Podcasts about Chief justice

In one of the most heinous acts of police violence against Black Americans, Philadelphia cops killed 11 people (including 5 kids) and left hundreds more homeless. But the case is mostly forgotten now. We get the inside scoop on the 1985 MOVE bombing - and why it's relevant today with our bloated and growing police state.  SHOW NOTESGuest: Linn Washington Jr.Linn Washington Jr. is an award-winning investigative journalist and professor at Temple University. His reporting focuses on the news media, social justice, race, and law. He also served as Special Assistant to the Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.Linn is the leading authority on the Philadelphia Police Department's bombing of the MOVE house on May 13, 1985. He was on the scene covering the tragedy. MORE ABOUT MOVE:“MOVE: Untangling The Tragedy” (Linn's great podcast series)The 1985 MOVE Massacre: When Cops Bombed Philadelphia (documentary)On A Move: Philadelphia's Notorious Bombing And A Native Son's Lifelong Battle For Justice  (book by Mike Africa Jr.) TEACHING RESOURCES:"On A Move" High School CurriculumZinn Education Project - Philadelphia Police Bomb MOVEMiddle School Students Memorialized The MOVE BombingEPISODE HIGHLIGHTS:[4:29] Origins of MOVE and overview of May 13, 1985 bombing[7:20] Brutal history of Philadelphia police and pushback from MOVE[10:46] 1978 starvation blockade of MOVE compound resulted in shootout and nine MOVE members sentenced to prison for 30 to 100 years[13:10] MOVE's strategy to free incarcerated members[17:37] Police Commissioner's plan to bomb compound and let fire burn[27:05] Middle school students' discovery of bombing inspires marker commemorating deaths of children[31:32] Importance of a free press to inform the public and serve as watchdog on government    Contact Tony & AdamSubscribe to the podcast

This episode contains discussions of murder, execution, racial violence, and a botched public hanging. If you need to skip any section, the chapter markers below will help you find your way around. Support resources are listed at the end of these notes.This EpisodeSeason 40 of Foul Play covers America's forgotten crimes — fifty states, 250 years, and the stories that slipped out of the history books. Episode 8 closes out the season with a double portrait. One case from New Hampshire. One from Colorado. Eleven years apart. Two thousand miles between them. The same question at the center of both: when the law finally catches up with a killer, does it actually deliver justice?This is historical true crime at its most uncomfortable.Case A: The Great Falls National Bank Murder — New Hampshire , 1897Joseph A. Stickney was sixty-eight years old when a man walked into his bank on Good Friday morning, April 16, 1897, and cut his throat.Stickney was the cashier of the Great Falls National Bank in Somersworth, New Hampshire — a mill city of seven thousand people where the Salmon Falls River dropped one hundred feet over a mile and powered seven textile mills. The bank had operated since 1865. On a holiday morning, with the mills closed and families walking to Mass, Stickney was alone at his desk with $150,000 in money and securities behind him.The man who killed him was Joseph E. Kelley, twenty-four years old, born in Amesbury, Massachusetts. Kelley had been convicted in Somersworth five years earlier for breaking and entering. He had studied the bank's routine. He walked in with a blackjack, knocked Stickney to the floor, cut his throat, and left with approximately $6,000 in cash — leaving $144,000 behind.The historical murder investigation moved fast. Kelley hired a horse team from Whitten's Stable. The team was found the next day at Phoenix Stables. On April 29, investigators searched a boarding house in Berwick, Maine, where they found a box containing a false mustache and goatee. Kelley had already crossed into Quebec on a Boston & Maine train. He was caught in a Montreal brothel, seated between two prostitutes, still wearing a woman's dress he had purchased for $10 in gold from a hotelkeeper in Quebec.At trial in Dover, New Hampshire, in November 1897, Kelley changed his plea to guilty — but only if the hanging could be scheduled for January 16, 1898. He had a contract with the Devil, he explained, that expired January 15.Dr. Charles Bancroft of the New Hampshire State Asylum for the Insane examined Kelley multiple times and concluded he had the instincts of a man but the judgment and capacity of a child of nine. Expert after expert called him a "high-grade imbecile. " Chief Justice Alonzo P. Carpenter, who had served as Chief Justice of the New Hampshire Supreme Court since 1896, presided over a bench that ultimately found Kelley guilty of second-degree murder — thirty years in state prison. Kelley was reportedly disappointed. He had wanted to hang.Case B: The Trolley Murder of Joseph C. Whitnah — Colorado , 1886On the night of May 19, 1886, Joseph C. Whitnah was driving a horse-drawn streetcar along the Broadway line of the Denver City Railway when two men approached his car at the southern terminus at Broadway and Alameda.Whitnah was a streetcar operator in a city mid-boom. Denver's population tripled between 1880 and 1890, from roughly 35,000 to more than 106,000. The Denver City Railway operated forty-five coaches across sixteen miles of track.Andrew Green, twenty-five years old, and his associate John "Kansas" Withers had been waiting for Whitnah's car. Green fired two shots from a .38 caliber revolver. The first shot was accidental — triggered when Whitnah screamed. The second was deliberate, close-range, through the heart. Whitnah died on the spot. The $14 in fares in his cashbox went untouched.The true crime investigation broke in six days. On May 21, a private detective received a tip at the G.A.R. Saloon on Larimer Street — the Grand Army of the Republic, a fraternal organization for Union veterans. Withers confessed almost immediately and identified Green as the shooter. Green was arrested and confessed on May 25. He told investigators he had been promised the death penalty would be taken off the table if he cooperated.That promise was never confirmed or denied.Green stood trial before an all-white jury. This was Denver six years after a mob of 3,000 attacked the city's Chinese quarter and lynched a man named Look Young. Defense attorney Edgar Caypless worked pro bono. He argued that no robbery had actually been completed, that Green's confession was coerced by a false promise, and that the first shot was accidental. The jury deliberated a little over an hour — was polled four times, one juror holding out for second- degree — and returned a verdict of guilty of first-degree murder. Death.On July 27, 1886, Sheriff Frederick Cramer of Arapahoe County cut the main rope at 2:24 PM before fifteen to twenty thousand spectators gathered between the Broadway and Colfax bridges. Vendors sold lemonade. Families had brought picnic lunches. Children were in the crowd.Green's neck did not snap. Twelve minutes after the jerk-up, doctors could still feel a pulse at his wrist. At 3:45 PM — eighty-one minutes after Cramer cut the rope — undertakers removed Andrew Green from the gallows and placed him in a casket bound for the "colored" section of Riverside Cemetery.The execution was condemned by nearly every Denver newspaper. In 1889, Colorado moved all executions to the state prison in Canon City, limited witnesses, and commissioned a new gallows design. In 1897 — the same year Joseph Stickney was murdered in New Hampshire — Colorado abolished the death penalty. It was reinstated in 1901.Historical ContextBoth cases arrived during the same decade, when American law was negotiating what justice was supposed to look like. In New Hampshire, a court grappled with whether a man who could plan a murder could simultaneously lack the mental capacity to stand fully accountable for it. In Colorado, a court asked whether a Black man could get a fair trial six years after his city had watched a lynch mob go unpunished.Neither question has a clean answer. Both still echo.This is Season 40 of Foul Play: America's 250th Anniversary — the crimes that didn't make the monuments.Our Sponsors:* Check out Kensington Publishing: https://www.kensingtonbooks.com* Check out Mood and use my code SHANE for a great deal: https://mood.comAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Mandy Wiener speaks to Legal Analyst, Mpumelelo Zikalala about Ramaphosa seeking the chief justice Mandisa Maya’s consent before initiating Phala Phala review. The Midday Report with Mandy Wiener is 702 and CapeTalk’s flagship news show, your hour of essential news radio. The show is podcasted every weekday, allowing you to catch up with a 60-minute weekday wrap of the day's main news. It's packed with fast-paced interviews with the day’s newsmakers, as well as those who can make sense of the news and explain what's happening in your world. All the interviews are podcasted for you to catch up and listen to. Thank you for listening to this podcast of The Midday Report Listen live on weekdays between 12:00 and 13:00 (SA Time) to The Midday Report broadcast on 702 https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj and on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from The Midday Report, go to https://buff.ly/BTGmL9H and find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/LcbDdFI Subscribe to the 702 and CapeTalk daily and weekly newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702 CapeTalk on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@capetalk CapeTalk on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ CapeTalk on X: https://x.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CapeTalk567See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listen to Nepal Diary, a weekly podcast segment from SBS Nepali, featuring the major news from Nepal over the past seven days. - गत सात दिनका नेपालका मुख्य समाचारहरू समेटिएको, एसबीएस नेपालीको साप्ताहिक पोडकास्ट प्रस्तुति नेपाल डायरी सुन्नुहोस्।यस अपडेटमा समावेश भएका प्रमुख विषयहरू:⚖️ वरीयता क्रममा चौथो स्थानमा रहेका मनोजकुमार शर्मा सर्वोच्च अदालतको प्रधानन्यायाधीशमा नियुक्त।

Next, Hawk calls for expanding the Supreme Court by four seats, drawing nominees from federal judges who held the line against the Trump administration, including Judge Boasberg. Ketanji Brown Jackson gets the nod for Chief Justice. Puerto Rico and Washington DC become states, adding four new senators and giving millions of Americans real representation for the first time. Roe v. Wade gets codified into law nationwide. And critically, Hawk argues Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries must not lead the Senate or House, citing their stated loyalties to foreign interests over their own base. All four items fit on one piece of paper. Voting rights. Court reform. Statehood. Reproductive rights. That's the plan. SUPPORT & CONNECT WITH HAWK- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mdg650hawk - Hawk's Merch Store: https://hawkmerchstore.com - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@mdg650hawk7thacct - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hawkeyewhackamole - Connect on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mdg650hawk.bsky.social - Connect on Substack: https://mdg650hawk.substack.com - Connect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hawkpodcasts - Connect on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mdg650hawk - Connect on Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/mdg650hawk ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Content Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts- Listen to Hawk Podcasts On Your Favorite Platform:Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3RWeJfyApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/422GDuLYouTube: https://youtube.com/@hawkpodcastsiHeartRadio: https://ihr.fm/47vVBdPPandora: https://bit.ly/48COaTB

The American Democracy Minute Radio News Report & Podcast for May 18, 2026U.S. Supreme Court Rejects VA's Hail Mary to Save Its Redistricting Referendum; First Challenge to Florida's New Map Reaches CourtThe Hail Mary stay application by Virginia Democrats to save their congressional redistricting referendum was rejected by U.S. Supreme Court May 15th.  The same day, the first challenge to Florida's map tilting four more seats to the GOP was heard.Some podcasting platforms strip out our links.  To read our resources and see the whole script of today's report, please go to our website at https://AmericanDemocracyMinute.orgToday's LinksArticles & Resources:States Newroom - Supreme Court rejects Virginia Democrats' bid to salvage redistricting plan U.S. Supreme Court  - On Emergency Application to the Supreme Court of Virginia U.S. Supreme Court - "Application (25A1240) for stay presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is denied."Florida 2nd Judicial Court (via Democracy Docket)  - Complaint from Equal Ground Education Fund & VotersLeague of Women Voters - Voting Rights Groups Sue to Stop Florida Congressional MapFlorida 2nd Judicial Court - Common Cause/League of Women Voters Challenge to Congressional MapRelated ADM Reports:American Democracy Minute - VA Supreme Court Invalidates Redistricting Referendum for Not Following the Rules for Amendments. It Could Tilt Control of Congress.American Democracy Minute - Florida Governor Ron DeSantis Signs Redistricting Bill with Four More GOP Seats; Illinois and New York Contemplate a ResponseGroups Taking Action:Campaign Legal Center,  Common Cause, Equal Ground Find all of our reports at AmericanDemocracyMinute.org#NewsAlerts #AmericanDemocracy #Florida #Virginia #USSupremeCourt #Redistricting #TrumpGerrymandering 

A former Chief Justice of South Carolina evaluated Becky Hill's jury conduct and concluded Alex Murdaugh wasn't prejudiced. Five sitting Supreme Court justices looked at the same record and said she applied the wrong legal standard entirely. The conviction is gone.Eric Fadds brings his experience as both a former prosecutor and current defense attorney to the question of how that happened. The court found Toal committed multiple errors: she placed the burden of proof on Murdaugh instead of the State, she questioned jurors about whether Hill's comments changed their votes in violation of Rule 606(b), and she relied on those improper answers to deny the new trial motion. The Supreme Court overruled one of its own prior decisions to reinforce that juror mental processes are off-limits.Fadds breaks down the Remmer presumption the court formally adopted, explains how Toal's handling of Juror Z's contradictory testimony gave the Supreme Court an opening to reject her credibility findings, and addresses how unusual it is for an appellate court to credit witness testimony that the lower court tried to limit from the record.LINKSJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDISCLAIMERThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS#AlexMurdaugh #TrueCrimeToday #BeckyHill #MurdaughRetrial #JuryTampering #SCSupremeCourt #TrueCrime #EricFadds #JeanToal #MurdaughTrial

This Day in Legal History: Abe Fortas Resigns SCOTUSOn May 15, 1969, Justice Abe Fortas resigned from the United States Supreme Court, becoming the first justice to leave the Court under the threat of impeachment. Fortas had been appointed to the Court in 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson, a close friend and political ally. His reputation had already been damaged in 1968, when Johnson tried to elevate him to Chief Justice and the nomination failed after senators criticized his outside income and ties to the president. The controversy deepened when it became public that Fortas had accepted a financial arrangement from the family foundation of Louis Wolfson, a financier who was later convicted of securities violations. Although Fortas returned the money, the arrangement created the appearance that a sitting Supreme Court justice might be financially entangled with someone who had legal troubles. That appearance alone was enough to cause a major crisis for the Court's legitimacy.Members of Congress began discussing impeachment, and Fortas ultimately resigned before a formal impeachment process could remove him. His departure became an important example of how judicial ethics are not limited to actual corruption, but also include conduct that undermines public confidence in judicial independence. The episode also showed the tension between life tenure and accountability for federal judges. Article III judges are protected from political pressure through lifetime appointments, but they can still face removal through impeachment for serious misconduct.Fortas's resignation left a lasting mark on debates over Supreme Court ethics, outside income, recusals, and financial disclosure. More than fifty years later, the Fortas controversy is still cited when questions arise about whether Supreme Court justices should follow clearer and more enforceable ethics rules.Closing arguments ended Thursday in Elon Musk's federal trial against OpenAI, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and Microsoft, with the case now headed to a nine-member jury. Musk's lawyer argued that OpenAI violated its charitable mission by shifting assets, employees, and value from its nonprofit structure into a for-profit enterprise now worth hundreds of billions of dollars. He focused heavily on Altman's credibility, telling jurors that OpenAI's defense depends on believing Altman and pointing to testimony and documents that Musk says show dishonesty, conflicts, and self-enrichment. Musk's side also attacked Brockman's large equity stake and cited old journal entries as evidence that OpenAI insiders were thinking about personal wealth while controlling a nonprofit mission. Microsoft was portrayed by Musk's team as helping the alleged breach by investing billions and gaining major access to OpenAI's intellectual property and business structure. OpenAI's lawyers responded that Musk's claims are late, unsupported, and driven by his status as a competitor rather than by concern for charitable law. They argued Musk's donations were not legally restricted gifts, that he once sought control of OpenAI himself, and that he did not object to earlier restructuring documents. OpenAI also emphasized that the nonprofit remains in control and now holds a stake worth roughly $200 billion, which its lawyers described as enormous value created for the charity, not stolen from it. Microsoft's lawyer argued the company did not know of any specific conditions on Musk's donations and was not involved in the core events Musk complains about. In rebuttal, Musk's lawyer said OpenAI and Microsoft were distracting the jury from documents and texts showing that Musk funded OpenAI based on a specific nonprofit safety mission. The jury is scheduled to begin deliberations Monday.‘Who's Telling The Truth?' Musk-OpenAI Fight Goes To Jury - Law360 UKMusk accused of ‘selective amnesia,' Altman of lying as OpenAI trial nears end | ReutersThe Senate Banking Committee advanced the Clarity Act, a major crypto regulation bill that would set clearer rules for digital assets and define which regulators oversee different parts of the industry. The Republican-led committee approved the bill with support from all Republicans and two Democrats, Senators Ruben Gallego and Angela Alsobrooks, giving the measure a better chance of reaching the full Senate. Even so, both Democrats warned they may not support the final version unless negotiations change. The bill is important to the crypto industry because it would help determine when tokens are treated as securities, commodities, or something else, which companies say is necessary for growth and legal certainty. Several Democrats objected that the proposal does not go far enough on anti-money laundering protections and should do more to stop public officials from profiting from crypto ventures. Banks are also fighting part of the bill because they fear crypto companies could use stablecoin rewards to compete with traditional deposits. The dispute led to tense committee negotiations, including a late compromise that Chairman Tim Scott allowed while rejecting some other Democratic amendments. Crypto groups have pushed hard for the legislation after spending heavily to support pro-crypto candidates in 2024. The White House is also backing crypto reform, and the House already passed its version of the Clarity Act last year. Supporters see the committee vote as a milestone after years of work, while critics, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, warn the bill favors the crypto industry at the expense of consumers, investors, national security, and the financial system. The bill now moves to the full Senate, where lobbying from crypto companies, banks, and consumer-protection advocates is likely to intensify.US Senate committee advances crypto bill in milestone for digital assets | ReutersA federal appeals court in Washington heard arguments over the Trump administration's attempt to revive executive orders targeting four major law firms: Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey. The firms had previously won in lower court, where judges found the orders unconstitutional. The executive orders punished the firms over issues including their legal work, hiring practices, diversity policies, and political connections. They also sought to restrict the firms' lawyers from federal buildings, cancel government contracts held by their clients, and remove security clearances from firm employees. The Justice Department argued that the firms' business relationships and hiring decisions are not protected by the First Amendment, and that courts should not second-guess presidential decisions involving national security. Judges on the D.C. Circuit appeared skeptical of the administration's broad view of presidential authority, especially the claim that security clearance decisions are unreviewable even when allegedly made for improper reasons. Paul Clement, arguing for the firms, said the orders threatened the First Amendment and the ability of lawyers to represent unpopular clients without government retaliation. He warned that accepting the administration's theory could allow presidents to punish lawyers or firms based on political affiliation. Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, seemed more receptive to the administration's argument that courts have limited power to review security clearance decisions. The case is part of a broader fight over presidential power and whether the government can use executive authority to punish lawyers and firms viewed as political opponents. The appeals court also heard a related case involving lawyer Mark Zaid's security clearance. Any ruling from the D.C. Circuit could eventually be appealed to the Supreme Court.US appeals court questions Trump's push to punish major law firms | 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

Stay connected with us at americangroundradio.com, on Facebook, and Instagram. You're listening to American Ground Radio with Louis R. Avallone and Stephen Parr. This is the full show for May 12, 2026. We open with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez comparing ICE to Jim Crow — and we take it apart piece by piece. We play the clip, explain why this comparison isn't just historically wrong but actively dangerous, and make the case that when you tell people they are witnessing a rebirth of racial oppression rather than the enforcement of democratically enacted law, you are not making a policy argument anymore — you are issuing marching orders to people on the edge. We also point out the obvious — the party that wrote, enforced, and defended Jim Crow was the Democrat Party. AOC's party. And if she actually disagrees with how ICE operates, she has the power to change the law. She's in Congress. That's literally her job. In our Top 3 Things You Need to Know, the DOJ has announced criminal charges against two Singapore and India-based shipping companies and their technical superintendent for the 2024 collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore — six construction workers killed, $5 billion in economic damage, and pollutants released into the Chesapeake Bay. Then inflation jumped to 3.8% in April — the highest level in three years — driven primarily by energy costs related to the Iran conflict and the bottleneck at the Strait of Hormuz, with prices now rising faster than wages for the first time since Biden was president. And the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has blocked the federal government from continuing to collect President Trump's 10% global tariffs — with the underlying authority set to expire in July unless Congress acts. We think those tariffs are doomed and that Congress should fix it. Our American Mamas Teri Netterville and Kimberly Burleson weigh in on the growing trend of no-phone parties on college campuses — events where phones get locked away and people actually talk to each other. We get into why this trend is catching on, why Chick-fil-A is now offering phone-free booths with free ice cream as an incentive for families who make it through a full meal without touching their devices, why phones have become security blankets as much as communication tools, and why one mama's husband's week-long phone detox challenge may be the most ambitious thing happening in American households right now. We dig into a Democrat Senate candidate in Michigan — Abdul El-Saeed — who has spent his entire campaign presenting himself as a physician. His LinkedIn says physician. His campaign literature says physician. His website says physician. Michigan and New York have no record of ever granting him a medical license. We ask the simple question — if you've been practicing medicine your entire career without a license, what do you call that? In our Digging Deep segment, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced a first-in-the-nation program called Golden State Start — 400 free diapers for every newborn in California, administered through an NGO called Baby to Baby. The state has budgeted $20 million for the program. Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton went to Target and discovered you can buy diapers for 16 cents each. The state is paying 50 cents each — more than three times the retail price. We follow the money and find that Baby to Baby is co-led by a woman who sits on the board of Gavin Newsom's wife's nonprofit, that its board includes Kim Kardashian, Jessica Alba, and other Hollywood mega-donors, and that the organization funnels money back to Democrat candidates. Newsom's free diapers aren't about babies. They're about political payback with your tax dollars. We also cover the mayor of Arcadia, California — Democrat Eileen Wang — who has resigned and agreed to plead guilty after being charged with acting as a foreign agent for communist China. A sitting American mayor, taking directives from the People's Republic of China and posting propaganda designed to influence American public opinion. We connect it to the broader pattern of Chinese infiltration into American politics and ask why it keeps happening in the same party. We also cover Representative Darrell Issa's resolution to expunge both of Donald Trump's impeachments from the historical record — laying out the evidence that the 2019 impeachment was built on fabricated testimony from a biased whistleblower with no firsthand knowledge, and that the 2021 impeachment violated the Constitution in multiple procedural ways including the Chief Justice refusing to preside. Both should be expunged. We note that most of the seven Republican senators who voted to convict are already out of Congress — and we mention one who is not. And we close with President Trump calling out a reporter on the White House lawn who accused his ballroom of doubling in cost without apparently knowing he had doubled the size. We give him full credit for the content of the correction — and only minor points off for the delivery. May your pursuit of happiness bring you joy. Listen now wherever you get your podcasts, visit AmericanGroundRadio.com, and join the conversation at 866-AGR-1776!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was the law that made the United States a representative democracy for the first time. Seventeen years after it passed, a young John Roberts joined the Department of Justice and reportedly began what Hawk describes as a 42-year project to undermine Black voting rights and eliminate proportional Black representation in the House of Representatives. Roberts climbed from DOJ attorney to federal judge to Supreme Court Justice to Chief Justice of the United States. Hawk argues that every step of that career was guided by a singular purpose: stripping Black Americans of their constitutional right to vote and their right to fair representation in Congress. That goal, according to Hawk, was accomplished within the past week. Hawk reflects on growing up in rural Ohio and how easily he could have turned out differently, using that contrast to highlight what he sees as the deliberate, career-long racism embedded in Roberts' judicial record. SUPPORT & CONNECT WITH HAWK- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mdg650hawk - Hawk's Merch Store: https://hawkmerchstore.com - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@mdg650hawk7thacct - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hawkeyewhackamole - Connect on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mdg650hawk.bsky.social - Connect on Substack: https://mdg650hawk.substack.com - Connect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hawkpodcasts - Connect on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mdg650hawk - Connect on Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/mdg650hawk ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Content Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts- Listen to Hawk Podcasts On Your Favorite Platform:Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3RWeJfyApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/422GDuLYouTube: https://youtube.com/@hawkpodcastsiHeartRadio: https://ihr.fm/47vVBdPPandora: https://bit.ly/48COaTB

David Waldman is coming home! That's good, because the place has been falling apart without him. The Waldmans still have some tourism left in them though. They stopped at Lambert's Cafe (The Home of THROWED ROLLS!) to get their fill of hog jowls and fried chicken. I have catched some rolls there myself and recommend it. Later they stopped at Uranus, which I hear is a quite popular destination, although I personally have never had the pleasure of a visit. Chief Justice of the Trump Supreme Court, John Roberts asserts that his Supreme Court is not political. Giggling right-wing partisans wholeheartedly agree. Democrats who prefer to wait until all hope is lost feel that time might soon be approaching. Who would guess that Alligator Alcatraz would be a bad idea? Probably anyone who considered why its namesake closed. Rudy Giuliani is still "alive". Cigar aficionado Giuliani, 81, remains in poor health because of a noun, a verb, and 9/11. A Secret Service agent at a Trump event followed a woman up to her room, took off all of his clothes, and masturbated in the hallway. Even in the Kash Patel era, this is considered "unprofessional". Donald K. Trump had his "Military" force Apple to stop his iPhone from autocorrecting Melania's name to "Melody". He directed his motorcade to drive through the National Mall reflecting pool. Oh, and he kills a lot of people, too. What can you do about all of this? You can do many, many things. But you could begin with sending a letter to Congress for better treatment of public lands and federal employees or sending this letter demanding to stop further NPS staffing cuts and restore their staff!

Chief Justice John Roberts is pushing back on growing criticism of the Supreme Court, insisting the justices are not political actors. Speaking at a legal conference, Roberts said the court’s decisions are based on interpreting the law, not politics, even when those rulings are unpopular. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. -- Philip Teresi on KMJ Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chief Justice John Roberts is pushing back on growing criticism of the Supreme Court, insisting the justices are not political actors. Speaking at a legal conference, Roberts said the court’s decisions are based on interpreting the law, not politics, even when those rulings are unpopular. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. -- Philip Teresi on KMJ Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Salmon P. Chase DiesOn May 7, 1873, Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase died, ending one of the most unusual legal and political careers in American history. Chase had been an antislavery lawyer, a U.S. senator, governor of Ohio, Abraham Lincoln's secretary of the Treasury, and then Chief Justice of the United States. He was also one of the many talented and ambitious men around Lincoln who did not begin as an admirer of him. Before Lincoln became president, Chase had encountered him as a lawyer and reportedly did not think much of him, viewing him as a rough western attorney rather than a national figure. After Lincoln defeated him for the Republican nomination in 1860, Chase had reason to believe a summons to the White House might be an occasion for Lincoln to enjoy the victory. Instead, Lincoln offered him one of the most important jobs in the government: secretary of the Treasury.It was a revealing moment in Lincoln's political genius, because he was willing to place a rival who had underestimated him in a position of enormous responsibility during the Civil War. Chase helped finance the Union war effort and became closely associated with the creation of a national banking system and the issuance of paper currency. In 1864, Lincoln elevated him again by appointing him Chief Justice of the United States.As Chief Justice, Chase presided over the 1868 impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson, a major constitutional test of presidential power and congressional authority. Near the end of his life, Chase dissented in the Slaughter-House Cases, one of the first major Supreme Court interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court's majority read the Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause narrowly, limiting a provision that many had hoped would become a strong source of federal protection for civil rights. Chase's dissent placed him on the side of a broader understanding of Reconstruction's constitutional promise. His death mattered not only because of the offices he held, but because it came at a moment when the Supreme Court was deciding whether the Civil War amendments would transform American law or be read down almost as soon as they were adopted.Apple customers have asked a California federal judge to preliminarily approve a proposed $250 million settlement over claims that Apple overstated the artificial intelligence features available on the iPhone 16. The proposed class includes people who bought any iPhone 16 model or certain iPhone 15 models between June 10, 2024, and March 29, 2025. The customers allege Apple advertised enhanced Siri capabilities as part of its Apple Intelligence rollout even though those features were not yet available. Under the settlement, eligible class members who submit valid claims would receive $25 per device, with payments possibly rising to $95 per device depending on participation. Apple is also expected to provide additional Siri-related Apple Intelligence updates in the future at no extra cost.The plaintiffs said settlement made sense because AI-related consumer claims are still legally novel and would carry risk if the case continued. Apple had argued that its marketing was not deceptive because it had already released many Apple Intelligence features and had disclosed that other features would arrive over time. The case began in March 2025 and later became part of a consolidated set of related lawsuits in the Northern District of California. The parties conducted discovery, consulted experts, and participated in three full-day mediation sessions before reaching the proposed deal. Plaintiffs' lawyers plan to seek up to $70 million in fees, plus up to $600,000 in expenses. The settlement does not resolve separate securities or shareholder cases claiming Apple misled investors about the timing of the Siri rollout. Apple said it settled to remain focused on developing products and services, while maintaining that it has already introduced numerous Apple Intelligence tools.Apple Reaches $250M Deal Over Claims It Overhyped IPhone AI - Law360Bayer has agreed to acquire Perfuse Therapeutics, a San Francisco biopharma company, in a deal worth up to $2.45 billion. The transaction gives Bayer full rights to PER-001, a drug candidate in phase-two clinical development for glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy. Bayer will pay $300 million upfront, with the rest tied to development, regulatory, and sales milestones. Perfuse focuses on treatments that improve blood flow to the retina, with the goal of addressing conditions that can lead to blindness. Bayer said the acquisition strengthens its ophthalmology pipeline and supports its effort to develop new therapies for serious eye diseases.The deal is being handled legally by Baker McKenzie for Bayer, with partners Alan Zoccolillo, Oren Livne, and Jieun Tak leading the team. Goodwin Procter is advising Perfuse. The transaction still needs antitrust clearance and approval from Perfuse shareholders. Bayer is being advised financially by BofA Securities, while Centerview Partners is advising Perfuse. Bayer and Perfuse said glaucoma could affect about 112 million people by 2040, while diabetic retinopathy could affect 160 million people by 2045.Baker McKenzie-Led Bayer To Buy Perfuse For Up To $2.45B - Law360 UKThe California Supreme Court is considering whether drugmakers can be held legally responsible for stopping development of a potentially safer drug while continuing to sell an already-approved medication. The case involves Gilead Sciences and roughly 24,000 HIV patients who took drugs containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, or TDF. TDF-based drugs received FDA approval in 2001, but they were associated with possible kidney and bone side effects. Gilead later began developing a related drug, tenofovir alafenamide fumarate, or TAF, which patients say had fewer side effects. The company stopped developing TAF in 2004, arguing that it was not different enough from TDF to justify further investment.The patients claim Gilead delayed TAF for business reasons, including to protect TDF sales and time TAF's release around the expiration of TDF patents. Gilead argues that allowing the negligence claims to proceed would punish companies for researching possible improvements and could discourage innovation. The company says the lower court rulings effectively create a “duty to innovate,” even when the drug already on the market is not alleged to be defective. The patients respond that the case is not about forcing endless research, but about whether Gilead unreasonably delayed a safer alternative for profit. A ruling for the patients could expand product-liability exposure for pharmaceutical companies, while a ruling for Gilead could limit claims based on decisions not to commercialize drugs still in development.California's highest court to consider whether drugmakers have ‘duty to innovate' | 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

What does it really take to change the culture of a profession? In this episode of Trial Tested, host James Brown sits down with the Honorable George Strathy, former Chief Justice of Ontario, for a deeply personal and wide-ranging conversation about mental health in the legal profession. Chief Justice Strathy opens about his mother's lifelong struggle with bipolar disorder, a colleague's near-crisis moment that was met with remarkable compassion, and his own experience using alcohol to self-medicate anxiety during his years in practice. Together, he and James explore why stigma persists, why culture change must come from the top, and what law firms can do right now to build environments where lawyers can thrive.  This episode also marks the release of the ACTL Mental Health Awareness Committee's new white paper — a set of concrete recommendations for law firm infrastructure change to support lawyer wellbeing.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is a goddamned crook. 

Breaking news, Hawaii Lieutenant Governor Sylvia Luke announced a moment ago that she will be taking a leave of absence, without pay, for an indefinite period of time. Governor Green's nominee to be Chief Justice of the Hawaii Supreme court, Vladimir Devens, apologized to state senators yesterday for not disclosing his prior role with a controversial political action committee. And the Office of Elections is set to hold its 2026 political party ballot order drawing next week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sarah Isgur and David French push back against the New York Times ⁠reporting⁠ on the birth of the shadow docket, discuss Justice Sotomayor's apology after criticizing him in personal terms during a speech at the University of Kansas School of Law, and interview  Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt about ⁠McGirt v. Oklahoma⁠. The Agenda:–The birth of the shadow docket–Who leaked Dobbs?–Justice Sotomayor apologizes to Justice Kavanaugh–Justice Kagan's screaming tantrum–Justice Thomas's talk on the Declaration of Independence–We are the McGirt podcast Order Sarah's book here. Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Onion's plan to take over Infowars looks to have succeeded at last.A judge in Rhode Island became the fifth to reject the DOJ's voter roll grab. But Harmeet Dhillon, head of the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, is undeterred. Now she's trying to snatch ballots from Wayne County, Michigan. Trump's Justice Department is negotiating with Trump's lawyers to decide how much taxpayer money to pay Trump for the illegal disclosure of his tax returns in 2020. The statutory max is $1,000 per return. He wants $10 billion. The DOJ has hired Joe diGenova, a Reagan-era US Attorney, to spice up the grand conspiracy investigation into all Trump's enemies taking place in Florida under the watchful eye of Judge Aileen Cannon.And Pennsylvania's intermediate appellate court rules that the state's ban on abortion coverage under Medicaid violates both the Pennsylvania Equal Rights Amendment and the state constitution's equal protection provisions.MAIN SHOW:FBI Director (for now) Kash Patel is big mad over an article in The Atlantic reporting that his drinking is freaking out everyone around him. He's rounded up wonderweasel lawyer Jesse Binnall and filed a defamation trollsuit in DC. This will be amazing content, and we are grateful in advance!And we'll break down the blockbuster article from the New York Times on Chief Justice Roberts' invention of the modern shadow docket ten years ago to stop the “emergency” of states being asked to come up with a way to reduce carbon emissions. The Times got the receipts, and they are ugly. So much for Mister Balls and Strikes!SUBSCRIBERS:Alan Dershowitz is indulging his humiliation kink at the Supreme Court. He's asking the justices to overturn the actual malice standard from New York Times v. Sulllivan so he can sue CNN for reporting what he said during Trump's first impeachment. Are his arguments good? NO. Are they hilarious? HELL YES.The Onion Has a New Plan to Take Over Infowarshttps://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/20/business/infowars-alex-jones-the-onion.htmlUS v. Amore [Rhode Island voter rolls]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71982644/united-states-v-amoreAG Nessel, Governor Whitmer, Secretary Benson Denounce DOJ Demand for 2024 Ballotshttps://www.michigan.gov/ag/news/press-releases/2026/04/19/ag-nessel-governor-whitmer-secretary-benson-denounce-doj-demand-for-2024-ballotsTrump v. IRShttps://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72207870/trump-v-internal-revenue-service/U.S. Installs a Trump Loyalist to Lead ‘Grand Conspiracy' Case Into Trump Foeshttps://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/18/us/politics/digenova-trump-lawyer-conspiracy.htmlAllegheny Reproductive Health Center v. Pennsylvania Department of Human Serviceshttps://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/26MD19_4-20-26.pdf?cb=1Patel v. The Atlantic Monthly Grouphttps://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73213220/patel-v-the-atlantic-monthly-group-llc/The FBI Director Is MIAhttps://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2026/04/kash-patel-fbi-director-drinking-absences/686839/“The Shadow Papers: The Inside Story of Five Days That Remade the Supreme Court,” New York Times, April 18, 2026https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/18/us/politics/supreme-court-shadow-docket.html“Read the Supreme Court's Shadow Papers,” New York Times, April 18, 2026https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/04/18/us/politics/supreme-court-shadow-docket-papers.htmlDersh at SCOTUShttps://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-770.htmlShow 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.

Recording at LegalWeek in New York, Zach sits down with Shlomo Klapper (founder of Learned Hand) and Bridget McCormack, former Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court and now CEO of the American Arbitration Association, to challenge one of the biggest double standards in legal AI: “AI for me, but not for thee.” Lawyers are now widely using AI, but the moment it touches judges or arbitrators, support drops off. That hesitation comes as courts are under real strain, with judges handling thousands of cases a year and only minutes to decide each one, and no realistic way to keep up. Shlomo describes Learned Hand's “AI law clerk,” built to support judicial research, analysis, and drafting, while Bridget brings the perspective of someone who has both made decisions on the bench and now leads a major dispute resolution institution. The conversation moves beyond AI as an assistant and into a harder shift: AI as part of decision-making itself, and whether the system can continue to function without it. Learn More: Bridget - http://www.aaaicdrfoundation.org/director/bridget-m-mccormack Shlomo - https://www.learned-hand.ai/ Zach - https://www.legallydisrupted.com/   Follow Along: Bridget - https://www.linkedin.com/in/bridget-mary-mccormack-26700b30 Shlomo - https://www.linkedin.com/in/sklapper Zach - linkedin.com/in/zachabramowitz

Today, it is my pleasure and honor to speak with John A. Warnick. John A. is a celebrated leader and founder in the family wealth professional space, and an inspiration to many of us in our niche field. He has practiced as a tax attorney for over 45 years and has published articles in law reviews, Trust and Estates magazine and the Journal of Practical Estate Planning. He worked as a legislative assistant on Capitol Hill in the 1970s and was a legal intern in the office of the Administrative Assistant to the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973. In 2010 John A. founded the Purposeful Planning Institute which today is the largest multi-disciplinary educational institute (non-profit) focused on best practices for UHNW and HNW families with over 525 members in the U.S. and nine countries internationally. He was also a co-founder of the Collaboration for Family Flourishing (CFF) and served for four years on the Board of the International Association of Advisors in Philanthropy. He was nominated as a fellow of the American College of Trust and Estate Counsel in 1994 and has chaired two subcommittees within ACTEC, the Legacy and Generational Planning Subcommittee of the Practice Committee and the Family Dynamics Subcommittee of the Business Planning Committee. In 2017, John A. received the Scott Fithian Leadership Award from the International Association of Advisors in Philanthropy and served on the Board of Directors of that organization for four years. He has served on the Planned Giving Advisory Council of the Carter Center in Atlanta, Georgia since 2015. John A. is the author of two Tax Management portfolios and more recently has self-published The Purposeful Trusts and Legacies Handbook and is currently working on two book projects, The Gift of You, and the New Vocabulary of Family Wealth. John A. is a good and long-time friend of FOX and we are privileged to have collaborated with him and with PPI repeatedly throughout the years. Purpose is often cited as one of the key pillars of long-term success for multigenerational families. John A. dedicated much of his professional work on bringing purpose to families and the advisors who serve them – particularly as the founder of the Purposeful Planning Institute. He elaborates on the importance of purpose for families and their advisors and talks about why it is important to be purposeful as a family leader or wealth advisor. He also highlights the distinctions between purpose, values, and mission since these are often lumped together and not always fully understood. John A. has pointed to the significance of family traditions and rituals as powerful tools for establishing and living the family purpose. He describes why rituals are important and how they help families crystallize their purpose and values and pass them on across generations. Conversely, he points out what happens if traditions become performative or imposed on the family, rather than genuinely meaningful. John A. shares some examples of family traditions that he has encountered over his decades of work with UHNW families and outlines the impact of these traditions on the family and the changed that resulted from these shared rites. John A. has formulated five suggestions for trustees, including corporate and professional trustees, as well as PTCs, related to helping the families they serve define and fulfill their shared purpose. He provides an overview of these practical resources and describe how they can be put to use in support of the family's success and wellbeing. Do not miss this opportunity to hear from one of the most respected founders and premier thought leaders of the family wealth space.

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

As part of the Future of Texas series in partnership with Texas 2036, this episode explores how Texas courts and the justice system must evolve to serve a rapidly growing state. In this episode of Texas Talks, host Brad Swail is joined by Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas, and Luis Soberon, Senior Policy Advisor and In House Counsel at Texas 2036, for a forward-looking conversation about the future of courts, access to justice, and judicial reform in Texas. As Texas adds more residents, more businesses, and more complexity to its economy, the demands on the justice system are growing as well. Chief Justice Jefferson and Soberon discuss how population growth affects everything from family law and criminal dockets to business disputes and court backlogs — and why the state must modernize now if it wants to preserve public trust and timely access to justice by 2036. The conversation also examines how Texas courts have already evolved through electronic filing, virtual hearings, and greater public transparency, while also looking ahead to the next wave of change driven by AI, data systems, and digital tools that could make the justice system more accessible and more efficient. The discussion also covers: • Why access to justice still depends too heavily on who can afford a lawyer • How legal aid, pro bono work, and technology can help narrow that gap • The role of e-filing, courtroom livestreams, and digital systems in modernizing courts • How AI could improve legal access and court administration without replacing human judgment • Why Texas may need more courts, more judges, and stronger court funding as the state grows • Whether partisan judicial elections still make sense in a more populous and polarized Texas • Why court data and transparency are essential to understanding backlog, performance, and reform • How simple changes like text reminders and clearer notices can improve compliance and reduce harm • Why backlog reduction and access to justice may be the clearest markers of success by 2036 Chief Justice Jefferson argues that Texas should aim to become a national leader in ensuring every resident can protect their most basic rights in court, while Soberon emphasizes that better data, smarter administration, and sustained investment will be critical if the justice system is going to keep pace with Texas's future. Through the Future of Texas podcast series, Texas 2036 brings together diverse perspectives as we explore the opportunities and challenges facing our state over the next ten years. The views expressed in this program are those of the individual speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Texas 2036, its staff or its Board of Directors. 00:00 — Introduction to the Future of Texas series and today's justice focus 00:29 — Why population growth puts pressure on Texas courts 01:14 — Guests introduced: Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson and Luis Soberon 02:26 — What it means for justice to evolve in a growing state 03:22 — Access to justice and why cost remains the biggest barrier 04:15 — Technology, remote hearings, and how courts have already changed 05:44 — Chief Justice Jefferson on modernizing the Texas court system 07:16 — AI, court technology, and the future of legal access 09:53 — The growing gap between people who have lawyers and people who do not 11:22 — Legal aid, self-help tools, and high-volume civil cases 15:20 — How AI could transform legal work without replacing judges or lawyers 20:04 — How growth affects court demand, specialization, and business courts 24:25 — More judges, more courts, and pressure on judicial elections 27:53 — Can judicial independence survive a hyperpartisan environment? 32:23 — What a chief justice actually does in the Texas court system 37:30 — The data problem in Texas courts and why it matters 41:06 — How better data could reveal backlog, performance, and reform needs 47:30 — Transparency, text reminders, and making courts easier to navigate 53:08 — State policy changes needed to modernize Texas justice 56:16 — The one metric that will show whether Texas got it right by 2036 Watch Full-Length Interviews: https://www.youtube.com/@TexasTalks

Some Twin Cities school districts that offered virtual learning during increased federal immigration enforcement operation are bringing students back to in-person classes today. Minnesota's top judge is retiring in September. Chief Justice Natalie Hudson's planned departure gives Gov. Tim Walz one more major appointment to the Supreme Court.Those stories and more in today's evening update from MPR News. Hosted by Emily Reese. Music by Gary Meister.

It's time for the first official meeting of the Modern Law Library Book Club, and Lee has invited on her friend (and go-to Nixon expert) Victor Li to talk about his experience reading the 1979 bestseller The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court. As both a lawyer and journalist, Victor gives his thoughts on how Woodward and Armstrong were able to pierce the secrecy of the Supreme Court and show the behind-the-scenes wrangling as Nixon's newly-appointed chief justice, Warren Burger, took over from famed liberal Chief Justice Earl Warren. Up next, we'll be discussing Chapter 1, the 1969 Term, and we want to hear from you! Email your comments or a voice message to modernlawlibrary@legaltalknetwork.com to appear on a future episode. Check out our discussion group on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/1285340-modern-law-library  Purchase your copy of The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court: https://amzn.to/4cRQivF Subscribe to Modern Law Library: https://play.megaphone.fm/93wtgxnatpsubsdxwklzwq Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SEASON 4 EPISODE 74: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (2:30) SPECIAL COMMENT: The buffoon who is, for better or worse, the actual president of this country has called the United States of America STUPID. No – seriously: “We are the only country in the world stupid enough to allow birthright citizenship” He didn’t call the Constitution stupid. He didn’t call the Supreme Court stupid. He didn't call the immigrants stupid. He didn't call the Democrats stupid. He called the ENTIRE COUNTRY stupid. You. And me. And his own supporters. Why again do we continue to permit this disloyal, deranged moron to remain president? Oh by the way that was him - even before his pathetic speech on Iran last night - signaling he will LOSE, that he is getting CREAMED, after the oral arguments OVER birthright citizenship at the Supreme Court, summarized by his lawyer saying “it’s a new world” and the Chief Justice replying but “it’s the same constitution.” When the Justices rule in June it could be 9-0, though 7-2 would be likelier. THE BESTEST WAR EVER: Near as I can tell, the essence of Trump's argument in his Iran speech last night was: It's going perfectly because it hasn't taken nearly as long as World War I or Vietnam. He didn't address NATO, he only tweaked the allies who have refused to jump overboard with him, and he only once gave any hint about what's next (Iran has "two or three weeks" to make a deal even though everybody in Iran is dead). The overriding theme of the speech was the tantalizing prospect that he might fall asleep at the podium while he was talking. TRUMP'S PERVERTS: The latest on Kristi Noem and whether she got a group discount on plastic surgery, the servitude of Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio and RFK Jr and Jeff Bezos, and the weird psychology behind why his former critics enslave themselves to Trump. A professional in the field says it's not masochism, and while it may be blackmail, it's more about Trump providing them with a way for them to lie to themselves and say they aren't deviants or hypocrites, that he will back up their delusions - provided they do exactly what he tells them to. B-Block ( ) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Oh, look, I'm dragging Katy Tur and Tony Dokoupil again. Tur and I used to talk about Trump's lack of acuity in 2015. She just did a tv segment on it this week and it was as if she discovered it. And a profile of Dokoupil by Columbia Journalism Review has revealed he was once a hair model. What do you mean "once?" Also on here, Navy Commander Tim Parlatore ragging on behalf of Gamblin' Pete Hegseth. Last time we saw him he was civilian Trump attorney Tim Parlatore. I'm waiting for Cardinal Parlatore. And if Cory Booker is paying for the astroturfed online support, he deserves a refund. C-Block ( ) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: If I'm dragging Tur, it's only fair I tell the story of when she went above-and-beyond even live-in girlfriend duties: the saga of the day my appendix exploded and it took me 48 hours to figure out it wasn't just an upset stomach. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Drama on a ThursdayFirst,  a look at this day in History.Then, Let George Do It starring Bob Bailey and Virginia Gregg, originally broadcast April 2, 1951, 75 years ago, The Eight Ball.  The mayor and two other respected citizens of Summer Springs has called for George Valentine. George is offered $1000 to not take the case, then finds a dead body named George Valentine has already arrived!Followed by Mr. President starring Edward Arnold,  originally broadcast April 2, 1951, 75 years ago, There's Hay in the Barn.  He wanted to be Chief Justice.  His predecessor wanted him to be his successor.  Then, Nick Carter Master Detective starring Lon Clark, originally broadcast April 2, 1946, 80 years ago, Eight Records of Death.  A man finds phonograph records in an abandoned trunk that lead Nick Carter to investigate a possible murder.Followed by The New Adventures of Sherlock Holmes starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce, originally broadcast April 2, 1945, 81 years ago, The Amateur Mendicant Society.  A group of "wealthy eccentrics" who enjoy dressing as beggars, hires Sherlock Holmes to solve the murder of one of the members. As a time bomb ticks, Holmes learns of a plot against the Prime Minister! Finally, Claudia, originally broadcast April 2, 1948, 78 years ago, Finding the Stateroom.  Claudia at sea! Kathryn Bard and Paul Crabtree star.Thanks to Richard G for supporting our podcast by using the Buy Me a Coffee function at http://classicradio.streamCheck out Professor Bees Digestive Aid at profbees.com and use my promo code WYATT to save 10% when you order! Find the Family Fallout Shelter Booklet Here: https://www.survivorlibrary.com/library/the_family_fallout_shelter_1959.pdfhttps://wardomatic.blogspot.com/2006/11/fallout-shelter-handbook-1962.html

It's time for the first official meeting of the Modern Law Library Book Club, and Lee has invited on her friend (and go-to Nixon expert) Victor Li to talk about his experience reading the 1979 bestseller The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court. As both a lawyer and journalist, Victor gives his thoughts on how Woodward and Armstrong were able to pierce the secrecy of the Supreme Court and show the behind-the-scenes wrangling as Nixon's newly-appointed chief justice, Warren Burger, took over from famed liberal Chief Justice Earl Warren. Up next, we'll be discussing Chapter 1, the 1969 Term, and we want to hear from you! Email your comments or a voice message to modernlawlibrary@legaltalknetwork.com to appear on a future episode. Check out our discussion group on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/1285340-modern-law-library  Purchase your copy of The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court: https://amzn.to/4cRQivF

Struggling to balance the stress of your legal career? You're not alone. Hear how Chief Justice Megan Cavanagh built her work-life balance, including her personal wellness practices, the tools she uses to stay grounded, and how she manages her responsibilities at both work and home.

Alumni packed their cars and headed to Regina for their day in court as our stayed civil action was argued before the Court of Appeal. Our legal team: Grant Scharfstein, Samuel Edmondson, Michael Scharfstein, and Christine Libner, faced counsel for the church and the government.  During the hearing, the Chief Justices of the Court of Appeal characterized the rationale for staying the civil suit due to a supposed "change in the litigation landscape" as "abstract theory and speculation".  Tune in as we share our ongoing saga with the legal system.    Join the Class Action: https://scharfsteinlaw.com/class-action/ Links and Socials: https://linktr.ee/legacyofabusepodcast Contact Us: legacyofabusepodcast@gmail.com

March is Women's History Month, a time to celebrate the accomplishments of women. And what better way to do so, than with a conversation with three remarkable women who've been inducted into the Colorado Women's Hall of Fame. Velveta Golightly Howell, Jill Tietjen, and Dusti Gurule have shaped our state through activism, community building, and fierce advocacy. Then, when Monica Márquez was sworn-in as the new Chief Justice on the Colorado Supreme Court in 2024, she made history as the first Latina to take on that role. And we also sit down with former state lawmaker and First Lady of Denver, Wilma Webb, who has worked in public service for most of her life. 

In this exciting new iteration of Presidential War, we step into the presidential shoes and choose the appointees of our own administration from an incredible talent pool: all of the former presidents! We contemplate the prospects of Abe Lincoln as Attorney General, James Madison as Chief Justice of Supreme Court, Richard Nixon as CIA Director, and much more! Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram Email us at deadpresidentspodcast@gmail.com Please rate & review,  subscribe & share. Thanks for listening!

This Supreme Court term has seen threats against the Justices – from the President, a slew of game-changing shadow docket opinions, justices sparring in public, and some of the most consequential cases of our lifetimes. If you're feeling a little disoriented by it all, join Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern on this week's show for a clearer understanding of what's going on at One, First Street. They discuss the big immigration case the court took up just this week that will be crammed into the last week of arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's courage at a public event, and what it means when a justice steps out of the four corners of her opinions to voice urgent concerns about the shadow docket in public, and why, when it comes to threats to judges, the Chief Justice is meekly asking Trump knock it off, while taking no responsibility for his court's role in it all. Supplemental reading: The Constitutional Accountability Center on the history of mail-in ballotsThis week's Executive Dysfunction newsletter from Slate's jurisprudence team is a must-read: slate.com/dysfunctionWant more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This Supreme Court term has seen threats against the Justices – from the President, a slew of game-changing shadow docket opinions, justices sparring in public, and some of the most consequential cases of our lifetimes. If you're feeling a little disoriented by it all, join Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern on this week's show for a clearer understanding of what's going on at One, First Street. They discuss the big immigration case the court took up just this week that will be crammed into the last week of arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's courage at a public event, and what it means when a justice steps out of the four corners of her opinions to voice urgent concerns about the shadow docket in public, and why, when it comes to threats to judges, the Chief Justice is meekly asking Trump knock it off, while taking no responsibility for his court's role in it all. Supplemental reading: The Constitutional Accountability Center on the history of mail-in ballotsThis week's Executive Dysfunction newsletter from Slate's jurisprudence team is a must-read: slate.com/dysfunctionWant more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This Supreme Court term has seen threats against the Justices – from the President, a slew of game-changing shadow docket opinions, justices sparring in public, and some of the most consequential cases of our lifetimes. If you're feeling a little disoriented by it all, join Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern on this week's show for a clearer understanding of what's going on at One, First Street. They discuss the big immigration case the court took up just this week that will be crammed into the last week of arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's courage at a public event, and what it means when a justice steps out of the four corners of her opinions to voice urgent concerns about the shadow docket in public, and why, when it comes to threats to judges, the Chief Justice is meekly asking Trump knock it off, while taking no responsibility for his court's role in it all. Supplemental reading: The Constitutional Accountability Center on the history of mail-in ballotsThis week's Executive Dysfunction newsletter from Slate's jurisprudence team is a must-read: slate.com/dysfunctionWant more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Senate begins what is expected to be a long, full week of debate on a bill requiring proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote; Senate Democrats send to the White House their latest offer to reopen the Homeland Security Department; National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent resigns over the war against Iran, telling President Donald Trump Iran did not pose an immediate threat and he was tricked into supporting the war by Israel; U.S. Capitol Police Chief Michael Sullivan testifies before a House subcommittee about a budget increase request in part to handle an increase in threats of violence against Members of Congress; Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts says personal criticism of federal judges is dangerous and “it's got to stop"; Postmaster General David Steiner tells a House subcommittee the Postal Service will run out of cash in one year without Congress loosening its operating regulations; Ireland's Prime Minister, Taoiseach Micheal Martin, visits Washington, DC on this St. Patrick's Day, meeting President Trump in the White House Oval Office and attending a Congressional Friends of Ireland Caucus luncheon in the U.S. Capitol building. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send me a DM here (it doesn't let me respond), OR email me: imagineabetterworld2020@gmail.comPublished at https://commission.itnj.org/2018/09/0...Chosen for her particular bloodline, high cognitive abilities and physical prowess, Fiona was a perfect subject for MK ULTRA mind control programming, which took place in numerous universities and underground facilities both in Australia and abroad. Other nightmarish crimes perpetrated upon her throughout her childhood include ritual abuse, torture, the witness of torture and murder, being dressed as a teddy bear whilst hunted for sport at the annual camp at ‘The Bohemian Grove.'Fiona Barnett's testimony provides a very clear and detailed picture of global child trafficking, which, she explains, “is run as a single coordinated operation through the CIA in collaboration with British and Australian Intelligence Services.”In her testimony, she interweaves her personal account with a vast research-knowledge of the history, practices and interconnection between intel-agency child trafficking, Luciferianism, ritual abuse, and MK ULTRA mind control, all of which she witnessed and suffered at the hands of.Fiona was eventually able to escape the cult and has since made numerous attempts to have her perpetrators brought to justice. Her story has been publicly derided and she has been prevented from leading any semblance of a normal life.Her testimony was heard via a virtual sitting of the ITNJ's Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Human Trafficking & Child Sex Abuse on 7th July, 2018, before Chief Justice, Dr. John Walsh of Brannagh, His Grace Bishop Riah Abu El Assal, ITNJ Commissioner Carine Hutsebaut, and ITNJ Trustees Reverend Dr. Nancy Ash and Connie Broussard.WATCH FIONA'S NEW 3-HOUR TESTIMONY ON 'THE IMAGINATION' PODCAST: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trCyavZV2LQREAD FIONA'S BOOK 'EYES WIDE OPEN':https://burners.me/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/eyes-wide-open-_fiona-barnett_first-edition_august-2019.pdfWATCH FIONA'S DOCUMENTARY 'CANDY GIRL:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2pAnwTB90gCONNECT WITH FionaWebsite: https://fionabarnett.org/Twitter: https://x.com/TheFionaBarnettCONNECT WITH EMMA:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@imaginationpodcastofficialRumble: https://rumble.com/c/TheImaginationPodcastEMAIL: imagineabetterworld2020@gmail.com OR standbysurvivors@protonmail.comMy Substack: https://emmakatherine.substack.com/BUY ME A COFFEE: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/theimaginationVENMO: @emmapreneurCASHAPP: $EmmaKatherine1204All links: https://direct.me/theimaginationpodcastSupport the show

AP correspondent Ed Donahue reports on the leader of the Supreme Court's message to critics of judges.

Trey answers listener questions on the inherent risks of living in a free society and the rise of domestic radicalization. He also discusses the inspiration behind his gripping fiction debut The Color of Death and unpacks some constitutional mysteries surrounding the U.S. Supreme Court — including why you technically don't need a law degree to serve as Chief Justice. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We announce an exciting new partnership with SCOTUSblog and introduce the show to new listeners. We then return to the mysterious origins of the Chief Justice's "no, no, a thousand times no," debate the Court's new policy designed to maintain secrecy, and then take a close look at Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corporation, a sovereign immunity decision in which the Court may, or may not, have paid attention to Will's amicus brief.  

Candidate filing season is underway, and the next few weeks will reveal not just who's running—but who can't get on the ballot. Chris and John flag what to watch: retirements, surprise re-runs by incumbents, and especially the volume (and seriousness) of primaries against sitting legislators—potentially on both sides of the carbon capture pipeline issue.They then revisit TIF (Tax Increment Financing) within Iowa's urban renewal framework and the renewed debate around it inside the Governor's property tax proposal. The core reforms discussed: (1) a 20-year limit (ending “perpetual TIFs”), and (2) narrowing eligible spending toward horizontal infrastructure (roads/utilities) rather than incentives that effectively boost developer profitability. The theme is not abolition—just enforceable guardrails.Next up: a Budget Continuation Act concept—essentially a “status quo” backstop that keeps government operating if a budget isn't passed on time (whether due to political deadlock or emergencies). They frame it as stability for taxpayers and a structural safeguard against D.C.-style shutdown politics and policy “hostage-taking” during endgame budget negotiations.Finally, they tease broader regulatory reform via the REINS Act approach—tightening legislative oversight of major regulations and reinforcing checks and balances over the administrative state. They also note movement on integrity/oversight legislation affecting SNAP and Medicaid, driven in part by federal rule changes and the need to reduce error and fraud exposure for Iowa.00:00:14 – Welcome + trivia setup00:01:12 – Trivia question: President + Chief Justice (only one person)00:02:13 – Candidate filing period: who's in, who's out, and what to watch00:05:04 – Primaries vs incumbents; carbon pipeline politics00:06:50 – Democrats: U.S. Senate primary chatter and endorsements00:09:04 – TIF recap: what it is and why it exists00:10:45 – Governor's TIF reforms: 20-year limit + guardrails00:12:33 – Restricting TIF uses: infrastructure vs developer incentives00:17:00 – Budget Continuation Act: how it works and why it matters00:21:25 – How budget brinksmanship drives bad policy add-ons00:24:16 – REINS Act: regulatory oversight and checks/balances00:27:54 – SNAP/Medicaid oversight bills: error rates and fraud control00:29:15 – Wrap + subscribe

DEI is facing unprecedented legal and cultural pushback. Kenji Yoshino and David Glasgow, founders of NYU Law's Meltzer Center, argue it's time for a strategic shift: swap the 'E' in DEI for Equality. They join Mike to discuss their new book, How Equality Wins, explaining why mandatory diversity statements often lead to "preference falsification," the importance of supporting dissent, and why the movement must expand its tent to include the working class by simply going "where the pain is." Plus, we're awaiting Chief Justice's Facial expressions during the State of the Union.  And in the spiel, why your daily anxiety has become the ultimate consumer product. Produced by Corey Wara Video and Social Media by Geoff Craig Do you have questions or comments, or just want to say hello? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠thegist@mikepesca.com For full Pesca content and updates, check out our website at https://www.mikepesca.com/ ⁠For ad-free content or to become a Pesca Plus subscriber, check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/ For Mike's daily takes on Substack, subscribe to The Gist List https://mikepesca.substack.com/ Follow us on Social Media:⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4_bh0wHgk2YfpKf4rg40_g⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/pescagist/ X https://x.com/pescami TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@pescagist To advertise on the show, contact ⁠⁠⁠⁠ad-sales@libsyn.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ or visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://advertising.libsyn.com/TheGist

This week The President of The United States of America and Tech Stuff Guy discuss Olympics, Seahawks, Tariffs, Prince Andrew, and The President answers some questions from Perfect 10 Patreon Patriots sitting in LIVE. If you enjoy the show leave a rating and review on spotify or iTunes. Join the Patreon for hours of bonus content ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.Patreon.com/MPGA⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

(0:00) Intro (1:29) About the podcast sponsor: The American College of Governance Counsel. (2:15) Start of interview. *Reference to prior episode with Leo Strine (E100) (3:09) The Call of Conscience and The Current Moment (reference to his speech at the Weinberg Center in Oct of 2025) (5:18) Skepticism about Credibility of the Elite Among the Youth (7:02) The Ethical Muscle (8:20) Acknowledging Discrimination (8:56) The Climate Crisis (12:37) Shifts in Delaware Law (13:45) Return to Traditions. "What Delaware has done is return to its traditions that existed the entire time I was a judge." (14:28) The Controlled Company Debate and the MFW standard. (25:00) On the recent pushback against incorporating in Delaware: "I don't minimize the moment" (32:00) Section 220 Books and Records under SB21 (34:20) The statute was amended to provide more predictability. It actually looks like the Model Business Corporation Act. "I think both elements of this statute balance fairness and efficiency in a really good way." (39:54) Activist Judges and Delaware. "This was a nonpartisan initiative to restore confidence in Delaware's corporate law. I have the utmost respect for our judiciary, I'm proud to have been part of it, and I believe they will follow the law." (42:26) Delaware's Competitive Edge (48:25) The Rise of AI Companies (52:16) Energy Demand from AI. From guardrails to "trust us" (58:39) The Urgency of Leadership (1:01:59) Davos looks like a portrait of leadership failure "either eliminate it or make it real." Leo E. Strine, Jr., is Of Counsel at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. Prior to joining WLRK, he was the Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court from early 2014 through late 2019.   You can follow Evan on social media at:X: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__To support this podcast you can join as a subscriber of the Boardroom Governance Newsletter at https://evanepstein.substack.com/__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Aughie and Nia discuss the Stone Court, years 1941 - 1946.  Harlan Fiske Stone served first as an Associate Justice, and then as the Chief Justice, over a Court that issued several important war-time rulings.  Despite its ruling in the Korematsu case, Stone oversees a gradual warming to civil rights and liberties on the Court.

Alex Murdaugh's fight for a new trial just reached South Carolina's highest court—and the justices came with hard questions.On February 11, 2026, the South Carolina Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Murdaugh's appeal of his double-murder conviction. The hearing split into two phases: first, the alleged jury tampering by former Colleton County Clerk Becky Hill; second, whether the trial itself was fair given the evidence admitted against him.Chief Justice John Kittredge set the tone early, calling Hill a "rogue clerk" and pressing prosecutor Creighton Waters on the scope of financial crimes evidence. "The granular detail and the expansiveness of which everything under the sun was allowed is arguably problematic," Kittredge said. Justice George James questioned the "logical connection" between Murdaugh's financial crimes and the murders of Maggie and Paul.Waters attempted to frame Murdaugh's financial desperation as the boiling point—at one point invoking the movie "Fargo" to illustrate his argument. Justice John Few wasn't having it: "I haven't seen 'Fargo'—get to the point."Defense attorneys Harpootlian, Griffin, and Barber argued that Hill's comments to jurors—including "watch his body language" and warnings not to be "fooled"—constituted jury tampering that denied Murdaugh a fair trial. They also challenged cell phone evidence, a blue raincoat with gunshot residue, and the overwhelming emphasis on financial crimes as prejudicial.The state maintained the conviction was based on "overwhelming evidence" and that Hill's remarks were "fleeting" and "largely neutral." But the justices pushed back repeatedly.No decision was issued from the bench. The court will deliberate privately with no deadline for a ruling. This episode covers the full hearing—what was argued, how the justices reacted, and what comes next.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#MurdaughAppeal #AlexMurdaugh #TrueCrimeToday #SouthCarolinaSupremeCourt #BeckyHill #JuryTampering #CreightonWaters #MurdaughCase #TrueCrimePodcast #LegalAnalysis

This episode dives headfirst into what may be the most explosive judicial scandal in Colorado history. We break down the verified federal complaint filed by Christopher S.P. Gregory, a former senior leader inside Colorado's judicial discipline system, accusing the Colorado Supreme Court, Governor Jared Polis, Attorney General Phil Weiser, and dozens of judges, lawyers, and oversight officials of a years-long conspiracy to conceal corruption, obstruct a federally required audit, and silence whistleblowers. At the center: a $2.66–$2.75 million alleged fraud and bribe scheme tied to former SCAO Chief of Staff Mindy Masias and a cover-up that spans more than six years.We walk through the paper trail: the 2019 anonymous fraud complaint sent directly to the Justices, Polis, and Weiser; the deliberate withholding of the “Masias Memo” from the State Auditor; coordinated damage control after public exposure; admissions of misconduct by a former Chief Justice; expired statutes of limitation due to obstruction; and repeated allegations that judicial oversight bodies were stacked, compromised, and weaponized to protect insiders. This isn't just about one contract it's about systemic abuse of power, suppression of evidence, retaliation against a whistleblower, and alleged violations of federal civil rights law.Finally, we unpack the seven claims at the heart of the case: civil rights conspiracy, obstruction of justice, failure to prevent misconduct, retaliation under the Colorado False Claims Act, demands for extraordinary writs to dismantle conflicted oversight bodies, equitable relief to halt ongoing constitutional violations, and reimbursement of taxpayer-funded legal defenses for officials found personally liable. If these allegations are substantiated, the fallout could shake Colorado's judiciary, trigger federal scrutiny, and force a reckoning over who the rules really apply to.

In this podcast, Kyle welcomes Aaron Siri, a prominent legal advocate known for his work with the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) and Del Bigtree's Highwire, who has been influential in uncovering pharmaceutical industry practices. The conversation revolves around Siri's new book, 'Vaccines. Amen,' which critiques the almost religious zeal with which vaccines are regarded and delves into various controversial aspects of vaccine safety and policy. Siri discusses the deficiencies in safety testing of vaccines, such as the Hepatitis B vaccine trials involving infants, and highlights how the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act shifted the responsibility of vaccine safety from manufacturers to the federal government, resulting in a lack of accountability. The conversation also explores the history and efficacy of the Measles vaccine, potential long-term health impacts of vaccines, and the broader implications of governmental and pharmaceutical industry practices. Kyle and Siri emphasize the importance of individual choice and informed consent in vaccination decisions, criticizing the lack of transparency and the ethical implications of government-mandated vaccines. The discussion concludes with reflections on the future of vaccine policy and the importance of maintaining personal freedoms and rights. Aaron Siri is the managing partner of Siri and Glimstad, where he focuses on civil rights, informed consent, class actions, and complex civil litigation. His work includes challenging medical mandates, defending parental rights, representing whistleblowers, and forcing government transparency, including litigation that compelled the FDA to release Pfizer COVID 19 records. Aaron previously practiced at Latham and Watkins and clerked for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Israel. He earned his law degree from UC Berkeley School of Law, where he served as Editor in Chief of the Berkeley Business Law Journal.   From Kyle: The Community is coming! Click here to learn more   Connect with Aaron here: Instagram Website Siri & Glimstad LLP   Our Sponsors: Let's level up your nicotine routine with Lucy. Go to Lucy.co/KKP and use promo code (KKP) to get 20% off your first order. Lucy offers FREE SHIPPING and has a 30-day refund policy if you change your mind.   Connect with Kyle: I'm back on Instagram, come say hey @kylekingsbu Twitter: @kingsbu Our Farm Initiative: @gardenersofeden.earth Odysee: odysee.com/@KyleKingsburypod Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@Kyle-Kingsbury Kyle's Website: www.kingsbu.com - Gardeners of Eden site If you enjoyed this podcast, please subscribe & leave a 5-star review with your thoughts!

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

A feckless Chief Justice who is obviously trying to avoid being attacked by his favorite president Trump, issued a worthless “Final Report” on this past year at the Judiciary, filled with misstatements, omissions and misleading “statistics”. Missing from the report? Any mention of Trump's attacks on the Judiciary, Judges, Lawyers and Law Firms, the violence threatened against them, the use of rogue US Attorneys to go after Trump's political enemies, the corruption of the DOJ, the lack of ethics at the Supreme Court, and the battle that has spilled into the open between the lower federal trial courts and the Supreme Court, or the Court being complicit with Trump through the use of the “shadow docket” to allow back door appeals to side with Trump 86% of the time. Michael Popok blows apart the Report and its attempt to wrap Roberts and judges in a flag to fool the American people into believing that the Third Branch hasn't been captured by MAGA and Trump. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast⁠ Legal AF: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af⁠ MissTrial: ⁠https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial⁠ The PoliticsGirl Podcast: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast⁠ Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan⁠ Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen⁠ The Weekend Show: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show⁠ Burn the Boats: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats⁠ Majority 54: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54⁠ Political Beatdown: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown⁠ On Democracy with FP Wellman: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman⁠ Uncovered: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices