarah Isgur break down new polling showing historic lows in trust for the Supreme Court, debate whether a public disagreement between Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson helps or hurts the institution, and dive into oral arguments on property seizures and witness testimony rights. Show Notes–Hometown Program last call–Supreme Court polling and public trust–Justices Jackson and Kavanaugh clash–Trump vs. Supreme Court–Takings Case: property seizure over $2,000 debt–Appellate moments: Lisa Blatt and more Order Sarah's book here. Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

OA1242 - Ever heard of the “major questions doctrine”? Most lawyers sure hadn't until a few years ago. So how did it get that important-sounding name? Where did it come from? What even is it? How can we call something a “doctrine” or a rule if we don't have a clear rule statement to cite to? (Hint: You can't). If you've been feeling like maybe this is all made up and the points don't matter, you can get your vindication here as we trace back the history of this ever-changing heavily-politicized increasingly-disputed amorphous blob. Jenessa read way too many cases and law review articles to tolerate this nonsense today. Timeline, each citing the one below it: 1. “Major questions doctrine” first appearance in any court case: West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, 597 U.S. 697 (2022) 2. “Major question doctrine” [not plural] in an EPA statement on deregulations: Repeal of the Clean Power Plan, 84 Fed. Reg. 32520, 32529 (proposed Jul. 8, 2019) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. pt. 60). 3. “Major rules doctrine”: U.S. Telecom Association v. F.C.C., 855 F.3d 381, 422-423 (D.C. Cir 2017), Kavanaugh dissent. (Note: There are many decisions by this name, including one from the D.C. Circuit in 2016, all of which are more prevalent online. Only this exact citation, minus the “422-23” pincite, will get you to the right case. Unfortunately I cannot find it outside the paywall to provide a link). 4. “Economic and political significance” allegedly the first unnamed use of the concept: F.D.A. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co. 529 U.S. 120 (2000) 5. “Major questions” first appears in any legal scholarship… well those words appear in that order, at least: Stephen Breyer, Judicial Review of Questions of Law and Policy, 38 Admin. L. Rev. 363 (1986). Meanwhile, in another timeline: Cass R. Sunstein, There are two “Major Questions” Doctrines, 73 Admin. L. Rev. 475, (2021). First ever use of “major questions rule/exception” in a positive light in legal scholarship. Would become more mainstream around 2013-2016: Abigail Moncrieff, Reincarnating the "Major Questions" Exception to Chevron Deference as a Doctrine of Non-Interference as a Doctrine of Non-Interference (Or Why Massachusetts v. EPA Got It Wrong), 60 Admin L. Rev. 593 (2008). Moncrieff, above, cites this as the original coining of “major questions”, not Breyer's 1986 paper: Cass R. Sunstein, Chevron Step Zero, 92 VA. L. Rev. 187 (2006). Other definitions from legal scholarship: Allison Orr Larsen, Becoming a Doctrine, 76 Fla. L. Rev. 1 (2024). Austin Piatt & Damonta D. Morgan, The Three Major Questions Doctrines, Forward Wis. L. Rev. 19 (2024). Thomas B. Griffith & Haley N. Proctor, Deference, Delegation, and Divination: Justice Breyer and the Future of the Major Questions Doctrine, 132 Yale L.J. F. 693 (2022). Chad Squitieri, Who Determines Majorness?, 44 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 463 (2021). Kevin O. Leske, Major Questions about the “Major Questions” Doctrine, 5 Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law 479 (2016). Jonas J. Monast, Major Questions About the Major Questions Doctrine, 68 Admin. L. Rev. 445 (2016). Other relevant cases: Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 607 U.S --- (2026) Biden v. Nebraska, 600 U.S. 477 (2023) King v. Burwell, 576 U.S. 473 (2015) Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 573 U.S. 302 (2014) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

1. Supreme Court Tariff Decision A predicted 5–4 ruling upholding presidential tariff authority was incorrect; the Court ruled 6–3 against the administration’s use of one specific tariff statute (AIPA). Majority held that the statute allowed banning imports but not charging tariffs—a conclusion strongly criticized in the dissents (Kavanaugh, Thomas). Despite the ruling, the impact is expected to be limited, as the President has multiple other statutes still available to impose tariffs. A new 10–15% tariff was quickly announced using alternate legal authority. The administration still retains broad power using: Section 338 (1930 Tariff Act) – allows tariffs up to 50% for discriminatory treatment. Section 122 (Trade Act of 1974) – 15% tariffs for 150 days (renewable). Section 301 (Trade Act of 1974) – addresses unfair foreign trade practices. Section 232 (Trade Expansion Act of 1962) – tariffs for national‑security threats. Section 201 (Trade Act of 1974) – safeguard tariffs for import surges. Litigation may unfold for years, potentially costing billions over refunded or contested tariffs. China and Democrats were portrayed as celebrating the ruling, implying political dimension rather than policy substance. Administration aims to use tariffs as leverage for better trade deals, not as permanent protectionism. 2. State of the Union (SOTU) Speech Impact Speech viewed as effective, more disciplined, and likely helpful for midterm momentum. Highlighted major administration achievements: Border control and sharp decline in illegal crossings. Crime reductions (e.g., murder and overdose rates reportedly down by ~20%). Economic relief themes like no tax on tips and overtime. Strong emotional moments involving veterans, Olympians, and American heroes created bipartisan resonance. Speaker Johnson and congressional Republicans portrayed as unusually unified. Coordination with the President seen as stronger than in previous cycles. 3. The Olympic Contrast: Alysa Liu vs. Eileen Gu Alysa Liu Daughter of a Chinese refugee who fled Tiananmen Square. Target of CCP intimidation and espionage on U.S. soil. Required 24/7 FBI protection before the Beijing Olympics. Despite pressure, competed for Team USA and won gold. Story framed as patriotic, resilient, and emotionally powerful. Eileen Gu Also U.S.-born with Chinese heritage. Chose to compete for China after being offered substantial financial incentives. Criticism focused on choosing a communist regime over the U.S., though the speakers avoided personal attacks. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Meet my friends, Clay Travis and Buck Sexton! If you love Verdict, the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show might also be in your audio wheelhouse. Politics, news analysis, and some pop culture and comedy thrown in too. Here’s a sample episode recapping four takeaways. Give the guys a listen and then follow and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Epstein Files Fallout The continued fallout from the newly released Epstein documents and the unprecedented spectacle of both Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton being forced to testify. Clay and Buck break down why the leaked photo from Hillary’s deposition turned out to be meaningless, why the uproar over recording rules was a “tempest in a teapot,” and why none of the questioning is likely to lead to criminal charges. They argue that despite the media frenzy, no prosecutor—Republican or Democrat—has produced evidence that would support criminal cases against the political figures whose names appear in the files. The hosts spend significant time explaining why Democrats are now weaponizing the Epstein scandal as their primary political attack against President Trump, using insinuation and narrative tactics similar to the Steele dossier, Russia‑collusion accusations, and the Kavanaugh smear campaigns. Clay emphasizes two major points largely missing from media coverage: it was Trump’s Department of Justice that charged Epstein in 2019, and it was Biden’s DOJ that held the Epstein files privately for four years without any Democrats demanding transparency. Buck argues that if Biden’s DOJ had any evidence implicating Trump, they would have used it immediately—especially given their aggressive efforts to undermine and prosecute him in other areas. Texas Primary President Trump’s remarks to the media as he departs for Texas ahead of the state’s crucial upcoming primary. Clay announces that unlike Stephen Colbert, the show has officially invited Jasmine Crockett to appear and make her case directly to Texas voters—a point they frame as exposing the media’s bias and double standards after Colbert’s alleged interference benefiting James Talarico. The hosts emphasize that they are offering Crockett a platform specifically because the race matters and because voters deserve transparency. The hour then shifts sharply into listener reactions, starting with calls urging the audience to push Congress to pass the SAVE Act. Clay and Buck walk through the political math, explaining why the bill is effectively dead without the elimination of the Senate filibuster, something Republicans cannot achieve. Additional callers escalate the tension, accusing the hosts of “covering up for pedophiles” in their Epstein commentary—prompting Clay and Buck to push back forcefully. They reiterate that Epstein was unquestionably a criminal, that Trump’s Department of Justice charged him, and that if Democrats truly cared about justice, Biden’s DOJ wouldn’t have sat on the files quietly for four years. The hosts argue that many people in conservative media have monetized fear and conspiracy, convincing listeners that Epstein revelations will bring down powerful figures, but that the evidence simply doesn’t support those narratives. Cuba Takeover? The rapidly growing speculation about Cuba. Clay revisits his argument from the previous day that the United States should consider a “friendly takeover” of the island. Coincidentally, President Trump had just made remarks saying the Cuban government is in deep trouble and that a “friendly takeover” is possible—prompting Clay and Buck to discuss the geopolitical implications, including a pending Supreme Court case about U.S. business assets seized during the Cuban Revolution. They explore whether American corporations might seek to reclaim prime Cuban real estate and how a shift in Cuban leadership could weaken foreign adversaries like China and Russia. Several callers raise concerns about how Cuba’s political leanings might influence U.S. elections if it ever became a state, leading Buck to clarify that the debate is about territory—not statehood—and that Cuban American voters in the United States already lean strongly Republican. Hour 2 ends with broader geopolitical concerns, including the looming uncertainty around Iran, the possibility of destabilization following military strikes, and the strange, still‑developing story of a boat of Americans allegedly shot at by Cuban forces. Clay and Buck close by previewing their upcoming conversation with an Iran expert and noting that Epstein fallout, Cuba, and potential conflict in the Middle East are all shaping what may be one of the most consequential weekends in recent memory. Iran Predictions An extended interview on Iran with political commentator Debra Lea, fresh off a trip to Israel. She outlines why embassy drawdowns, evacuation timelines, and Tehran’s rhetoric suggest imminent U.S. airstrikes on Iran could come as soon as Sunday night but warns that any operation is likely to be limited strikes that “kick the can down the road” rather than achieve regime change. The hosts and Lea debate whether destroying nuclear facilities is feasible now that sites are hardened underground, how the Ayatollah’s succession bench and the regime’s 800,000‑person security apparatus blunt decapitation strategies, and why a long conflict would be politically perilous heading into the midterms. They also game out regional dynamics—Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Gulf states hedging as middlemen; U.S. assets repositioned closer to Israel; and the possibility that China and Russia have quietly improved Iran’s air defenses—while emphasizing that Iran’s direct capability to harm the United States is limited, with the most credible risks being proxy rockets toward Israel or sleeper‑cell scenarios. Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8 For the latest updates from Clay and Buck: https://www.clayandbuck.com/ Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton on Social Media: X - https://x.com/clayandbuck FB - https://www.facebook.com/ClayandBuck/ IG - https://www.instagram.com/clayandbuck/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck Rumble - https://rumble.com/c/ClayandBuck TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@clayandbuck YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

1. Virginia Politics & Redistricting Democrats in Virginia are moving quickly to enact policy changes after recent elections. The new Virginia congressional map heavily favors Democrats (projected 10D–1R), despite the state split being closer to 53% Democrat / 47% Republican. Comparisons to redistricting in Texas, California, and New England, arguing that both parties gerrymander but Virginia’s map is described as especially extreme. 2. Immigration Enforcement Virginia’s governor (referred to as Abigail Spanberger) cut cooperation with ICE. This policy could result in criminal undocumented immigrants being released into communities. 3. Discussion of Supreme Court Oral Arguments on Tariffs Detailed recounting of a Supreme Court case involving presidential authority to impose tariffs. Highlights: Roberts, Gorsuch, and Barrett expressed skepticism toward the administration’s position. Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Alito appeared more open to upholding the tariff authority. Predicts that Chief Justice Roberts may write a majority opinion to uphold tariff powers on institutional grounds. 4. The “Save America Act” House of Representatives passed the act with only one Democrat voting in favor. The act requires: Proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote. Photo ID to vote. Presented as “common-sense” election integrity legislation. Describes a procedural strategy within existing Senate rules, not abolishing the filibuster. Would force Democrats to perform a talking filibuster (continuous floor speeches). Requires Republicans to maintain 50 senators physically present, possibly for days or weeks. Democrats aim to: Eliminate photo ID laws. Grant statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico. Offer citizenship and voting rights to undocumented immigrants. Pack the Supreme Court. Voter ID and citizenship proof are extremely popular nationwide with broad bipartisan support. Republicans should force Democrats to publicly defend opposition during a talking filibuster. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

1. The Case at the Supreme Court The case is Trump v. Vos Selections, argued on Nov. 5, 2025. Small businesses are challenging Trump-era tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). 2. Central Legal Questions Does IEEPA’s power to “regulate imports” include authority to impose tariffs? Did Congress delegate too much taxing authority to the President?→ This triggers two major constitutional doctrines: Non‑Delegation Doctrine – Congress cannot hand over core lawmaking powers (like taxation) without clear limits. Major Questions Doctrine – Major economic or political actions require explicit congressional authorization. 3. Constitutional Tension Article I, Section 8 gives Congress the power to: Lay and collect taxes/tariffs Regulate commerce with foreign nations Tariffs sit at the intersection of foreign policy (executive power) and taxation (legislative power). 4. Oral Argument Themes Justices skeptical of Trump’s argument: Roberts – Concerned tariffs are fundamentally taxes on Americans, which is Congress’s domain. Gorsuch & Barrett – Pressed the need for clear statutory limits; worried about unchecked executive authority. Justices leaning toward upholding the tariffs: Kavanaugh – Emphasized long history of broad presidential discretion in foreign affairs. Thomas – Focused on historical practice of using tariffs as trade tools. Alito – Concerned about practical impacts and the large reliance interests ($133B already collected). 5. Predicted Outcome (from the document’s speaker) Expected ruling: 5–4 in favor of Trump, upholding tariff authority. Predicted majority: Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh + either Barrett or Gorsuch. Reasoning: Court is reluctant to disrupt years of foreign policy and economic decisions already relying on the tariffs. Institutional stability concerns—similar to Roberts’ reasoning in the Affordable Care Act case. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.