POPULARITY
Categories
133 episodes with Breyer
69 episodes with Breyer
8 episodes with Breyer
13 episodes with Breyer
6 episodes with Breyer
5 episodes with Breyer
6 episodes with Breyer
10 episodes with Breyer
6 episodes with Breyer
4 episodes with Breyer
4 episodes with Breyer
4 episodes with Breyer
2 episodes with Breyer
2 episodes with Breyer
4 episodes with Breyer
3 episodes with Breyer
4 episodes with Breyer
9 episodes with Breyer
Die Themen: Hitzewelle grillt Deutschland tagelang; Warum Trump den Iran-Deal schon unterschrieben hat; Ukrainische Drohnen treffen Ölraffinerie in Russland; Bundesarbeitsministerin plant Pflicht zur Arbeitszeiterfassung; Die Einbildung ein Fußballspiel angeschaut zu haben; Die Bach-Hitparade in Leipzig und wie Lesen wieder sexy geworden ist Host der heutigen Folge ist Cornelius Pollmer (Die Zeit) Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte: https://linktr.ee/ApokalypseundFilterkaffee Du möchtest Werbung in diesem Podcast schalten? Dann erfahre hier mehr über die Werbemöglichkeiten bei Seven.One Audio: https://www.seven.one/portfolio/sevenone-audio
In this episode of the Dressage Today Podcast, sponsored by Tribute, we talk to Grand Prix dressage rider Lauren Chumley about her superstar partner Leeloo Dallas and the Dressage Foundation Anne Barlow-Ramsay grant she and the mare received in 2024, her experience training a variety of breeds for dressage and her passion for teaching up-and-coming dressage professionals to prioritize developing young horses for the sport.As always, if you love our podcasts, make sure to subscribe, like and share them with your friends!About Lauren ChumleyLauren Chumley, who's often referred to by her peers as the “coolest dressage trainer,” wasn't born into a horse family, but even from a young age the telltale signs that she indeed had the recessive horse gene were there. From the moment she could read, she started pouring over every horse book she could get her hands on and amassed an unusually large collection of Breyer horses for a 12-year-old that she still has to this day.Lauren pleaded for riding lessons, but her parents who came from humble means thought the “hobby” was too expensive. It was her grandmother, however, who would eventually turn her riding dreams into a reality. One fortuitous summer, Lauren went to stay with her grandparents at the Quantico Marine Corps Base in Virginia, where her grandfather was stationed. When her grandmother decided she wanted to learn how to ride, Lauren jumped at the chance to take riding lessons with her on the base.The now decorated Grand Prix dressage rider laughs that her parents likely never forgave her grandmother for fostering her budding passion. Following her introduction to riding at Quantico, Lauren started taking lessons at a local barn in Hamilton, Ohio, where she quickly found her calling in dressage.At 14, she started training with dressage trainer Rebecca Stromatt and went on to also worked for Sorum Fjord Farm in Lebanon, Ohio, one of the largest Norwegian Fjord breeding farms in the country, where she gained a wealth of knowledge and experience working with different breeds. After attending clinics with Grand Prix dressage rider Silke Rembacz for three consecutive years, Lauren was invited to join Silke's team as an assistant trainer.In 2011, she branched out to start her own training and sales business at Hilltop Farm based out of New Jersey and Florida. Today, she is a USDF bronze, silver and gold medalist with distinction and has made her mark in both dressage and eventing, proving her diverse talent as a rider. Lauren, who regularly works with Michael Bragdell, has competed multiple self-trained horses through Grand Prix and has earned many USDF year-end and all-breeds awards at the national levels.In 2024, she received one of two Dressage Foundation Anne Barlow-Ramsay grants for U.S.-bred horses with her then 8-year-old home-bred Dutch Warmblood mare Leeloo Dallas, who she is currently competing with at the Grand Prix level. She and one of her other current Grand Prix mounts, Santa Barbara DASH also have an amazing partnership and won the 3* Intermediate I Freestyle at the 2022 Dressage at Devon during a downpour.Lauren is a regular competitor at the USEF Festival of Champions, Dressage at Devon, USDF Regional Championships and the US Dressage Finals. She has high hopes for her pipeline of North American-bred young horses and hopes to start them in the FEI young horse classes in the future.About This Episode's Sponsor: TributeWhat if your horse's nutrition only changed when it truly mattered? That's the philosophy behind Tribute Equine Nutrition. As a fixed-formula brand, they don't make changes unless new research shows they can make their feeds meaningfully better—supporting things like digestibility, nutrient absorption, and overall performance. That's why Tribute Equine Nutrition is upgrading every formula in their lineup, building on improvements made to their best-sellers and rolling those advancements out across 2026.To celebrate, Tribute has hidden golden tickets in random bags—worth up to a year's supply of feed for one horse. Horse owners can also get a free, personalized feeding plan, and new customers receive their first bag shipped free. Visit TributeEquineNutrition.com and click “Get a Feed Plan” to learn more.Connect with the Hosts: Email Aviva Nebesky (horsepenhillfarm@aol.com) | Email Stephany Fish Crossman (stephanyfish@gmail.com)Connect with the Show: Website (DressageToday.com) | Socials (@DressageToday) Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | PinterestGuest: Lauren ChumleyOur Sponsors this month: Tribute
In this episode of the Dressage Today Podcast, sponsored by Tribute, we talk to Grand Prix dressage rider Lauren Chumley about her superstar partner Leeloo Dallas and the Dressage Foundation Anne Barlow-Ramsay grant she and the mare received in 2024, her experience training a variety of breeds for dressage and her passion for teaching up-and-coming dressage professionals to prioritize developing young horses for the sport.As always, if you love our podcasts, make sure to subscribe, like and share them with your friends!About Lauren ChumleyLauren Chumley, who's often referred to by her peers as the “coolest dressage trainer,” wasn't born into a horse family, but even from a young age the telltale signs that she indeed had the recessive horse gene were there. From the moment she could read, she started pouring over every horse book she could get her hands on and amassed an unusually large collection of Breyer horses for a 12-year-old that she still has to this day.Lauren pleaded for riding lessons, but her parents who came from humble means thought the “hobby” was too expensive. It was her grandmother, however, who would eventually turn her riding dreams into a reality. One fortuitous summer, Lauren went to stay with her grandparents at the Quantico Marine Corps Base in Virginia, where her grandfather was stationed. When her grandmother decided she wanted to learn how to ride, Lauren jumped at the chance to take riding lessons with her on the base.The now decorated Grand Prix dressage rider laughs that her parents likely never forgave her grandmother for fostering her budding passion. Following her introduction to riding at Quantico, Lauren started taking lessons at a local barn in Hamilton, Ohio, where she quickly found her calling in dressage.At 14, she started training with dressage trainer Rebecca Stromatt and went on to also worked for Sorum Fjord Farm in Lebanon, Ohio, one of the largest Norwegian Fjord breeding farms in the country, where she gained a wealth of knowledge and experience working with different breeds. After attending clinics with Grand Prix dressage rider Silke Rembacz for three consecutive years, Lauren was invited to join Silke's team as an assistant trainer.In 2011, she branched out to start her own training and sales business at Hilltop Farm based out of New Jersey and Florida. Today, she is a USDF bronze, silver and gold medalist with distinction and has made her mark in both dressage and eventing, proving her diverse talent as a rider. Lauren, who regularly works with Michael Bragdell, has competed multiple self-trained horses through Grand Prix and has earned many USDF year-end and all-breeds awards at the national levels.In 2024, she received one of two Dressage Foundation Anne Barlow-Ramsay grants for U.S.-bred horses with her then 8-year-old home-bred Dutch Warmblood mare Leeloo Dallas, who she is currently competing with at the Grand Prix level. She and one of her other current Grand Prix mounts, Santa Barbara DASH also have an amazing partnership and won the 3* Intermediate I Freestyle at the 2022 Dressage at Devon during a downpour.Lauren is a regular competitor at the USEF Festival of Champions, Dressage at Devon, USDF Regional Championships and the US Dressage Finals. She has high hopes for her pipeline of North American-bred young horses and hopes to start them in the FEI young horse classes in the future.About This Episode's Sponsor: TributeWhat if your horse's nutrition only changed when it truly mattered? That's the philosophy behind Tribute Equine Nutrition. As a fixed-formula brand, they don't make changes unless new research shows they can make their feeds meaningfully better—supporting things like digestibility, nutrient absorption, and overall performance. That's why Tribute Equine Nutrition is upgrading every formula in their lineup, building on improvements made to their best-sellers and rolling those advancements out across 2026.To celebrate, Tribute has hidden golden tickets in random bags—worth up to a year's supply of feed for one horse. Horse owners can also get a free, personalized feeding plan, and new customers receive their first bag shipped free. Visit TributeEquineNutrition.com and click “Get a Feed Plan” to learn more.Connect with the Hosts: Email Aviva Nebesky (horsepenhillfarm@aol.com) | Email Stephany Fish Crossman (stephanyfish@gmail.com)Connect with the Show: Website (DressageToday.com) | Socials (@DressageToday) Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | PinterestGuest: Lauren ChumleyOur Sponsors this month: Tribute
In this episode of the Dressage Today Podcast, sponsored by Tribute, we talk to Grand Prix dressage rider Lauren Chumley about her superstar partner Leeloo Dallas and the Dressage Foundation Anne Barlow-Ramsay grant she and the mare received in 2024, her experience training a variety of breeds for dressage and her passion for teaching up-and-coming dressage professionals to prioritize developing young horses for the sport.As always, if you love our podcasts, make sure to subscribe, like and share them with your friends!About Lauren ChumleyLauren Chumley, who's often referred to by her peers as the “coolest dressage trainer,” wasn't born into a horse family, but even from a young age the telltale signs that she indeed had the recessive horse gene were there. From the moment she could read, she started pouring over every horse book she could get her hands on and amassed an unusually large collection of Breyer horses for a 12-year-old that she still has to this day.Lauren pleaded for riding lessons, but her parents who came from humble means thought the “hobby” was too expensive. It was her grandmother, however, who would eventually turn her riding dreams into a reality. One fortuitous summer, Lauren went to stay with her grandparents at the Quantico Marine Corps Base in Virginia, where her grandfather was stationed. When her grandmother decided she wanted to learn how to ride, Lauren jumped at the chance to take riding lessons with her on the base.The now decorated Grand Prix dressage rider laughs that her parents likely never forgave her grandmother for fostering her budding passion. Following her introduction to riding at Quantico, Lauren started taking lessons at a local barn in Hamilton, Ohio, where she quickly found her calling in dressage.At 14, she started training with dressage trainer Rebecca Stromatt and went on to also worked for Sorum Fjord Farm in Lebanon, Ohio, one of the largest Norwegian Fjord breeding farms in the country, where she gained a wealth of knowledge and experience working with different breeds. After attending clinics with Grand Prix dressage rider Silke Rembacz for three consecutive years, Lauren was invited to join Silke's team as an assistant trainer.In 2011, she branched out to start her own training and sales business at Hilltop Farm based out of New Jersey and Florida. Today, she is a USDF bronze, silver and gold medalist with distinction and has made her mark in both dressage and eventing, proving her diverse talent as a rider. Lauren, who regularly works with Michael Bragdell, has competed multiple self-trained horses through Grand Prix and has earned many USDF year-end and all-breeds awards at the national levels.In 2024, she received one of two Dressage Foundation Anne Barlow-Ramsay grants for U.S.-bred horses with her then 8-year-old home-bred Dutch Warmblood mare Leeloo Dallas, who she is currently competing with at the Grand Prix level. She and one of her other current Grand Prix mounts, Santa Barbara DASH also have an amazing partnership and won the 3* Intermediate I Freestyle at the 2022 Dressage at Devon during a downpour.Lauren is a regular competitor at the USEF Festival of Champions, Dressage at Devon, USDF Regional Championships and the US Dressage Finals. She has high hopes for her pipeline of North American-bred young horses and hopes to start them in the FEI young horse classes in the future.About This Episode's Sponsor: TributeWhat if your horse's nutrition only changed when it truly mattered? That's the philosophy behind Tribute Equine Nutrition. As a fixed-formula brand, they don't make changes unless new research shows they can make their feeds meaningfully better—supporting things like digestibility, nutrient absorption, and overall performance. That's why Tribute Equine Nutrition is upgrading every formula in their lineup, building on improvements made to their best-sellers and rolling those advancements out across 2026.To celebrate, Tribute has hidden golden tickets in random bags—worth up to a year's supply of feed for one horse. Horse owners can also get a free, personalized feeding plan, and new customers receive their first bag shipped free. Visit TributeEquineNutrition.com and click “Get a Feed Plan” to learn more.Connect with the Hosts: Email Aviva Nebesky (horsepenhillfarm@aol.com) | Email Stephany Fish Crossman (stephanyfish@gmail.com)Connect with the Show: Website (DressageToday.com) | Socials (@DressageToday) Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | PinterestGuest: Lauren ChumleyOur Sponsors this month: Tribute
The Mares are Back from hiatus for BreyerFest 2026 to talk about Resin Renaissance model horse show, the charity raffle and Jackie's performance clinic! Lots of up front rambling and catchup talk! Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
Müller, Dirk www.deutschlandfunk.de, Interviews
Sarah Isgur — legal commentator, former DOJ spokesperson, and author of Last Branch Standing — joins the Chuck Toddcast for a comprehensive deep dive into the Supreme Court that challenges virtually everything the public thinks it knows about how the institution actually works. Isgur argues that the court's politics don't map neatly onto the current left-right spectrum, and that the court isn't really 6-3 but rather 3-3-3 — with a bloc of doctrinaire conservatives, a liberal minority, and a pragmatic center that includes Kavanaugh and Chief Justice Roberts. She reveals that Elena Kagan plays a major behind-the-scenes role that the public rarely sees, and that over the past 20 years more than 90% of rulings have had a liberal justice in the majority (undermining the narrative of a runaway conservative court) The conversation turns to deeper structural concerns about the judiciary that Isgur argues are undermining the rule of law itself. She notes that today's justices all have eerily uniform résumés — a problem created by a system that essentially identifies future Supreme Court candidates by the time they're 18 and forces them to lead incredibly sheltered lives for both career and safety reasons — making them detached from the real world in ways that earlier, more varied courts were not. She is sharply critical of Congress for making the court the arbiter of fundamental rights, which has turned every confirmation into an existential battle — the refusal to take on issues like Roe legislatively forced them to the court, and now there's no real dialogue between the branches. They close by debating a provocative proposal: the confirmation threshold for justices should be raised to 60 or even 75 votes to force presidents to nominate consensus candidates, breaking the cycle of partisan warfare that has made the Federalist Society effectively a prerequisite for any aspiring conservative judge and turned the nomination process into something that is actively bad for both the court and the rule of law. Thank you Wildgrain for sponsoring. Visit http://wildgrain.com/TODDCAST and use the code "TODDCAST" at checkout to receive $30 off your first box PLUS free Croissants for life! Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Sarah Isgur (Last Branch Standing) joins the Chuck ToddCast 01:45 The Supreme Court’s politics don’t map neatly to current left/right 03:00 Bono called Chuck a “radical centrist” 03:45 Brett Kavanaugh’s biggest regret was not getting selfie with Bono 05:30 Songs that best comment on American political culture 08:30 Incrimentalism more important than liberal/conservative 09:30 Kavanaugh & Kagan most similar to Chuck in philosophy 11:00 Kagan plays a major role on the court behind the scenes 12:00 The reputation of the solicitor general has changed under Trump 12:45 Earlier justices didn’t have the uniform resume of the current justices 14:30 Current justices are detached from the real world 15:45 Alito likely retiring this summer or next as Dems senate chances increase 16:45 White House is eager to get a Supreme Court opening 17:30 Trump may have his hands tied, Alito will want to approve successor 19:30 Alito will want someone like him to replace him 20:00 Unlikely Ted Cruz or Mike Lee will be nominated for the court 21:00 We’ve narrowed down who can be justices by the time candidates are 18 21:45 Justices have to lead an incredibly sheltered life for safety 23:45 The court isn’t really 6-3, it’s 3-3-3 25:45 Which justices are the most overtly political for their side? 27:00 Gorsuch had best opinion of the year on Trump’s tariffs 27:45 Congress has abdicated their duty, forced the court to legislate 28:45 There’s no dialogue between congress & court. Court gets final word 30:00 Congress didn’t have the guts to take on Roe, forced it to the court 31:45 Court has become the arbiter of rights, making confirmations existential 33:15 Rights of criminal defendants are compromised by an elected judiciary 34:15 Elections for judges create perverse incentive structures 35:45 Jackson & Kavanaugh share view of their role on the court 36:45 In past 20 years, over 90% of rulings had a liberal in the majority 38:30 Justice Thomas has been remarkably consistent in his rulings 40:30 Gorsuch consistently relies on the text and applies it 41:15 Thomas is a hardcore originalist 43:00 Chief Justice Roberts has eschewed any type of label 45:00 Kagan tries to keep the court out of issues unless they must intervene 46:15 Justices are taking fewer cases and writing more opinions than ever 47:15 The court speaks in too many voices now 49:00 Justice Alito’s favorite movie is “Being There” 50:15 Breyer was a 2nd backup choice for the court 52:00 The value of moderation vs. abstention 53:45 Should the confirmation threshold for justices be raised to 60 or 75? 56:30 Requirement to join the Federalist Society if you want to be a judge 57:30 Proposal for how to fix the confirmation wars 1:00:00 Current nomination process is bad for the court & rule of law 1:05:00 Court is last branch standing for now, haven’t seen result of 50 vote confirmationSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Chuck Todd surveys a dire geopolitical landscape where the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, fuel rationing has begun in many places around the globe, and the Trump administration is scrambling to extend a fragile ceasefire with Iran — sending JD Vance back to Pakistan for another round of talks, a move Chuck says signals genuine desperation to end a war that has become a generational foreign policy disaster. Heargues that Iran's control of the strait is now a greater deterrent than nuclear weapons ever were, that the Iranians know Trump is on the clock and that time is firmly on Tehran's side — meaning the best Trump can realistically hope for is a deal that looks remarkably like the Obama nuclear agreement he once shredded. Oil and stock markets appear divorced from reality while energy markets are in major distress, China's position has been strengthened enormously and Netanyahu has effectively suckered Trump into a mess that will define American foreign policy for a generation. He then unpacks a bombshell Atlantic report painting FBI Director Kash Patel as absent, unreliable, and allegedly drunk on the job — noting that just because it's a "hit piece" doesn't mean it's not true, that rank-and-file intelligence professionals don't trust the people leading their agencies, and that Patel himself believes he's about to be fired because Trump personally despises anecdotes about drinking. He closes with Virginia's redistricting referendum, which ends Tuesday and looks likely to pass, but he questions whether Democrats are making a smart investment — blowing enormous political capital and damaging Governor Abigail Spanberger's brand to pick up only two House seats, a tradeoff that may not be worth the cost. Then, Sarah Isgur — legal commentator, former DOJ spokesperson, and author of Last Branch Standing — joins the Chuck Toddcast for a comprehensive deep dive into the Supreme Court that challenges virtually everything the public thinks it knows about how the institution actually works. Isgur argues that the court's politics don't map neatly onto the current left-right spectrum, and that the court isn't really 6-3 but rather 3-3-3 — with a bloc of doctrinaire conservatives, a liberal minority, and a pragmatic center that includes Kavanaugh and Chief Justice Roberts. She reveals that Elena Kagan plays a major behind-the-scenes role that the public rarely sees, and that over the past 20 years more than 90% of rulings have had a liberal justice in the majority (undermining the narrative of a runaway conservative court) The conversation turns to deeper structural concerns about the judiciary that Isgur argues are undermining the rule of law itself. She notes that today's justices all have eerily uniform résumés — a problem created by a system that essentially identifies future Supreme Court candidates by the time they're 18 and forces them to lead incredibly sheltered lives for both career and safety reasons — making them detached from the real world in ways that earlier, more varied courts were not. She is sharply critical of Congress for making the court the arbiter of fundamental rights, which has turned every confirmation into an existential battle — the refusal to take on issues like Roe legislatively forced them to the court, and now there's no real dialogue between the branches. They close by debating a provocative proposal: the confirmation threshold for justices should be raised to 60 or even 75 votes to force presidents to nominate consensus candidates, breaking the cycle of partisan warfare that has made the Federalist Society effectively a prerequisite for any aspiring conservative judge and turned the nomination process into something that is actively bad for both the court and the rule of law. Finally, Chuck hops into the ToddCast Time Machine to revisit America’s first war of choice: The Spanish American War. He also answers listeners’ questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment. Thank you Wildgrain for sponsoring. Visit http://wildgrain.com/TODDCAST and use the code "TODDCAST" at checkout to receive $30 off your first box PLUS free Croissants for life! Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 04:00 We’re in a precious position. Strait of Hormuz closed & fuel rationing is coming 05:00 Expect some sort of extension of the current ceasefire agreement 05:45 JD Vance headed back to Pakistan for another round of talks 06:30 Sending Vance shows they’re serious about trying to end war 07:15 Trump is desperate to get out of the war 08:00 Control of Strait of Hormuz is a greater deterrent than nukes 09:00 Oil & stock markets seem divorced from reality 09:45 Energy markets are is major distress 10:45 Trump’s approval has slipped, public knows the war is going badly 11:30 Trump is talking tough, but his actions are cautious 12:30 Iranians know Trump is desperate and Iranians have serious leverage 14:00 Iranians know Trump is on the clock, and they have time on their side 14:30 China’s position has been strengthened by Iran war 15:45 U.S. is stretched too thin currently to defend Taiwan 17:00 Energy shock increases demand for clean energy, where China leads 18:15 Bibi suckered Trump into a generational foreign policy disaster 19:15 We’re likely stuck without a resolution to the war for awhile 20:15 Best Trump can hope for is redoing the Obama nuclear deal 21:30 Time is running out on the 60 day war powers resolution deadline 22:45 Trump has 5 weeks to get a deal before congress is forced to step in 23:30 Atlantic publishes story about Kash Patel being MIA & drunk 24:30 Patel denied everything, hoping for White House backup 25:30 Just because it’s a “hit piece” doesn’t mean it’s not true 26:15 People working at the FBI don’t trust the guy leading it 28:00 Atlantic paints a portrait of an FBI leader that’s completely unreliable 29:00 Patel’s ineptitude creates a national security threat to the U.S. 30:30 Rank & file intel professionals don’t trust the people in charge 31:45 Trump hates anecdotes about drinking, Patel’s days are numbered 32:30 Patel believes he’s going to be fired 34:00 Balloting for Virginia redistricting ends on Tuesday, looks like it will pass 34:30 Democrats expending political capital to only pick up two house seats 35:30 Redistricting fight has been terrible politically for Abigail Spanberger 38:00 New map will trim two very blue districts and export voters to swing districts 40:30 Blowing all this political capital for two seats doesn’t seem worth it 42:15 Livestream on Tuesday evening breaking down the results from VA 48:30 Sarah Isgur (Last Branch Standing) joins the Chuck ToddCast 50:15 The Supreme Court’s politics don’t map neatly to current left/right 51:30 Bono called Chuck a “radical centrist” 52:15 Brett Kavanaugh’s biggest regret was not getting selfie with Bono 54:00 Songs that best comment on American political culture 57:00 Incrimentalism more important than liberal/conservative 58:00 Kavanaugh & Kagan most similar to Chuck in philosophy 59:30 Kagan plays a major role on the court behind the scenes 1:00:30 The reputation of the solicitor general has changed under Trump 1:01:15 Earlier justices didn’t have the uniform resume of the current justices 1:03:00 Current justices are detached from the real world 1:04:15 Alito likely retiring this summer or next as Dems senate chances increase 1:05:15 White House is eager to get a Supreme Court opening 1:06:00 Trump may have his hands tied, Alito will want to approve successor 1:08:00 Alito will want someone like him to replace him 1:08:30 Unlikely Ted Cruz or Mike Lee will be nominated for the court 1:09:30 We’ve narrowed down who can be justices by the time candidates are 18 1:10:15 Justices have to lead an incredibly sheltered life for safety 1:12:15 The court isn’t really 6-3, it’s 3-3-3 1:14:15 Which justices are the most overtly political for their side? 1:15:30 Gorsuch had best opinion of the year on Trump’s tariffs 1:16:15 Congress has abdicated their duty, forced the court to legislate 1:17:15 There’s no dialogue between congress & court. Court gets final word 1:18:30 Congress didn’t have the guts to take on Roe, forced it to the court 1:20:15 Court has become the arbiter of rights, making confirmations existential 1:21:45 Rights of criminal defendants are compromised by an elected judiciary 1:22:45 Elections for judges create perverse incentive structures 1:24:15 Jackson & Kavanaugh share view of their role on the court 1:25:15 In past 20 years, over 90% of rulings had a liberal in the majority 1:27:00 Justice Thomas has been remarkably consistent in his rulings 1:29:00 Gorsuch consistently relies on the text and applies it 1:29:45 Thomas is a hardcore originalist 1:31:30 Chief Justice Roberts has eschewed any type of label 1:33:30 Kagan tries to keep the court out of issues unless they must intervene 1:34:45 Justices are taking fewer cases and writing more opinions than ever 1:35:45 The court speaks in too many voices now 1:37:30 Justice Alito’s favorite movie is “Being There” 1:38:45 Breyer was a 2nd backup choice for the court 1:40:30 The value of moderation vs. abstention 1:42:15 Should the confirmation threshold for justices be raised to 60 or 75? 1:45:00 Requirement to join the Federalist Society if you want to be a judge 1:46:00 Proposal for how to fix the confirmation wars 1:48:30 Current nomination process is bad for the court & rule of law 1:53:30 Court is last branch standing for now, haven’t seen result of 50 vote confirmation 1:56:30 Thoughts on Sarah Isgur’s proposal on SCOTUS confirmations 1:57:30 ToddCast Time Machine April 20th, 1898 - Spanish American War 1:59:00 U.S.S. Maine exploded in Havana harbor, conclusion was Spain did it 1:59:30 The facts didn’t lead to the conclusion, the conclusion came first 2:00:15 Hearst & Pulitzer were locked in a publishing war, competing for readers 2:01:00 William McKinley didn’t want war, but pressure kept building 2:02:00 It was a War of Choice, and the press pushed leaders into war 2:02:30 Congress demanded that Spain leave Cuba 2:03:30 U.S. begins blockage of Cuba, basically kicking off the war 2:04:15 Congress backdated their declaration of war 2:05:00 Teddy Roosevelt’s rise scared establishment Republicans 2:05:30 The war produced Roosevelt’s presidency 2:06:30 It was a war of choice, until it felt like there was no other option 2:07:00 Wars of choice never end well 2:07:30 Ask Chuck 2:07:45 As Trump’s support erodes, any chance the 25th amendment gets invoked? 2:11:30 Does Federalist 10 still hold up? Is there a case for a constitutional convention? 2:18:00 A Top 5 list of races where you think the election projections are off? 2:24:30 Did I hear a dog in the background in your Wednesday episode? 2:26:45 Can you bring on a late night host like Colbert, Oliver or Maher? 2:29:30 What can and can’t be done with the huge fundraising hauls Dems are getting? 2:36:30 Thoughts on the NBA playoffsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
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!
It's one thing to build a successful business, and another to survive it. In this episode, luxury photographer Oona Breyer shares how she shifted from “barely treading water” to building a brand that's fully booked and sustainable.We talk about the behind-the-scenes realities of scaling in a midsize market, what changed when she got clear on her messaging, and how understanding buyer types helped her not just sell more, but serve better. Oona also opens up about the mindset shifts, team decisions, and copy-led strategies that helped her attract more of the right clients without compromising her life or her values.What you'll learn:Why good work and referrals are not enough to grow (and what actually is)The moment it all clicked for Oona and how she used that insight to sell more effectivelyHow to build a business that supports your family, team, and clients without burning out
Mark Breyer runs The Husband & Wife Law Team with a simple belief: If intake breaks, everything breaks. In this episode, he lays out how he thinks about calls, follow-up, and trust-building—and why he invests in experience on the front end. He also breaks down how he built a social presence that feels real, not polished, and why that matters when people decide who to call. You'll learn: The intake habits Mark believes separate winners from everyone else. Why experienced attorneys stay involved on the first call. How dashboards expose slowdowns before they cost cases. Why his social content makes the firm feel familiar before anyone reaches out. If you like what you hear, hit Subscribe. We do this every week. Buy tickets for PIMCON 2026: pimcon.org Subscribe to our newsletter: newsletter.rankings.io Get Social! Personal Injury Mastermind (PIM) powered by Rankings.io is on Instagram | YouTube | TikTok
Is transecting urethroplasty still the default, or is reconstructive urology moving beyond it? In this episode of BackTable Urology, Dr. Ben Breyer (University of California San Francisco) joins host Dr. George Koch (Ohio State University) to discuss evolving approaches in reconstructive urology with an emphasis on complex stricture cases. --- SYNPOSIS Throughout the conversation, Dr. Breyer reflects on his path into the subspecialty and breaks down the evolution of reconstructive practice, particularly the shift from anastomotic urethroplasty to non-transecting techniques. Dr. Breyer and Dr. Koch also discuss managing complex urethral strictures, including cases involving prior radiation and inflammatory conditions, while emphasizing thoughtful patient selection and surgical planning. Finally, they explore the current training landscape, challenges in patient access to subspecialty reconstructive care, and why patient-reported outcomes will play a central role in shaping future innovation in urethral reconstruction. --- TIMESTAMPS 00:00 - Introduction05:40 - Evolution of Surgical Techniques10:01 - Managing Complex Cases14:19 - Education and Training in Reconstructive Urology23:45 - The Future of Reconstructive Urology28:45 - The Journey of a Reconstructive Urologist30:45 - Challenges in Urology Training and Practice35:35 - Addressing Urologist Shortages in Rural Areas48:34 - Innovations and Research in Reconstructive Urology57:25 - Final Thoughts
Juan Linhares Weiss é estrategista e coprodutor. Milena Breyer é modelista, expert e influenciadora no nicho de moda. Juntos, eles transformaram conhecimento técnico em um negócio por recorrência em um dos nichos mais improváveis do digital: modelagem de roupas.Neste episódio do Kiwicast, o casal conta como construiu um produto durável, com comunidade engajada e vendas previsíveis, faturando mais de R$ 1,5 milhão ao unir estratégia, conteúdo e posicionamento em um mercado pouco explorado.A conversa passa pelos bastidores da criação do produto, pelas decisões que sustentam a recorrência e pela conexão verdadeira com a sua comunidade.Neste episódio, você vai aprender:● Como criar um produto com recorrência e longevidade● As estratégias de funil, tráfego e copy por trás dos R$ 1,5 milhão faturados● Como criar e testar diferentes formatos de criativosE muito mais!Aprenda com quem vive o mercado digital na prática.Dá o play e deixe nos comentários qual foi o melhor insight que você tirou do episódio.Nosso Instagram é @Kiwify
This Day in Legal History: Bush v. GoreOn December 12, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Bush v. Gore, effectively ending the Florida recount and resolving the 2000 presidential election in favor of George W. Bush. The per curiam opinion held that the Florida Supreme Court's method for ordering a manual recount violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment due to inconsistent standards across counties. The Court also ruled that there was not enough time to implement a constitutionally valid recount before the deadline for certifying electors.The decision was one of the most controversial in the Court's history. It was split 5-4 along ideological lines, with the majority—led by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, and O'Connor—arguing that allowing the recount to continue would irreparably harm Bush. The dissent, written by Justices Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Souter, criticized the majority for intervening in a state election process and undermining public confidence in judicial neutrality.The ruling effectively awarded Florida's 25 electoral votes to Bush, giving him 271 electoral votes—one more than needed to win the presidency—despite losing the national popular vote to Al Gore. The case remains a flashpoint in debates over judicial activism, the politicization of the courts, and the role of federal courts in state election matters. It also raised enduring questions about election integrity and the limits of judicial power in resolving political disputes.The watchdog group American Oversight filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Commerce and Justice Departments, demanding records of legal arrangements between the Trump administration and nine major law firms. The group had submitted eight Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests in October seeking details about agreements in which the firms pledged to provide nearly $940 million in pro bono or discounted legal services to the federal government. After receiving inadequate responses, the group took legal action to compel the release of any related contracts, communications, or internal legal analyses.The agreements were announced by Trump earlier in the year on social media, shortly after he issued executive orders targeting law firms for their previous political and diversity-related work. American Oversight is particularly concerned about whether the deals were transparent and whether they might have influenced government policy or enforcement decisions. Several firms—Kirkland & Ellis, Paul Weiss, Simpson Thacher, and Skadden Arps—were reported to have been involved in trade matters or other projects with the administration. None of the firms or the agencies responded to requests for comment.This lawsuit follows a similar legal action by Columbia University's Knight First Amendment Institute, which alleged in October that related federal record requests had been improperly denied. Meanwhile, Democratic lawmakers have also asked several of the firms to explain their government work, but the firms declined, citing client confidentiality and discretion in matter selection.Trump administration sued for records of law firm deals | ReutersA federal judge blocked a renewed attempt by immigration authorities to detain Kilmar Abrego, just one day after his court-ordered release from ICE custody in Pennsylvania. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis had previously ordered Abrego's temporary release, but an immigration judge quickly issued a new directive requiring him to report back to detention by the following morning. In response, Abrego's attorneys filed an emergency request to stop the re-detention, which Xinis granted.In her ruling, Judge Xinis emphasized that judicial decisions must be respected and cannot be reversed hastily without due process. Abrego's case has drawn national attention, serving as a high-profile example of what critics view as the Trump administration's heavy-handed immigration enforcement tactics. Originally deported in March to El Salvador under disputed circumstances, Abrego was returned to the U.S. in June to face charges related to human smuggling.Supporters argue his case reflects serious due process violations, while administration officials have maintained he poses a public safety risk. The legal tug-of-war over Abrego's detention has become emblematic of broader legal and political conflicts surrounding immigration enforcement and civil liberties under the Trump administration.Judge blocks new effort to detain Kilmar Abrego | ReutersA federal judge in Boston ruled that the Trump administration acted unlawfully when it attempted to terminate a FEMA program designed to help states prepare for natural disasters. U.S. District Judge Richard Stearns sided with a coalition of 20 mostly Democratic-led states, finding that the administration overstepped its authority by trying to cancel the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program and redirect its funds elsewhere without congressional approval.The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees FEMA, had labeled the program wasteful and politically driven when it moved to end it in April. Judge Stearns rejected that rationale, emphasizing that Congress—not the executive branch—has the power to decide how federal funds are spent. He previously issued an order in August blocking FEMA from diverting more than $4 billion in BRIC funding. In this latest decision, he ordered the program reinstated and required FEMA to take immediate steps to undo its termination.Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell praised the ruling, stating it would save lives by preserving funding for critical infrastructure improvements meant to prevent disaster-related harm. The Department of Homeland Security, in contrast, denied that it had ended BRIC and accused the court of siding with a politicized narrative, claiming the program had been misused by the Biden administration.Since its launch, BRIC has approved over $4.5 billion in grants for nearly 2,000 disaster mitigation projects, many located in vulnerable coastal states. The lawsuit, led by states like Washington and Massachusetts, argued that canceling the program delayed or canceled hundreds of vital community projects aimed at reducing disaster risk.Trump administration unlawfully canceled disaster prevention program, US judge rules | ReutersPresident Trump announced an executive order threatening to withhold federal broadband funding from states with AI regulations deemed obstructive to national technological dominance. The order targets state-level laws that the administration argues create a fragmented, burdensome environment for AI innovation, particularly for startups. Trump emphasized the need for a single, centralized regulatory system, positioning the U.S. to compete more aggressively with China in the AI sector.The order authorizes the Commerce Department to review state AI laws and restrict access to the $42 billion Broadband Equity Access and Deployment fund for non-compliant states. It also criticizes anti-discrimination measures in states like Colorado, claiming such laws inject “ideological bias” into AI development. While the administration supports certain safeguards, such as child protection, it aims to dismantle what it sees as excessive oversight.Critics argue the move undermines state authority and risks public safety. Representative Don Beyer warned the order violates the 10th Amendment and discourages meaningful congressional action. State leaders from both parties have defended their right to regulate AI, citing the federal government's inaction on tech legislation. States like New York, California, and Florida have already enacted laws addressing AI's risks, from data transparency to deepfake bans.Trump threatens funding for states over AI regulations | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Abigail Leahey and her classmates.This week, we are proud to present a performance of singular clarity, youthful ambition, and the product of more than a little bit of dedicated practice: The First Scale March, recorded live on December 10th at a school Winter Concert. Its thematic simplicity belies its pedagogical complexity: it is equal parts warm-up and war cry. The holidays are upon us.The featured artist, Abigail, is one of several violins. She was born in New Jersey in 2014 and has been defying expectations and delighting her family ever since. A gifted writer, illustrator, softball player, and—crucially—violinist, she began studying the instrument in earnest in early 2025. In a bold display of ambidextrous courage, she agreed to learn the instrument right-handed.Abigail's musical sensibility combines the raw urgency of a student recital with the unmistakable rhythmic intensity of a group trying very hard to play the same tempo at the same time. Her phrasing evokes a deep respect for the discipline of practice; she has come a long way—and is still going.We are honored to showcase this piece as a representative work from a performer at the dawn of her musical journey, backed by a supporting cast of equally determined string players. With hearts full and bows raised, they march forward—one note at a time. 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
This show has been flagged as Clean by the host. When Your Dentist Uses ChatControl Logic So there I am, sitting in the waiting room with a mildly annoying toothache. Nothing catastrophic, just one of those dull throbs that tells you something's going on in there that could turn nasty if ignored. The receptionist calls my name, and I walk into Dr. ChatControl's office. Dr. ChatControl greets me with a concerned expression. "I've reviewed your case," he says gravely, "and many others. Toothaches are a serious problem. Did you know that in 2023 alone, at least 101,988 people in Europe experienced dental pain? That's over 60% of all global dental complaints traced to this region." "Okay," I say. "But I just need you to look at this one tooth" "This is an epidemic," he interrupts. "And we can't just treat symptoms anymore. We need a comprehensive, mandatory risk assessment." Dr. ChatControl pulls out a 47-page questionnaire. "First, we assess the risk that your mouth might develop cavities, gum disease, or oral cancer," he explained. "This applies to everyone, regardless of whether they have symptoms." "But I have symptoms," I sigh. "That's why I'm here." "Exactly!" he says triumphantly. Which means you're high-risk. So we move to Phase Two: mitigation measures." He hands me a pamphlet titled Safety-by-Design for Oral Health . "From now on, you'll need to implement parental controls on your diet. Every candy will come with an age verification wrapper and user reporting mechanisms. so your teeth can flag potential problems, and verify your age before consuming any hard foods." "I'm 38," I retort. "Perfect," he replies. "That means you're old enough to consent to monitoring." "Now," Dr. ChatControl continues, "since your mitigation measures haven't been implemented yet because you just got here - I'm authorized to issue a detection order." He holds up an official-looking document with a judge's signature. "This allows me to scan not just the tooth that hurts, but your entire mouth. Also your sinuses. And your lymph nodes. And, just to be thorough, everyone in the waiting room." "Wait, what?" I blurt out. "It's targeted," he assures me. "We're only scanning high-risk areas—which, according to our independent EU Dental Centre, is every tooth, every patient, all the time." "But here's the clever part," Dr. ChatControl says, pulling out what looks like a tiny sander strapped to an airbrush. "Well, your enamel contains layers that currently block our view with regards to early detection of certain viruses. So we need to replace the enamel with an optimized layer that perfectly protects against currently known sugars and acids but allows our government approved detection equipment to inspect the content of your teeth." I' flabberghasted. "You want to weaken my enamel?" "Only slightly!" he said cheerfully. "Just enough so that our scanner can monitor what's happening inside your teeth at all times. Don't worry,the new enamel will still protect you from everything else." "How's that possible if you can penetrate it?", I continue, still cautious. "Well, factory approved candies, for example," he says. "Reputable candy manufacturers have agreed to respect the adapted enamel and not penetrate it. They've signed a treaty to use optimized sugars." "And the artisanal candies?" I asked. "Ah," he said, adjusting his glasses. "Well, those are obviously illegal! Those criminals don't tend to honor treaties. So yes, the adapted enamel will make your teeth more vulnerable to unauthorized cavity formation, bacterial attacks, and anyone who wants to exploit the fact that your natural protection has been replaced with a see-through version." "So you're making my teeth less secure," I repeat. "We're making them more observable," he corrects, with a slightly annoyed tone. "There's a difference. Your teeth will still be protected, just not from us. Or hostile foreign candy shops. Or those criminal artisanal real-sugar-nuts. But you have no business there anyway. But they definitely protect against harms from law-abiding candy!" "But... Over 500 leading dentists signed a letter saying this would create massive vulnerabilities", I point out. "Those dentists aren't thinking about long term dental hygiene." Dr. ChatControl sighs dismissively. "Besides, it's not a backdoor if we're replacing your front door with a tinted glass door given all our citizens are law abiding!" His tone gets sterner if he continues: "Let me say more, If you refuse to upgrade your enamel, we will consider you a risk of dental terrorism. This no longer is about only your teeth, you must know. If you choose to blatantly ignore your teeth, you are a threat to society!" "But... The whole reason I am here, is because I care about my teeth..." The docter holds up his machine and asks: "Do you want me to treat you or report you?" Oh, whatever, it seems everybody is doing this. I don't want to be the outcast crying wolf all the time. So I cave in. The procedure doesn't feel painful, so that's a relief. After completing the baseline scan, Dr. ChatControl frowns at the screen: "This is concerning," he says. "The system has flagged 8,412 potential cavities." "But I only have 32 teeth," I wimper. "The detection algorithm works on a probabilistic model," he explains. "Swiss dental authorities report that about 80% of automated cavity reports are false positives, so we'll need to investigate all of them." "That still means 1,682 of those threats are real", I sigh. "Which is still 1,682 too many!" Dr. ChatControl blurts. "Now, I'll need to drill exploratory holes in every tooth, in your gums, your tongue, and —just to be safe— your neighbor's mouth, because the system flagged them too when they walked past the waiting room." "This seems insane," I say. "The math is solid," he insists. "Even at 99.999% accuracy —which doesn't exist— we'd still generate 100,000 false dental alerts per day across Europe's 450 million people. But we can't let cavities win." While Dr. ChatControl explains his flawless system, I notice how the tooth that actually is hurting —the one I came in to fix— is starting to abscess. "Uh, Doctor," I say, pointing to the swelling. "We'll get to that after we finish scanning everyone," he says dismissively. "The important thing is that no cavity goes undetected, even if that means we spend all our time investigating healthy teeth." "But the actual problem is getting worse," I said. "That's because sophisticated cavities have learned to evade detection," Dr. ChatControl explains. "They change their appearance slightly —maybe grow on the back of the tooth instead of the front, or hide under existing fillings. Our algorithms can't catch those." "What about that letter from those 500 dentists? They also claim this detection method is technically infeasible." I try again. "They're just not thinking big enough", the doctor blocks my argument. "So here's the treatment plan," Dr. ChatControl says, "We're going to install a permanent scanning device in your jaw that monitors every tooth, 24/7, and reports any suspicious activity to a centralized EU Dental Database." "That sounds like a massive security risk," I said. "Not at all!" he replied. "The device is encrypted. Only our scanners can look behind your upgraded enamel. What leaves your tooth, is already encrypted. No other device than ours, can read the data, so your privacy is intact." "So what about those knock-offs you can buy on Ali Express?" I ask. "Oh, but they don't work reliably. And also: Why would hackers want access to your teeth?" he scoffed. "Although, now that I think about it, the device itself would make a high-value target for malicious actors, Als they could abuse them to learn how to make knock-off candy that doesn't get detected by the scanners. Things your natural enamel obviously protects against. But let's not dwell on that." "By the way," Dr. ChatControl adds casually, "EU politicians and government officials are exempt from this scanning requirement under 'professional dental secrecy.'" "So their teeth don't get monitored?" I ask. "Correct," he says. "Their oral health is a matter of public trust. Yours, however, requires constant surveillance." "That seems like a double standard," I say. "It's a two-tier system for a two-tier society," he replies pleasantly. "Now, shall we proceed with installing the jaw monitor?" By this point, my actual toothache is developing into a full-blown infection. The pain is excruciating. "Doctor, I need antibiotics and a root canal," I cry. "We don't do targeted treatments anymore," Dr. ChatControl says. "That's the old model. Now we focus on comprehensive, mandatory monitoring." "But I'm going to lose the tooth," I say. "Perhaps," he acknowledges. "But while we were scanning everyone in the waiting room, we found three people with slightly suspicious molars! They're perfectly healthy now, but they could develop cavities someday. That's three potential problems prevented!" "But my actual problem isn't being prevented," I point out. "It's getting worse." "Well yes," he admits. "But we've invested so much in the scanning infrastructure that we can't really afford to do traditional dentistry anymore. The system needs to justify itself, you understand." "This is insane," I repeat. "This is progress ," he corrects me. As I' left 'm leaving the office —untreated, in pain, and with a jaw full of surveillance equipment— I notice a sign on the door: "Signal Dental, Orthodontics Threema, and Proton Mouthcare have ceased operations in the EU due to incompatibility with mandatory scanning requirements." Apparently, the dentists who actually know how to fix teeth without installing spyware have all moved to Switzerland. Meanwhile, I hear the voice of Dr. ChatControl behind me in the waiting room, announcing to everyone: "We've successfully detected 6,847 potential cavities this week!" When someone asks what he means by potential, he quietly answers: "Only 11 were real, but that's 11 teeth saved!" The infection is still spreading and I'll probably loose my tooth after all because nobody actually is treating it. But at least the healthy ones are under constant surveillance. I made fun of it. But it's not funny. It's about wasting loads of money on a noble goal in all the wrong ways. But next week the vote will be cast in the EU. So it's high time to reach out to your MEP and ask their stance if they are undecided or worse - are in favor. Go to fightchatcontrol.eu if you live in Europe. Oh, and if you don't live in Europe... This will also impact you. Because weakened encryption in mainstream products will most certainly spread. Time to act Fight current Chat Control legislation: fightchatcontrol.eu References and Sources used Estonian Public Broadcasting. (2025, September 15). Experts: European Union's 'chat control' plan a blow to free speech. Privacy Guides explaining why it must be stopped Michel Portier, Lecturer at Hogeschool Arnhem and Nijmegen, MSc Cybersecurity and Patrick Breyer, former MEP Open Letter from 500+ Scientists and Cryptographers (2025, September 9). Open letter on the EU's proposed Child Sexual Abuse Regulation Joint statement Breyer, P. (2025, September 9). 'Danger to Democracy': 500+ Top Scientists Urge EU Governments to Reject 'Technically Infeasible' Chat Control. Breyer, P. (2025). Chat Control: The EU's CSAM scanner proposal. Private Internet Access. (2025). Chat Control, EU's Plan for Real-Time Mass Surveillance Takes a Dramatic Turn. European Digital Rights (EDRi). (2023, August). Fact-checking of top 9 claims made on the CSA Regulation. Internet Watch Foundation. (2024). 2024 Annual Insights and Data Report. European Commission. (2022, May 11). [Proposal for a Regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse COM(2022) 209 final.]( https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX%3A52022PC0209 ) European Commission. (2023, December 19). Report on the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2021/1232 (temporary derogation/"Chat Control 1.0"). Anderson, R. (2022). Chat Control or Child Protection? Research paper . University of Cambridge. Computer Weekly. (2025, September 11). Chat Control: EU to decide on requirement for tech firms to scan encrypted messages. Multiple security researchers. (2021). Bugs in Our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning . Salt Typhoon: Chinese hacking operation exploits US telecom backdoors . Provide feedback on this episode.
Peter Craddock joins us once again to discuss the recent EDPS v Single Resolution Board decision by the Court of Justice of the EU. Although it builds on the previous Scania and Breyer cases to settle on the “relative” nature of personal data, its practical implications on everything we do in the Marketing Technology and digital advertising spaces cannot be overstated.Peter is a lawyer as well as a software developer. He is based in Brussels, heads the EU Data/Cyber/Tech Law team at Keller & Heckman, and helps international companies with their global data strategy and with EU data litigation.References:* Peter Craddock on LinkedIn* When is data no longer personal? And what are the implications? (Peter Craddock)* EDPS v. SRB (full text of the decision)* Peter Craddock: ePrivacy exceptions, advertising, analytics, the limits of consent and server-side processing (Masters of Privacy, 2024) This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.mastersofprivacy.com/subscribe
This Day in Legal History: First Continental CongressOn September 5, 1774, the First Continental Congress convened in Philadelphia, marking a critical early step toward American independence. Delegates from twelve of the thirteen colonies—Georgia being the sole exception—gathered at Carpenters' Hall to coordinate a colonial response to the "Intolerable Acts," a series of punitive measures imposed by the British Parliament in the wake of the Boston Tea Party. These acts, which included the Boston Port Act and the Massachusetts Government Act, were seen by the colonists as severe violations of their rights as Englishmen.The Congress brought together influential figures such as George Washington, John Adams, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, and John Jay. Though the colonies had differing interests and levels of loyalty to the Crown, the delegates united in their desire to assert colonial rights through collective action. They adopted the Suffolk Resolves, endorsed a boycott of British goods through the Continental Association, and agreed to reconvene the following year if their grievances were not addressed.Rather than immediately pushing for independence, the First Continental Congress aimed to restore harmony with Britain while defending colonial autonomy. It drafted a Declaration of Rights and Grievances, emphasizing allegiance to the Crown but rejecting parliamentary authority over the colonies in matters of internal governance.This Congress laid the groundwork for future intercolonial cooperation and demonstrated that the colonies could act in concert. Its organizational structure, with committees and formal resolutions, prefigured the eventual legislative model adopted under the U.S. Constitution. While King George III and Parliament ultimately ignored the Congress's petitions, the gathering significantly escalated the political crisis that would lead to the American Revolutionary War.Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett said this week that, despite political polarization and President Trump's aggressive use of executive power, the U.S. is not experiencing a constitutional crisis. Whew! Speaking at New York's Lincoln Center while promoting her new book, Listening to the Law, Barrett emphasized that the Constitution is “alive and well,” and that American institutions—particularly the courts—are still functioning effectively. Her remarks come amid widespread concern over Trump's second-term policies, including sweeping immigration crackdowns, tariff impositions, and rollbacks of diversity programs, many of which have been challenged in court.Federal judges have repeatedly halted or delayed Trump's initiatives, leading to sharp criticism from the president. Earlier this year, Trump even called for the impeachment of a federal judge, raising alarms among legal scholars. Despite these tensions, Barrett asserted that a real constitutional crisis would require the collapse of the rule of law—something she doesn't see happening.Barrett also defended her controversial vote to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022, arguing that Supreme Court decisions shouldn't be influenced by shifting public opinion. While support for abortion rights has grown in recent years, Barrett stood by the Court's direction, which has taken a decisively conservative turn since her appointment in 2020. Her comments signal confidence in the judiciary's resilience during politically charged times.Supreme Court's Barrett says US not in constitutional crisis | ReutersU.S. prosecutors are aggressively charging individuals in Washington, D.C. with assaulting or resisting federal officers under a new DOJ-led law enforcement push, but the initiative is drawing scrutiny due to its stark contrast with President Trump's earlier decision to dismiss or pardon many January 6-related assault charges. A Bloomberg Law review found at least 20 new federal cases that closely resemble charges from the Capitol riot—charges that Trump has largely wiped away. Critics argue that this inconsistency undermines prosecutorial credibility and raises concerns about politicization of the Justice Department.Some judges and grand juries have echoed that skepticism. In one case, a magistrate judge cited the Jan. 6 clemencies in deciding not to detain a man charged with threatening a National Guard member. Prosecutors have also struggled to secure felony indictments, including in a case where a former DOJ employee was accused of throwing a sandwich at a federal officer. These outcomes point to juror reluctance in cases they may view as politically selective.U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro is leading the local effort and has acknowledged the difficulty of securing convictions. Some cases involve more serious allegations—kicking, hitting, or spitting on officers—while others stem from lower-level confrontations, including a disputed video involving immigration agents.Meanwhile, defendants and defense attorneys are raising claims of selective prosecution, citing the dismissal of hundreds of Jan. 6 assault cases still pending when Trump returned to office. One high-profile example involves Rep. LaMonica McIver, whose lawyers argue her case—stemming from a confrontation with immigration officers—is being pursued for political reasons. Prosecutors have already been forced to downgrade multiple cases from felonies to misdemeanors due to lack of support from grand juries.DOJ Crime Crackdown Clashes With Jan. 6 Cases Trump ForgaveA federal appeals court has temporarily blocked a lower court's ruling that would have restricted President Trump's use of military troops for immigration enforcement and crowd control in Los Angeles. The move preserves Trump's authority to use active-duty military and National Guard personnel in support of federal agents while the case is under appeal. The original ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, found that the administration had violated the Posse Comitatus Act, a law dating back to the 1800s that limits military involvement in domestic law enforcement.Breyer's decision, which would have barred military personnel from performing police functions in California, was scheduled to take effect on September 12 but is now on hold as the 9th Circuit reviews the appeal. The legal fight stems from Trump's June deployment of over 4,000 National Guard members and 700 Marines to Los Angeles during protests over federal immigration policies. Though most of the protests have since calmed, around 300 National Guard troops remain on the ground, supporting immigration and drug enforcement operations.Critics argue that Trump's use of the military in civilian law enforcement roles marks a dangerous shift in executive power. The same day the 9th Circuit paused Breyer's ruling, Washington, D.C.'s attorney general filed a lawsuit challenging similar military deployments in the capital. Trump has also signaled interest in expanding military involvement to other cities like Chicago and New Orleans.US appeals court pauses restrictions on Trump's use of troops in Los Angeles | ReutersGoogle has been hit with a $425 million jury verdict in a major privacy class action, after a last-minute law firm switch brought Cooley LLP into the case. Originally led by Willkie Farr, the defense team—headed by partners Benedict Hur and Simona Agnolucci—jumped to Cooley in June, just weeks before trial. Cooley took over the multibillion-dollar case and brought in additional lawyers to assist. The abrupt law firm change followed internal dissent at Willkie over a controversial agreement with the Trump administration requiring pro bono work aligned with White House directives.The case centered on allegations that Google collected data from nearly 100 million users despite their account settings indicating they wanted to keep their information private. After a two-week trial in San Francisco, the jury sided with the plaintiffs, led by prominent attorneys from Morgan & Morgan, Boies Schiller Flexner, and Susman Godfrey. While the plaintiffs had sought $31 billion, the jury awarded just over 1% of that amount.Google said it will appeal, claiming the jury misunderstood how its privacy settings function. The plaintiffs' legal team, however, called the verdict a clear message about unauthorized data collection. The firms behind the case have brought similar lawsuits, including one over Google's Chrome “Incognito” mode, which resulted in a settlement earlier this year that forced the company to destroy billions of data records.Google trial ends with $425 million verdict after Cooley inherits privacy case | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Amy Beach.This week's closing theme features the elegant and expressive piano miniatures of Beach, one of the most important American composers of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. A prodigy and largely self-taught composer, Beach broke barriers as the first American woman to write a symphony performed by a major orchestra and became a central figure in the Boston musical scene. Her works span symphonic, choral, chamber, and solo piano music, all marked by lyrical intensity and harmonic richness.Composed in 1892, her Four Sketches, Op. 15 for solo piano offers a vivid, compact display of her early voice as a composer. Each short piece evokes a distinct atmosphere: In Autumn captures seasonal change with swirling colors; Phantoms conjures mysterious shadows; Dreaming drifts into quiet introspection; and Fireflies sparkles with quick, darting motion. Though brief, these character pieces are finely crafted, offering emotional depth and technical elegance.As our closing music, Beach's Sketches remind us how much can be said in miniature—and how, even in the restrictive musical culture of her time, she composed with clarity, beauty, and unmistakable individuality.Without further ado, Amy Beach's Four Sketches, Op. 15 – enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
You know how agile transformations always promise better collaboration but somehow teams end up chasing tickets like a factory assembly line? Klaus Breyer from Edding has some thoughts on why this keeps happening—and what actually works instead. Klaus's path to leading product and technology at Germany's most famous pen company wasn't exactly traditional. Before Edding, he spent years managing 40-person World of Warcraft raids (yes, really) and running startups. Now he's applying those lessons to build software teams that actually solve problems instead of just completing tasks. The conversation digs into Shape Up methodology, but more importantly, Klaus explains the mindset changes needed to stop treating software development like an assembly line. His team at Edding has built some pretty cool stuff too—like a B2B driver license verification system using invisible conductive ink that smartphones can read. What you'll learn: • Why "give me a ticket" thinking kills collaboration (even in tiny teams) • How 6-week cycles help teams focus on one problem without distractions • The art of separating problems from solutions before jumping into code • Why late-stage compromises usually mean your team isn't really collaborating • When senior teams can ditch tickets entirely and just... work • Klaus's templates for getting everyone aligned on what problems are worth solving
After a full trial, a federal judge in California ruled that Trump grabbing control of the California National Guard and his deployment of the military to the streets of Los Angeles was illegal, and he also ordered him to stop violating the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal law that prohibits the military from enforcing civilian law.As Politico reported, "Judge rules Trump can't act as national police chief." Glenn reviews this new legal development.For nightly live Law Talks, please join Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comIf you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
After a full trial, a federal judge in California ruled that Trump grabbing control of the California National Guard and his deployment of the military to the streets of Los Angeles was illegal, and he also ordered him to stop violating the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal law that prohibits the military from enforcing civilian law.As Politico reported, "Judge rules Trump can't act as national police chief." Glenn reviews this new legal development.For nightly live Law Talks, please join Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comIf you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Dr. Nigel Brayer's Revolutionary Approach to Bladder Health | Wheel With It PodcastIn this episode of the Wheel With It Podcast, host Devon Wieters welcomes Dr. Nigel Brayer, a natural health physician with extensive experience as a chiropractor, acupuncturist, and functional medicine practitioner. Dr. Brayer shares valuable insights into urinary incontinence, an issue prevalent in the disability community and beyond. He discusses his unique approach that combines biofeedback, acupuncture, and a specialized exercise called the Squeal to effectively treat bladder control issues. With real-life success stories and practical tips, this episode offers hope and actionable advice for those struggling with incontinence.00:00 Introduction and Welcome00:44 Meet Dr. Nigel Breyer02:33 Understanding Urinary Incontinence03:30 Dr. Breyer's Personal Journey06:18 Innovative Treatments for Incontinence18:46 Success Stories and Hope22:07 Program Details and How to Join25:14 Conclusion and Social Media LinksConnect with Nigel:https://www.facebook.com/drnigelbhttps://www.instagram.com/drnigelbrayer/https://www.linkedin.com/in/nigel-brayer-76a59813/https://drnigelbrayer.com/Connect with Devon/ the showhttps://linktr.ee/wheelwithitpod
Is your software development process stuck on a conveyor belt? Discover how to break free from outdated manufacturing mindsets and build truly high-performing, agile teams that “Move Fast and Break Silos.”In this episode, experienced CPTO, Klaus Breyer, introduces a revolutionary approach to software development. He explains why treating software engineering like a factory assembly line leads to inefficiency, micromanagement, and disempowered teams. Learn how to slice work effectively—from objectives down to delivery—and align small, empowered teams to solve real customer problems and ship value faster.Key topics discussed:Why software development is a design process instead of a manufacturing processHow Agile and Scrum has become micromanagement toolsWhy ticketing systems can create communication silosHow to slice work into objectives, problems, solutions, and deliveryGiving teams problems to solve, not just solutions to buildThe concept of empowered teams that own their outcomesWhy small, dynamic groups of 2-3 people work bestAligning your teams' work with company goals and business objectives Timestamps:(00:00) Trailer & Intro(02:10) Career Turning Points(05:26) Critical Key Skills as CPTO(07:40) Juggling Between Being Optimistic vs Pessimistic(09:15) Move Fast and Break Silos(13:08) The Difference Between Manufacturing and Software Development(16:51) The Problems with the Status Quo of Software Development Practices(23:50) Key Practice 1: Slicing Work(25:51) Slicing Objectives(28:30) Slicing Problems(33:25) Slicing Solutions(38:03) Slicing Delivery(41:09) Key Practice 2: Aligning Teams(43:21) The Effective Teams Alignment Practices(48:10) Working in Small Teams at a Time(51:07) Alignment with the Value Streams(53:15) Mapping the Sliced Work to the Organization(56:41) The Importance of Reporting Structure in the Large Organization(58:52) 3 Tech Lead Wisdom_____Klaus Breyer's BioKlaus Breyer is an experienced B2B SaaS CPTO who specializes in bridging the gap between technical delivery and agile product strategy, driven by a passion for breaking down silos. His career includes founding and leading the startups Buddybrand (a digital agency) and BuzzBird (a B2B marketplace), as well as building corporate startups and business units for major companies like Voith and edding in the IoT and B2B SaaS sectors.Based in Berlin, he has extensive experience working with diverse and primarily remote teams. In addition to his leadership roles, he sometimes invests in and advises leadership teams on building effective interdisciplinary teams themselves. He is also a speaker, blogger, and book author who champions the philosophy of “Move Fast And Break Silos!”Follow Klaus:LinkedIn – linkedin.com/in/klaus-breyerTwitter – twitter.com/klausbreyerWebsite – v01.ioEmail – kb@v01.ioLike this episode?Show notes & transcript: techleadjournal.dev/episodes/224.Follow @techleadjournal on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram.Buy me a coffee or become a patron.
Auditor Chantel joins us live from Breyerfest live at the Kentucky Horse Park. Breyer is celebrating their 75th anniversary this year. Auditor Holly does a product review of the Kool Kurtain and we meet Amy Cairy, Vice President of Marketing & Innovation for W.F. Young. Listen in….HORSES IN THE MORNING Episode 3731 – Show Notes and Links:Hosts: Jamie Jennings of Flyover Farm and Glenn the GeekGuest Co-Host: Lisa WysockyTitle Sponsor: Kentucky Performance ProductsGuest: Amy Cairy , VP of Marketing and Innovation for WF Young - Honest to GoodnessGuest: Auditor Holly does a product review of the Kool KurtainGuest: Auditor Chantel live from BreyerfestAdditional support for this podcast provided by: Care Credit, Equine Network, My New Horse and Listeners Like YouTime Stamps:04:44 - Daily Whinnies08:44 - Chantel from Breyerfest17:26 - Amy Cairy31:50 - Holly38:50 - Realli Bad Adz
Auditor Chantel joins us live from Breyerfest live at the Kentucky Horse Park. Breyer is celebrating their 75th anniversary this year. Auditor Holly does a product review of the Kool Kurtain and we meet Amy Cairy, Vice President of Marketing & Innovation for W.F. Young. Listen in….HORSES IN THE MORNING Episode 3731 – Show Notes and Links:Hosts: Jamie Jennings of Flyover Farm and Glenn the GeekGuest Co-Host: Lisa WysockyTitle Sponsor: Kentucky Performance ProductsGuest: Amy Cairy , VP of Marketing and Innovation for WF Young - Honest to GoodnessGuest: Auditor Holly does a product review of the Kool KurtainGuest: Auditor Chantel live from BreyerfestAdditional support for this podcast provided by: Care Credit, Equine Network, My New Horse and Listeners Like YouTime Stamps:04:44 - Daily Whinnies08:44 - Chantel from Breyerfest17:26 - Amy Cairy31:50 - Holly38:50 - Realli Bad Adz
Apologies for such a long wait between episodes! On this episode the Mares talk with the legendary Chris Flint! Chris joins us to talk about a ton of hobby history, her art and artistic journey and how she sees the hobby now through the first gen lens. It's a great interview! Enjoy!
Happy Hump Day, yo. Last day in the 70's for awhile. Looking at temps in the mid-to-upper 90's this weekend. Uffdah. Started the morning by talking about the death of celebrity chef Anne Burrell…a lawsuit against Tyler Perry…a Breyer's recall…and a report that most Americans get their news from social media. In sports, the Brewers dropped the series opener to the Cubs last night, the Panthers beat the Oilers to capture a consecutive Stanley Cup, the NBA Finals continue tonight, Tyrese Haliburton has to get an MRI on his calf, and Carson Hocevar was penalized for his comments about Mexico City last weekend. Elsewhere in sports, there's a new PGA Tour Commissioner, and the Tyreke Hill/Noah Lyles race is off, apparently. We talked about what's on TV today, and we discussed a list of cheap hobbies you can pick-up during the summer. A new study finds that 24% of Americans want to take a break from sex for some reason, and there's one trait that has the power to make you happier for the rest of your life! Funny story about a 102 year-old woman who wanted a stripper for her birthday recently…and check out these mowing companies in Kansas that got together to help their community! Father's Day was this weekend and a baseball team in Japan wanted to celebrate dads by asking their fans to share stories involving their dad & the baseball team…and it kinda backfired. And in today's edition of "Bad News with Happy Music", we had stories about a guy who tried to kill his friend with a wooden stake because he thought his friend was a werewolf, a woman who legally married her ex without him knowing,See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
This episode features Kristy Donaldson, a high-volume recruiter at Chewy by day and a full-blown horse and Breyer model enthusiast by night. Kristy's world is a fascinating blend of real horses, collectible horses, YouTube creativity, and early morning barn rides before work. We talk about her journey into dressage, her obsession with Breyer models, and how she balances the two worlds like a pro.Key topics we discussed in 6 bullet points:The world of Breyer model horses and how Kristy grew a collection of over 300The surprising resale value of rare models and the collector economy behind themStarting a YouTube channel and what content horse people actually want to seeRiding at 6 a.m. and juggling shows with a full-time job at ChewyWhy horse people secretly (and not so secretly) hire other horse peopleThe misunderstood beauty and grind of dressage for adult amateursBonus fact:Kristy once scored a bullseye on her very first horseback archery attempt, combining her two passions—horses and archery—into one epic moment.Social media links for the guest:YouTube: Blue Eyed BreyersInstagram: @blue_eyed_breyers and @spartographer07Social media links for Horse People Podcast:Instagram: @horsepeoplepodcastLinkedIn: Horse People PodcastSubscribe to the show and leave us a review and if you've got a model horse collection you're proud of, shoot us a message—we want to hear your story.
This Day in Legal History: Miranda v. ArizonaOn June 13, 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Miranda v. Arizona, fundamentally reshaping American criminal procedure. The case centered on Ernesto Miranda, who had confessed to kidnapping and rape during a police interrogation without being informed of his constitutional rights. In a narrow 5–4 ruling, the Court held that the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination and the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel require law enforcement officers to inform suspects of their rights before custodial interrogation begins.The decision mandated that suspects be told they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say can be used against them in court, and that they have the right to an attorney—either retained or appointed. These now-standard warnings, known as "Miranda rights," became a required part of police procedure across the United States.Chief Justice Earl Warren, writing for the majority, emphasized that custodial interrogation is inherently coercive and that procedural safeguards were necessary to preserve the individual's privilege against self-incrimination. The dissenters, led by Justice Harlan, argued the decision imposed an impractical burden on law enforcement and that traditional voluntariness tests were sufficient.Miranda sparked immediate controversy, with critics warning it would hamper police efforts and allow guilty individuals to go free. Nonetheless, it has endured as a cornerstone of American constitutional law, embodying the principle that the government must respect individual rights even in the pursuit of justice. Over the years, the ruling has been refined but not overturned, and Miranda warnings are now deeply embedded in both law enforcement training and popular culture.Tesla has filed a trade secret lawsuit in California federal court against former engineer Jay Li and his startup, Proception, alleging that Li stole confidential information to accelerate the development of robotic hands. According to the complaint, Li worked on Tesla's Optimus humanoid robot project from 2022 to 2024 and allegedly downloaded sensitive files related to robotic hand movements before departing the company. Tesla claims Li used this proprietary data to give Proception an unfair edge, enabling the startup to make rapid technological gains that had taken Tesla years and significant investment to achieve.The suit points out that Proception was founded just six days after Li left Tesla and began showcasing its robotic hands five months later—devices Tesla says bear a “striking similarity” to its own designs. Tesla is seeking monetary damages and a court order to prevent further use of its alleged trade secrets. Legal representation for Tesla includes attorneys from Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, while counsel for Proception and Li has not yet been disclosed.Tesla lawsuit says former engineer stole secrets for robotics startup | ReutersA federal district court and a federal appeals court issued conflicting rulings over President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles amid protests over aggressive immigration enforcement.U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled earlier in the day that Trump's order to deploy the Guard was unlawful. He found that the protests did not meet the legal threshold of a “rebellion,” which would be necessary for the president to override state control of the Guard under the Insurrection Act or related powers. Breyer concluded the deployment inflamed tensions and stripped California of the ability to use its own Guard for other state needs. His 36-page opinion ordered that control of the National Guard be returned to California Governor Gavin Newsom.However, about two and a half hours later, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted an administrative stay, temporarily pausing Breyer's ruling and allowing Trump to retain command of the Guard for now. The three-judge panel—two appointed by Trump and one by President Biden—stressed that their order was not a final decision and set a hearing for the following Tuesday to evaluate the full merits of the lower court's decision.Meanwhile, a battalion of 700 U.S. Marines was scheduled to arrive to support the Guard, further escalating the federal presence. Critics, including L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and Senator Alex Padilla—who was forcibly removed from a press event—argued that the military response was excessive and politically motivated. Supporters of the deployment, including Trump and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, defended it as necessary to restore order. A Reuters/Ipsos poll showed public opinion split, with 48% supporting military use to quell violent protests and 41% opposed.Appeals court allows Trump to keep National Guard in L.A. with Marines on the way | ReutersIn a pattern that surprises few, the conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court has granted President Donald Trump a series of victories through its emergency—or "shadow"—docket, continuing a trend of fast-tracking his policy goals without full hearings. Since returning to office in January, Trump's administration has filed 19 emergency applications to the Court, with decisions in 13 cases so far. Of those, nine rulings went fully in Trump's favor, one partially, and only two against him. These rapid interventions have enabled Trump to enforce controversial policies—including ending humanitarian legal status for migrants, banning transgender military service, and initiating sweeping federal layoffs—despite lower court injunctions.District court challenges to these actions often cite constitutional overreach or procedural shortcuts, but the Supreme Court has repeatedly overruled or paused these lower court decisions with minimal explanation. The emergency docket, once used sparingly, has become a regular tool for the Trump administration, matching the total number of applications filed during Biden's entire presidency in under five months. Critics argue that the Court's increasing reliance on this docket lacks transparency, with rulings frequently unsigned and unexplained. Liberal justices have voiced strong objections, warning that rushed decisions with limited briefing risk significant legal error.The Court's 6-3 conservative majority, including three Trump appointees, has given the president a judicial green light to implement divisive policies while litigation plays out. Some legal scholars argue these outcomes reflect strategic case selection rather than simple ideological bias. Still, in light of the Court's current composition and its repeated willingness to empower executive action, the results are hardly shocking.Trump finds victories at the Supreme Court in rush of emergency cases | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Tomaso Albinoni.This week's closing theme is Sinfonia in G minor, T.Si 7 by Tomaso Albinoni, a composer whose elegant, expressive works have often been overshadowed by his more famous contemporaries. Born on June 14, 1671, in Venice, Albinoni was one of the early Baroque era's leading figures in instrumental music and opera. Though he trained for a career in commerce, he chose instead to live independently as a composer, unusual for his time. He wrote extensively for the violin and oboe, and was among the first to treat the oboe as a serious solo instrument in concert music.Albinoni's style is marked by a graceful clarity and balanced formal structure, qualities well represented in this week's featured piece. The Sinfonia in G minor, T.Si 7 is a compact, three-movement work likely composed for a theatrical performance or ceremonial function. It opens with a dramatic Grave, setting a solemn tone that gives way to a lively Allegro and a brief yet expressive final movement.The G minor tonality gives the piece an emotional intensity, without tipping into melodrama—typical of Albinoni's refined dramatic sensibility. While his best-known composition today may be the Adagio in G minor—ironically, a piece reconstructed long after his death—Albinoni's authentic works, like this sinfonia, display a deft hand at combining lyricism with architectural clarity.His music enjoyed wide dissemination in his lifetime and was admired by J.S. Bach, who used Albinoni's bass lines as models for his own compositions. As we close out this week, Albinoni's Sinfonia in G minor offers a reminder of the beauty in restraint and the enduring resonance of Baroque form.Without further ado, Tomaso Albinoni's Sinfonia in G minor, T.Si 7. 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
Tesla shareholder reaction to the fallout between Elon Musk and President Trump. NYC comptroller Brad Lander, who oversees the city's pension fund and stake of more than three million Tesla shares lays out changes he would like to see take place at the company. Then legendary Silicon Valley investor Jim Breyer on the Tesla turmoil and what it means for an already growing political divide in the tech community. Plus his outlook for stablecoin issuer Circle, as the largest outside shareholder. The stock surging close to 170% in its public debut. And then Former Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarida gives his outlook for the Fed following the monthly jobs report.
Join us as we explore the lifelong passion for horses with two remarkable women on this classic re-visit episode. Stephanie Macejko's journey began with a single Breyer Horse, leading to over 25 years of contributing her extensive knowledge and marketing acumen to the growth, evolution, and quality commitment of Breyer Horses and BreyerFest. Then, meet Sharon Jantzen, whose diverse riding career spans from Pony Club in California through Hunter/Jumper, Eventing, Dressage, and even Horseback Archery—often from the back of a Connemara. She's also shown Arabians in Dressage and is currently applying those same principles to a Rocky Mountain horse. Tune in to hear their inspiring stories from the heart of the equestrian world.Horsemanship Radio 280:Show Host: Debbie LoucksTitle Sponsor: HandsOn Gloves, All-In-One Shedding/Bathing/Grooming GlovesPhotos used with permissionGuest: Stephanie Macejko, Vice President of Marketing and Product Development at BreyerGuest: Sharon JantzenTraining Tip: Ask MontyLearn more about Good Horsemanship at Monty Roberts EQUUS Online University Monty's CalendarPlease follow Monty Roberts on FacebookFollow Monty Roberts on Twitter or on InstagramSee more at: MontyRoberts.comHear all the shows on the Horse Radio NetworkSupport the show
Join us as we explore the lifelong passion for horses with two remarkable women on this classic re-visit episode. Stephanie Macejko's journey began with a single Breyer Horse, leading to over 25 years of contributing her extensive knowledge and marketing acumen to the growth, evolution, and quality commitment of Breyer Horses and BreyerFest. Then, meet Sharon Jantzen, whose diverse riding career spans from Pony Club in California through Hunter/Jumper, Eventing, Dressage, and even Horseback Archery—often from the back of a Connemara. She's also shown Arabians in Dressage and is currently applying those same principles to a Rocky Mountain horse. Tune in to hear their inspiring stories from the heart of the equestrian world.Horsemanship Radio 280:Show Host: Debbie LoucksTitle Sponsor: HandsOn Gloves, All-In-One Shedding/Bathing/Grooming GlovesPhotos used with permissionGuest: Stephanie Macejko, Vice President of Marketing and Product Development at BreyerGuest: Sharon JantzenTraining Tip: Ask MontyLearn more about Good Horsemanship at Monty Roberts EQUUS Online University Monty's CalendarPlease follow Monty Roberts on FacebookFollow Monty Roberts on Twitter or on InstagramSee more at: MontyRoberts.comHear all the shows on the Horse Radio NetworkSupport the show
On this episode of MIB we recap last month's BreyerMidwest! The mares are joined by Heather Jackson-Lain and Stephanie Blaylock and we all share our different perspectives of the events and roles we played as well as all the fun and food! News and tangents abound as well!Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
We're a bit late this week, because following our recent conversation with Justice Breyer, we had the opportunity to speak at length with Judge William Pryor, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, former Alabama Attorney General, and an important member of the Judicial Conference the “national policymaking body for the federal courts.” Judge Pryor has had a colorful career, having effectively prosecuted another judge for misconduct, had a contentious confirmation hearing, clerked for a titan among judges in Judge Wisdom, and served at the highest level short of the Supreme Court for many years. We discuss a wide range of matters from judicial safety, to the importance of following Court orders, to enforcing civil rights laws, and much more. The discussion took place in two parts; with an audience of undergraduates, and then with an audience of Yale Law School students, many from the Federalist Society chapter at Yale; this produced a great variety of topics. We also have timely information on a new EverScholar program where registration is about to open; be among the first to know about this! CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.
Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
This week on Cooking Issues, Dave Arnold welcomes Professor Douglas Goff, one of the world's leading ice cream scientists and Professor Emeritus at the University of Guelph. They discuss the science behind smooth texture, how to recreate Haagen-Dazs vanilla at home, and the hidden factors that determine how ice cream melts.Other key topics:• The Ice Cream Book That Defines the Industry – Goff discusses the upcoming 8th edition of the seminal Ice Cream textbook, a publication that's shaped the frozen dessert world since 1966.• Soft Serve Machines and Their Dirty Secret – Why cleaning is the Achilles' heel of soft serve, and what really happens inside fast-food soft serve machines.• Lactose and the Mystery of Sandiness – Quinn loves adding extra lactose to his gelatos, but why doesn't it crystallize? Goff explains why large manufacturers have to fight against sandy textures.• Low Overrun vs. High Overrun Soft Serve – Does less air make for better ice cream? Goff weighs in on why dense ice creams like Haagen-Dazs work—but soft serve benefits from a little extra air.• The Problem with Freezing Ice Cream Without Churning – Is there a way to create smooth, scoopable ice cream without a machine? Goff breaks down why static freezing results in unpleasant ice crystal growth and why nucleating agents are the missing piece.• Breyer's Old Formula vs. New Formula – Once known for its pure ingredients, Breyer's ice cream had a unique dryness when left in the freezer too long. Goff explains why, and what changed when they started stabilizing their mix.• Trends in Ice Cream for 2025 – From international flavors (think ube and kulfi) to local, small-batch innovations, Goff talks about where the frozen dessert industry is heading.Plus, Dave builds a DIY 220V countertop fryer, experiments with a homemade ducted ventilation hood, and unveils a wheat bran granola that might just be the next great ice cream topping.All that and more, this week on Cooking Issues! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In this enlightening episode of The Brand Called You, we dive deep into the world of renewable energy with Prof Christian Breyer from LUT University, Finland. Prof Breyer, an eminent figure in the realm of solar economy, shares his insights on the transition towards 100% renewable energy systems. Explore the promising technologies, challenges, and the future of energy economics and policy. If you've ever wondered about how countries can effectively transition to sustainable energy, or the role of policy and innovation in encouraging this shift, this episode is not to be missed.
In this special edition of Mares in Black we are joined by Jennifer Buxton and we talk all about NaMoPaiMo 2025! Jenn takes us through the history, philosophy and rules of National Model (horse) Painting Month as well as how to enter and get involved and they also have a shiny (glossy?) new sponsor! We also cover the latest model horse news re: Breyer and Stone as well as the normal off topic silliness.Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
Jamie Dimon says stock market valuations are high, is he right? We breakdown the next steps for the markets. Plus, VC heavyweight, Jim Breyer. The early Facebook investor – who predicted Nvidia's rise – on where the next opportunities are in the AI space and the future of the IPO markets. And, the CEO of Databricks – the hottest new AI play. With a new $62B valuation – are they getting closer to an IPO?
Happy New Year from the Mares. This episode we are joined by the fabulous hobby artist, DeeAnn Kjelshus, to talk about her hobby journey, her craft and her upcoming endeavors. We also talk about the first round of BreyerFest releases as well as all the usual MIB shenanigans.Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
Rev. Dr. Chloe Breyer, Executive Director of the Interfaith Center of New York (ICNY), reflects on her journey of faith, leadership, and advocacy. Rev. Breyer discusses her upbringing in an interfaith household, her experiences studying religion, and her eventual call to ordained ministry. She shares the transformative work of ICNY, which brings together diverse faith leaders to address critical issues like housing, immigration, and racial justice in New York City. Throughout the conversation, Rev. Breyer highlights the power of grassroots interfaith collaboration and her commitment to amplifying the role of religious communities in civic and social movements. An ordained Episcopal priest and a dedicated advocate for peace and equity, Rev. Breyer brings a wealth of experience to her work. Beyond her leadership at ICNY, she has participated in interfaith initiatives in Afghanistan and Iran, authored The Close: A Young Woman's First Year at Seminary, and holds a Ph.D. in Christian Ethics. Rev. Breyer's work exemplifies the intersection of faith and justice, offering hope and tangible pathways for change in one of the world's most dynamic cities. Listener Engagement: Discover more about Chloe via the website of the Interfaith Center of New York. Their social media handles LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook and don't forget to buy her latest book: The Close: A Young Woman's First Year at Seminary. Share your thoughts on this episode at innovationhub@cwsglobal.org. Your feedback is invaluable to us. Explore the songs selected by Chloe and other guests on our #walktalklisten playlist here. Follow Us: Support the Walk Talk Listen podcast and Maurice by liking and following Maurice on Blue Sky, Facebook and Instagram. Visit our website at 100mile.org for more episodes and information about our initiatives. Check out the special WTL series "Enough for All," featuring Church World Service (CWS) and the work of the Joint Learning Initiative (JLI).
Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
THIS IS NOT WHAT RECESS APPOINTMENTS ARE FOR When I heard yesterday that Trump wanted the Senate to come to order and then recess so he could make recess appointments for his Cabinet, especially with Matt Gaetz, I got mad. This is NOT what recess appointment power is supposed to be used for. Obama got his hand slapped by the Supreme Court when he appointed a bunch of people to the National Labor Relations Board in this fashion and the more conservative justices all joined an opinion by the late great Antonin Scalia in which he said: As Scalia explained in a lengthy statement from the bench that followed Breyer's summary of the Court's decision, he and his three colleagues would have held that the president's recess appointments power is substantially more limited than the Court ruled today. For example, they would have ruled that the president can only make recess appointments during inter-session recesses, and only then to fill vacancies that are created during that recess. And the majority did not escape Scalia's trademark incisive remarks, as he criticized it for relying on an “adverse-possession theory of executive authority: “Presidents have long claimed the powers in question, and the Senate has not disputed those claims with sufficient vigor, so the Court should not ‘upset the compromises and working arrangements that the elected branches of Government themselves have reached.'”Three of the justices who joined this opinion are still on the bench and have been joined by even more conservative justices so I would expect Trump to have his nominations invalidated too. By the way, Gaetz already resigned from Congress. None of the other appointees have. You know why he resigned? Because the House Ethics investigation was due to release their findings,which now won't happen because he isn't a member of Congress. How convenient. I've got Daily Caller News Foundation reporter Katelynn Richardson on at 2:30 to discuss.
On episode 124 of Mares in Black, we sit down with hobby icon Lesli Kathman and discuss her wide-ranging hobby journey. Lesli is an accomplished show holder, sculptor, customizer, painter, glazer, mold-maker and a recognized expert and author in the field of equine color genetics. We talk through her career in model horses and how it informed her deep dive in to the science of color. Lesli also gives us the rundown on a new artist holiday marketplace event, founded along side Sarah Minkiewicz-Breunig, called Christmas on Mane Street! Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
In this episode of Passing Judgment, we engage in a thought-provoking discussion with retired Justice Stephen Breyer. Host Jessica Levinson delves into Breyer's critique of textualism, focusing on whether "costs" in legal contexts should include educational experts. The episode also touches on public trust in the judiciary, the role of the First Amendment, and the complexities of precedent. Breyer's engaging stories and reflections provide a comprehensive perspective on modern judicial challenges.Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Critique of Textualism and Originalism: Breyer critiques the methodologies of textualism and originalism, which focus strictly on the text and original meaning of the law. He highlights the limitations of these approaches, given the evolving societal and political contexts since the laws were written.Pragmatism in Constitutional Interpretation: Advocating for a pragmatic approach, Breyer emphasizes the importance of interpreting the Constitution by considering historical context, consequences, and inherent values such as democracy and human rights. Supreme Court's Political Perception: Addressing public concerns about the Supreme Court's political influence, especially with the conservative supermajority appointed by Republican presidents, Breyer contends that legal analysis should be distinct from political thought. Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica
Today on the Woody and Wilcox Show: Dead bird at the entrance to the radio station; The Menendez brothers have received an increase in mail since the Netflix series about them premiered; Cool Beans Remix; Music bits: Frankie Valli and Perry Farrell of Jane's Addiction; Reviews of Joker 2; Diddy's mom says he is innocent; Wart remover in the bathroom; California stops testing drivers over the age of 70; Diddy sexual assault phone number; Breyer's ice cream settlement; And more!
durée : 00:38:25 - France Culture va plus loin (l'Invité(e) des Matins) - par : Guillaume Erner, Isabelle de Gaulmyn - Ancien juge de la Cour Suprême pendant près de 30 ans, Stephen Breyer revient sur l'évolution sur la démocratie américaine et les derniers arrêts de la Court Suprême. - réalisation : Félicie Faugère - invités : Stephen Breyer Juriste américain, ancien membre de la Cour Suprême des États-Unis
durée : 02:29:39 - Les Matins - par : Guillaume Erner, Isabelle de Gaulmyn - . - réalisation : Félicie Faugère
Join us for the second of our BreyerFest episodes co-hosted with Heather by the amazing Anne Field of Field of Dolls! We walk through some news and catching up, and then get into Anne's first, but hopefully not last, HorseFest odyssey!Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
For episode 122, HMB welcomes Jenn Constantine as co-host while Jackie is at SDCC. They talk through both of their Horsefest (BreyerFest/Equilocity/KHP/KY) and dining adventures for the biggest model horse event of the year. Jenn also shares her experience as a relative newbie to the model horse hobby as well as her inspiring and unique artistic journey. Something Elated by Broke For Free is licensed under a Attribution 3.0 United States License.
Jim talks with Bob Levy about the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, in the Supreme Court. They discuss Bob's late-career move to law, never being too old to reinvent yourself, how Bob got involved in a pivotal Supreme Court case in establishing the modern interpretation of the Second Amendment, the text of the Second Amendment, District of Columbia v. Heller, United States v. Miller, United States v. Emerson, the scholarship around framing the Second Amendment as an individual right, the state of play of gun control in D.C. at the time, the handgun ban, handguns in the home for self-defense, the NRA case & a rookie error by the NRA's lawyers, legal strategy in the Heller case, sufficient vs necessary conditions for exercising the right, the meaning of "well-regulated," the specific holdings in Heller, the meaning of fundamental rights, Breyer's dissent against Scalia's opinion, the rational basis standard, McDonald v. City of Chicago, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, "good moral character," the murky precedent of striking down laws that weren't present during the framing era, a strict scrutiny approach, speculations on the future of Second Amendment jurisprudence, ghost guns, and much more. Episode Transcript The Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Supreme Court Cases Radically Expanded Government and Eroded Freedom, by Robert Levy & William Mellor "The Peculiar Story of United States v. Miller," by Brian L. Frye Bob Levy was, for 14 years, chairman of the board of directors at the Cato Institute. He is now chairman emeritus. Bob joined Cato as senior fellow in constitutional studies in 1997 after 25 years in business. The Institute's Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies is named in his honor. He has also served on boards of the Federalist Society, the Foundation for Government Accountability, and the Institute for Justice. Bob received his PhD in business from the American University in 1966, then founded CDA Investment Technologies, a major provider of investment information and software. At age 50, after leaving CDA in 1991, Bob went to George Mason law school, where he was chief articles editor of the law review and class valedictorian. He received his JD degree in 1994. The next two years he clerked for Judge Royce Lamberth on the US District Court and Judge Douglas Ginsburg on the US Court of Appeals, both in Washington, DC.
© 2020-2026 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
