Podcast appearances and mentions of John Roberts

This Day in Legal History: Roe v. WadeOn January 22, 1973, the United States Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, fundamentally reshaping American constitutional law and reproductive rights. In a 7–2 ruling, the Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects a person's right to privacy, which includes the right to choose to have an abortion. The case arose after a Texas woman, known under the pseudonym “Jane Roe,” challenged state laws that criminalized abortion except to save the life of the mother. Writing for the majority, Justice Harry Blackmun articulated a constitutional framework that balanced the state's interest in regulating abortions with an individual's right to privacy.The Court introduced a trimester system, giving states greater regulatory power as pregnancy progressed but prohibiting outright bans on abortion in the first trimester. This decision effectively invalidated abortion restrictions in dozens of states and became one of the most politically and legally contentious rulings in American history. Roe expanded the constitutional interpretation of the right to privacy, which had been previously recognized in cases like Griswold v. Connecticut, but its grounding in substantive due process quickly became a lightning rod for critics.Opponents of the ruling argued that the Constitution did not explicitly guarantee a right to abortion, while supporters saw it as a critical protection of bodily autonomy and gender equality. Over the next five decades, Roe faced continual challenges and legislative efforts aimed at narrowing its scope. Ultimately, in 2022, the Court overturned Roe in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, returning authority to regulate abortion back to individual states and ending federal constitutional protection for abortion rights. The legacy of Roe v. Wade continues to shape legal discourse, political identity, and reproductive healthcare policy in the United States.A federal appeals court has lifted a temporary order that had limited immigration agents from using tear gas and force against peaceful protesters in Minneapolis, a city currently at the center of a legal and political clash over immigration enforcement. The lower court's injunction—issued by U.S. District Judge Kate Menendez—had aimed to protect demonstrators as they protested President Trump's mass deployment of ICE and Border Patrol agents throughout the area. The Biden-era precedent of restrained enforcement has been upended by Trump's aggressive tactics, which now include militarized agents patrolling streets and confronting U.S. citizens, particularly people of color, demanding identification and sometimes using force.The protests intensified after an ICE agent fatally shot Renee Nicole Good, an American citizen monitoring ICE activities. In response to mounting legal challenges, including a suit from the Minnesota state government and its largest cities, the Trump administration has doubled down. Not only did the Department of Homeland Security appeal the injunction, but the Justice Department has also launched a criminal investigation into Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, both Democrats, accusing them of obstructing federal law enforcement.The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a temporary stay of the injunction while it considers a longer-term ruling, effectively allowing ICE to resume more aggressive tactics in the meantime. Critics, including Walz and Frey, warn that the Trump administration is intentionally provoking unrest to justify escalated federal intervention. The administration defends its actions as necessary to combat fraud, particularly among Minnesota's Somali community, which Trump has disparaged in stark terms. The legal and political standoff continues, with lawsuits and investigations adding to the tension.US appeals court lifts order curbing immigration agents' tactics against Minnesota protesters | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court appeared reluctant to endorse President Trump's unprecedented attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, signaling concern over the potential threat to the central bank's independence. During oral arguments, justices from across the ideological spectrum questioned whether Trump had the authority to remove Cook without due process, especially given the lack of precedent and the vague legal standard for removing Fed officials “for cause.”The administration cited unproven mortgage fraud allegations—claims Cook denies—as grounds for dismissal. However, several justices, including conservatives like Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, expressed concern that firing a Fed governor without a hearing or judicial review could set a dangerous precedent and politicize the central bank. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elena Kagan questioned whether minor or disputed past conduct could justify removal without any formal process.Cook argued the allegations were merely a pretext for her removal over policy disagreements, particularly her resistance to Trump's pressure to cut interest rates. The Court's skepticism reflects unease about weakening safeguards designed to insulate the Fed from political interference. District Judge Jia Cobb previously blocked Cook's removal, citing due process concerns and insufficient legal cause.A decision from the Court is expected by June. If the justices rule in Cook's favor or remand the case for further proceedings, it could reinforce limits on presidential power over independent agencies.US Supreme Court appears reluctant to let Trump fire Fed's Lisa Cook | ReutersThe Trump administration has launched a new immigration enforcement campaign in Maine, dubbed “Operation Catch of the Day,” with a focus on targeting criminal offenders—though internal sources indicate the true emphasis is on refugee populations, especially Somalis. Over 100 federal immigration agents have been deployed to the state, intensifying fears in immigrant communities and sparking political backlash.Maine Governor Janet Mills, a Democrat currently running for a U.S. Senate seat, criticized the operation as unwelcome and politically motivated. This mirrors broader national trends, with Trump having already surged thousands of agents into other Democratic-led areas, such as Minnesota, where tensions recently escalated after ICE officers fatally shot a U.S. citizen. In Lewiston, Maine's second-largest city and home to a longstanding Somali refugee community, the mayor condemned ICE's tactics as inhumane and fear-driven.Despite Trump's framing of the effort as a crackdown on criminality, many targeted individuals have no criminal records. Critics argue the campaign serves more as political theater than public safety. Meanwhile, public support for such operations has eroded, especially as aggressive enforcement methods—including tear gas and raids—become more visible. DHS has defended its actions and criticized local leaders like Mills for not fully cooperating with federal immigration enforcement.Trump administration starts immigration operation in Maine | ReutersIn my latest piece for Forbes, I examine the absurdity of President Trump's renewed push to acquire Greenland—this time by threatening tariffs on countries that don't support the plan. Far from making foreign governments pay, these tariffs would, once again, function as a consumption tax on Americans. Drawing from the Kiel Institute's data, I show that during the 2025 “Liberation Day” tariff campaign, 96% of the costs fell on U.S. importers and consumers, not foreign exporters. This new Greenland-linked tariff threat follows the same script, only now it's not even pretending to protect American industry—it's economic coercion for a geopolitical fantasy.I describe how tariffs, sold as leverage, collapse trade volumes without lowering foreign prices. Countries like Brazil and India didn't budge on pricing; they just shipped elsewhere. Meanwhile, Americans paid more for less. I also highlight how small businesses and low-income households feel the pain first, as import costs ripple through the economy, raising prices on both foreign and domestic goods. Despite the $200 billion in customs revenue collected, it amounts to a regressive tax—not a clever policy move.The deeper issue, as I argue, is the unchecked executive power to unilaterally impose tariffs. Current law enables the president to take sweeping trade actions with little oversight, and we're now seeing that power used not for national defense or economic stability, but to punish allies for not acquiescing to a real estate deal. I call on Congress to reclaim its constitutional role in trade policy and set clear limits on executive authority in this arena. Otherwise, we're left with a precedent where tariffs become tools of vanity projects—not national strategy.Tariffs For Greenland—Or, ‘I'll Hold My Breath Until You Turn Blue' This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

You're listening to American Ground Radio with Louis R. Avallone and Stephen Parr. This is the full show for January 20, 2025. 0:30 Is Wall Street moving to Texas? It might not be official—yet—but the signs are everywhere. We break down the explosive rise of NYSE Texas and the brand-new Texas Stock Exchange in Dallas, and what it means for the future of American finance. As New York tightens taxes and treats wealth like a crime, Texas is offering low regulation, affordable living, and a pro-business environment that’s attracting banks, corporations, and financial talent by the thousands. From housing costs to political culture, we ask the uncomfortable question: is Dallas becoming the new financial capital of the world while New York drives business away? 9:30 Plus, we cover the Top 3 Things You Need to Know. President Trump is in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum meeting. Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson spoke to the British Parliament in London today. The State of California is being ordered to pay back more than $1.3 billion to the Federal government for Medicaid Fraud. 12:30 Get Performlyte from Victory Nutrition International for 20% off. Go to vni.life/agr and use the promo code AGR20. 13:00 Now even your clothes have to pass a political test? We react to Michelle Obama’s latest comments suggesting Americans should think about the race of their fashion designers before buying clothes. The conversation turns into a blunt takedown of modern race politics, cancel culture, and what critics call “ideological purity tests” creeping into everyday life. From closets to consumer choices, we ask the real question: when did buying a shirt stop being about style and start being about race, politics, and virtue signaling? 16:00 Ever put your foot in your mouth so badly you wanted the ground to swallow you?

In this video, we break down the major January 14, 2026 Supreme Court decision in Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections — a 7-2 victory for election integrity and candidate rights.The Court ruled that political candidates, like Illinois Republican Congressman Mike Bost, have Article III standing to challenge state election laws governing how votes are counted in their races — even before proving specific harm to their electoral chances. This reverses lower court dismissals and remands the case for further proceedings.At issue: Illinois law allows mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be received and counted up to two weeks later. Bost argued this violates federal statutes setting a uniform Election Day for federal elections.Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, emphasized candidates' concrete interest in the integrity of vote-counting rules and the democratic process. The decision could open the door to more pre-election challenges nationwide, helping resolve disputes before votes are tallied and reducing post-election chaos.A big step forward for transparency and accountability in our elections. What do you think — will this lead to fairer processes or more litigation? Drop your thoughts below, like, subscribe, and hit the bell for more updates on SCOTUS, self-defense, and the law! #ElectionIntegrity #SCOTUS #BostvIllinois

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger Picture[WEF]/[CB] agenda is now coming true, it is no longer a conspiracy, they are controlling the cars in Germany remotely. Kamal Harris climate warrior buys house on the ocean.Remove the illegals and the cost for everything goes down. People are now seeing the truth about sound money compared to fiat. Trump tariffs system is taking off. The [DS] is now pushing their war to the next level. They know that soon the people of this country will see the crimes they have committed against the people and to this country. They are fighting back and they are testing Trump to see what he will do. At the same time Trump is testing them, watch and observing their movements. When the time is right the Insurrection Act will be invoked nationwide, but now he might test it in a local area. Trump has given the warning to the insurrectionists.   Economy https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/2011712915963859403?s=20  Toyota used remote access to turn off the pre heating, which is used to heat up the cars before driving. You would turn it on, 10 minutes before driving somewhere, so your car is warm and de-iced already.   Toyota spokesman Ralph Müller: “The pre-air conditioning is a free function of the MyToyota app or Lexus Link Plus App. This function is still available for all pure electric vehicles and plug-in vehicles. For vehicles with conventional drive, this only works when the combustion engine is running. The legislator considers this an unnecessary running of the engine or an avoidable exhaust gas pollution, which is prohibited. This is not known to many users. In Europe, there is no uniform legal situation, about which we have informed with a corresponding note in the app. In order to protect the vehicle user from fines, we have deactivated the function on these vehicles.” Climate Change Warrior Kamala Harris Buys New Mansion Near The Ocean in Malibu  Kamala Harris just bought a new $8 million mansion in Malibu near the beach. She must be deeply concerned about climate change. Have you noticed this pattern? Democrat elites, the people most likely to lecture others about climate change and to claim that it's an existential threat to humanity and the planet, sure do love to buy homes on the coast. Just look at Obama. Where are his homes? Martha's Vineyard and Hawaii. Does that sound like a man who is worried about climate change? The New York Post reports: Kamala Harris upgrades LA real estate portfolio with $8M mega mansion in Malibu's celeb-packed Pt. Dume Source: thegatewaypundit.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/2011568614898614645?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2011548021511897343?s=20 https://twitter.com/thencamekevin/status/2011562742029959291?s=20  face value. Four of these quarters might have the face value of $1.00 but, THEIR ACTUAL VALUE IS $64! The stackers were right. . . Political/Rights https://twitter.com/VinceDaoTV/status/2011540393947775098?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical    https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/2011598672929440042?s=20 Vice President Vance Casts Tie-Breaking Vote To Kill Venezuela War Powers Resolution in the Senate Two Republicans who previously voted to advance the bill flipped after pressure from Trump Vice President JD Vance had to cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate on Wednesday night to kill a Venezuela War Powers Resolution that sought to prevent another US attack on the country without congressional authorization. The Senate was deadlocked at 50-50 on a point of order vote to strip the War Powers Resolution of its privileged status to block a final vote. President Trump and his top officials put significant pressure on five Republicans who voted to advance the legislation last week, and two of the GOP senators — Josh Hawley (MO) and Todd Young (IN) — flipped and voted against the bill. Source: news.antiwar.com https://twitter.com/Sec_Noem/status/2011803374807547909?s=20   President Trump's established quarantine of sanctioned vessels in the Caribbean. Through close coordination with our colleagues in the Departments of War, State, and Justice, our heroic Coast Guard men and women once again ensured a flawlessly executed operation, in accordance with international law. As we've now demonstrated through multiple boardings, there is no outrunning or escaping American justice — period. Our resolve is unshakeable and our mission coordination has never been better. America’s Coast Guard remains Always Ready to apply the full force of its unique authorities and specialized capabilities against this threat anywhere, anytime.    War/Peace https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2011817852290895915?s=20  https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2011576169918054597?s=20 https://twitter.com/ABC/status/2011788458042540303?s=20 Zelensky to declare state of emergency after strikes cripple power grid    Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has announced plans to declare a state of emergency in the energy sector. This measure aims to address disrupted power supplies following sustained Russian attacks on the country’s infrastructure. Source: .independent.co.uk  https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2011757910041452892?s=20 President Trump Identifies the Roadblock to a Ceasefire Between Ukraine and Russia In an interview with Reuters, President Trump was asked why the Russia/Ukraine negotiations appear to have stalled.  President Trump responded with one word, “Zelenskyy.” WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump told Reuters that Ukraine – not Russia – is holding up a potential peace deal, rhetoric that stands in marked contrast to that of European allies, who have consistently argued Moscow has little interest in ending its war in Ukraine. In an exclusive interview in the Oval Office on Wednesday, Trump said Russian President Vladimir Putin is ready to wrap up his nearly four-year-old invasion of Ukraine. Zelenskiy, the U.S. president said, was more reticent. “I think he's ready to make a deal,” Trump said of the Russian president. “I think Ukraine is less ready to make a deal.” Asked why U.S.-led negotiations had not yet resolved Europe's largest land conflict since World War Two, Trump responded: “Zelenskiy.”   Source: theconservativetreehouse.com  https://twitter.com/zeroDEIUSA/status/2011211989847326747?s=20  this point, dictated that Canada, Denmark, and NATO generally are allowed to sit on their collective asses vis a'vis Defense. Poland and Hungary are the exceptions since they rarely conform to WEF dictums. But we also know something else: This administration doesn't see the world and this hemisphere through a WEF lens. Those differences in world view, opinion, policy, and sense of urgency between America and our allies are bubbling up publicly. I don't think the friction is or will be inconsequential. In fact, I would posit that the hairline cracks we hear about, in terms of NATO cooperation and membership, will inevitably become full fledged fissures. There are any number of pressure points between this administration and our ANO's (allies in name only) most notably the UK. Saber rattling has become the norm in communiques from Germany, the UK, and the EU. Calls for a “European only” Army and Navy have come from the upper and middle echelons of the military in several NATO member nations in Europe. The Europeans are shocked and outraged by our statements and concerns about Greenland. Now I could be wrong; but it seems that NATO's members are viewing our actions in Venezuela as well as Trump's position that Ukraine is largely a Euro problem, and his vision that the “Donroe” doctrine should be a precursor to a solid military defense strategy as well as a strategic trading block composed by countries in the Western Hemisphere as an emerging existential threat. And indeed it is. We have all seen examples that, by now prove conclusively, that Trump and his advisers are some of the best “tea leaf” readers ever. I honestly think this administration sees the rapid cultural, political, and social deterioration in Europe (Germany, Austria, France, the UK) and other Western nations (Australia and NZ) as harbingers and not one off's. And as such, I believe Trump and his team have concluded that these EU countries have reached a point of no return in every measure that matters. I believe the head butting will, by the end of Trump's term, deteriorate or accelerate to locking horns with former allies and our eventual departure from them as a bloc in favor of the Western Hemisphere as a replacement block. The “Donroe” doctrine says as much. I believe Trump would prefer to capitalize on Geography. That is to say a land mass that stretches from the Arctic circle to the Antarctic circle with North America and South America in between. I believe he sees that as something America can control, protect, and develop. How this will play out, I'm not sure. But I believe he is quietly preparing an exit ramp for our departure from NATO per se. It will be interesting. He will leave office and hand this massive initiative to Vance and Rubio; confident in their judgment and ability to execute. Medical/False Flags President Trump Announces “The Great Healthcare Plan” President Donald J. Trump's Great Healthcare Plan is a broad healthcare initiative that will slash prescription drug prices, reduce insurance premiums, hold big insurance companies accountable, and maximize price transparency in the American healthcare system. This plan will deliver money directly to the American people, not insurance companies, big pharma and special interest groups—putting patients over industry leaders' profits, just as he promised. The Great Healthcare Plan also builds on the successes of his first term by promoting competition, eliminating wasteful spending, and putting consumers back in control. [The Great Healthcare Plan] Source: theconservativetreehouse.com [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/Patri0tContr0l/status/2011502712819761455?s=20 https://twitter.com/gatewaypundit/status/2011821087911231924?s=20 https://twitter.com/philthatremains/status/2011763419293368576?s=20 https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2011705622249816580?s=20 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2011695320112251315?s=20     https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2011634818375958782?s=20     https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/2011644187708371237?s=20 https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2011632198000976086?s=20    into a parked car. The subject then fled on foot. The law enforcement officer caught up to the subject on foot and attempted to apprehend him when the subject began to resist and violently assault the officer. While the subject and law enforcement were in a struggle on the ground, two subjects came out of a nearby apartment and also attacked the law enforcement officer with a snow shovel and broom handle. As the officer was being ambushed and attacked by the two individuals, the original subject got loose and began striking the officer with a shovel or broom stick. Fearing for his life and safety as he was being ambushed by three individuals, the officer fired a defensive shot to defend his life. The initial subject was hit in the leg. All three subjects ran back into the apartment and barricaded themselves inside. The attacked officer and subject are both in the hospital. Both attackers are in custody. This attack on another brave member of law enforcement took place while Minnesota's top leaders, Governor Walz and Mayor Frey, are actively encouraging an organized resistance to ICE and federal law enforcement officers. Their hateful rhetoric and resistance against men and women who are simply trying to do their jobs must end. Federal law enforcement officers are facing a 1,300% increase in assaults against them as they put their lives on the line to arrest criminals and lawbreakers. https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/2011711533014036932?s=20 Antifa are teaching illegals that they can attack federal law enforcement.    https://twitter.com/DAGToddBlanche/status/2011620198751597028?s=20  and Frey – I'm focused on stopping YOU from your terrorism by whatever means necessary. This is not a threat. It's a promise. https://twitter.com/StandUpForElonn/status/2011591809114210333?s=20   TORCHED. For once, the IRS is being deployed FOR AMERICANS FIRST — not against working families. Follow the money. Audit everything. Prosecute whoever broke the law.    protection from the Fake News Media but, it will end, as we, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Joy Behar of The View: Trump Will Use ICE Protests in Minneapolis to Declare Martial Law and Cancel the Midterm Elections (VIDEO) This week on The View, Joy Behar suggested that she is worried that Trump is planning to use the ICE protests in Minneapolis and elsewhere to declare martial law and cancel the 2026 midterm elections. Think about what she is suggesting here. She is saying that Trump will override local jurisdictions, put the military in charge, and then cancel elections. It is pure BlueAnon lunacy. And remember that The View falls under the ABC ‘News' division. FOX News reports: Joy Behar claims Trump seeking to declare martial law to stop midterm elections amid ICE protests     ABC News should be held accountable for pushing this madness on the air. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2011606173993353376?s=20 https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/2011613524251066484?s=20 https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2011628944877883438?s=20   is EXTREMELY dangerous stuff. Not only is he lying about what's happening, but not once did he tell his constituents to stay out of the way of federal law enforcement officers. He is actively encouraging them to obstruct ICE agents, as a means to cover up the massive fraud and criminality in his state. This is 1860's type stuff we are dealing with here, and you can see it on Walz's face, especially at the end. He knows the severity of what he just did. The Dems are in open rebellion against the Trump administration, while harboring illegal aliens in their Unconstitutional “sanctuary cities”, which they use to steal elections. This is irregular warfare. Things are about to get real. We are witnessing something historic.   https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2011525886630379525?s=20 https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/2011802180710289546?s=20   President Trump's Plan   https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/2011799570041250146?s=20  This authority can be invoked unilaterally by the President without congressional approval, though it includes specific procedural requirements.  The Act has three main triggers for invocation: At a state’s request (§251): When a governor or state legislature requests federal aid to suppress an insurrection within the state.   To enforce federal authority (§252): When unlawful obstructions, combinations, assemblages, or rebellion make it impracticable to enforce U.S. laws through ordinary judicial processes.   To address domestic violence or rights deprivations (§253): When insurrection, domestic violence, or conspiracy hinders the execution of laws or deprives citizens of constitutional rights, and state authorities are unable, fail, or refuse to act. For the Minnesota scenario described in the post (involving federal agents and no mention of a state request), §§252 or 253 would likely apply, allowing action without state consent. Next Steps for InvocationIf President Trump decides to proceed, the process is straightforward but must follow statutory requirements. Here’s a step-by-step outline based on the law and historical precedents: Assess and Determine Applicability: The President (or advisors) evaluates whether the situation meets one of the Act’s criteria, such as rebellion against federal authority or obstructions to law enforcement. This is an internal executive decision, often informed by reports from agencies like DHS, DOJ, or DOD. No formal public step is required here, but it sets the legal justification.  Issue a Presidential Proclamation (§254): Before deploying forces, the President must publicly issue a proclamation ordering the “insurgents” or obstructors to disperse and return home peacefully within a specified time limit (e.g., hours or days). This serves as a formal warning and is a mandatory prerequisite under the law. The proclamation is typically published in the Federal Register and announced via White House channels.  Failure to issue this could make any deployment unlawful. Monitor Compliance and Issue an Executive Order for Deployment: If the proclamation is ignored, the President can issue an executive order authorizing the deployment of federal troops or federalizing the National Guard. This order specifies the scope, duration, and rules of engagement. Troops can then be mobilized to enforce laws, restore order, or protect federal operations (e.g., supporting ICE in this case). Deployment is not automatic upon invocation; it’s at the President’s discretion. Oversight and Termination: Once invoked, the deployment continues until the President determines the crisis is resolved. Congress can potentially override or limit it through legislation, but this is rare. The Act requires reporting to Congress “as soon as practicable” on the reasons and measures taken. https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2011886917311414381?s=20 Republican Rep. Harriet Hageman (WY-At-Large) challenged former Justice Department prosecutor Michael Romano on whether any participants in the January 6th protest in 2021 had been convicted under the federal insurrection statute. It was a question that led Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin (MD-8) to attempt to interject, to no avail. https://twitter.com/BreitbartNews/status/2011604461412663618?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2011604461412663618%7Ctwgr%5Ecfabd7c33610a57fe0964ce3add2ff2ab7586c34%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Frusty-weiss%2F2026%2F01%2F15%2Fwatch-raskin-shut-down-after-hageman-exposes-insurrection-myth-at-new-j6-committee-n2198161 https://twitter.com/ChiefSund/status/2011625686289494153?s=20  the requests and denials GOP Rep. Neal Dunn Announces Retirement After Five Terms — Triggering Critical March 10 Special Election  Republican Congressman Neal Dunn (R-Fla.) has announced he will retire after five terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, opting not to seek re-election in 2026. The Panama City physician-serving lawmaker said he wants to spend more time with his family, but his departure comes at a perilous moment for the GOP as Republicans cling to a razor-thin House majority. Dunn's decision to step away from the House after a decade of service leaves Florida's 2nd Congressional District wide open and adds to a growing list of incumbents abandoning their posts ahead of one of the most consequential midterm cycles in recent memory. https://twitter.com/DrNealDunnFL2/status/2011092421866930495?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2011092421866930495%7Ctwgr%5E90201f9195637f0f3c794268082281e562876921%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Fgop-rep-neal-dunn-announces-retirement-after-five%2F Source: thegatewaypundit.com UPDATE: Pam Bondi Reveals Classified Leaker Behind Trump's Venezuela Operation Was Pentagon IT Contractor   Pam Bondi revealed that the classified leaker was a Pentagon IT contractor who has been arrested and jailed for endangering U.S. military operations and national security. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has unmasked the traitor behind the illegal leak of classified information about President Trump's bold Venezuela operation. Pam Bondi revealed Wednesday night that the individual responsible for leaking classified information about President Trump's Venezuela operation was an IT contractor for the Department of War and he is now sitting in jail. The disclosure came during an explosive interview with Sean Hannity, where Bondi confirmed that the Trump DOJ and FBI are aggressively pursuing those who leak classified military intelligence and the media figures who obtain and publish it. Source: thegatewaypundit.com   https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2011673479813222821?s=20   https://twitter.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/2011574493966188556?s=20 https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/2011860087313154089?s=20   https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2011565907110224263?s=20  “These two individuals have been particularly egregious in their contempt of the President and putting their personal views in front of their duty as judges to carry out the jobs that they hold.” UPDATE: Pam Bondi Says Minnesota Prosecutors Didn't Quit — “I FIRED THEM ALL” After Refusing to Cooperate with ICE and Demanding Taxpayer-Funded Paid “Vacation” Till April Pam Bondi appears on Fox News' Hannity announcing that Minnesota prosecutors who refused to cooperate with ICE were fired. The narrative pushed by the corporate media has officially collapsed. After early reports claimed that at least six prosecutors in the Minneapolis U.S. Attorney's Office had “resigned in protest” over the Justice Department's actions following the fatal shooting of ICE protester Renee Nicole Good, Attorney General Pam Bondi stepped in and set the record straight.  According to The New York Times, the group of ousted attorneys includes Joe Thompson (Former Acting U.S. Attorney) Harry Jacobs Melinda Williams Thomas Calhoun-Lopez Ruth Schneider Tom Hollenhurst Source: thegatewaypundit.com HUGE WIN FOR ELECTION INTEGRITY: Supreme Court Greenlights Lawsuits Against Late Mail-In Ballots — Opens Door to Nationwide Challenges to Democrat Schemes The Supreme Court handed a crushing blow to the radical left's ballot-harvesting machine on Wednesday. In a stunning 7-2 decision, the High Court ruled that Republican Congressman Mike Bost (R-IL) has the legal standing to challenge Illinois's unconstitutional law that allows mail-in ballots to be counted up to 14 days after Election Day. This ruling reverses the Seventh Circuit and sends the case back to the lower court—where Illinois' late-ballot scheme will now be evaluated on the merits This is the game-changer we have been waiting for. For years, Democrats and their media allies have relied on “late-arriving ballots” to shift the results of elections days or even weeks after the polls close. We all remember what happened in 2020. We remember the “pauses” and the late-night spikes. But now, the Supreme Court has finally opened the floodgates for Republicans to sue to stop it. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, made it clear: candidates have a “personal stake” in the rules governing their elections. This destroys the liberal argument that Republicans can't sue unless they can prove a specific fraudulent ballot cost them the race. The following states accept ballots that arrive late, as long as they have a valid postmark: Alaska California District of Columbia Illinois Maryland Massachusetts Mississippi Nevada New Jersey New York Oregon Texas (Note: Must be received by 5:00 PM the day after Election Day) Virginia Washington West Virginia Note on Territories: Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam also typically accept late-arriving ballots if postmarked by Election Day. Several states that previously accepted late-arriving ballots have recently passed laws requiring ballots to be in the hands of election officials by the time polls close on Election Day, regardless of when they were mailed. Kansas (Changed in 2024/2025) North Dakota (Changed in 2025) Ohio (Changed in 2025) Utah (Changed in 2025) In all other states (e.g., Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona), your ballot must be received by the county election office by the close of polls on Election Day. Source: thegatewaypundit.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

Chief Justice John Roberts famously told the country that, if confirmed to the Supreme Court, he would act like an umpire—just there to call balls and strikes. To help answer the question of how Umpire Roberts Court has fared, Harry spoke with Lisa Graves about her new book, Without Precedent: How Chief Justice Roberts and His Accomplices Rewrote the Constitution and Dismantled Our Rights, in which Graves makes the case that Roberts has acted less as an umpire than a political loyalist. In the conversation, Harry and Lisa discuss Roberts's background as a movement conservative at DOJ, his nomination and ascension as Chief Justice, and his tenure now entering its third decade. They also delve into the modern Federalist Society, unpacking how Roberts and his fellow conservative justices align—or don't—with its ideology. With the Supreme Court wielding unprecedented influence over American policy, this discussion provides a clear look at how we arrived at the Court we have today. Read Lisa's book: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/lisa-graves/without-precedent/9781645030676/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Interesting fact: While all federal officials take an oath that they will support the US Constitution, Supreme Court justices must also take a second (and very profound) oath of office.As New York Times judicial columnist Adam Liptak reports, each of the nine “supremes” must swear that they will “do equal right to the poor and the rich.” Yes, class fairness is not only a core element of justice, but it's supposed out to be a formal measure of Supreme Court behavior.Every justice is aware of this consequential, ethical requirement, since each one took the oath. How damning, then, that the Court's right-wing ideologues feel no twinge of conscience about flagrantly and frequently violating their own word of honor! Call the roll: Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. In case after case that pits corporate power against workers, consumers, small business, voters, communities, our environment, farm families—i.e., you and me—this plutocratic cabal rules for the rich.This month, an independent study of decisions by the Roberts Court revealed that two-thirds of its rulings favor wealthy powers over middle-income and poor people. Thus, our so-called “court of justice” is a primary pusher of inequality, especially through its farfetched decree that unlimited corporate political cash is “free speech,” and that corporations are “people.”Chief Justice Roberts smugly proclaims that the Constitution tells him whether the corporate giant or “the little guy” should win. “That's the oath” I took, he sniffs.This is Jim Hightower saying… Bovine excrement! It's obvious that plutocratic ideologues like him are using the Constitution like a ventriloquist dummy. And—hello, your honorableness—what about that other oath you took about equal fairness for the poor?Do something!There are groups that are working on holding the mighty Supremes accountable—what a world that will be! Check out:* The Alliance for Justice* Common Cause* Brennan Center for JusticeJim Hightower's Lowdown is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jimhightower.substack.com/subscribe

They want you to be passive and quiet. But history tells a different story. We're joined by award-winning comic creator Ben Passmore, author of Black Arms to Hold You Up: A History of Black Resistance, to dig into the stories that history books, and Hollywood, whitewash: De-sanitizing Resistance: We discuss how films and media often strip away the political intellect of figures like the Black Liberation Army, reducing revolutionary struggle to nihilism. Community as Armor: Ben puts the focus on true resistance as mutual aid. From the Jane Collective organizing healthcare, to prisoners organizing even from solitary confinement, the most radical act is building a culture of care. The Trap of Online Activism: In an age of surveillance capitalism, Ben warns that we must move beyond the "power fantasy" of social media. Real solidarity happens offline, face-to-face, building trust that algorithms can't suppress. As MAGA's Supreme Leader expands the surveillance state through Peter Thiel's Big Brother Palantir and unleashes a KKK gestapo through ICE, we must learn from unfiltered history and understand what it actually takes to survive. January 15th is the birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. The Civil Rights movement ushered in the Third American Revolution, defeating the authoritarianism of Jim Crow, which John Roberts' Supreme Court is bringing back. Listen to our episode on Stride Toward Freedom, the memoir by a young MLK Jr. after he captured the world's attention leading the successful Montgomery Bus Boycott. For more on resistance strategies, listen to our episode on Gene Sharp, author of From Dictatorship to Democracy, and our interview with his protege Jamila Raqib, the executive director of the Albert Einstein Institution: Fire in Our Peace: The Power of Nonviolent Resistance.   Join our community of listeners and get bonus shows, ad free listening, group chats with other listeners, ways to shape the show, invites to exclusive events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Discounted annual memberships are available. Become a Democracy Defender at Patreon.com/Gaslit Show Notes:  Watch: A sobbing mother calls 911 as federal agents force their way into her home to chase down a DoorDash driver who was just trying to deliver food. https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesota/comments/1q8vvwa/st_paul_mn_a_sobbing_resident_calls_911_as/?sort=old Trump Taps Palantir to Build a "Big Brother": How the administration is partnering with Peter Thiel's tech giant to monitor Americans. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/30/technology/trump-palantir-data-americans.html ACLU Investigates Police Use of Flock License Plate Surveillance: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-roundup Project 2025 Tracker: Monitoring the conservative policy blueprint and authoritarian roadmap. https://www.project2025.observer/en Want to Stop ICE? Go After Its Corporate Collaborators: A guide on how to target the businesses fueling the deportation machine. https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/ice-businesses-boycott-campaign/?fbclid=IwY2xjawPR1kdleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEezKLIFd9EZUL6g5uRoGAhj6cAItrut7MjpF8RislyssfXbo-V_-dZNqW2Fw4_aem_f4IvbocKBVROoBGqO-V_Kg Prairieland Defendants: Legal support and mutual aid for protesters. https://prairielanddefendants.com/ Police Accountability and Reform: An activist checklist for demanding transparency. https://activistchecklist.org/police/ The Singing Revolution: How music helped liberate the Baltic States from Soviet occupation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singing_Revolution Thomas Paine's Common Sense (1776): The full text of the pamphlet that sparked a revolution. https://loveman.sdsu.edu/docs/1776ThomasPaine.pdf "The Voice of Dust and Ash": A documentary film on resistance and silence. https://vimeo.com/753111135?fl=pl&fe=cm Man Up: The New Misogyny and the Rise of Violent Extremism. https://share.google/t85l3THA4XfvEEbNo Whistleblower drops 'largest ever' ICE leak to unmask agents: 'The last straw' https://www.rawstory.com/ice-agents-data-leak/ Review: 'One Battle After Another,' What Black Women Call Life https://blacknerdproblems.com/review-one-battle-after-another/ EVENTS AT GASLIT NATION: The Gaslit Nation Outreach Committee discusses how to talk to the MAGA cult: join on Patreon.  Minnesota Signal group for Gaslit Nation listeners in the state to find each other:join on Patreon.  Vermont Signal group for Gaslit Nation listeners in the state to find each other:join on Patreon.  Arizona-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to connect, join on Patreon.  Indiana-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to join,join on Patreon.  Florida-based listeners are going strong meeting in person. Be sure to join their Signal group, join on Patreon.  Gaslit Nation Salons take place Mondays 4pm ET over Zoom and are recorded and shared on Patreon.com/Gaslit for our community

Jeff John Roberts, an attorney, journalist, and author, currently serves as Finance & Crypto Editor at Fortune and formerly Executive Editor at Decrypt. He is the author of "Kings of Crypto," which offers a deeply reported look into the origins and rise of Coinbase. In this episode, Roberts and host David Braue discuss the book, as well as Coinbase as a whole and the state of cryptocurrency today. • For more on cybersecurity, visit us at https://cybersecurityventures.com.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen, watching the Supreme Court become the hottest ticket in town, but here we are on this crisp January morning in 2026, with President Donald Trump's legal battles dominating the headlines. Just days ago, on December 23, 2025, the justices handed down a key ruling in Trump v. Illinois, partially siding with the administration in a tense showdown over federalizing the National Guard in Illinois. The majority allowed the move, with Justice Kavanaugh writing a concurrence, while Justices Alito and Thomas dissented, arguing it overstepped state authority. According to the Brennan Center's Supreme Court Shadow Docket Tracker, this decision came after a First Circuit ruling let it stand, underscoring Trump's push to assert federal control amid rising urban unrest in Chicago.But that's just the appetizer. The real drama kicks off next week. On January 13, the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., will hear oral arguments in two massive challenges to state bans on transgender students—like those in West Virginia and Idaho—playing on sports teams matching their gender identity. KVUE News reports these cases hinge on the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause and Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools. Challengers say the bans unfairly sideline kids like Becky Pepper-Jackson in West Virginia, who's been fighting since 2021 to compete in girls' track.Then, on January 21, all eyes turn to Trump v. Cook, a blockbuster testing presidential firing powers. President Trump tried to oust Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook in August 2025, citing alleged mortgage fraud from before her 2023 appointment to the Fed's Board in Washington. A D.C. district judge blocked it, and now the Supreme Court has deferred any stay until arguments, per the official docket for case 25A312. The Constitution Center notes this stems from the Federal Reserve Act, which only allows removal "for cause," not at-will. If Trump wins, it could reshape independent agencies like the Fed, which steers the U.S. economy with trillions in influence—think interest rates affecting your mortgage or job market.These aren't isolated fights. The Court's fall term already tackled Trump v. Slaughter on firing a Federal Trade Commissioner and Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump over tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Lawfare's Trump Administration Litigation Tracker logs dozens more, from immigration deportations under the Alien Enemies Act in Trump v. J.G.G. to earlier agency head removals. With decisions due by June, the stakes couldn't be higher—executive power, civil rights, economic stability all colliding.As I sip my coffee, scrolling updates from the National Constitution Center, I can't help but wonder: will this term redefine Trump's second presidency? The justices, from Chief Justice John Roberts to the newest voices, hold the gavel.Thanks for tuning in, listeners. Come back next week for more, and this has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Barb McQuade hosts #SistersInLaw to relay the #Sisters' 2026 predictions on everything from SCOTUS ethics to crypto, political engagement, and even fashion trends.  Then, they revisit the events of J6 and analyze Jack Smith's recently released testimony, focusing on the evidence, witness testimonies, and the political attempts to silence him.  From there, they dissect the fraud accusations targeting the Somali community in Minnesota and call out the reliance on misinformation and the dangerous precedent of targeting communities rather than individuals.  They also discuss Chief Justice Roberts' end-of-year statement, upcoming cases, and whether the court is still independent. The holidays are here! Get the brand new ReSIStance T-Shirt, Mini Tote, and other #SistersInLaw gear at politicon.com/merch!  Additional #SistersInLaw Projects Check out Jill's Politicon YouTube Show: Just The Facts Check out Kim's Newsletter: The Gavel Joyce's new book, Giving Up Is Unforgivable, is now available, and for a limited time, you have the exclusive opportunity to order a signed copy here.  Pre-order Barb's new book, The Fix. Her first book, Attack From Within, is now in paperback.  Add the #Sisters & your other favorite Politicon podcast hosts on Bluesky Get your #SistersInLaw MERCH at politicon.com/merch WEBSITE & TRANSCRIPT Email: SISTERSINLAW@POLITICON.COM or Thread to @sistersInLaw.podcast Get text updates from #SistersInLaw and Politicon.  From the #Sisters On Joyce's Substack - Crypto Interview  Jack Smith's Video Testimony & Transcript Chief Justice Roberts' Year-End Report Support This Week's Sponsors Gusto: Gusto is your all-in-one online payroll and benefits software built for small businesses.  It's remote-friendly and incredibly easy to use.  Try Gusto today at gusto.com/SISTERS and get three months free when you run your first payroll! Thrive Causemetics: Amplify your everyday look in 2026. Go to thrivecausemetics.com/sisters for an exclusive offer of 20% off your first order. OneSkin: Get up to 30% off OneSkin with the code SISTERS at https://www.oneskin.co/SISTERS #oneskinpod Get More From The #SistersInLaw Joyce Vance: Bluesky | Twitter | University of Alabama Law | Civil Discourse Substack | MSNBC | Author of “Giving Up Is Unforgiveable” Jill Wine-Banks: Bluesky | Twitter | Facebook | Website | Author of The Watergate Girl: My Fight For Truth & Justice Against A Criminal President | Just The Facts YouTube Kimberly Atkins Stohr: Bluesky | Twitter | Boston Globe | WBUR | The Gavel Newsletter | Justice By Design Podcast Barb McQuade: barbaramcquade.com | Bluesky | Twitter | University of Michigan Law | Just Security | MSNBC | Attack From Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America

In this New Year's Day episode of The Daily Herold, Jon Herold opens 2026 with a candid, free-flowing broadcast that blends reflection, headlines, and philosophical critique. Jon sets the tone by explaining his approach to the show, engaging directly with chat, and revisiting the Badlands New Year's Eve stream before turning to expectations for the year ahead. A central focus of the episode is Chief Justice John Roberts' year-end report on the federal judiciary, which Jon reads through and sharply critiques, questioning claims of judicial independence, fidelity to the Founders' intent, and the modern interpretation of the Declaration of Independence. The discussion expands into the concept of mandate, narrative warfare, and public consent, drawing parallels between Thomas Paine's Common Sense and today's information battles. Jon also touches on Minnesota fraud cases, accountability gaps, national debt, economic indicators, Trump statements, and cultural commentary, closing with an emphasis on tempering expectations, resisting psyops, and staying grounded as 2026 begins.

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

We finish Chief Justice Roberts' Opinion for the Court today for Part 4d of this deep dive as we continue the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) decision that overruled Chevron (1984), Chief Justice Roberts' Opinion for the Court starting from from his page 23 Roman Numeral III, letter B number 2 in the Slip Opinion through to the end of the Opinion of the Court on the bottom of page 35. We have one more episode in this Deep Dive after this one to do the concurrences by Thomas and Gorsuch. This is the 15th Chevron Deference Deep Dive episode we've done on TRP podcast since winter 2024. And here it is winter 2025. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf (603 U.S. _____ (2024) of the Opinion of the Court written by Chief Justice Roberts. We will pick up with the Republican concurrences in Loper Bright next time. The Republican Professor is a pro-correctly-articulating-separation-of-powers podcast. Donate a gift to keep the podcast going on Venmo at-sign no space TheRepublicanProfessor or https://buymeacoffee.com/lucasj.mather Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

EXECUTIVE POWER AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Epstein discusses a Supreme Court case regarding the President's power to fire members of independent boards like the FTC. He fears Chief Justice Roberts will side with executive power, a move Epstein views as an "unmitigated disaster" that undermines the necessary independence of agencies like the Federal Reserve. NUMBER 14

SHOW 12-19-25 THE SHOW BEGINS WITH DOUBTS ABOUTGAVIN NNEWSOM  ON THE AMPAIGN TRAIL FOR 2028... LA 1900 WEST COAST WEATHER AND PORTLAND'S DECLINE Colleague Jeff Bliss, Pacific Watch. Jeff Bliss reports that Nordstrom Rack is leaving downtown Portland, citing high vacancy rates, crime, and homelessness. He also details a massive atmospheric river bringing heavy rain to the West Coast and dangerous Tule fog in California, while analyzing Gavin Newsom's presidential prospects amidst state economic struggles. NUMBER 1 CHINA'S CHIP THEFT AND AI WARFARE RISKS Colleague Brandon Weichert, The National Interest. Weichert discusses China's attempts to upgrade older ASML machines and reverse-engineer chips to bypass sanctions. They also review 2025 lessons, noting that AI in military war games tends to escalate conflicts aggressively toward nuclear options, warning that China may fuse AI with its nuclear command systems. NUMBER 2 ITALY'S ECONOMIC STABILITY AND DEMOGRAPHIC CRISIS Colleague Lorenzo Fiori, Il Giornale. Lorenzo Fiori reports that Italy's economy is stabilizing, with debt under control and bond spreads narrowing close to Germany's levels. While northern Italy remains industrialized, the south suffers from depopulation and climate change. Fiori emphasizes the urgent need for government policies to boost Italy's declining birth rate. NUMBER 3 NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION AND RUSSIAN SANCTIONS Colleague Henry Sokolski, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center. Sokolski criticizes the lifting of sanctions on Russian banks for nuclear projects and highlights the dangers at the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia plant. He warns against potential deals allowing Saudi Arabia and South Korea to enrich uranium, arguing this brings them dangerously close to bomb-making capabilities. NUMBER 4 LANCASTER COUNTY AND A HOLIDAY SPENDING SLUMP Colleague Jim McTague, Author and Journalist. Reporting from Lancaster County, Jim McTague observes a sluggish Christmas shopping season, with consumers buying practical items like gloves rather than expensive packages. While tourist venues like Sight & Sound Theaterremain busy, he predicts a mild recession in 2026 due to rising local taxes and utility costs. NUMBER 5 THE URGENCY OF SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM Colleague Veronique de Rugy, Mercatus Center. Veronique de Rugy argues Social Security must be reformed before trust funds run dry in the 2030s. She contends the system unfairly redistributes wealth from young workers to increasingly wealthy seniors and advocates for capping benefits or means-testing rather than raising taxes or allowing across-the-board cuts. NUMBER 6 NASA'S NEW LEADERSHIP AND PRIVATE SPACE Colleague Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com. Bob Zimmerman discusses Jared Isaacman's confirmation as NASA administrator and an executive order prioritizing commercial space. Zimmerman predicts Isaacman might cancel the crewed Artemis II mission due to safety concerns with the Orion capsule, signaling a shift away from government-run programs like SLS toward private enterprise. NUMBER 7 SPACE BRIEFS: ROCKET LAB AND MARS RIVERS Colleague Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com. Zimmerman highlights Rocket Lab's record launches and Max Space's new inflatable station module. He notes a European satellite report on sea levels omitted "global warming" references. Additionally, he describes Martian drainage features that resemble rivers and cites a study claiming AI algorithms are exposing children to harmful content. NUMBER 8 THE FALL OF THE REPUBLIC: SULLA TO CAESAR Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Watts traces the Republic's fall, starting with the rivalry between Marius and Sulla. Sulla'sbrutal proscriptions and dictatorship traumatized a young Julius Caesar. Watts explains that Caesar eventually concluded the Republic's structures were broken, leading him to seize power to enforce rights, which his assassins misinterpreted as kingship. NUMBER 9 NERO, AGRIPPINA, AND THE MATRICIDE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Professor Watts details the pathology of the Roman emperorship, focusing on Agrippina's maneuvering to install her son Nero. Watts describes Nero's eventual assassination of his mother using a collapsible ship and his pivot to seeking popularity through rigged Olympic victories in Greece before losing control of Rome. NUMBER 10 THE YEAR OF FOUR EMPERORS AND FLAVIAN RULE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Watts analyzes the chaos following Nero's death, where Vespasian seized power after a brutal civil war that burned Capitoline Hill. The segment covers the Flavian dynasty, Titus's destruction of Jerusalem, and Domitian's vilification, concluding with Nerva's coup and the adoption of Trajan to stabilize the succession. NUMBER 11 THE BARRACKS EMPERORS AND THE ANTONINE PLAGUE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. The discussion turns to the "barracks emperors," highlighting Trajan's expansion into Dacia and Hadrian's infrastructure focus. Watts describes Marcus Aurelius's Stoic governance during constant warfare and a devastating smallpox pandemic, which forced Rome to settle German immigrants to repopulate the empire. NUMBER 12 SUPREME COURT CHALLENGES TO TARIFF POWERS Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Professor Epstein analyzes potential Supreme Court rulings on the President's use of emergency powers for broad tariffs. He predicts the Court may find the interpretation unconstitutional, creating a logistical nightmare regarding the refund of billions in collected revenues and addressing the complexity of overturning Article I court precedents. NUMBER 13 EXECUTIVE POWER AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Epstein discusses a Supreme Court case regarding the President's power to fire members of independent boards like the FTC. He fears Chief Justice Roberts will side with executive power, a move Epstein views as an "unmitigated disaster" that undermines the necessary independence of agencies like the Federal Reserve. NUMBER 14 ECONOMIC SLOWDOWN AND CONSUMER SPENDING Colleague Gene Marks, The Guardian. Gene Marksreports on a US economic slowdown, citing contracting architectural billings and falling hotel occupancy. He notes that while the wealthy continue spending, the middle class is cutting back on dining out. Marks attributes inflation to government money circulation and discusses proposals for mandated retirement contributions. NUMBER 15 AI ADOPTION IN BUSINESS AND CONSTRUCTION Colleague Gene Marks, The Guardian. Marks argues that AI is enhancing productivity rather than replacing humans, despite accuracy issues. He highlights AI adoption in construction, including drones and augmented reality for safety. Marks notes that small businesses are eager for these technologies to improve efficiency, while displaced tech workers find roles in smaller firms. NUMBER 16

-- On the Show -- Donald Trump promotes $1,776 cash payments to service members while escalating explicit oil-driven rhetoric about Venezuela, raising concerns that patriotic rewards are being used to soften troops ahead of potential military action -- Donald Trump signs an executive order reclassifying cannabis to Schedule III, formally acknowledging medical use while stopping far short of federal legalization or criminal justice reform -- Reporting reveals Susie Wiles pushed Donald Trump into a nationally televised address meant to deflect from her Vanity Fair fallout, resulting in a rambling speech that damages both Trump and his administration -- Donald Trump appears disengaged and authoritarian as he dismisses congressional oversight and avoids accountability -- Fox News anchor John Roberts publicly dismantles Howard Lutnick's mathematically impossible defense of Donald Trump's exaggerated pricing claims -- Cardiologist Jonathan Reiner warns that Donald Trump's frantic speech cadence raises serious medical and leadership concerns for a sitting commander in chief -- Trump administration officials delay credit for economic outcomes by pushing promised gains into 2026 while deflecting questions about present-day performance -- The Friday Feedback segment -- On the Bonus Show: The Epstein files were supposed to be released today, the Brown University shooting suspect was found dead, MAGA infighting spills into the Turning Point USA conference, and much more…

This Day in Legal History: Trump ImpeachedOn December 18, 2019, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to impeach President Donald J. Trump, marking the third presidential impeachment in American history. The impeachment followed a months-long investigation centered on Trump's dealings with Ukraine. House Democrats alleged that the president abused the powers of his office by pressuring a foreign government to investigate a political rival. A second article charged Trump with obstruction of Congress for directing executive branch officials not to comply with House subpoenas. The votes largely split along party lines, reflecting deep political polarization.Impeachment itself did not remove Trump from office, but instead formally accused him of constitutional wrongdoing. Under the Constitution, the House holds the sole power of impeachment, functioning similarly to a grand jury. Once impeached, the process shifted to the Senate, which is responsible for conducting a trial. Chief Justice John Roberts later presided over the Senate proceedings, as required when a president is tried. The Senate ultimately acquitted Trump in February 2020, falling short of the two-thirds vote needed for conviction. Despite the acquittal, the impeachment reinforced Congress's oversight authority over the executive branch. The episode also highlighted ongoing debates about the limits of presidential power and the role of impeachment as a constitutional check.A federal appeals court in Washington reversed an earlier ruling that would have allowed the Trump administration to move forward with mass firings at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Sitting as a full bench, the court blocked plans to cut as much as 90% of the agency's workforce and agreed to rehear the administration's appeal of a lower court order that had paused efforts to dismantle the bureau. As a result, the administration remains temporarily barred from gutting the agency while litigation continues. The legal fight has stretched on for months, during which the CFPB has been largely sidelined. Congress originally created the CFPB after the 2008 financial crisis to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices by banks, lenders, and other financial companies. Its mission includes enforcing federal consumer financial laws and preventing the kinds of predatory conduct that helped trigger the financial collapse. Supporters of the agency, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, praised the ruling as necessary to shield families from financial harm.Critics within the Trump administration have argued the CFPB is politically motivated (as protecting consumers from predatory financial practices is political, apparently) and should be eliminated, though they have also claimed in court that some version of the agency would remain. Complicating matters further, the CFPB faces a funding dispute over whether it can draw money from the Federal Reserve, raising concerns that it could run out of operating funds.US appeals court tosses decision allowing Trump mass firings at consumer bureau | ReutersFull DC Circuit Will Review Trump's Bid to Dismantle CFPB (2)A group of leading medical organizations asked a federal judge to allow their lawsuit challenging vaccine policy changes under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to move forward. The groups argue that recent actions by Kennedy and the Department of Health and Human Services will reduce vaccination rates and endanger public health. They point to a directive removing COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for pregnant women and children without advance notice or explanation. The lawsuit also challenges Kennedy's decision to dismiss 17 experts from a CDC advisory panel and replace them with members more aligned with his views. That reconstituted panel later voted to scale back broad vaccine recommendations, including limiting COVID-19 shots to shared decision-making with doctors and eliminating universal recommendations for certain childhood vaccines.The plaintiffs claim the panel was unlawfully reshaped in violation of federal law requiring advisory committees to be balanced and free from improper influence. Government lawyers argue the medical groups lack standing because the CDC's guidance merely advises consultation with doctors and does not directly harm them. The plaintiffs counter that they have been injured by having to divert resources to help doctors navigate confusing and abrupt policy shifts. The judge indicated skepticism toward the government's standing argument, particularly in light of statements suggesting doctors could face liability for deviating from CDC guidance. A ruling on whether the case can proceed is expected before a scheduled January hearing.US medical groups urge judge to allow challenge to Kennedy-backed vaccine policies to proceed | ReutersA federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., to remain in place while legal challenges continue. A three-judge panel said the administration was likely to succeed in defending the deployment, temporarily blocking a lower court order that would have ended it. The ruling gives Trump an interim victory as he claims broad authority to use troops for domestic law enforcement. The deployment began earlier in the year and expanded after two Guard members were shot near the White House. The judges emphasized that Washington, D.C.'s unique status—because it is not a state—strengthens presidential authority there. District officials who sued to stop the deployment said the decision is preliminary and does not resolve the underlying legal questions. The White House praised the ruling as confirmation of the president's lawful powers and credited the deployment with improving public safety. The case comes amid broader disputes over Trump's efforts to deploy troops in several major cities despite objections from local and state leaders. Lower courts have generally been skeptical of those efforts, rejecting claims that protests against federal immigration enforcement qualify as rebellions. The Supreme Court is widely expected to weigh in on the scope of presidential power in this area.US appeals court says Trump's National Guard deployment in DC may continue | ReutersTrump's DC Troop Deployment Gets Extension From US Appeals CourtA federal judge allowed President Donald Trump to continue work on a proposed White House ballroom, rejecting an emergency request from preservation advocates to immediately halt the project. The judge ruled that the National Trust failed to show imminent, irreparable harm that would justify stopping construction at this early stage. However, he cautioned that the government may be required to reverse certain underground work if it ends up locking in a specific design. The project involves replacing the demolished East Wing with a large ballroom that would be significantly bigger than prior White House renovations. Trump has described the ballroom as a privately funded project and recently increased its estimated cost. Preservationists argue the administration moved forward without required public input and bypassed federal planning and design review processes. The government countered that the design is still in flux and that above-ground construction will not begin for several months. Relying on those representations, the judge found no immediate risk of irreversible aesthetic damage. He scheduled another hearing to reconsider whether the project should be paused as the lawsuit continues. For now, construction may proceed while the court reviews whether the administration complied with historic preservation and planning laws.Judge allows Trump's ballroom project to proceed for now | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode of EisnerAmper's Engaging Alternatives Podcast, Elana Margulies-Snyderman, Director, Publications, speaks with John Roberts, Managing Partner & Mickal Adler, General Partner, Boot64 Ventures, a New Orleans-based venture capital firm that invests in Louisiana entrepreneurs. They share their outlook for venture capital investing in entrepreneurs in the Pelican State including the greatest opportunities, challenges and more. ✨ What you'll learn:

What do the National Labor Relations Board, Blake Lively's lawsuit against Justin Baldoni, and Lindsey Halligan have in common? They're all swimming in the chaos soup cooked up by a Supreme Court that engages in motivated reasoning and jettisons precedent whenever it gets in the way. Eat up!Links: Richman v. UShttps://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71982634/richman-v-united-states/?order_by=descCorporate Union Busting in Plain Sight, Economic Policy Institute, January 28, 2025https://www.epi.org/publication/corporate-union-busting/Amazon Services LLC v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board (New York Litigation) [docket via CourtListener]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71421477/amazoncom-services-llc-v-new-york-state-public-employment-relations-board/National Labor Relations Board v. State of California (California Litigaton) [docket via CourtListener]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71657795/national-labor-relations-board-v-state-of-california/National Trust for Historic Preservation v. National Parks Servicehttps://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72028010/national-trust-for-historic-preservation-in-the-united-states-v-national/List of Trump Clemency Grantshttps://www.justice.gov/pardon/clemency-grants-president-donald-j-trump-2025-presentUS v. Abrego https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70475970/united-states-v-abrego-garcia/?order_by=descAbrego Garcia v. Noem https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/abrego-garcia-v-noemShow Links:https://www.lawandchaospod.com/BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPodThreads: @LawAndChaosPodTwitter: @LawAndChaosPodSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

M

I step into the studio knowing that, for listeners, the noise around Donald Trump's legal battles can feel endless. So let's get right to what has happened in the courts over the past few days.The biggest spotlight has been on the marble steps of the United States Supreme Court, where justices heard oral argument in a case called Trump v. Slaughter. Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog reports that this case asks whether President Donald Trump has the power to fire Federal Trade Commission commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter at will, even though federal law says FTC commissioners can only be removed for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” According to SCOTUSblog, during arguments on December 8, a solid majority of the justices signaled they are inclined to side with Trump and strike down those removal limits as unconstitutional restrictions on presidential power.In practical terms, that means the Court appears ready to say that President Trump lawfully fired Rebecca Slaughter in March by email, when he told her remaining at the FTC would be inconsistent with his administration's priorities, even though he did not claim any misconduct. Commentators at Holland and Knight, analyzing the argument, note that this could ripple well beyond the Federal Trade Commission, potentially weakening protections for members of other independent agencies like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Consumer Product Safety Commission.Inside the courtroom, the justices wrestled with a ninety‑year‑old precedent called Humphrey's Executor v. United States, a 1935 decision that upheld protections for FTC commissioners. According to SCOTUSblog, Chief Justice John Roberts described Humphrey's Executor as a “dried husk,” while Justice Neil Gorsuch called it “poorly reasoned.” On the other side, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan warned that tearing it down could fundamentally alter how much control Congress has over independent regulators. Justice Amy Coney Barrett pointed out that, in her view, the Court's more recent decisions have already eroded that old case.All of this is happening against a broader backdrop of litigation targeting actions by the Trump administration since his return to the White House. The Lawfare media team, which maintains a Trump Administration Litigation Tracker, has been following a sprawling set of challenges to Trump-era policies ranging from immigration rules to the deployment of the National Guard. Their tracker shows new filings landing in federal courts almost weekly, a sign that legal scrutiny of the administration's actions has not slowed.At the same time, local outlets like WABE in Atlanta continue to summarize where the various criminal and civil cases involving Donald Trump himself stand after earlier verdicts and appeals. WABE notes that previous jury decisions in defamation and civil fraud matters have largely been upheld on appeal, even as Trump continues to challenge them and attack prosecutors and judges in public.For listeners, the key point is this: in just a few days, the Supreme Court has given the clearest signal yet that it may expand presidential power over independent agencies in Trump v. Slaughter, while a wide network of lower courts and appellate panels continues to process the many criminal, civil, and constitutional fights that surround Donald Trump's political comeback.Thank you for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out QuietPlease dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

THEY AREN'T HUMAN: Proof Nick Fuentes is Leading a Foreign Bot Army The receipts are in, and the "Groyper Revolution" is a lie. A bombshell new report reveals that 61% of the online engagement driving the fringe Right isn't coming from American voters—it's coming from paid bot farms in Pakistan, Indonesia, and Russia. Austin Petersen breaks down the foreign psychological operation designed to rot the MAGA movement from the inside out. Plus, the Deep State is finally on trial. In Trump v. Slaughter, the Supreme Court appears ready to dismantle the "Fourth Branch" of government, with Chief Justice Roberts calling the bureaucracy a "dried husk." Is this the end of the unaccountable federal regulator? Today's Show Rundown:

The United States may be on the verge of losing the independent agencies that oversee consumer protection, worker protection, and environmental protection — replaced with nothing but lackeys of whichever politician has the most power. A right-wing group that favors unitary executive power — at least when a conservative is president — will argue their case Monday before the US Supreme Court, with a Chief Justice in John Roberts who has been pushing for this for 40 years, dating back to his days working in the Reagan administration. Mornings with Pat Kreitlow is powered by UpNorthNews, and it airs on several stations across the Civic Media radio network, Monday through Friday from 6-9 am. Subscribe to the podcast to be sure not to miss out on a single episode! Get more from Pat and UpNorthNews on their website and follow them on X, Facebook, TikTok and Instagram. To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast lineup. Follow the show on Facebook, X, and YouTube. Guest: Dr. Kristin Lyerly

The Stuph File Program Featuring Glen Swanson, author of Inspired Enterprise: How NASA, The Smithsonian, And The Aerospace Community Helped Launch Star Trek; Claude Haggerty, aka “The Super Sponsorship Man”; & Stuart Nulman with Book Banter Download Glen Swanson is the author of Inspired Enterprise: How NASA, The Smithsonian, And The Aerospace Community Helped Launch Star Trek. Claude Haggerty is known as “The Super Sponsorship Man” who primarily helps performers to get sponsorships. Stuart Nulman with another edition of Book Banter. It's our annual roundup of great holiday book ideas. The reviewed titles are: Wings: The Story Of A Band On The Run by Paul McCartney (Liveright, $60) Talk Of The Devil: The Collected Writings Of Ian Fleming by Ian Fleming (Morrow/The Ian Fleming Estate, $37) No Lessons Learned: The Making Of Curb Your Enthusiasm as told by Larry David and the Cast and Crew (Black Dog and Leventhal Publishers, $51) Christmas Weekend by Monique Polak (Ruelle/Linda Leith Publishing, $16.95) You can also read Stuart's articles in The Main and at BestStory.ca. This week's guest slate is presented by John Roberts, the co-founder and Director of Muttley's Estate, the New Zealand makers of wine for pets. He was back on show #0846 talking about his unique business. Click below to order directly from Amazon.com Part of the success of this show depends on the generosity of its listeners worldwide. If you enjoy the program please feel free to make a donation in any amount, no matter how small, in any denomination of $1, $5, $10, $20 or more. Just click on the donate button to the left. It will be greatly appreciated. This website is powered by PubNIX a boutique Internet service provider with great personalized service that was instrumental in helping to structure the look of this very site! The computer used for this site was built by InfoMontreal.ca, serving individuals, commercial & industrial companies in Quebec with computers, software and networks. Your needs are unique and InfoMontreal.ca believes the solutions should be too.

In this episode of No Holding Back, we take the gloves off and ask the questions everyone's thinking but few are saying out loud.Will the Supreme Court rule us — or doom us? As Donald Trump's legal battles collide with America's highest court, we examine whether the justices will rule against him, shield him, or fundamentally reshape the country in the process. Has the Court become a rubber stamp in the Trump era, or is that claim overstated?We also put Chief Justice John Roberts under the microscope. Is he successfully protecting the Court's independence, or has his leadership fallen short as public trust erodes?Joining us for this no-nonsense conversation is Erwin Chemerinsky, one of the nation's most respected constitutional law scholars and Dean of Berkeley Law. With his expert insight, we cut through the noise to understand what's really at stake — legally, politically, and democratically.No spin. No holding back. Just the hard truths about power, the Court, and America's future.All this and more on No Holding Back with Susan Estrich.Sign up to receive updates by email when a new episode drops at: www.noholdingback.fm/Produced by 1985 Productions

For Part 4c of this deep dive we continue the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) decision that overruled Chevron (1984), Chief Justice Roberts' Opinion for the Court starting from from his page 13 Roman Numeral II.C in the Slip Opinion through Roman Numeral III, letter B number 1, stopping at number 2 on the bottom of page 23. We have one more episode after this one. This is the 14th Chevron Deference Deep Dive episode we've done on TRP podcast since winter 2024. And here it is fall 2025. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf (603 U.S. _____ (2024) of the Opinion of the Court written by Chief Justice Roberts. We will pick up with Chief Justice Roberts' Opinion for the Court at the top of his page 23 bottom, Roman Numeral III.B no.2 next time. The Republican Professor is a pro-correctly-articulating-separation-of-powers podcast. Donate a gift to keep the podcast going on Venmo at-sign no space TheRepublicanProfessor or https://buymeacoffee.com/lucasj.mather Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

Legally speaking in NASCAR, there's not much thanks and not much giving this year. Brett welcomes John Roberts and Jeff Hammond.

It's been a while since we've done one of these shows. It was back with the Nikon FA, and in that case, we just passed the camera around the table. But today we have something special, the Pentax MZ-S, the last professional camera from Pentax/Asahi with a rich history. The camera was provided by John Roberts (who is back on the show today). It was used by Alex, James, and Bill, along with the three limited-edition lenses that were released with the camera.

John Roberts talks all things NASCAR & racing with Katherine Legge.#nascar #racing #katherinelegge

John Roberts talks all things NASCAR & racing with Hall of Famer Ray Evernham.#nascar #racing #rayevernham

We sat down with John Roberts, Executive Vice President and Chief Field Officer of Northwestern Mutual, for a conversation on the role of the advisor-client relationship in financial planning. John shared his insight on how advisors are establishing niche specialties to differentiate their practices, and balancing modern technology with human connection in their relationships with clients.

John Roberts catches up with Jordan Bianchi of The Athletic to discuss the NASCAR lawsuit and the state of the sport.#nascar #racing

Headlines for November 07, 2025; “The Fight Is Not Over”: LGBTQ Advocates Challenge Supreme Court’s Anti-Trans Passport Ruling; “Without Precedent”: Lisa Graves on the Supreme Court, Tariffs, Voting Rights & Legacy of John Roberts; Is the U.S. Planning to Assassinate Maduro? Peter Kornbluh on “Trump’s Gunboat Diplomacy”; Remembering Peter Weiss: Legendary Human Rights Lawyer Dies at 99

This Day in Legal History: John Jay First SCOTUSOn November 6, 1789, John Jay was sworn in as the first Chief Justice of the United States, marking a foundational moment in the development of the federal judiciary. Appointed by President George Washington, Jay was a prominent figure in the American founding, having co-authored The Federalist Papers and served as President of the Continental Congress. His confirmation by the Senate came just weeks after the Judiciary Act of 1789 formally established the structure of the federal court system, including the Supreme Court. At the time of his appointment, the Court held limited power and prestige, lacking even a permanent home or a defined role within the balance of government.Jay's tenure as Chief Justice lasted from 1789 to 1795 and was characterized more by circuit riding—traveling to preside over lower federal courts—than by Supreme Court rulings. Nonetheless, he helped lay the procedural and institutional groundwork for the Court's future authority. One of his few significant decisions came in Chisholm v. Georgia (1793), which asserted that states could be sued in federal court, a holding that was quickly overturned by the Eleventh Amendment. Jay also took on diplomatic duties, most notably negotiating the controversial Jay Treaty with Great Britain in 1794, which aimed to resolve lingering tensions from the Revolutionary War.Though his judicial legacy on the bench was modest, Jay's influence as the Court's inaugural leader was crucial in legitimizing the judiciary as a coequal branch of government. He later declined a reappointment to the position in 1800, citing the Court's lack of power and institutional independence. The role of Chief Justice would eventually evolve into a central force in constitutional interpretation, but it was Jay who first gave the office its shape. This milestone in legal history underscores the slow and deliberate construction of American judicial authority, which did not arrive fully formed but was built case by case, institution by institution.The Supreme Court is currently reviewing Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump, a case that raises major constitutional and statutory questions about the scope of presidential power—particularly in the context of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). At the heart of the dispute is whether the word “regulate” in IEEPA grants the president the authority to impose tariffs without explicit congressional approval. The case touches on foundational issues in constitutional law, including statutory interpretation, the nondelegation doctrine, emergency powers, and the “major questions” doctrine. The Court must assess not just what the statute says, but also how to interpret the silence—IEEPA never mentions “tariffs” or “taxes”—in light of Congress's constitutional power to impose taxes and regulate foreign commerce.From a textualist standpoint, the omission of “tariffs” suggests Congress did not intend to delegate that taxing authority to the executive. From a purposivist view, the debate turns on whether Congress meant to arm the president with broad economic tools to respond to emergencies or to narrowly limit those powers to national security concerns. Additional arguments center on legislative history and the principle of avoiding surplusage, as opponents claim interpreting “regulate” to include “tariff” would render other statutes that explicitly mention tariffs redundant.The nondelegation doctrine also plays a key role. If IEEPA is read to permit the president to impose tariffs, critics argue it may represent an unconstitutional transfer of legislative power—particularly taxing power—absent a clear “intelligible principle” to guide executive discretion. The Court is also being asked to consider whether the president's determination of an “emergency” under IEEPA is reviewable and whether actions taken in response to such emergencies must still adhere to constitutional limits. The outcome of this case could significantly redefine the boundary between congressional authority and executive power in trade and economic policy.The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on November 5, 2025, in a case challenging President Donald Trump's use of emergency powers to impose sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Justices from across the ideological spectrum questioned whether Trump had exceeded his authority by bypassing Congress to enact tariffs, which are traditionally under legislative control. The legal debate centered on whether IEEPA's grant of authority to “regulate importation” includes the power to impose long-term tariffs, and whether doing so constitutes a “major question” requiring explicit congressional authorization.Chief Justice John Roberts, among others, expressed concern that Trump's use of IEEPA effectively allowed the executive to impose taxes—a core congressional function. Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked whether there was any precedent for interpreting “regulate importation” as tariff-imposing authority, while Justice Elena Kagan and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson emphasized that IEEPA was designed to limit, not expand, presidential power. Some conservative justices, like Brett Kavanaugh, were more receptive, referencing historical precedents like Nixon's use of similar powers.The administration argued the tariffs were necessary to respond to trade deficits and national security threats and warned that removing them could lead to economic harm. But critics, including business representatives and Democratic-led states, warned of a dangerous shift in power toward the executive. Justice Neil Gorsuch suggested such an interpretation of IEEPA could permanently shift trade powers away from Congress, violating constitutional checks and balances.Lawyer for Trump faces tough Supreme Court questions over legality of tariffs | ReutersThe U.S. Senate confirmed Eric Tung to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a 52-45 party-line vote, making him President Donald Trump's sixth appellate court appointee in his second term. Tung, a former federal prosecutor and Justice Department lawyer, most recently worked at Jones Day, where he focused on commercial litigation and frequently represented cryptocurrency interests. His confirmation came over the objections of California's Democratic senators, who criticized his past statements and writings on issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, and gender roles.Tung has been a vocal legal advocate for controversial positions, including support for the independent state legislature theory and the argument that stablecoin sales fall outside SEC regulation. While he pledged to follow Supreme Court precedent, critics raised concerns about his originalist approach to constitutional rights. He faced intense scrutiny during his confirmation hearings for remarks made at a Federalist Society event and earlier in life, including statements about gender roles that drew fire from Senator Alex Padilla.Despite these concerns, Tung's legal career earned strong endorsements from colleagues and conservative legal allies. He clerked for Justices Antonin Scalia and Neil Gorsuch and has experience handling judicial nominations from within DOJ. Tung fills the seat vacated by Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta, a fellow conservative, ensuring ideological continuity on the Ninth Circuit.Former DOJ, Jones Day Lawyer Confirmed as Ninth Circuit JudgeThe California Republican Party filed a federal lawsuit against Governor Gavin Newsom, seeking to block the implementation of new congressional maps approved by voters just a day earlier via Proposition 50. The measure, backed by Newsom and passed by wide margins, suspends the state's independent redistricting commission and installs a Democratic-leaning map that could endanger five Republican-held congressional seats. Newsom has framed the move as a direct response to Texas' mid-cycle redistricting, which is expected to boost Republican power in the 2026 midterms.The GOP lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, argues that the new maps violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by using race as the primary factor in redrawing districts to favor Hispanic voters. The plaintiffs, represented by attorney Mike Columbo of the Dhillon Law Group, claim the state legislature lacked sufficient justification to use race in this way and failed to meet the legal standards required under the Voting Rights Act.Republicans also contend that Proposition 50 diminishes the political voice of non-Hispanic groups and constitutes unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. The suit, Tangipa v. Newsom, is backed by the National Republican Congressional Committee and includes Republican lawmakers and candidates as plaintiffs. It mirrors legal challenges in Texas, where courts are evaluating claims of racial bias in redistricting. The outcome of these cases could significantly affect congressional control heading into the latter half of President Trump's second term.California Republicans Sue to Block New Congressional Maps (1) 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

It can be tempting to look away from the Supreme Court. The cases are complicated, the traditions archaic, and these days the decisions are almost always devastating and the reasoning often perverse. But alas, the Court is too important to ignore, particularly as John Roberts and his five ultra- conservative colleagues have turned it into a rubber stamp for Donald Trump. Luckily, we at The Nation are blessed to have perhaps the only person in America who can make following the Supreme Court not only bearable but entertaining — our inimitable justice correspondent, Elie Mystal. Elie's annual roundup of the court's biggest upcoming cases is the cover story in our November issue.Our Sponsors:* Check out Avocado Green Mattress: https://avocadogreenmattress.com* Check out BetterHelp: https://betterhelp.com/THENATIONAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

The Stuph File Program Featuring John Roberts, co-owner, Muttley's Estate; Gilles Gignac, Ig Nobel Award winner; Jeffrey Haskell, author of, Against All Odds Download John Roberts is the co-owner of Muttley's Estate, a New Zealand company that makes wine for pets. Gilles Gignac is one of the recipients of the Psychology Prize of this year's Ig Nobel Awards. They investigated what happens when you tell narcissists, or anyone else that they are intelligent. Jeffery Haskell is the author of the sci-fi novel, Against All Odds. This week's guest slate is presented by Andrew Webster, owner of Pubnix Inc, a boutique Internet service provider with great personalized service. It's the place that the Stuph File Program's website has been powered by for over 15 years.

John Roberts talks with his longtime friend Wendy Venturini about growing up in a motorsports family, her career as a NASCAR reporter, business owner and her horrible accident several years ago.#nascar #racing #wendyventurini #johnroberts

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we tackle the Supreme Court battle over Louisiana's redistricting and its far-reaching implications for voting rights. Host Jessica Levinson and NPR's Hansi Lo Wang unpack the legal fight over Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, explaining how redistricting shapes the power of racial minorities and the future of partisan gerrymandering. Join us as we break down what's at stake for Congress, the states, and the promise of equal representation.Here are three key takeaways from the episode:Redistricting = Real Voting Power: How district lines are drawn can dramatically dilute or amplify your vote. Redistricting is a complex, often opaque process with huge, tangible consequences for representation.Supreme Court Decisions Have National Impact: The outcome of Louisiana's case (and similar cases) could directly affect minority representation in Congress and potentially lock in partisan advantages for years to come.Tension Between Race & Partisan Politics: The debate isn't just about protecting minority voters. The Court is grappling with whether racial considerations in redistricting are required or unconstitutional, especially since partisan gerrymandering is now out of reach for federal courts.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

John Roberts talks with Chad Knaus of Hendrick Motorsports about getting two cars in the championship four at Phoenix. Both William Byron and Kyle Larson have a shot at the title.#nascar #racing #ChadKnaus

John Roberts talks with longtime NASCAR reporter Holly Cain about her fights against cancer and the state of NASCAR.#nascar #racing #hollycain

In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson welcomes Jan Wolfe of Reuters to break down a major Supreme Court case that could reshape voting rights nationwide. They discuss how a challenge to Louisiana's congressional map escalated into a broader attack on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act—one of the remaining federal protections against racial discrimination in voting. Jan and Jessica unravel the complexities of the case, the Supreme Court's skepticism, and the potential consequences: from narrowing how race can be considered in redistricting, to making it much harder to bring successful claims under Section 2. The episode also takes a look at other high-profile cases on the Supreme Court's docket, including questions of executive power and social issues, highlighting the legal and political stakes at play this term.Here are three key takeaways from the episode:Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is at a crossroads:Following the Supreme Court's 2013 Shelby County decision (which gutted Section 5 preclearance provisions), Section 2 remains the primary tool to challenge racially discriminatory voting practices. This case could either hobble or maintain its effectiveness, depending on how the justices rule.The current dispute reflects broader battles over race and "colorblindness":The case sits at the intersection of redistricting and the recent trend in the Court toward a “colorblind” constitutional interpretation—reminiscent of last year's affirmative action ruling. The outcome could make it significantly harder to prove voting power is being diluted due to race, with huge consequences for minority representation.The Court's decision may have national ripple effects—or remain narrow:While the justices have options ranging from a sweeping redefinition of Section 2 to a narrow ruling specific to Louisiana, the oral arguments showed splintering among conservatives and uncertainty about the ultimate path forward. Watch for possible “off ramps” that limit the case's impact nationally.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

The Supreme Court appears ready to overturn the last remaining provision of the Voting Rights Act, a civil rights law meant to undo Jim Crow-era policies that disenfranchised Black voters. This week, the court heard oral arguments in Louisiana v. Callais over the state's redistricting map. The case was brought by a group of self-described "non-African-American voters" who argue the creation of Louisiana's second majority-Black congressional district violates the Constitution. Marisa and Scott are joined in studio by Lisa Graves, a former senior Justice Department official and executive director of the progressive watchdog group True North Research. Graves' new book "Without Precedent: How Chief Justice Roberts and His Accomplices Rewrote the Constitution and Dismantled Our Rights" ties the rolling back of civil rights to the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts.  Check out Political Breakdown's weekly newsletter, delivered straight to your inbox. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Trump's prosecutorial puppet prosecutes Leticia James. Ben riffs. David Faris runs down the stages of autocracy. We're currently in the competitive authoritarianism phase. Thanks in part to John Roberts and his Supremes. Imagine a president named, oh, Pritzker behaving like Trump. The Gaza truce. David is a professor of political science at Roosevelt University and a columnist for Newsweek and The Nation.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

Kate, Leah, and Melissa preview what fresh hell SCOTUS has in store for us this term, including challenges to the Fourteenth Amendment and the Court's continued obsession with fighting the culture wars. Then, after breaking down the latest legal news, the hosts welcome Lieutenant Governor of Illinois–and Senate candidate–Juliana Stratton to discuss Trump's plan to deploy the National Guard to Chicago, how state and local governments can push back against this administration, and what gives her hope in this fight. Finally, a game to commemorate Chief Justice Roberts' 20 long years on the Court. This episode was recorded live at the Athenaeum Center in Chicago.Favorite things:Leah: Bone Valley: A True Story of Injustice and Redemption in the Heart of Florida, Gilbert King; Without Precedent: How Chief Justice Roberts and His Accomplices Rewrote the Constitution and Dismantled Our Rights, Lisa Graves; One Battle After Another; The Life of a Showgirl, Taylor SwiftKate: WBEZ Chicago; Block Club Chicago; Chicago Reader; The Chicago Sun-Times on Broadview; Heart the Lover, Lily KingMelissa: Ta-Nehisi Coates and Ezra Klein Hash Out Their Charlie Kirk Disagreement; Tony Shalhoub's Breaking Bread (CNN); Mexodus (Audible's Minett a Lane Theater); Meghan Markle in Balenciaga Learn more: http://crooked.com/eventsOrder your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad VibesGet tickets to CROOKED CON November 6-7 in Washington, D.C at http://crookedcon.comFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The New Yorker contributing writer Jeannie Suk Gersen joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss the Supreme Court's new term and the cases that could test the boundaries of executive authority and separation of powers. They talk about challenges to Presidential power under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, disputes over voting rights and racial gerrymandering, and a First Amendment fight over state bans on conversion therapy. They also consider the Court's increasing reliance on its emergency docket and what John Roberts's twenty years as Chief Justice reveals about the conservative legal movement's influence on the Court.This week's reading: “Harvard's Mixed Victory,” by Jeannie Suk Gersen “Is Donald Trump's Sweeping Gaza Peace Plan Really Viable?,” by Robin Wright “Why Democrats Shut Down the Government,” by Jon Allsop “Have Cubans Fled One Authoritarian State for Another?,” by Jon Lee Anderson “The Age of Enshittification,” by Kyle Chayka Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW SCHEDULE  9-10-25 Good evening. The show begins in Poland as the government and military respond to drones crossing the Belarus to Poland border... FIRST HOUR 9-915 General Blaine Holt NATO Reacts to Russian Drone Incursions into Poland General Blaine Holt analyzes Russiandrone incursions into Polish airspace from Belarus, triggering a NATO Article 4 meeting. While NATO calls it an "intentional incursion" to allow de-escalation, Poland considers it an "act of war." The incident highlights NATO's rapid response capabilities and the broader "poly crisis" in Europe, requiring diplomatic de-escalation. 915-930 CONTINUED General Blaine Holt NATO Reacts to Russian Drone Incursions into Poland General Blaine Holt analyzes Russiandrone incursions into Polish airspace from Belarus, triggering a NATO Article 4 meeting. While NATO calls it an "intentional incursion" to allow de-escalation, Poland considers it an "act of war." The incident highlights NATO's rapid response capabilities and the broader "poly crisis" in Europe, requiring diplomatic de-escalation. 930-945 Lance Gatling Japan's LDP Prime Minister Race and China's Influence Lance Gatling discusses the race for Japan'snew Prime Minister within the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) following Ishida's resignation. The LDP lacks a majority, complicating coalition-building. Takaichi Sanae, a conservative candidate critical of China, is opposed by Beijing's propagandists, highlighting China's active influence in the Japanese political landscape .945-1000 Captain James Fanell NATO Article 4 Invoked Amidst Russian Drones, China's South China Sea AggressionCaptain James Fanell discusses NATO's Article 4 invocation after Russian drones entered Polish airspace during Zapad exercises, potentially testing defenses. He also details China's escalating aggression in the South China Sea, where its navy chased a Philippine vessel near Scarborough Shoal. The "poly crisis" necessitates increased US defense spending and alliances. SECOND HOUR 10-1015 Steve Yates Pentagon's National Defense Strategy Amidst Global Crises Steve Yates discusses the Pentagon's new National Defense Strategy (NDS), which prioritizes China as the "pacing challenge" over climate change. The "Fortress America" concept of homeland defense is debated against the need for alliances and extended deterrence. Events like Russian drones in Poland underscore the loss of US initiative and the urgency of adaptive defense strategies. 1015-1030 Charles Burton Canada's Dilemma: Chinese EVs and National Security Charles Burton discusses Canada'sreluctance to link national security with China, specifically regarding Chinese EVs (dubbed "spy machines"). Canadaimposed 100% tariffs at US request, leading to China's retaliation on Canadian canola. This creates a dilemma, as Canada prioritizes economic gain despite China's espionage and potential US border bans on Chinese EVs.1030-1045 Andrea Stricker Iran's Nuclear Program Targeted, Verification Crisis Ensues Andrea Stricker discusses Israel and USstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities like Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan, destroying centrifuges and weaponization capabilities. The IAEA cannot verify Iran's nuclear material locations after inspectors were expelled. Iran's 60% enriched uranium poses a proliferation risk, leading to anticipated UN sanctions. The strikes prevented JCPOA-allowed centrifuge surges.1045-1100CONTINUED Andrea Stricker Iran's Nuclear Program Targeted, Verification Crisis Ensues Andrea Stricker discusses Israel and USstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities like Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan, destroying centrifuges and weaponization capabilities. The IAEA cannot verify Iran's nuclear material locations after inspectors were expelled. Iran's 60% enriched uranium poses a proliferation risk, leading to anticipated UN sanctions. The strikes prevented JCPOA-allowed centrifuge surges. THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 Professor Josh Blackman Judicial Defiance: Lower Courts Challenge Supreme Court and Trump AdministrationProfessor Josh Blackman details an unprecedented judicial "revolt" where lower federal courts, particularly in Boston, repeatedly defy Supreme Court rulings and temporary restraining orders against the Trump Administration. Cases involve deportation and presidential firing power. Chief Justice Roberts is struggling to make lower courts "get in line," prompting a rare concurrence from Justice Gorsuch criticizing the defiance.1115-1130 Professor Josh Blackman Judicial Defiance: Lower Courts Challenge Supreme Court and Trump AdministrationProfessor Josh Blackman details an unprecedented judicial "revolt" where lower federal courts, particularly in Boston, repeatedly defy Supreme Court rulings and temporary restraining orders against the Trump Administration. Cases involve deportation and presidential firing power. Chief Justice Roberts is struggling to make lower courts "get in line," prompting a rare concurrence from Justice Gorsuch criticizing the defiance. 1130-1145 Bob Zimmerman Space Policy, Launches, and Astronomical Discoveries Bob Zimmerman criticizes the over-budget Artemis lunar program while praising SpaceX's increased launches from Cape Canaveral. He discusses the politically-driven Space Force HQ relocation and NASA's efforts to reduce reliance on Russia for ISS orbit-raising. Global space startups are booming, Starlink cuts prices, and new astronomical discoveries are made.1145-1200CONTINUED Bob Zimmerman Space Policy, Launches, and Astronomical Discoveries Bob Zimmerman criticizes the over-budget Artemis lunar program while praising SpaceX's increased launches from Cape Canaveral. He discusses the politically-driven Space Force HQ relocation and NASA's efforts to reduce reliance on Russia for ISS orbit-raising. Global space startups are booming, Starlink cuts prices, and new astronomical discoveries are made.FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 Simon Constable Global Commodities, French Politics, and 9/11 Reflection Simon Constable discusses commodity trends: copper and gold prices surge due to AI demand and monetary fear, while orange juice falls and coffee rises. He covers France's political crisis, with Sebastien Lecornu becoming the sixth Prime Minister under Macron, and local support for Marine Le Pen's National Rally. He also shares a personal 9/11 account from One World Financial Center.1215-1230CONTINUED Simon Constable Global Commodities, French Politics, and 9/11 Reflection Simon Constable discusses commodity trends: copper and gold prices surge due to AI demand and monetary fear, while orange juice falls and coffee rises. He covers France's political crisis, with Sebastien Lecornu becoming the sixth Prime Minister under Macron, and local support for Marine Le Pen's National Rally. He also shares a personal 9/11 account from One World Financial Center.1230-1245 Grant Newsham Korea's Division, South Korea's Shift, and the Axis of Adversaries Grant Newsham traces Korea's1945 division by US officers, leading to North Korea's establishment. He highlights the pro-North Korea South Korean administration's alignment with China and Russia. The unified appearance of Kim Jong-un, Xi Jinping, and Vladimir Putin at a Beijing parade solidifies them as a formidable "axis of adversaries," intimidating the West.1245-100 AM Michael Bernstam Falling Oil Prices Threaten Russia's Economy, Boost US and Europe Michael Bernstam explains that falling oil prices, forecasted to drop to $50/barrel due to increased OPEC supply, will severely impact Russia'sbudget (based on $70/barrel) and push it towards recession. This benefits US consumers and GDP, while rising US LNGexports fully replace Europe's Russian gas, effectively isolating Russia from the European energy marke

Professor Josh Blackman Judicial Defiance: Lower Courts Challenge Supreme Court and Trump AdministrationProfessor Josh Blackman details an unprecedented judicial "revolt" where lower federal courts, particularly in Boston, repeatedly defy Supreme Court rulings and temporary restraining orders against the Trump Administration. Cases involve deportation and presidential firing power. Chief Justice Roberts is struggling to make lower courts "get in line," prompting a rare concurrence from Justice Gorsuch criticizing the defiance.1115-1130

CONTINUED Professor Josh Blackman Judicial Defiance: Lower Courts Challenge Supreme Court and Trump AdministrationProfessor Josh Blackman details an unprecedented judicial "revolt" where lower federal courts, particularly in Boston, repeatedly defy Supreme Court rulings and temporary restraining orders against the Trump Administration. Cases involve deportation and presidential firing power. Chief Justice Roberts is struggling to make lower courts "get in line," prompting a rare concurrence from Justice Gorsuch criticizing the defiance. 1888 GAR OHIO

VR6 - For today's Vapid Response Wednesday, Thomas, Lydia, and Matt review two examples from a newly-popular genre of lazy right wing op-eds: insecure white guys complaining about Supreme Court justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. What is with these losers who are so obsessed with trying to prove that one of the most qualified nominees to the high court in our lifetimes isn't fit for the job? We take dark-money sugar baby Josh Hammer up on the joke to compare his life achievements to someone who began her SCOTUS career with four times as much courtroom experience as John Roberts, Elena Kagan, Clarence Thomas, and Amy Coney Barrett combined--before moving on to trying to even understand what Federalist weirdo Shawn Fleetwood thinks he is saying. “Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is an Insult to the Supreme Court,” Josh Hammer, Newsweek (7/1/2025) “KBJ Could Learn a Few Lessons in ‘Professionalism' From Justice Barrett,” Shawn Fleetwood, The Federalist (8/20/2025) Ketanji Brown Jackson's career timeline from the Southern Poverty Law Center (4/7/22) Watch on YouTube!