Podcasts about Chief justice

Three things have come together to raise a combination of issues related to caste and minorities that India has failed to resolve even 75 years after its Constitution was born. The caste issue, of course, has persisted through centuries. The shoe thrown at the Chief Justice and, sadder still, the ‘suicide' of Haryana Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) Y. Puran Kumar & the third, the somewhat counter-intuitive success among the well-heeled of Homebound, by Neeraj Ghaywan, the most prominent and powerful Dalit filmmaker in Bollywood. Education, reservations and government jobs are meant to bring equality and dignity — Watch this week's #NationalInterest with ThePrint's Editor-in-Chief Shekhar Gupta.

In a new series, Aughie and Nia are exploring the United States Supreme Court Eras, usually defined by the name of the Chief Justice of the era. In this first episode the first eleven years of the Court (Chiefs Jay, Rutledge, and Ellsworth) are covered as a group, since there really wasn't a lot accomplished in this period.

It was indeed an honor to have the Honorable Cory Swanson, Chief Justice of the Montana Supreme Court, visit in-studio. The outreach represented one of Justice Swanson’s tenets in judicial reform; a more public-facing court system. Click on the podcast […] The post Chief Justice Cory Swanson – Placing Outreach on the Supreme Court Docket first appeared on Voices of Montana.

Health officials are sounding the alarm after a case of mumps was confirmed in Kailua-Kona. An ongoing downtown Honolulu property dispute escalates after power is abruptly shut off for dozens of tenants. The Hawaii Supreme Court's Chief Justice withdraws her initial opinion on a high-profile corruption trial.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Earl Warren AppointedOn October 2, 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren as the 14th Chief Justice of the United States, setting in motion one of the most transformative periods in Supreme Court history. Warren, who had previously served as Governor of California and was the Republican nominee for Vice President in 1948, was a surprise choice—appointed during a recess of the Senate following the death of Chief Justice Fred Vinson. Though Eisenhower reportedly later regretted the decision, Warren would go on to lead a Court that dramatically expanded civil rights, civil liberties, and judicial power.Under Warren's leadership, the Court issued a series of landmark decisions, beginning with Brown v. Board of Educationin 1954, which declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. The Warren Court also established the principle of “one person, one vote” in legislative apportionment, expanded the rights of criminal defendants in cases like Gideon v. Wainwright and Miranda v. Arizona, and reinforced the wall between church and state. Warren was known for his ability to forge consensus among justices, often securing unanimous decisions in major cases to strengthen the Court's moral authority.His tenure marked a fundamental shift in constitutional interpretation, emphasizing equality, due process, and the role of the judiciary in correcting social injustices. While praised by many for championing individual rights and the rule of law, the Warren Court also faced significant criticism from those who viewed its decisions as judicial activism. Warren retired in 1969, but the legal legacy of his Court continues to shape American law and society.New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a lawsuit and an emergency motion against U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), accusing them of unlawfully withholding nearly $34 million in funding for New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). The MTA oversees subway, bus, and commuter rail systems across New York City and surrounding areas. James filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking a temporary restraining order to preserve the funds while the legal case proceeds.According to James, DHS abruptly reduced the funding allocation from nearly $34 million to zero, a move she described as unlawful and politically motivated. Her office emphasized that the emergency request does not seek immediate disbursement, but rather aims to prevent the funds from being lost while the court reviews the matter. She warned that the funding freeze could endanger the safety of millions of transit riders in New York.This legal action comes amid broader concerns raised by the U.S. Transportation Department, which recently threatened to withhold 25% of MTA's federal transit funding unless improvements are made to track worker safety protocols. DHS did not provide an immediate response to requests for comment.New York AG James sues Homeland Security for nearly $34 million over transit funding freeze | ReutersApple and OpenAI asked a U.S. judge to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Elon Musk's AI company, xAI, over claims that their partnership harms competition. xAI's suit, filed in August, seeks billions in damages and argues that Apple's integration of ChatGPT into its devices gives OpenAI an unfair advantage while sidelining rival products like Musk's Grok chatbot. Apple and OpenAI countered that their deal is not exclusive and that Apple plans to work with other generative AI providers.Apple's lawyers emphasized the openness of the agreement, asserting that the arrangement does not prevent competition or violate antitrust laws. In a separate filing, OpenAI described Musk's legal actions as part of a broader “campaign of lawfare” against the company, referencing previous lawsuits Musk has filed, including one challenging OpenAI's shift from nonprofit to for-profit status.OpenAI further argued that xAI had not demonstrated concrete harm or the kind of anticompetitive behavior that antitrust law is designed to prevent. Musk, who co-founded OpenAI in 2015 before departing, has accused the company and CEO Sam Altman of straying from its original nonprofit mission.Apple, OpenAI ask US judge to dismiss Musk's suit over competition claims | ReutersLawyers representing Prince Harry and other public figures accused the Daily Mail publisher, Associated Newspapers (ANL), of also targeting Prince William and Princess Kate in an ongoing privacy lawsuit. The new allegations, presented in filings at London's High Court, suggest that confidential details about William's 21st birthday were obtained through “blagging”—a deceptive tactic to access private information. Kate was allegedly targeted by a private investigator working for a Mail journalist.Prince Harry and six others, including Elton John and his husband David Furnish, are suing ANL for alleged privacy violations dating back 30 years. The lawsuit accuses ANL of unlawful activities such as voicemail hacking, obtaining medical records by deception, and even burglary. ANL has denied the claims and called them baseless and exaggerated. A trial is scheduled for early 2026.The publisher pushed back in court, arguing that the claimants failed to connect the alleged misconduct to specific journalists or investigators. They also sought to exclude findings from earlier cases against other newspaper publishers like News Group Newspapers and the Daily Mirror. ANL accused two claimants, Sadie Frost and Simon Hughes, of manipulating the timing of story publications to evade a statute of limitations—though the court had previously ruled in the claimants' favor on that issue.Prince Harry attended the hearing remotely, while several other claimants were present in court. This lawsuit marks the first time ANL has been directly implicated in the phone-hacking scandal that has plagued British tabloids for nearly two decades.Daily Mail publisher asks UK court to limit Prince Harry lawsuit | 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

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

Congress has failed to pass a short-term funding bill by the deadline, and the government has shut down. We take a look at how the shutdown may affect you.The Supreme Court issued an order on Wednesday indicating that it would hear oral argument over Federal Reserve Board of Governors member Lisa Cook's challenge to President Donald Trump's attempt to fire her. “The application for stay presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is deferred pending oral argument in January 2026,” an order from the court reads.

Michael Wolff , Retired Missouri Supreme Court Judge and Chief Justice, and Former Dean and Professor Emeritus, Saint Louis University Law School joins Megan Lynch pointing out the challenges facing the redrawn district maps.

In November 1926, Cecelia Gullivan, treasurer of the Cone Automatic Machine company of Windsor, Vermont, was brutally killed in her home. Local police quickly arrested Cone Automatic machinist John Winters on suspicion of the crime, and the trial that followed was sensational and swift. Convicted of murder, Winters' appeal brought in an unexpected ally: America's most famous defense attorney, Clarence Darrow, who took the case after Winters' family called in a favor promised decades before. My guest is former Chief Justice of the Vermont Supreme Court, Jeffrey L. Amestoy. He is the author of "Winters' Time: A Secret Pledge, a Severed Head, and the Murder that Brought America's Most Famous Lawyer to Vermont". Link to the book through the Vermont Historical Society's website: https://vermonthistory.org/vermont-history-winters-time-clarence-darrow-jeff-amestoy The author's Amazon page: https://www.amazon.com/stores/Jeffrey-L.-Amestoy/author/B01FC3Q07Q Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This Day in Legal History: John Jay CommissionedOn September 26, 1789, John Jay was commissioned as the first Chief Justice of the United States, marking a foundational moment in the establishment of the American judiciary. Nominated by President George Washington and swiftly confirmed by the Senate, Jay took the helm of the newly formed Supreme Court just one day after the Judiciary Act of 1789 was signed into law. His appointment signaled the beginning of the federal judiciary as a coequal branch of government under the U.S. Constitution.Jay was already a prominent figure in American political life, having served as President of the Continental Congress, co-author of The Federalist Papers, and Secretary for Foreign Affairs under the Articles of Confederation. As Chief Justice, he led a court that initially had little authority or docket, with its first session delayed until February 1790 due to logistical difficulties and lack of cases.Despite the Court's limited power at the time, Jay helped lay the groundwork for its future role. In Chisholm v. Georgia(1793), Jay authored an opinion asserting federal judicial authority over state governments, a controversial stance that ultimately led to the adoption of the Eleventh Amendment. His tenure also saw diplomatic service; while still Chief Justice, he negotiated the Jay Treaty with Great Britain in 1794 to resolve lingering post-Revolutionary War disputes.Jay resigned in 1795 after being elected Governor of New York and declined a later offer from President John Adams to return to the bench. His brief but influential time as Chief Justice helped define the legitimacy and independence of the U.S. Supreme Court.The U.S. Department of Justice indicted former FBI Director James Comey, escalating what critics describe as President Donald Trump's campaign of retribution against political adversaries. Comey faces two charges: making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding, stemming from his 2020 Senate testimony in which he denied authorizing anonymous leaks related to an FBI investigation. The indictment claims he actually did authorize such disclosures. However, the charges are notably sparse, lacking detailed supporting facts or corroborating evidence typically included in indictments of this gravity.The case has drawn intense scrutiny within the Justice Department. Prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia reportedly advised against filing charges due to insufficient evidence, and the district's top prosecutor resigned last week after expressing concern about political interference. Tensions escalated when U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan—formerly Trump's defense attorney—personally presented the case to the grand jury, an unusual move suggesting top-level involvement. Notably, the grand jury declined to indict Comey on a third proposed charge, highlighting doubts about the prosecution's strength.Legal experts and former officials, including Obama-era ethics advisor Norm Eisen, have condemned the indictment as politically motivated. Comey maintains his innocence and says he welcomes a trial. Members of his family, including his son-in-law and daughter, have faced professional consequences, which Comey's supporters view as further evidence of political targeting. The charges represent a sharp departure from norms intended to shield law enforcement from partisan use.Former FBI chief Comey charged as Trump ramps up campaign against critics | ReutersA federal judge in California has preliminarily approved a $1.5 billion class action settlement between authors and the AI company Anthropic, marking a major development in the legal battles over generative AI's use of copyrighted materials. U.S. District Judge William Alsup described the agreement as fair during a Thursday hearing, though final approval is still pending. Authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson brought the lawsuit, accusing Anthropic of training its AI assistant Claude using millions of pirated books without permission.This settlement is the first in a growing wave of lawsuits targeting companies like OpenAI, Meta, and Microsoft for allegedly infringing on creators' rights through large-scale data scraping to train AI models. Although Alsup had previously ruled that some of Anthropic's training practices fell under fair use, he determined the company crossed the line by storing more than 7 million pirated books in a centralized database not strictly tied to AI training.The judge had initially hesitated to approve the deal and demanded further clarification from both sides, but now appears inclined to allow it to proceed to the notification stage for affected authors. If finalized, the agreement could signal a broader shift toward holding AI developers financially accountable for unauthorized content use. Publishing industry leaders have praised the development as a step toward curbing what they see as systemic, unchecked copyright violations in AI development. Anthropic, meanwhile, emphasized its commitment to safe and responsible AI.US judge preliminarily approves $1.5 billion Anthropic copyright settlement | ReutersKathryn Nester, a seasoned Utah criminal defense attorney and former top federal public defender, has been appointed to represent Tyler Robinson, the man accused of fatally shooting conservative activist Charlie Kirk during a Utah Valley University event on September 10. The state is seeking the death penalty against Robinson, who faces a charge of aggravated murder.Nester has a history of representing clients in high-profile and controversial cases. She previously defended Lyle Jeffs, a fugitive leader of a polygamous sect convicted of food stamp fraud, and John Earnest, the gunman in the 2019 Poway synagogue shooting, before stepping down due to a conflict of interest. She also defended a Utah doctor accused of destroying COVID-19 vaccines—a case later dropped—and is currently representing Kouri Richins, a children's author now charged with poisoning her husband.Her firm, Nester Lewis, has strong ties to Utah's federal public defense system. Her partner, Wendy Lewis, once represented Brian David Mitchell, the man convicted in the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart. Robinson's case is expected to cost Utah County at least $750,000 for the defense alone, with over $1.3 million budgeted for the total prosecution and defense efforts.Robinson's next court appearance is scheduled for Monday. Nester has declined public comment on the case.Attorney representing Charlie Kirk's accused killer is former top public defender | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by George Gershwin.Born on September 26, 1898, George Gershwin occupies a unique place in American music history—standing at the intersection of classical composition, jazz improvisation, and Broadway flair. Raised in Brooklyn to Russian-Jewish immigrant parents, Gershwin began his musical life on the piano and quickly showed an uncanny ability to absorb and reshape the sounds of his time. Though he composed everything from operas to show tunes, it was Rhapsody in Blue, written in 1924 when he was just 25, that cemented his legacy.Commissioned by bandleader Paul Whiteman for a concert intended to bridge classical and popular music, Rhapsody in Blue was composed in a rush—famously sketched out on train rides and completed with the help of orchestrator Ferde Grofé. The piece opens with its iconic clarinet glissando, a spontaneous flourish during rehearsal that Gershwin decided to keep, and unfolds into a sweeping blend of jazz rhythms, bluesy melodies, and symphonic ambition. It captured something distinctly American—urban, restless, full of promise.Rhapsody in Blue premiered at Aeolian Hall in New York on February 12, 1924, with Gershwin himself at the piano. The audience included titans like Sergei Rachmaninoff and Jascha Heifetz, and the piece earned immediate acclaim. Though critics at the time debated whether it was truly “serious” music, it has since become a cornerstone of 20th-century composition and a symbol of American cultural identity.For Gershwin, Rhapsody in Blue was not a departure from classical form but a statement that American music—jazz, blues, Tin Pan Alley—deserved a place in the concert hall. More than a century later, it remains as fresh and vibrant as the city that inspired it.Without further ado, George Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue, the first movement–enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

National pancake day. Entertainment from 2017. 1st televised presidential debate, 1st Chief Justice to the US Supreme Court, NC-17 created. Todays birthdays - Johnny Appleseed, Edmond Guinn, Pope Paul VI, Jack LaLanne, Marty Robbins, Donna Douglas, Lynn Anderson, Olivia Newton-John, Linda Hamilton, Jim Caviezel, Zoe Perry. Paul Newman died.Intro - God did good - Dianna Corcoran     https://www.diannacorcoran.com/Pancake song - Singalong kids songsLook what you made me do - Taylor SwiftBody like a back road - Sam HuntBirthdays - In da club - 50 Cent      http://50cent.com/El Paso - Marty RobbinsBeverly Hillbillies TV theme(I never promised you a) Rose garden - Lynn AndersonIf not for you - Olivia Newton-JohnYoung Sheldon TV themeExit - Pink Whitney - Payton Howie    https://paytonhowie.com/countryundergroundradio.comHistory & Factoids webpage

Chief Justice nominee Paul Baffoe-Bonnie has backed the Ghana Law Society's bid for recognition, amid a Supreme Court challenge to the Ghana Bar Association's monopoly.

"I don't remember that I was ever President," William Howard Taft once said, a decade removed from his tumultuous tenure as 27th President. Learn about his post-Presidency; the real joy of his life, his tenure as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; his death, burial, and commemorations! Check out the website at VisitingthePresidents.com for visual aids, links, past episodes, recommended reading, and other information!Episode Page: https://visitingthepresidents.com/2025/09/23/season-3-episode-27-william-howard-tafts-tomb/Season 1's William Howard Taft Episode: "William Howard Taft and Cincinnati" on his birthplace!Season 2's William McKinley Episode: "William Howard Taft and Washington, DC" on his homes!Support the show Also, check out “Visiting the Presidents” on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter!

Order in the court! Introducing a new series of TYLA's Young Gunners podcast, spotlighting all nine justices of the Supreme Court of Texas! In these special episodes, TYLA President Hisham Masri, TYLA Immediate Past President Laura Pratt, and TYLA President-Elect Alyson Martinez speak with the SCOTX bench about their respective path to the high court, judicial philosophy, and advice for young attorneys navigating the legal profession. We kick off this series with an interview with Justice Jimmy Blacklock, who was elevated to chief justice on January 6, 2025. In this episode, Chief Justice Blacklock shares how the principles of fatherhood and his deep-rooted faith have influenced not only his path to the judiciary but also the way he approaches leadership, decision-making, and the responsibilities of public office. Tune in for a thoughtful exploration of character, calling, and the intersection of personal conviction with professional duty. You can access this episode and our other episodes here: https://tyla.org/resource/young-gunners-podcast/ And tune in soon for our second episode where we speak with Senior Justice Debra Lehrmann, the longest-serving member on the court!  #tyla #younggunners #scotx #legalpodcast

This Day in Legal History: Judiciary Act of 1789On September 24, 1789, Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789, formally titled An Act to Establish the Judicial Courts of the United States. This foundational statute created the structure of the federal judiciary as we know it today, establishing a three-tiered court system consisting of district courts, circuit courts, and the Supreme Court. At the top sat a six-member Supreme Court, with one Chief Justice and five Associate Justices. The Act also created 13 district courts and three circuit courts, aligning largely with state boundaries, and assigned federal judges to serve on both district and circuit courts—a practice known as “circuit riding.”The Act gave federal courts jurisdiction over a wide range of cases, including those involving federal law, disputes between states, and cases between citizens of different states. It also authorized the Supreme Court to review decisions from state courts when federal law was at issue, a power that would later be affirmed in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816). The Act created the office of the Attorney General, tasked with representing the United States in legal matters, and laid the groundwork for the U.S. Marshals Service.One of the most controversial provisions was Section 25, which allowed the Supreme Court to overturn state court decisions that conflicted with federal law or the U.S. Constitution—an early assertion of federal supremacy. The Act was largely the product of compromise, balancing the concerns of Federalists, who favored a strong national judiciary, and Anti-Federalists, who feared centralized power.The Judiciary Act of 1789 was signed into law by President George Washington on the same day he nominated the first justices to the Supreme Court. Chief among them was John Jay, who became the nation's first Chief Justice. The Act did not resolve all questions about federal judicial power, but it laid a durable foundation that, with amendments, remains in place more than two centuries later.The Justice Department's “weaponization” working group, led by controversial interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin, has launched an inquiry into alleged improper practices at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). In a June letter to then-Acting PTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart, Martin accused the agency of covertly targeting certain patent applications—especially those in the electrical and artificial intelligence fields—for secret scrutiny and delay. He alleged the existence of a Biden-era revival of the discontinued Sensitive Application Warning System (SAWS), a program once used to quietly flag questionable applications without applicant knowledge. To be clear, these “questionable applications” were for things like free energy systems and so-called “miracle cures.”Martin, who framed his inquiry as part of enforcing President Trump's executive orders on transparency, claimed Stewart had uncovered and ended the secretive policy. The letter demanded records related to the review of AI-related patents and other complex applications. The investigation was triggered by a PTO presentation highlighting a study on “patent thickets,” or overlapping patent claims in large families, which revealed examiner challenges in identifying double patenting issues in up to 22% of cases.Critics argue that such behind-the-scenes programs lack transparency and due process for inventors. Veteran patent attorney Tom Franklin warned that any flagging system that denies applicants notice and opportunity to respond undermines legal fairness. However, some public interest advocates, like Alex Moss, defended the PTO's efforts to improve patent quality, dismissing claims of illegality as political posturing.Martin's involvement has drawn scrutiny given his record of dismissing January 6 prosecutions, purging prosecutors, and publicly airing inflammatory and racist remarks, including blaming “crazy Black ladies” for his firing from CNN. Now awaiting Senate confirmation for the U.S. Attorney role in D.C., Martin's actions at DOJ—and this patent investigation—are fueling growing opposition in Congress.DOJ ‘Weaponization' Leader Sought Info on Patent Office ProgramA federal judge has extended an injunction blocking the Trump administration from imposing political and ideological conditions on federal grant funding. The order, issued by Judge Richard Seeborg of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, follows a previous temporary restraining order granted in August. The court found that cities and counties led by Fresno, California, are likely to succeed in their lawsuit, which argues the administration exceeded its legal authority and violated constitutional protections.The plaintiffs challenge a series of Trump executive orders, including one from August 7, which restricted federal funding from being used to support policies involving racial equity, environmental justice, transgender rights, immigration protections, and what it called “anti-American values.” Local governments say they were told to strip grant applications of any mention of “equity” or related concepts, or risk losing funding. Fresno reported receiving a letter from HUD on August 18, questioning its compliance with these mandates.Judge Seeborg agreed the orders may violate multiple legal provisions, including the Spending Clause, the Fifth and Tenth Amendments, and the Administrative Procedure Act. The court found that the conditions were likely arbitrary, beyond the scope of the administration's statutory authority, and unconstitutional. The administration had asked that any injunction be narrowly tailored, but Seeborg extended the broader block on enforcing these grant conditions.Trump Further Blocked From Imposing Federal Grant ConditionsU.S. law schools are reporting record-breaking first-year enrollment in 2025, driven by an 18% surge in applicants—a sharp jump following an already strong admissions cycle in 2024. Elon University School of Law is among seven schools announcing their largest-ever incoming classes, while at least ten others, including Harvard, reported their biggest first-year cohorts in over a decade. Harvard Law School enrolled 579 students this fall, up 3% from its norm and the largest class since at least 2011.The full scope of national enrollment won't be known until the American Bar Association releases official numbers in December, but early reports suggest crowded campuses and logistical challenges like classroom capacity and student support services. The University of Hawaii, Liberty University, Rutgers, Pace, and several regional law schools also saw record or near-record first-year intake.While law school deans are celebrating the growth, some industry experts are cautious. Nikia Gray of the National Association for Law Placement warned that an influx of graduates in 2028 could saturate the job market, especially as law firms scale back entry-level hiring due to AI advancements. Still, others see opportunity—Southern Illinois Law Dean Hannah Brenner Johnson noted rising student numbers may help address access-to-justice issues in underserved regions, or “legal deserts.”The last major spike in law school enrollment came in 2021 amid COVID-19, but that cohort graduated into a strong job market. Whether the class of 2028 will enjoy similar employment success is uncertain, as economic conditions and tech disruption may shift in the coming years.Applicant boom drives record first-year law school classes | 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

Order in the court! Introducing a new series of TYLA's Young Gunners podcast, spotlighting all nine justices of the Supreme Court of Texas! In these special episodes, TYLA President Hisham Masri, TYLA Immediate Past President Laura Pratt, and TYLA President-Elect Alyson Martinez speak with the SCOTX bench about their respective path to the high court, judicial philosophy, and advice for young attorneys navigating the legal profession. We kick off this series with an interview with Justice Jimmy Blacklock, who was elevated to chief justice on January 6, 2025. In this episode, Chief Justice Blacklock shares how the principles of fatherhood and his deep-rooted faith have influenced not only his path to the judiciary but also the way he approaches leadership, decision-making, and the responsibilities of public office. Tune in for a thoughtful exploration of character, calling, and the intersection of personal conviction with professional duty. You can access this episode and our other episodes here: https://tyla.org/resource/young-gunners-podcast/ And tune in soon for our second episode where we speak with Senior Justice Debra Lehrmann, the longest-serving member on the court!  #tyla #younggunners #scotx #legalpodcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jeffrey Amestoy, chief justice of the Vermont Supreme Court from 1997 to 2004, is best known for authoring the 1999 decision in Baker vs. Vermont that legalized same-sex civil unions. That case laid the groundwork for the legalization of same sex marriage in Vermont a decade later and ultimately led to the U.S. Supreme Court legalizing same sex marriage in 2015.At the age of 79, Amestoy is still a prolific writer, but in a different genre. His latest book is a true crime legal thriller that he spent years researching. Winters' Time: A Secret Pledge, a Severed Head, and the Murder That Brought America's Most Famous Lawyer to Vermont, is the story of when celebrity attorney Clarence Darrow came to Vermont to defend a convicted murderer before the Vermont Supreme Court. The book was just published by the Vermont Historical Society.Winters' Time recounts the brutal murder of Cecelia Gullivan, who was killed in her home in Windsor, Vermont in November 1926. Gullivan, a single woman, was the treasurer of the Cone Automatic Machine company in Windsor. Police quickly arrested John Winters, a machinist at her company, and he was promptly tried, convicted and sentenced to death. That's when Clarence Darrow entered the case after the Winters family called in a favor promised by Darrow's son.Amestoy, who was Vermont's attorney general from 1985 to 1997, set the scene for what would become one of Vermont's most sensational trials. “By the 1920s you had the first real mass media with radio and newspapers racing to outdo each other in circulation wars that focused primarily on murders and then a tremendous interest in celebrities," Amestoy said. "Darrow sort of combined two of those: he was an extraordinarily successful defense lawyer, adamantly opposed to capital punishment … And then he was famous for his ability to speak to larger social issues.”The death penalty was among the issues at play. “There was a tremendous amount of focus on capital punishment in Vermont but not, in fact, from those opposed to it, more about making sure that Vermont had a method of execution that would work,” said Amestoy. Winters would be only the second person executed by electric chair, which had recently been installed at the Windsor prison.Vermont executed 26 people between 1778 and 1954. The state abolished capital punishment in 1972 following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court.The most sensational aspect of the trial of John Winters was the prosecution's use of the victim's severed head as an exhibit. “That had never happened in Vermont legal history and as far as I was able to determine, hadn't ever happened in American legal history either,” said Amestoy.Amestoy said that the Winters case “gave us a lens on Vermont in the 1920s in terms of gender.” Cecilia Gullivan was an “extraordinary single woman, sort of a modern woman of the time.” He noted that Gullivan was “probably the highest ranking female executive in Vermont, a tremendously capable woman who had the authority for managing the plant.” Her murder was “extraordinary because of the status of the victim, and it immediately became front page news, not only in Vermont, but in Boston and really all over the country.”There were rumors raised at Winters' trial that Gullivan was in a relationship with Frank Cone, the owner of the company, who some thought was a suspect in her death. Amestoy noted that women did not sit on juries at that time. Vermont in the 1920s was "not attuned to issues of gender," said Amestoy.Clarence Darrow succeeded in winning a retrial for John Winters, who then pleaded guilty to second degree murder on Darrow's advice, though Winters publicly maintained his innocence. After serving 20 years in prison, Winters was pardoned in 1949 by Gov. Ernest Gibson. Clarence Darrow had saved the convict's life.Amestoy is no stranger to sensational cases himself. His civil unions decision, which he famously wrote “is simply a recognition of our common humanity,” changed the national conversation about same sex unions.“I thought that opinion helped move that issue in a way that allowed Vermonters to address a social issue of extraordinary importance in a way that I think stood as an example to the country. So to have been able to play a part in that was obviously something I was thankful for.”

Former Director of the Ghana School of Law Kwaku Ansah Asare has applauded President John Dramani Mahama for confirming acting Chief Justice Paul Baffoe Bonnie as the substantive Chief Justice, saying he is the right person on the bench to fill the role.

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

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar is remembered and admired for many things: for his heroic, lifelong, campaign to eradicate the evil of untouchability; for his scholarly contributions as an economist and social theorist; for the social movements he led and the political parties he founded; for the educational institutions he nurtured; for his critical role in overseeing and directing the framing of the Constitution; for the brilliant books, essays and pamphlets that he authored on a variety of subjects. This lecture will focus on Ambedkar as a visionary and deeply insightful theorist of constitutional democracy. By juxtaposing what he said in his speeches in the Constituent Assembly to the social and political realities of contemporary India, I shall demonstrate how his ideas remain of compelling relevance to us today. While the core of the talk will be on Ambedkar the political theorist, it will end by briefly comparing his legacy with that of other remarkable Indians of his generation, such as Nehru, Gandhi, Tagore, and Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay. The National Law School of India University, Bengaluru (NLSIU) and the Ahmadi Foundation have entered into a MoU to set up the Justice Ahmadi Initiative on Rule of Law, Democracy, and Social Justice in honour of, and to preserve and promote the legacy of former Chief Justice of India, Justice Aziz Mushabber Ahmadi. The Initiative will work to advance the ideas that Justice Ahmadi championed throughout his distinguished career, including but not restricted to human rights, education, inclusion and protection of vulnerable communities, judicial independence, alternate dispute resolution mechanisms, and strengthening of democratic institutions. An annual distinguished lecture series is one of the events planned under the Initiative. Presented by: National law School of India University, bangalore In this episode of BIC Talks, Ramchandra Guha will deliver a talk. This is an excerpt from a conversation that took place in the BIC premises in Jul 2025. Subscribe to the BIC Talks Podcast on your favourite podcast app! BIC Talks is available everywhere, including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Castbox, Overcast, Audible, and Amazon Music.

Et in Sempiternum Pereant by Charles Williams Lord Arglay, retired Chief Justice and seeker of forgotten knowledge, sets out for a quiet scholarly errand in the English countryside—only to find the landscape subtly warped, time grown strangely dense, and a chimney smoking where no fire burns. Drawn by a narrow path to a door that seems to wait for him alone, he enters a place where memory thickens, boundaries blur, and the air presses with the weight of something ancient and unyielding. Each step leads him deeper into a mystery that threatens not just understanding, but escape itself. First published in The London Mercury, December 1935.
 Charles Williams (1886–1945) was a British novelist, poet, and critic associated with the Inklings.
He wrote metaphysical thrillers—War in Heaven, Descent into Hell, All Hallows' Eve—exploring theology, myth, and the supernatural. Join Our Podia Community for 100s of Ad Free Ghost Stories https://www.classicghost.com/ghost-stories-episodes/buy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo filed an application challenging her removal by President John Mahama from both the office of Chief Justice and as a Justice of the Supreme Court.

Former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo filed an application challenging her removal by President John Mahama from both the office of Chief Justice and as a Justice of the Supreme Court

Online harassment of political figures in Canada is on the rise. Nearly half of campaign-related tweets are uncivil or abusive, discouraging diverse candidates and eroding trust in democracy. In this episode, Host Anthony Giroux (Law Student at the University of Montreal) speaks with Sabreena Delhon (CEO of the Samara Centre for Democracy) and Dr. Heidi Tworek (Canada Research Chair and Professor of History and Public Policy at the University of British Columbia). Together, they explore how disinformation, targeted and identity-based harassment, and algorithm-driven amplification are reshaping democratic participation in Canada. The discussion examines the specific challenges faced by women, racialized, and 2SLGBTQ+ candidates, the role of bots and foreign influence in spreading abuse, and the constitutional tension between free expression and curbing online hate. Delhon explains how SAMbot tracks toxic discourse during elections, while both guests reflect on solutions—from party protocols and platform moderation to policy reforms and community-driven responses—that could help safeguard trust, representation, and inclusion in Canadian democracy.   Guests Sabreena Delhon, Chief Executive Officer, Samara Centre for Democracy Dr. Heidi Tworek, Canada Research Chair and Professor of History and Public Policy, University of British Columbia Host Anthony Giroux, Law Student, Faculty of Law, University of Montreal     Ready to explore the future of our democracies ? From podcast to panel: Following their powerful conversation in this episode, both Dr. Heidi Tworek and Sabreena Delhon will also be joining us as speakers at the upcoming conference on Democracy, the Rule of Law, and Independence. Dr. Tworek will contribute to Panel 2, and Sabreena Delhon to Panel 4. Join us for our conference on Democracy, the Rule of Law, and Independence: November 18–20, 2025 Ottawa & Online A must-attend event for collective reflection on the threats facing our democratic institutions, alongside leading figures from the legal and intellectual spheres, including The Right Honourable Richard Wagner, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, and Jason Stanley.   DETAILS AND REGISTRATION  

"Millions of our citizens don't even have GHS 100,000 a year, those saying that these things [per diem on her trip] are trivial, I think they've lost touch " - Martin Kpebu [Lawyer]

AP correspondent Charles de Ledesma reports Nepal's president has appointed a former chief justice as interim premier.

MAGA ties itself into knots trying to dislodge Trump from Epsteingate. Ben riffs Monroe talks Epstein, Biden, Kamala and Roger Taney. Who? He's the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who wrote the opinion that slavery is legal. Is the current Supreme Court worse? Monroe advances that argument. How Money by the O'Jays is misunderstood. And why its theme applies to the Bears. In the middle of our recording, word breaks from Utah that Charlie Kirk has been shot. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports Chief Justice John Roberts is letting President Trump remove a Federal Trade Commission member for now.

Rtd Chief Justice David Kenani Maraga | The Legacy & Presidential Ambitions. Legal Insider by Capital FM

Private legal practitioner, Lawyer John Darko, has alleged that the John Mahama-led NDC government had plotted the removal of outgoing Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo way back when the party was in opposition

For Part 4b 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 7 Roman Numeral II.A and B to the top of page 13 through to Roman Numeral II.C in the Slip Opinion. 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 13, Roman Numeral II.C next time. 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

The Chief Justice's annual report says too few judges, high workloads and stress, not enough court rooms and fewer lawyers offering legal aid are putting the judiciary under considerable stress. 

President John Mahama has removed Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo from office with immediate effect on grounds of stated misbehaviour. The decision follows recommendations from a constitutional committee established under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution

In a historic move, President Mahama has dismissed Chief Justice Torkonoo over misconduct.

Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo has been removed from office by President John Dramani Mahama, following recommendations from a five-member committee constituted under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.

Scoot and Ian Hoch broadcast LIVE from The Presbytere in Jackson Square to commemorate the 20th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. This hour, Scoot and Ian Hoch have Chief Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court John L. Weimer and Marc Morial, President and CEO of the National Urban League, to share their experiences and memories of Hurricane Katrina 20 years ago.

Chief Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court John L. Weimer, joins Scoot and Ian Hoch to share their experiences and memories of Hurricane Katrina 20 years ago.

This Day in Legal History: Alabama Ten commandments MonumentOn August 28, 2003, the Supreme Court of Alabama removed a 5,280-pound granite monument of the Ten Commandments from the rotunda of the state courthouse in Montgomery. The monument had been installed two years earlier by Chief Justice Roy Moore, who argued it reflected the moral foundation of U.S. law. However, its religious nature sparked immediate controversy and litigation. In Glassroth v. Moore, three attorneys sued in federal court, asserting that the display violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The U.S. District Court ruled in their favor, ordering the monument's removal.Moore refused to comply with the court's order, prompting further legal and administrative actions. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court's decision, finding the monument's placement unconstitutional. When Moore continued to defy the federal ruling, the Judicial Inquiry Commission of Alabama brought ethics charges against him. The Alabama Court of the Judiciary subsequently removed Moore from office for failing to uphold the rule of law.The case underscored the constitutional limits on religious expression by public officials and reinforced federal supremacy in matters of constitutional interpretation. It also intensified national debates over the role of religion in public life and the meaning of the Establishment Clause. Moore would later regain the position of Chief Justice in 2013, only to be suspended again for defying federal law, this time over same-sex marriage.You will, of course, also remember that Roy Moore–in addition to being a huge fan of the Ten Commandments–is plausibly accused of misconduct involving multiple women, including allegations of sexual assault by three women—two of whom were minors at the time. Leigh Corfman alleged Moore assaulted her when she was 14 and he was 32, and Beverly Young Nelson accused Moore of assaulting her when she was 16. Six additional women have described Moore as behaving inappropriately when they were between 14 and 22 years old. Moore has denied all allegations of misconduct, though he admitted to knowing some of the women and, at times, dating teenagers while in his 30s. Dating teenagers while in his 30s. No criminal charges were filed, so of course all of these are merely allegations, but the accusations were widely reported during his 2017 Senate campaign, which he lost in a historic upset in deeply Republican Alabama.As President Trump threatens to deploy National Guard troops and ICE agents to Chicago, city and state leaders are scrambling to prepare. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson are working closely to coordinate a response, despite acknowledging that their legal options are limited. The move would follow similar deployments in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., both cities led by Black Democratic mayors. State Attorney General Kwame Raoul is crafting a legal strategy, and immigrant advocacy groups are ramping up legal training in anticipation of increased enforcement. Community leaders worry that a federal presence could disrupt efforts to build trust in high-crime neighborhoods and further strain relationships between residents and law enforcement.Trump claims the intervention is necessary to combat crime, but critics point out that shootings and homicides in Chicago have actually declined significantly this year. Despite the progress, public perceptions of danger persist, with many residents still feeling unsafe at night. Some, including Republicans and a few city residents, support Trump's plan, citing frustration with issues like homelessness and crime. Others view it as a political stunt, especially in light of recent federal cuts to violence prevention programs.Trump has also focused on Chicago's status as a sanctuary city, which has drawn national attention amid the city's efforts to house tens of thousands of migrants. The fear of federal enforcement has spread beyond undocumented immigrants to Latino citizens and residents. Legal experts suggest any unilateral deployment of the National Guard could violate the Constitution and the Posse Comitatus Act. Local protest groups are preparing for nonviolent resistance, framing the potential deployment as authoritarian overreach aimed at intimidation.In Chicago, locals prepare for Trump's possible deployment of National Guard | ReutersA federal grand jury has declined to indict Sean Dunn, a former Justice Department staffer arrested for allegedly throwing a sandwich at a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent during President Trump's law enforcement crackdown in Washington, D.C. Prosecutors had pursued felony assault charges, citing video evidence and statements that Dunn called the agents "fascists" and yelled, “I don't want you in my city!” before hurling the sandwich. The rejection is notable given the typically low threshold required for grand jury indictments and the prosecutorial control over such proceedings.The case has become symbolic of broader tensions surrounding the Trump administration's deployment of federal agents and National Guard troops to address what it calls a crime surge in the capital—claims contradicted by police data showing a decline in violence. The grand jury's decision reflects growing prosecutorial challenges in securing high-level charges amid political pressure to appear tough on crime.Dunn, who has not entered a plea, was featured in a White House video showing his arrest, part of a broader narrative emphasizing law-and-order policies. The Justice Department has 30 days from arrest to secure an indictment and may attempt to present the case to another grand jury. A similar recent case against a woman accused of assaulting an FBI agent was also downgraded to a misdemeanor after multiple failed attempts to indict.The ham sandwich indictment jokes write themselves. Grand jury declines to indict man arrested for throwing sandwich at US agent, source says | ReutersA federal judge has extended an order blocking the deportation of Kilmar Abrego, a Salvadoran migrant at the center of a high-profile immigration case tied to President Trump's enforcement crackdown. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ruled that Abrego must remain in the U.S. at least through October while she considers his legal challenge against a planned deportation to Uganda—a country where he has no connections. The judge also restricted ICE from moving Abrego more than 200 miles from her courthouse in Maryland, where a final hearing is set for October 6.Abrego's case drew national attention in March when he was deported to El Salvador despite a judge's order forbidding it. U.S. officials had accused him of gang affiliations, which he denies. After being imprisoned in El Salvador, he was brought back to the U.S. in June to face charges of transporting undocumented migrants, to which he has pleaded not guilty. His attorneys argue the prosecution is retaliatory and politically motivated.Abrego had been living in Maryland with his wife and children, all of whom are U.S. citizens, before his arrest. His legal team plans to seek asylum through separate immigration proceedings and has criticized the Trump administration's handling of the case as an attempt to erode due process protections in immigration law.Judge extends block on Trump administration's efforts to deport migrant Abrego | 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

As summer winds down, political ads on TV are revving up. Politics analyst Jeff Schapiro and Michael recap the week in politics and state government.

Tim Armstead, former Chief Justice of the state Supreme Court of Appeals who also served in the House of Delegates, died Tuesday. The post Remembering Justice Armstead And Examining Appalachia's Water Crisis, This West Virginia Morning appeared first on West Virginia Public Broadcasting.

In this week's episode, we revisit our interview with Alisa Cohn. Alisa is an Executive Coach who has worked with C-suite executives at prominent startups (such as Venmo, Etsy, Draft Kings, The Wirecutter, Mack Weldon, and Tory Burch) and Fortune 500 companies (including Dell, IBM, Microsoft, Google, Pfizer, Calvin Klein and The New York Times.) She is the author of From Start-up to Grown-up, which won the 2022 Independent Press Award, and the creator and host of a podcast of the same name.  A frequent keynoter, Inc. Magazine named Alisa one of the top 100 leadership speakers, and she was named the Top Startup Coach in the World at the Thinkers50/Marshall Goldsmith Global Coaches Awards and the #1 Global Guru for Startups. She is the executive coach for Cornell's New York City tech incubator, and she has coached leaders from around the world, including the first female minister of the transition state of Afghanistan and the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka. She has guest lectured at Harvard, Cornell, The Naval War College and Henley Business School. Her articles have appeared in HBR, Inc, and Forbes, and she's been featured as an expert on BBC World News, Bloomberg TV, and in the NY Times and Wall Street Journal. 

Greg and Holly walk through key issues being brought up in the Utah Legislature's Interim session today. Including changes to election law this morning and in the afternoon, the Judiciary committee will be having a discussion on changing how the chief justice of the Utah Supreme Court is named.

Who is to blame for the redistricting farce that many fear is breaking American democracy? There's Trump, of course, and his gang of MAGA crazies. But according to David Daley, the author of Antidemocratic, Inside the Far Right's 50-Year Plot to Control American Elections, the real culprit is anything but crazy. It's John Roberts, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. In a devastating 2019 decision, Daley argued in a powerful New York Times essay this week, Roberts closed federal courts to partisan gerrymandering claims just as judges from both parties were successfully policing redistricting abuses. "It's like that moment in Ghostbusters where they turn off the containment packs," Daley explains. "All the evil spirits spill out." The result? Today, 398 of 435 House districts are non-competitive, and we're witnessing what Daley calls a "redistricting apocalypse" with no end in sight. And those evil spirits aren't just on the far right, with Democratic hacks also benefitting from this out-of-control gerrymandering. What gets lost in all this, of course, is the bipartisan political center in both parties - thereby creating a political system increasingly out of touch with the kind of non-ideological voters (ie: most American citizens) whose interests John Roberts' Supreme Court is supposed to protect. 1. Chief Justice Roberts Created the Current Crisis Roberts' 2019 decision to close federal courts to partisan gerrymandering claims removed the last guardrails just as bipartisan judges were successfully policing redistricting abuses, unleashing the current "redistricting apocalypse."2. Technology Has Made Gerrymandering Permanent Modern software and voter data have transformed gerrymandering from a temporary trick into decade-long control. Districts can now be carved with surgical precision, making 398 of 435 House seats non-competitive.3. Democrats Were Caught Completely Off-Guard Despite clear warnings (Karl Rove even published the Republican strategy in the Wall Street Journal), Democrats "fell asleep" on redistricting and are now playing catch-up with far fewer opportunities to retaliate.4. The Math Doesn't Favor Democratic Counter-Gerrymandering Republicans can draw about 195 seats on their own while Democrats control only 49. Even if Democrats maximize gerrymandering in California and Illinois, Republicans have many more states where they can respond.5. The Stakes Go Beyond Elections Daley warns of "militarized voter suppression" and sees America on a "dark path" where the combination of gerrymandering, voting restrictions, and authoritarian tactics could fundamentally undermine democracy by 2026. Keen On America 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 keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Labor’s roundtable shrouded in secrecy as phones are banned, the debate heats up over legal versus illegal migration. Plus, the Chief Justice takes aim at the false “traditional violence” defence in Top End crime cases.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Our priorities are often misaligned with our faith, as we give more attention to social media, sports, and entertainment than to God and our spouses. We need to reconsider what truly matters and make intentional changes to our daily habits.• Galatians 5:13-26 teaches us to use our freedom to serve one another in love, not to satisfy selfish desires• The fruits of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control) should guide our daily lives• Discipline in faith and marriage means doing what's right even when we don't feel like it• Our closest neighbor is our spouse, who deserves our attention and love second only to God• Morality comes from God and doesn't change with society or time• John Jay (first Chief Justice) emphasized that moral law is unchanging and applies to everyone• The Medal of Honor recipient Dennis Bell voluntarily rescued wounded comrades in Cuba during the Spanish-American WarMake time for God today. Read His word and pray. If you're married, prioritize your spouse above everything else except God.Support the showThe American Soul Podcasthttps://www.buzzsprout.com/1791934/subscribe

PART TWO! Join me as I break down Appellate Court Judge Neomi Rao's concurrence in which she drives a metaphorical stake through the legal analysis heart of DC Chief Justice and Trump Derangement Syndrome Judge Jeb “Vlad” Boasberg!Of the many unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior district court judges afflicted with terminal Trump Derangement System and wielding lawful jurisdiction and orders over our Article II Executive Branch President Donald J. Trump, elected by the whole of the American people to carry out our political will, few have been as malicious, as odious, and as unconstitutionally corrupt as has the Chief Justice of the DC District Circuit, Judge Jeb “Vlad” Boasberg. Today, Judge Boasberg got body checked HARD by his bosses on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, to which the Trump White House had appealed Boasberg's lawless orders and obvious political and personal animus for Trump and for the Constitutional limits on his own authority. I'll break down that appellate court pimp-slap delivered to Boasberg—at least the majority opinion (there's 60 pages of dissent—losing opinion—that I'm not sure is worth reading).Before all that, however, I'll also share some date with you on how Trump has actually been faring in his lawfare cases once they reach the Supreme Court itself. The #1 guide for understanding when using force to protect yourself is legal. Now yours for FREE! Just pay the S&H for us to get it to you.➡️ Carry with confidence, knowing you are protected from predators AND predatory prosecutors➡️ Correct the common myths you may think are true but get people in trouble​➡️ Know you're getting the best with this abridged version of our best-selling 5-star Amazon-rated book that has been praised by many (including self-defense legends!) for its easy, entertaining, and informative style.​➡️ Many interesting, if sometimes heart-wrenching, true-life examplesGet Your Free Book: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook

Thirteen Allahabad HC judges have urged their Chief Justice to convene a full court meeting & refuse compliance with the SC order against Justice Prashant Kumar.  

The Republic of Texas Congress formed the first state Supreme Court in 1836. However, the Court really didn't meet in any significant way until 1840 under the leadership of Chief Justice John Hemphill. Being Chief Justice was a little different then. It meant fighting Indians, mastering Spanish law, and even leading an expedition to invade Mexico! Chief Justice John Hemphill did it all. Learn more about one of Texas' greatest jurists in this episode of Wise About Texas.

A couple of years ago, Jordan realized that far too few Americans know as much about the Court as they should. In fact, a 2019 C-SPAN poll found that 52% of American voters couldn't name a SINGLE Supreme Court Justice. We need to change that. In this episode, you'll learn: When SCOTUS was founded. Where SCOTUS was originally located. How many Justices sit on the bench. How Justices are selected and appointed. The Difference between the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices. A short biography about each of the current Justices. Majority opinions vs. dissents. How the Court's procedure works including the length of each term, how opinions are issued, who determines who writes each opinion, the format of oral arguments, and much more. After listening, you'll be smarter than the average American when it comes to knowledge of the Supreme Court and that's something to brag about! If you enjoyed this episode, please leave me a review and share it with those you know that also appreciate unbiased news!  SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S FREE NEWSLETTER. Follow Jordan on Instagram and TikTok. All sources for this episode can be found here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode: Very important follow-ups, the Chief Justice on your side, skyways, a mushroom murder update, terrible imitations, technical difficulties, habeas corpus, birdie mornings and fresh air, gingham at the airport, amazing friends, insider #LoveIsland info, a Wayfair double down, losing more things on planes, jigsaw records, eminent vs. imminent, balls of yarn, lottery intuition news, a swan census, local drama, Today in Yiddish, This Week in College Facebook Parenting, not a great waitress, chasing Laura Gandrud, public defending, Constitutional brilliance, #thevalley, #RHOM, and our interview with the best Supreme Court arguer and federal public defender ever, Annie Fisher!