Podcasts about Constitutional law

Mea Culpa welcomes back our old friend, Harry Litman, the former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Litman is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times and a professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. Harry can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC, and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast. You'd be smart to subscribe to the “Talking Feds” YouTube channel. New episodes are posted daily and he features the greatest legal minds and tough-as-nails former prosecutors breaking down the legal news and all things Trump indictment. But today Harry is here to give us the rundown on that pesky target letter and the imminent Trump indictment number three. 

Constitutional attorney Danny Sheehan — the legal voice behind Citizens for Disclosure — maps the real implications of full UAP disclosure: the constitutional crisis, the citizen-diplomacy path, and the Majestic 12 successors who are now known by name. From 43 states organizing on the ground to live Congressional testimony confirming retrieved craft and non-human biologics, Danny walks through what disclosure actually looks like when it happens. He covers psionic propulsion that moves entire UFO vehicles instantaneously, the candidate-pledge strategy circumventing media gatekeepers, and the citizen-led ET-contact diplomacy bypassing the national security state. This is the disclosure aftermath nobody is yet preparing for.

Across the country, judges and justices are making decisions that reach back, sometimes centuries, to define what the Constitution means today. Whether it's gun rights, abortion, or voting laws, the Supreme Court increasingly relies on what it calls history and tradition to interpret the nation's founding documents. But what history, exactly? How reliable is it as a guide for a democracy in the 21st century? And should five justices—the least required for a majority decision—have the power to strike down laws passed by hundreds of legislators, elected by millions of citizens? Explore these questions and what they reveal about the court, originalism, and the future of American democracy with Nikolas Bowie, PhD '18, the Louis D. Brandeis Professor of Law at Harvard Law School (HLS), a historian of democracy, and a thought leader on how power really works in our constitutional system. His new book with his fellow author Daphna Renan, also an HLS professor, is called Supremacy: How Rule by the Court Replaced Government by the People.

Corporations are people in the eyes of the law. But how did that happen, and why does it hand them rights you don't have?  UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, author of "We the Corporations", traces a 200-year campaign by business to win the constitutional rights of human beings. Bethany McLean and Luigi Zingales press him on what Zingales calls an incredible trick. Corporations insist they're separate from their owners when that shields owners from blame, then argue they're like people when they want to spend on elections or dodge a rule.  Winkler traces how the Fourteenth Amendment, written after the Civil War to protect the newly freed, became a tool for railroads and banks instead. He even describes a lawyer who, by his account, lied to the Supreme Court, producing a journal he claimed proved the amendment was meant for corporations.  Zingales pushes on what comes next: could AI itself qualify for legal personhood, and would that shield big tech from blame? When we ask Winkler for a shred of hope that the long arc doesn't simply keep favoring business, the answer is far shorter and blunter than expected.  Connect with us:

In this week's episode of The Learning Curve, co-hosts Prof. Albert Cheng of the University of Arkansas and Alisha Searcy of the Center for Strong Public Schools speak with Leslie Hiner, Senior Advisor for Legal Policy at EdChoice, about the constitutional foundations and future of educational freedom in America. Hiner reflects on her distinguished career in law and public policy before examining the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have shaped the modern school choice movement. She discusses how Brown v. Board of Education's promise of equal educational opportunity influenced later efforts to expand parental choice and educational access. Hiner then explores the significance of Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, and Carson v. Makin, explaining how each expanded protections for families seeking religious and private educational options. She assesses the legal landscape following Carson, highlights key recent victories such as Loffman v. California Department of Education, and offers insights into the future of school choice litigation, educational tax credits, and parental rights nationwide. Finally, Hiner also examines current legal cases, including Hellman v. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, and they could mean for the future of school choice in Massachusetts.

In this special episode, recorded at the Neukom Center's Rule of Law Speaker Series, Judge J. Michael Luttig, former Fourth Circuit judge and ex-General Counsel of Boeing,  discusses a looming constitutional crises facing the United States. Drawing on Lincoln, Paine, and Churchill, Judge Luttig argues that the Trump administration's actions represent not the exploitation of constitutional vulnerabilities, but unconstitutional conduct that federal courts have repeatedly struck down. He expresses particular alarm over the Supreme Court's use of the shadow docket to stay lower court decisions without briefing, argument, or written reasoning — a practice he characterizes as a crisis within the Court itself. Judge Luttig also addresses the DOJ's institutional corruption, Congress's abdication of war powers and tariff authority, and the Supreme Court's sweeping immunity ruling in Trump v. United States. Throughout, he challenges law students to treat their professional oath as a solemn civic obligation in a moment of national testing. Links: Honorable J. Michael Luttig >>> Federal Judicial Center page Connect: Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast Website Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn Page Rich Ford >>>  Twitter/X Pam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School Page Stanford Law School >>> Twitter/X Stanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X (00:00) America at 250—A Nation Under Assault from Within (14:00) The Legal Profession as Guardian of the Constitution  (20:30) Unconstitutional by Design—The Trump Administration's Legal Record (28:00) The Corruption of the DOJ (36:00) Congress, the War Power, and the Collapse of Separation of Powers (42:30) The Supreme Court, the Shadow Docket, and Presidential Immunity  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Mea Culpa welcomes our old friend, Harry Litman, the former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Litman is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times and a professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. Harry can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC, and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast. You'd be smart to subscribe to the “Talking Feds” YouTube channel. New episodes are posted daily. But today Harry is here to give us the rundown on all things Trump indictment. He is especially interested in Judge Cannon and the damage she could potentially do to the prosecution's case. 

This show was never meant to see the light of day, yet here it is.

Michael Smerconish sits down with George Washington University law professor Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, author of "Your Data Will Be Used Against You: Policing in the Age of Self-Surveillance," for a timely conversation about privacy, policing, and the rise of AI-powered surveillance. From license plate readers and facial recognition to Tesla “hurry up mode” and automated school bus tickets, they explore how technology is reshaping law enforcement — and what Americans may be sacrificing in the name of safety. Where should society draw the line between public security and personal privacy? Original Air Date 05/18/26, The book was published on 17 May 2026. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

President Donald Trump dropped his lawsuit against the IRS over leaked tax returns just before the Justice Department announced a nearly $2 billion taxpayer-funded settlement fund tied to the case. Critics are raising constitutional concerns over the newly created “Anti-Weaponization Fund” and how it was established without a congressional vote. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed with the latest news from a leading Black-owned & controlled media company: https://aurn.com/newsletter Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

0:30 - CPS 12:35 - Electronic Monitoring 32:33 - Eric Church commencement address at UNC 50:20 - Remembering Rich from Indian Head Park 51:39 - Gordon Chang, author of Plan Red: China’s Project to Destroy America & The Great U.S.-China Tech War, previews Trump’s trip to China. Follow Gordon on X @GordonGChang 01:10:37 - Ted Snider, contributing editor for The American Conservative: Between Iran and a Hard Place. Ted is also a frequent contributor to Responsible Statecraft & Antiwar.com 01:35:41 - Noted economist Stephen Moore: When you’re dealing with an enemy like China you have to use every tool in your chest. Get more Steve @StephenMoore 01:48:18 - Theodore Dalrymple, retired physician and psychiatrist who worked in a general hospital and prison in England, shares details from his two newest books Agatha Christie and the Metaphysics of Murder – available 6/9 & Life at the Bottom: The Worldview that Makes the Underclass 25th Anniversary Edition – available now 02:05:58 - Josh Blackman, Centennial Chair of Constitutional Law at the South Texas College of Law Houston, weighs in on election maps and The Stunning Plan To Reverse The Supreme Court of VirginiaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this week's episode, host David Myers leads a discussion with Amanda Shanor, Sigal Ben-Porath, and Serena Mayeri about the legal and historical implications of the Trump administration's request for lists of Jewish students, faculty, and organizations at the University of Pennsylvania. The conversation situates the subpoena within broader federal investigations into alleged campus anti-Semitism following October 7, 2023, while arguing that the demand for names, personal contact information, and organizational affiliations raises profound constitutional concerns. The panelists contend that the request threatens First Amendment protections surrounding free association, religious identity, and academic freedom, particularly because it targets individuals based on protected forms of expression and affiliation.Serena Mayeri is the Arlin M. Adams Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and a Professor of History (by courtesy). Serena has many publications including her first book Reasoning from Race: Feminism, Law, and the Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2011) and her new book is Marital Privilege: Marriage, Inequality, and the Transformation of American Law (Yale University Press, 2025).Sigal Ben-Porath is the MRMJJ Presidential Professor at the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education. She also currently serves as the faculty director of the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) Paideia Program. Her areas of expertise include philosophy of education and political philosophy. She has published numerous books including Cancel Wars (2022) and Making Up Our Mind: What School Choice is Really About (2019).Amanda Shanor is an Associate Professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Amanda's research explores the changing meaning of the First Amendment and the forces that affect it; democratic theory, illiberalism, and equality; and the intersection of constitutional law and economic life. Amanda has published more than ten scholarly papers including “Greenwashing and the First Amendment” (Columbia Law Review 2021) and “

Virginia Democrats are reportedly considering a stunning political maneuver after the Virginia Supreme Court struck down their redistricting amendment in a 4-3 ruling. Todd breaks down the constitutional issues at the center of the case, why the court ruled the amendment process violated Virginia law, and the extraordinary proposal Democrats are allegedly floating to remove the entire state Supreme Court bench by lowering the mandatory retirement age for justices. Todd also compares what's happening in Virginia to recent redistricting battles in Indiana, Texas, and other states, explaining the constitutional authority legislatures possess and why consistency matters when evaluating these fights. This episode dives into political power, constitutional process, and the escalating cold civil war shaping America's future.

Virginia Democrats are reportedly considering a stunning political maneuver after the Virginia Supreme Court struck down their redistricting amendment in a 4-3 ruling. Todd breaks down the constitutional issues at the center of the case, why the court ruled the amendment process violated Virginia law, and the extraordinary proposal Democrats are allegedly floating to remove the entire state Supreme Court bench by lowering the mandatory retirement age for justices. Todd also compares what's happening in Virginia to recent redistricting battles in Indiana, Texas, and other states, explaining the constitutional authority legislatures possess and why consistency matters when evaluating these fights. This episode dives into political power, constitutional process, and the escalating cold civil war shaping America's future.

Recorded April 28th, 2026. As part of our ‘Behind the Headlines' series,this panel examines the Irish government's plans for an age-related social media ban amid growing momentum for similar measures internationally. Gathering legal, psychology and social research experts, we will look at all aspects of the proposed legislation, including age verification, and the rights and freedoms of under-16 age groups. The panel also discusses the implications of social media use on this group, including what constitutes problematic internet use, and its implications for public health in the context of children and young persons today. The discussion is chaired by Dr Róisín Á Costello, Assistant Professor of Law at Trinity College Dublin and Deputy Director of TriCON, Trinity Centre for Constitutional Law. Panellists: Dr TJ McIntyre, Associate Professor in Law at the School of Law, University College Dublin and Chairperson of Digital Rights Ireland. Dr Ruth Melia, Associate Professor in Clinical Psychology at the University of Limerick. Dr Gretta Mohan, Senior Research Officer in Economic Analysis at the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI). This discussion is held in partnership with DEMCONEX, The Jean Monnet Centre for Excellence on Freedom of Expression and Democratic Resilience in Europe's Digital Age. DEMCONEX is a Jean Monnet Centre for Excellence on Freedom of Expression and Democratic Resilience in Europe's Digital Age is funded by the European Union. The Centre will be hosted by the Law School and the Department of Politics at Trinity College Dublin from 2025-2028 and is focused on research, teaching and public engagement on the Centre's themes and on European studies. Behind the Headlines is supported by the John Pollard Foundation. Learn more at www.tcd.ie/triniylongroomhub

The Voting Rights Act, or VRA, is viewed as the most important piece of legislation advancing civil rights in the 1960s. Passed in 1965, it was intended to redress the dis-empowerment of African Americans whose voting rights had been restricted due to several states legislation, ranging from poll taxes to literacy tests and other restrictions on voting. Throughout the Roberts Court, the VRA has been restricted and its protections stripped away. In 2026, perhaps the last of these provisions have been overturned, in a decision in the case Louisiana v Callais. On todays show, we will explore this decision and the impact it has on drawing Congressional districts, in an era of particularly aggressive gerrymandering. [ dur: 58mins. ] Eric J. Segall, Ashe Family Chair Professor of Law and the Executive Director of Emmet J. Bondurant Center for Constitutional Law, Practice and Democracy at Georgia State University. He is the author of Originalism as Faith and Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court Is Not a Court and Its Justices Are Not Judges. Seth C. McKee is a Professor of Political Science at Oklahoma State University. He is the author of The Dynamics of Southern Politics: Causes and Consequences and coauthor of Rural Republican Realignment in the Modern South: The Untold Story with MV Hood. Christian Grose is a Professor of Political Science & Public Policy and the Academic Director of the USC Schwarzenegger Institute for State and Global Policy at the University of Southern California. He is the author of Independent Redistricting Commissions Increase Voter Perceptions of Fairness and co-author of Local Election Administrators in the United States: The Frontline of Democracy. This program is produced by Doug Becker, Ankine Aghassian, Maria Armoudian, Anna Lapin and Sudd Dongre. Politics and Activism, Elections, Redistricting, Voting Rights, Congress, Courts, Democrats, Republicans

Bongani Bingwa speaks to Pierre de Vos, Constitutional Law Expert, about the renewed legal and political scrutiny surrounding the Phala Phala saga following recent court developments. They unpack whether the original Section 89 panel report can be reviewed, what obligations now fall on Parliament and the Speaker, and how the next steps could shape accountability, constitutional process, and political tensions at the highest level of government. 702 Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa is broadcast on 702, a Johannesburg based talk radio station. Bongani makes sense of the news, interviews the key newsmakers of the day, and holds those in power to account on your behalf. The team bring you all you need to know to start your day Thank you for listening to a podcast from 702 Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 06:00 and 09:00 (SA Time) to Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa broadcast on 702: https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/36edSLV or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/zEcM35T Subscribe to the 702 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/@radio7See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mea Culpa welcomes our old friend, Harry Litman, the former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Litman is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times and a professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. Harry can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC, and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast. You'd be smart to subscribe to the “Talking Feds” brand new YouTube channel. New episodes are posted daily. But today Harry is here to give us the rundown on all the legal battles currently raging in Washington. 

What authority do military tribunals have—and where are the legal boundaries when civilians are involved? In this compelling and thought-provoking episode, Lt. Eric Shine, USCG, explores the controversial and complex topic of U.S. Coast Guard military tribunals involving U.S. civilians. Drawing from military and legal perspectives, Lt. Shine discusses the structure and purpose of military tribunals, the historical contexts in which they have been used, and the constitutional questions that arise when civilian rights intersect with military authority. He examines the balance between national security, maritime law, and civil liberties. This episode invites listeners to consider important legal and ethical questions. Under what circumstances can military tribunals apply to civilians? How do constitutional protections operate in times of crisis or national security concerns? And what role does public understanding play in maintaining accountability and transparency? Join us for a serious and informative conversation that examines law, authority, and civil rights—where legal frameworks meet real-world concerns, and where informed discussion is essential to understanding the broader implications.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-x-zone-radio-tv-show--1078348/support.Please note that all XZBN radio and/or television shows are Copyright © REL-MAR McConnell Meda Company, Niagara, Ontario, Canada – www.rel-mar.com. For more Episodes of this show and all shows produced, broadcasted and syndicated from REL-MAR McConell Media Company and The 'X' Zone Broadcast Network and the 'X' Zone TV Channell, visit www.xzbn.net. For programming, distribution, and syndication inquiries, email programming@xzbn.net.We are proud to announce the we have launched TWATNews.com, launched in August 2025.TWATNews.com is an independent online news platform dedicated to uncovering the truth about Donald Trump and his ongoing influence in politics, business, and society. Unlike mainstream outlets that often sanitize, soften, or ignore stories that challenge Trump and his allies, TWATNews digs deeper to deliver hard-hitting articles, investigative features, and sharp commentary that mainstream media won't touch.These are stories and articles that you will not read anywhere else.Our mission is simple: to expose corruption, lies, and authoritarian tendencies while giving voice to the perspectives and evidence that are often marginalized or buried by corporate-controlled media

This week we cover a wide range of pressing issues including press freedom, recent Supreme Court decisions, gerrymandering, the state of political violence, and the Iran-U.S. conflict. Brian, Mark, and Nolan analyze the implications of these developments on democracy, civil rights, and international relations. Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/JATQPodcast Follow us on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/jatqpodcast.bsky.social Intragram: https://www.instagram.com/jatqpodcast This Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon supporters here: https://www.patreon.com/justaskthequestionpodcast Purchase Brian's book "Free The Press"  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

We live in a moment when billionaires are almost universally cast as a problem: A threat to democracy. A symptom of everything wrong with modern capitalism. In his new book Why Democracy Needs the Rich John McGinnis argues that the wealthy are not the enemies of democracy. They are, in fact, among its most important defenders. Attacking them may do far more democratic damage than we think. At what point does private wealth become not a democratic asset but a democratic threat? And what can technology, AI, wealth and power do to democracy in the future? These are among the questions Mathilde Fasting discusses with her guest, John O. McGinnis, Professor of Constitutional Law at Northwestern University.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Tudor Dixon Podcast, Tudor sits down with bestselling author, Federalist editor-in-chief, and Fox News contributor Mollie Hemingway to discuss her new book Alito: The Justice Who Reshaped the Supreme Court and Restored the Constitution. Mollie takes listeners behind the scenes of the Supreme Court, revealing the personal story of Justice Samuel Alito, the constitutional principles behind the Dobbs decision, the political pressure facing the Court, and how redistricting battles could reshape the 2026 midterms. Plus, a candid conversation on media bias, political violence, and the future of constitutional originalism.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On Episode 476 of The Andrew Parker Show, Andrew is joined by renowned constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz for a candid and wide-ranging discussion at a pivotal moment in American politics.Dershowitz—who has spent decades as a committed Democrat—explains why he is now publicly aligning with the Republican Party, arguing that the Democratic Party has shifted away from its historical principles. The conversation dives deep into the concept of a “big tent” political party, the role of moral clarity in leadership, and what Dershowitz views as a growing divide over Israel, foreign policy, and fundamental democratic values.Andrew and Dershowitz also examine:The changing political landscape within the Democratic PartyU.S.–Israel relations and why they remain strategically criticalThe implications of recent Senate votes impacting IsraelRising tensions in the Middle East, including the Iran conflictThe broader consequences for American leadership and global stabilityThis episode is direct, unfiltered, and intellectually charged—bringing together legal insight, political analysis, and decades of firsthand experience at the highest levels.If you care about the future of American politics, foreign policy, and the principles that guide both, this is a conversation you will not want to miss.Support the showThe Andrew Parker Show - Politics, Israel & The Law.  Follow us on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube and X. Subscribe to our email list at www.theandrewparkershow.comCopyright © 2026 The Andrew Parker Show - All Rights Reserved. 

The Supreme Court has ruled in Louisiana v. Callais, delivering a major decision on redistricting and the role of race in drawing congressional maps. Todd Huff breaks down what the Court actually said, why the media narrative is misleading, and how this ruling impacts the future of the Voting Rights Act. Plus, a look at how states like Florida are taking decisive action while others—like Indiana—hesitate. From constitutional principles to political strategy, this episode connects the legal, cultural, and electoral implications shaping America today. If you want clarity beyond the headlines, this is a must-listen.

The Supreme Court has ruled in Louisiana v. Callais, delivering a major decision on redistricting and the role of race in drawing congressional maps. Todd Huff breaks down what the Court actually said, why the media narrative is misleading, and how this ruling impacts the future of the Voting Rights Act. Plus, a look at how states like Florida are taking decisive action while others—like Indiana—hesitate. From constitutional principles to political strategy, this episode connects the legal, cultural, and electoral implications shaping America today. If you want clarity beyond the headlines, this is a must-listen.

The law says “equal protection,” but Wendy Murphy argues the U.S. legal system still keeps women on the outside of that promise and the proof is in how gender-based violence gets handled. From rape statutes that require force to charging practices that slow-walk sexual assault complaints, we trace how constitutional doctrine, policing discretion, and courtroom culture combine to under-protect women and girls and to re-victimize survivors who try to seek justice. Wendy, an attorney and former child abuse and sex crimes prosecutor, breaks down the difference between equity and equality in plain language: equality is the constitutional floor that controls how government must treat people, while equity is impossible to achieve on top of a broken baseline. She explains how the legacy of coverture and the Supreme Court's approach after Reed v. Reed produced what she calls “unequal equal rights,” leaving room for laws to be enforced differently and worse when the victim is female. We also dig into stark examples: rape laws that treat bodily autonomy as less protected than property, hate crime statutes that often exclude sex, and evidence rules and courtroom orders that burden victims in ways other crime victims never face. From there we shift to what can actually change. Wendy walks us through the Equal Rights Amendment's long fight, why litigation still matters, and why education is a missing catalyst for constitutional reform. We also talk about Title IX enforcement in schools and why treating sex-based civil rights as second-class shapes girls' expectations of safety for life. If you care about criminal justice reform, victims' rights, constitutional law, or ending violence against women, this conversation gives you a clearer map of the problem and a strategy for action. Check out Wendy's related article, "Unequal Protection of the Laws for Women is ConstitutionalTerrorism, So How Come Nobody Knows About It?": https://digitalcommons.onu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1357&context=onu_law_review

In this episode Jeff tears apart the latest assassination attempt against Donald Trump and the staggering security failures that allowed it to happen. From an armed suspect getting dangerously close to the president to the laughable claims that the system “worked” Jeff explains why this was a complete disgrace and why the response afterward was even worse. Jeff then breaks down the war with Iran and how what started with clear objectives quickly unraveled. Bad advice, unrealistic expectations and a fundamental misunderstanding of the enemy have led to a situation where Iran is now dictating terms. Trump's focus on markets and public perception over actual victory has turned a position of strength into an avoidable mess. The bigger problem is what this moment represents. Jeff argues this was likely the last real chance to cripple the world's leading terror regime and instead the United States blinked. The result is a stronger more emboldened enemy and a future that looks far more dangerous than it needed to be. Receive new episodes directly in your inbox: https://beyondthelegallimit.com/subscribe

Mea Culpa welcomes back our old friend, Harry Litman, the former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Litman is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times and a professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. Harry can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC, and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast. Today Harry is here to give us the rundown on all the legal battles currently raging in Washington. Micheal and Harry dig into the Manhattan DA investigation, the State of the Union, Jack Smith, and the special counsel.

A Virginia judge has ruled the state's redistricting referendum unconstitutional—just one day after voters approved it. What went wrong? In this episode, Todd breaks down the legal flaws, misleading ballot language, and the broader implications for election integrity and constitutional governance. He examines claims of judicial activism, the role of state legislatures, and why this case could head to the Virginia Supreme Court. Todd also unpacks how gerrymandering really works—and why the narrative pushed by the left doesn't hold up under scrutiny. If you want clarity on redistricting, constitutional law, and political strategy, this is a must-listen.

A Virginia judge has ruled the state's redistricting referendum unconstitutional—just one day after voters approved it. What went wrong? In this episode, Todd breaks down the legal flaws, misleading ballot language, and the broader implications for election integrity and constitutional governance. He examines claims of judicial activism, the role of state legislatures, and why this case could head to the Virginia Supreme Court. Todd also unpacks how gerrymandering really works—and why the narrative pushed by the left doesn't hold up under scrutiny. If you want clarity on redistricting, constitutional law, and political strategy, this is a must-listen.

A Virginia judge has blocked a voter-approved redistricting measure, ruling it unconstitutional just one day after voters passed it. The decision sets up a legal battle as state officials appeal and the future of congressional maps hangs in the balance. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed with the latest news from a leading Black-owned & controlled media company: https://aurn.com/newsletter Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Where's the outrage now? As Virginia moves forward with redistricting through a controversial referendum, the silence from critics who once condemned similar efforts is deafening. Todd Huff breaks down the political, legal, and constitutional implications of Virginia's move—and contrasts it with Indiana's missed opportunity. From claims of “fairness” on the ballot to potential legal challenges that could unravel the entire process, this episode exposes the double standards and strategic realities shaping control of the House. If you want to understand how redistricting really works—and why it matters more than ever heading into the next election cycle—this is a must-listen.

Where's the outrage now? As Virginia moves forward with redistricting through a controversial referendum, the silence from critics who once condemned similar efforts is deafening. Todd Huff breaks down the political, legal, and constitutional implications of Virginia's move—and contrasts it with Indiana's missed opportunity. From claims of “fairness” on the ballot to potential legal challenges that could unravel the entire process, this episode exposes the double standards and strategic realities shaping control of the House. If you want to understand how redistricting really works—and why it matters more than ever heading into the next election cycle—this is a must-listen.

Premier Eby announces the NDP will not be introducing legislation to amend DRIPA this legislative session Guest host Robin Gills talks to Dwight Newman, Professor, Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Rights, Communities, and Constitutional Law, University of Saskatchewan Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The 14th Amendment to the Constitution says: “all persons born are naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” But on his first day back in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order that changed that understanding. According to the President's executive order, going forward, the only people who will be U.S. citizens at birth are people who are born in the United States to parents who are citizens, at least one of whom is a citizen, or at least one of the parents is a legal permanent resident of the United States. And what does all of this mean for Native Americans?  In this episode, Greg Ablavsky, a Stanford Law professor and scholar of federal Indian law, joins Pam Karlan to discuss President Trump's challenge to birthright citizenship--a case now at the Supreme Court. The discussion centers on the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause and, in particular, the meaning of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Ablavsky explains why federal Indian law has become part of that debate. He traces the distinctive legal status of Native nations within the United States, the historical exception for members of tribal nations, and the way that history appears in seminal cases such as Elk v. Wilkins.  The conversation also looks at the relationship between Elk and U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the 1898 case that recognized birthright citizenship for a child born in the United States to Chinese parents. Along the way, Karlan and Ablavsky break down why history matters to the government's current effort to argue for new limits on birthright citizenship--and more. Links: Gregory Ablavsky >>> Stanford Law page Federal Ground: Governing Property and Violence in the First U.S. Territories >>> Stanford Law page Connect: Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast Website Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn Page Rich Ford >>>  Twitter/X Pam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School Page Stanford Law School >>> Twitter/X Stanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X (00:00:00) Who qualifies as a U.S. citizen at birth? (00:03:54) The Origins of the 14th Amendment  (00:05:58) "Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof" (00:11:42) Citizenship at the Supreme Court (00:17:03) Native Americans, the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act, and the Presidency (00:18:49) The Supreme Court Oral Argument in Trump v. CASA (Barbara) — Analogies, Originalism, and the Native American (00:28:31) Practical Chaos, Hard Cases and What the Court Should Do Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome to My Limited View with Sergio Novoa. How many times have you heard someone say,
“That's a violation of my First Amendment rights!” Usually right after getting banned from a Facebook group. Or muted at Thanksgiving. Or fired for tweeting something wild at 2 a.m. In this episode, we're breaking down what free speech actually means, what it doesn't mean, and whether you really support it…Or just support it when it agrees with you. Before you shout “That's unconstitutional!” again…You might want to listen. Intro Opening Sponsor ad Freedom of Speech Freedom of the Press Freedom of Assembly Freedom of Religion In the News Sponsor ad Closing Resources & Research:  This episode references the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the following U.S. Supreme Court decisions:Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)NAACP v. Alabama (1958)Engel v. Vitale (1962)Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah (1993)Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022) Additional research and analysis from: Cornell Legal Information Institute National Constitution Center First Amendment Encyclopedia Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism Pew Charitable Trusts Reporting from Reuters and The Guardian.

On March 24, 2026, Professor John O. McGinnis joined William & Mary Law School's Federalist Society to present a lecture on “Why Democracy Needs the Rich: The Hidden Benefits of Wealth in a Free Society.” The event was co-sponsored by the Institute of Bill of Rights Law and the Center for the Study of Law and Markets. Professor McGinnis is the George C. Dix Professor in Constitutional Law at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law.

On today's show, Dave Cohen speaks with Stephen Griffin, Professor of Constitutional Law at Tulane Law School, about what history and the Constitution tell us about a president's ability to wage war. Also, Keith Savoy, Deputy Director of NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility, joins the show to talk about Michoud's heavy involvement in the production of the rocket used in the Artemis II mission. Then, Jillian Scudder, Associate Professor of Physics & Astronomy at Oberlin College, talks about what the future holds for the space program after the successful Artemis II mission. Finally, Dave Cohen opens the phone lines, and the WWL listeners call in to share their thoughts on the war of words between President Trump and Pope Leo.

This hour, Dave Cohen speaks with Stephen Griffin, Professor of Constitutional Law at Tulane Law School, about what history and the Constitution tell us about a president's ability to wage war.

On today's show, Dave Cohen speaks with Stephen Griffin, Professor of Constitutional Law at Tulane Law School, about what history and the Constitution tell us about a president's ability to wage war. Alo, Keith Savoy, Deputy Director of NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility, joins the show to talk about Michoud's heavy involvement in the production of the rocket used in the Artemis II mission. Then, Dave Cohen opens the phone lines, and the WWL listeners call in to share their thoughts on the war of words between President Trump and Pope Leo.

With Democrats vowing to challenge President Trump's war powers again, what do history and the Constitution tell us about a president's ability to wage war? Stephen Griffin, Professor of Constitutional Law at Tulane Law School, joins Dave Cohen to talk about it.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen at 6 AM on this crisp April 13th, 2026, watching the legal world swirl around President Donald Trump like a storm over Mar-a-Lago. But here we are, listeners, with the U.S. Supreme Court diving headfirst into his bold Executive Order 14160, challenging the very heart of birthright citizenship. According to Rutgers Law School's analysis of key issues to watch in 2026, this order seeks to redefine who qualifies for U.S. citizenship by birth, potentially clashing with the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act. Oral arguments heated up just days ago on April 1st, as reported in coverage from the Maine Supreme Judicial Court proceedings, where lawyers like Peter J. Brann for the Senate President and David M. Kallin for the League of Women Voters of Maine squared off against Timothy C. Woodcock for the Republican National Committee. The stakes? A doctrinal earthquake that could reshape immigration law for generations.Just last week, on April 7th, G37 Chambers' International Legal News roundup from March 30 to April 3 highlighted the White House defending Trump, stating he was making the entire Middle East region safer amid foreign policy firestorms. But back home, the courts are buzzing. Picture this: the Supreme Court also just rejected Colorado's ban on conversion therapy in a March 31st update noted by Rutgers Law professors, a win for broader civil rights debates that echo Trump's administration priorities on limiting judicial overreach.Meanwhile, in a twist tying sanctions to legal battles, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, issued then revoked a license for paying defense attorneys in the Southern District of New York case against former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores de Maduro, per G37 Chambers. They're on the SDN List, facing narcotics and firearm charges after a dramatic U.S. Army Operation Southern Spear rendition. Their lawyers argue it violates Sixth Amendment rights to counsel and Fifth Amendment due process—echoes of constitutional fights Trump knows all too well from his own past tussles.And don't sleep on Trump v. CASA, Inc., where the Supreme Court in June ruled that universal injunctive relief likely exceeds federal courts' equitable authority, as detailed in Goodwin's emerging issues report for 2026. This curbs sweeping injunctions, handing a victory to executive actions like Trump's. With the D.C. Circuit eyeing CFPB overhauls under acting director Russell Vought, who wants to slash 88% of staff, these rulings signal a federal retrenchment aligning with Trump's deregulatory push.As the sun rises over Washington, D.C., these battles paint Trump as the epicenter of 2026's legal drama—citizenship clashes, sanction skirmishes, and court curbs on power. It's a high-wire act, listeners, blending policy wins with constitutional showdowns.Thanks for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

In this first episode of our series, “Democracy, Under Construction,” Sherrilyn Ifill joins host Alex Lovit to discuss the Second Founding, when the Reconstruction Amendments—and in particular the 14th Amendment—fundamentally changed American rights and who was defined as American. Birthright citizenship, protections from abuses by state governments, and equality before the law all entered the Constitution following the ratification of the 14th Amendment in 1868. The “Democracy, Under Construction” series commemorates America's 250th anniversary by focusing on the moments when our country became a more inclusive democracy and celebrating the historical figures who pushed the country to live up to its ideals. Sherrilyn Ifill is among the most accomplished civil rights lawyers in the United States. She is the Vernon Jordan Distinguished Professor in Civil Rights at Howard University School of Law and the founding director of the 14th Amendment Center for Law and Democracy. She previously served as the president and director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Supreme Court hears arguments on President Trump's effort to challenge birthright citizenship, and early signals suggest skepticism from several justices. Todd Huff breaks down what's really at stake, focusing on the 14th Amendment's “subject to the jurisdiction” clause and whether it applies to children of illegal immigrants. Is this a long-overdue correction—or a constitutional overreach? Todd explores the legal arguments, historical context, and common-sense implications of the case, while highlighting how this issue connects to broader immigration policy and national sovereignty. If you want clarity on one of the most important constitutional debates happening today, this is a must-listen episode.

DEI is being dismantled, what comes next for those interested in working toward equality? Kenji Yoshino is Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law at the NYU School of Law and the faculty director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging. He joins host Krys Boyd to discuss why, though counterintuitive, opening programs up to all people does help minority groups, how the language of DEI backfired and how to build a “multicultural meritocracy.” His book, written with David Glasgow, is “How Equality Wins: A New Vision for an Inclusive America.” Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

The Roberts Court has recently used its docket to indulge in growing antidemocratic tendencies, collecting power for itself as it shuts the courthouse doors on those seeking to vindicate their constitutional rights and uphold checks and balances.  David Sloss joins Lindsay Langholz to discuss his new book, People v. The Court: The Next Revolution in Constitutional Law, and how power might be rebalanced through a change in judicial review standards.Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.orgHost: Lindsay Langholz, Vice President of Policy and ProgramGuest: David Sloss, John A. and Elizabeth H. Sutro Professor of Law, Santa Clara University School of LawLink: People v. The Court: The Next Revolution in Constitutional Law, by David SlossLink: The Roberts Court's Assault on Democracy, by Judge Lynn Adelman Visit the Podcast Website: Broken Law PodcastEmail the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.orgFollow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Bluesky | LinkedIn | YouTube-----------------Broken Law: About the law, who it serves, and who it doesn't.-----------------Production House: Flint Stone MediaCopyright of American Constitution Society 2025.

Mea Culpa is thrilled to present Part 2 of our first-ever LIVE SHOW recorded at the El Rey Theatre on November 1st, 2022. With comedian actress and activist Kathy Griffin. Griffin is a two-time Emmy and Grammy winner who's been inducted into the Guinness Book of World Records for writing and starring in an unprecedented 23 televised stand-up specials!!! Griffin has been twice on the New York Times best-seller list and performed for sold-out crowds around the globe. Also joining Michael is Harry Litman, the former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Litman is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times and a professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. Harry can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC, and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast. To round out our top-shelf lineup is the former national media director for the Oath Keepers Jason Van Tatenhove. Van Tatenhove testified before the January 6th Committee and is the author of the upcoming book, “The Perils of Extremism …How I Left the Oath Keepers and Why We Should be Concerned about a Future Civil War”. Van Tatenhove has been instrumental in helping the country understand more about the inner workings of extremist para-military groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys and he's currently hosting his own podcast and writing weekly articles for the Colorado Switchblade. This panel of excellent guests discusses everything from being canceled to what to expect from the midterms. This special episode is hilarious and off the cuff. Enjoy!

Mea Culpa is thrilled to present Part 1 of our first-ever LIVE SHOW recorded at the El Rey Theatre on November 1st, 2022. With comedian actress and activist Kathy Griffin. Griffin is a two-time Emmy and Grammy winner who's been inducted into the Guinness Book of World Records for writing and starring in an unprecedented 23 televised stand-up specials!!! Griffin has been twice on the New York Times best-seller list and performed for sold-out crowds around the globe. Also joining Michael is Harry Litman, the former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Litman is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times and a professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. Harry can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC, and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast. To round out our top-shelf lineup is the former national media director for the Oath Keepers Jason Van Tatenhove. Van Tatenhove testified before the January 6th Committee and is the author of the upcoming book, “The Perils of Extremism …How I Left the Oath Keepers and Why We Should be Concerned about a Future Civil War”. Van Tatenhove has been instrumental in helping the country understand more about the inner workings of extremist para-military groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys and he's currently hosting his own podcast and writing weekly articles for the Colorado Switchblade. This panel of excellent guests discusses everything from being canceled to what to expect from the midterms. This special episode is hilarious and off the cuff. Enjoy!

Mea Culpa welcomes our old friend Harry Litman. Litman was a former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General and is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times Opinion Page and professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. He can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast and YouTube Channel. He's also a member of the Constantine Cannon Whistleblower Team find them at @CCWhistleblower. Michael and Harry dig deep into all of Trump's legal matters.

Mea Culpa welcomes back our good friend Harry Litman. Harry was a former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General and is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times Opinion Page and professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. He can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC, and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast, a must-listen for its sharp analysis of the corruption, crimes, and moral failures of the Trump era and beyond. Michael and Harry dig deep into the legalities of January 6th.