Podcasts about courts

Plea bargaining shapes most criminal cases, but how does it impact justice, sentencing, and the rights of defendants?Is Plea Bargaining Broken — or the Only Thing Saving the Courts?Plea bargaining dominates the U.S. criminal justice system, but is it a necessary tool or a practice undermining justice? In this eye-opening conversation, host Steve Palmer sits down with veteran litigator Paul Scarsella, who brings the rare dual perspective of former prosecutor and current defense counsel. Together, they peel back the layers of how plea deals really work. And why every decision, from charging to negotiation, is shaped by politics, human imperfection, and the quirks of local power.In this episode, you'll learn:How politics and individual bias affect charging decisions, negotiations, and outcomes for defendantsWhy plea deals often start with higher charges. And how that impacts a defendant's ability to exercise their right to trialThe real factors that sway plea bargaining: jurisdiction, the assigned judge, and prosecutors' motivesHow legislative changes, like mandatory minimums and sentencing guidelines, can backfire and drive case outcomesWhen plea bargains make sense. And where they risk coercing innocent people to plead guiltyTakeaways:The right to a jury trial exists in theory, but risk and charging tactics often leave defendants with little practical choiceJudicial discretion and the “luck of the draw” create wide outcome disparities across counties and judgesSeparation of powers—legislative, executive (prosecution), and judicial—both protect and complicate the systemPolitics, from the local to federal level, steer prosecution priorities and sentencing lawsUltimately, plea bargaining is a byproduct of a system built by and for humans. It's flawed, but with checks and balances5 Frequently Asked Questions about Plea Bargaining1. What is plea bargaining, and why is it so common in criminal cases?Plea bargaining is the process where a defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge (or receives a reduced sentence) to avoid trial. It's common because the volume of cases would overwhelm courts if every case went to trial 25:29.2. How do politics influence plea bargaining and prosecution decisions?Politics affect charging and negotiation, as prosecutors are often elected officials aiming to appear tough on crime, which impacts how cases are handled and settled 08:01.3. Do all defendants really have a practical choice to go to trial?Not always. Overcharging or risk of severe mandatory sentences can make the risk of trial too high, so even innocent defendants might feel pressured to accept a plea 30:33.4. How do local differences between judges and counties affect case outcomes?Outcomes vary greatly based on the county, the prosecutor's policies, and the assigned judge. There's one set of laws, but they're applied in 88 different ways in Ohio 13:19.5. Is plea bargaining inherently unfair or is it necessary?The episode argues it's complicated: plea bargaining addresses practical needs but can be abused due to overcharging and mandatory minimums. Its fairness depends on how prosecutors and judges wield their discretion 01:03:08.Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At LawMentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

The Jerusalem District Court has placed a temporary injunction preventing the transfer of crocodiles to the Ketziot Prison as part of a campaign spearheaded by National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir to place the large reptiles in moats surrounding the detention facility. A final decision on the matter will be made when the state responds to the petition by Let the Animals Live, an Israeli animal rights group that protested the move. KAN's Mark Weiss spoke with attorney Amnon Keren, who filed the petition, together with Let the Animals Live. (Photo:Flash90)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

⚖️ What Factors Determine Who Gets Custody of a Child? | Los Angeles Divorce How do California courts decide who gets child custody after a divorce? In Los Angeles custody cases, judges focus on one guiding principle: the child's best interests. Custody is not automatically awarded to one parent. Instead, courts evaluate the unique circumstances of each family when determining legal and physical custody arrangements. This video explains the factors California courts commonly consider and why every custody case is evaluated individually.

News and Updates: Windows 12: Not Yet: Microsoft has no plans to release Windows 12 in 2026, instead continuing annual updates to Windows 11 to avoid triggering another end-of-support mess like Windows 10's. Windows 12 likely won't require a subscription or higher hardware specs, keeping 8GB RAM support and focusing on agentic AI features that work across all Windows 11 PCs. Instagram Bans Creepy Glasses Content: IG chief Adam Mosseri says Instagram will remove videos filmed with Meta smart glasses that harass strangers, following viral "pickup line" videos targeting women in public. NY Courts Ban Smart Glasses: New York's court system banned smart glasses across all 1,240+ state courthouses starting July 20, citing concerns over secret recording of proceedings, witnesses, and jurors. ASU Launches Influencer Degree: Arizona State University now offers a Bachelor's in Content Creation, training students in video production, branding, and social media strategy for careers in digital influencing and marketing. Apple Launches Device Leasing: Apple's new "Apple Upgrade" program, backed by Klarna, lets customers lease iPhones, iPads, Macs, and Apple Watches monthly instead of buying outright, with plans from $12–$83/month.

Pippa Hudson speaks to Kirstie Haslam, a partner at DSC Attorneys what legal recourse there is for parents if a school fails to take action against bullies. Lunch with Pippa Hudson is CapeTalk’s mid-afternoon show. This 2-hour respite from hard news encourages the audience to take the time to explore, taste, read and reflect. The show - presented by former journalist, baker and water sports enthusiast Pippa Hudson - is unashamedly lifestyle driven. Popular features include a daily profile interview #OnTheCouch at 1:10pm. Consumer issues are in the spotlight every Wednesday while the team also unpacks all things related to health, wealth & the environment. Thank you for listening to a podcast from Lunch with Pippa Hudson Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays between 13:00 and 15:00 (SA Time) to Lunch with Pippa Hudson broadcast on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/MdSlWEs or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/fDJWe69 Subscribe to the CapeTalk Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/sbvVZD5 Follow us on social media: 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/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this week's podcast, Cyber Daily's Daniel Croft and David Hollingworth argue for sovereign Australian AI, catch up with the Origin Energy data breach, uncover a Court Services Victoria hack, and ponder the efficacy of taking a foreign chat platform to court over terror content. Should Aussie banks have access to Australian Taxation Office data to stop fraud? That's how the podcast kicks off, alongside the revelation that fraudsters are using AI to fake documents to secure massive bank loans. For Hollingworth and Croft, the answer is a resounding yes, which is also the case when it comes to sovereign AI capability, as Australian company Maincode brings its own coding agent online. This week, Origin Energy revealed the extent of its recent data breach, while Court Services Victoria disclosed it had fallen victim to prolific hacker 2019. It's been a torrid time for data security in Australia, with even an insider threat rearing its head in a data breach at NSW Health. Finally, the pair discuss whether or not eSafety can effectively sue chat platform Telegram over pro-terror content, while the Australian Communications and Media Authority said it is suing Optus over its Triple Zero failures last year. Just another week in cyber security. Enjoy, The Cyber Uncut team

The closely watched trial of Alan Jones is now underway with the veteran broadcaster accused of sexual assault.He dies all the charges and it's a judge alone trial, with evidence now being heard about alleged offences over a 17 year period.How did the once powerful media figure end up in court?

The contrast is the whole story. Trump had repeatedly claimed he possessed photos and video of a 350-foot gash being cut into the pool, and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum echoed that proof existed. Yet the dismissal filing attributes the damage to a defective installation that began failing almost immediately, and Hawk argues no criminal conduct occurred at all. He walks through why a prosecutor should never hold a national press conference without personally reviewing the evidence first. Hawk connects it to a broader pattern: DC grand juries declining to indict in several high-profile matters, other indictments dismissed over alleged grand jury misconduct, and federal judges increasingly wary of DOJ representations. He argues the reflecting pool collapse, like the stumbles around the Comey and James cases, reflects a Justice Department pursuing targets without the evidence to back the charges, and predicts Pirro's standing is slipping. 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

Long before the Supreme Court handed down the landmark Obergefell ruling on equal marriage in 2015, activists were canvassing door-to-door, courting any lawmaker who would listen, and losing at the local level—a lot. Their scrappy determination helped convince family members, neighbors and eventually the rest of the country that the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality applied to same-sex couples. In Episode 3 of By the People, equal marriage campaign architect Marc Solomon joins Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern to trace the movement's "quixotic" beginnings in 2001. As this series continues to explore how ordinary Americans—not just nine justices—can interpret and enforce the Constitution, the campaign for equal marriage offers examples and tools that dedicated citizens can use to make constitutional meaning.The episode also confronts an uncomfortable question: If popular pressure can produce a ruling you love, like Obergefell, it can produce one you might not, like the court's decision to enshrine an individual right to bear arms in 2008's D.C. v. Heller. Dahlia and Mark discuss what happens when popular constitutionalism is retrofitted as originalism, and why no constitutional win, no matter how popular, is ever truly permanent.By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Long before the Supreme Court handed down the landmark Obergefell ruling on equal marriage in 2015, activists were canvassing door-to-door, courting any lawmaker who would listen, and losing at the local level—a lot. Their scrappy determination helped convince family members, neighbors and eventually the rest of the country that the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality applied to same-sex couples. In Episode 3 of By the People, equal marriage campaign architect Marc Solomon joins Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern to trace the movement's "quixotic" beginnings in 2001. As this series continues to explore how ordinary Americans—not just nine justices—can interpret and enforce the Constitution, the campaign for equal marriage offers examples and tools that dedicated citizens can use to make constitutional meaning.The episode also confronts an uncomfortable question: If popular pressure can produce a ruling you love, like Obergefell, it can produce one you might not, like the court's decision to enshrine an individual right to bear arms in 2008's D.C. v. Heller. Dahlia and Mark discuss what happens when popular constitutionalism is retrofitted as originalism, and why no constitutional win, no matter how popular, is ever truly permanent.By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Presented by Farm Bureau, Maroon & Company, and EyeCare Professionals - Friday proved to be quite the day in college sports. Courts in Colorado and Tennessee dealt the NCAA a couple more setbacks, while in Washington, the Protect College Sports Act revives a pulse.

The Human Equation with Joe Pangaro – Congress may ultimately need to seek judicial review of the autopen pardons. Courts have the authority to determine whether a pardon was validly issued, whether the president had the required mental capacity, and whether staff exceeded their constitutional role. If a court finds the pardons invalid, Dr. Fauci and others could be compelled to...

This Day in Legal History: America's First PatentOn July 31, 1790, the United States issued its first patent under the newly enacted Patent Act of 1790. The patent was granted to Samuel Hopkins of Vermont for an improved method of producing potash and pearl ash, chemicals widely used in fertilizer, soapmaking, and glass production. President George Washington, Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, and Attorney General Edmund Randolph personally signed the patent—a reminder that, in the nation's earliest years, the federal government itself directly evaluated patent applications.The Patent Act of 1790 was one of Congress's first major efforts to implement the Constitution. Article I, Section 8 authorizes Congress to “promote the progress of science and useful arts” by granting inventors exclusive rights to their discoveries for limited periods. Rather than viewing patents as natural rights, the Framers saw them as legal incentives designed to encourage innovation while ultimately benefiting the public.The original patent system was remarkably small. A board consisting of Jefferson, Randolph, and Secretary of War Henry Knox decided whether an invention was “sufficiently useful and important” to merit protection. As the country industrialized, that system quickly became overwhelmed, leading Congress to create a more formal Patent Office in 1836 with professional examiners and standardized procedures.The first patent issued on this day marked the beginning of what has become one of the world's most influential intellectual property systems. Today, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office grants hundreds of thousands of patents each year, and patent law continues to shape industries ranging from pharmaceuticals and biotechnology to software and artificial intelligence.President Donald Trump is pressing Senate Republicans to confirm acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, whose nomination has stalled because of a dispute over a proposed $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund. Republican Senators John Cornyn and Thom Tillis have withheld their support while demanding written assurances that the Justice Department will not establish the program. The fund emerged from a proposed settlement of Trump's $10 billion lawsuit accusing the Internal Revenue Service of improperly handling his tax records. Critics contend that the program could use taxpayer money to compensate Trump supporters who claim they were unfairly targeted by federal authorities, including people investigated or prosecuted in connection with the January 6 Capitol attack. Trump defended the proposal by arguing that victims of government misconduct deserve compensation and maintained that he would not personally benefit from it. Cornyn and Tillis have also objected to a separate provision that could shield Trump and certain associates from future IRS audits. Blanche reportedly met with the senators as the Justice Department attempted to resolve the disagreement. Even without confirmation, Blanche may be able to remain acting attorney general while his nomination is pending, provided that Trump does not formally withdraw it and the Senate does not reject it.Trump defends ‘anti-weaponization' fund as Blanche nomination stalls | ReutersNew York Attorney General Letitia James has sued prediction-market operator Kalshi, alleging that the company is offering illegal gambling without a state license. Kalshi allows customers to trade contracts tied to the outcomes of sporting events, elections, television programs, and other future events. New York argues that these transactions function as wagers because customers risk money on outcomes they cannot control. State officials also object to Kalshi allowing customers between the ages of 18 and 20 to participate, while New York generally requires mobile sports bettors to be at least 21. The lawsuit seeks to stop the allegedly unlawful activity, recover Kalshi's gains, impose civil penalties worth three times those gains, and obtain restitution for customers. James previously brought similar cases against prediction-market platforms operated by Coinbase and Gemini. Kalshi argues that its contracts are federally regulated derivatives under the exclusive authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, rather than gambling products governed by individual states. The CFTC has supported that position and filed an emergency request seeking to prevent New York from enforcing its gambling laws against the company. Courts in several other states have already restricted Kalshi's operations, while a federal judge in New York recently declined to protect the company from state enforcement. The litigation could determine whether prediction markets must comply with state gambling laws, federal commodities regulation, or both.New York Says Kalshi's Prediction Markets Are Illegal GamblingFormer federal health official Anthony Fauci could face a contempt-of-Congress referral after refusing to answer more than 100 questions during a Senate investigation into the government's response to COVID-19. Senator Rand Paul, the Republican chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the panel would consider referring Fauci for prosecution. Federal law makes it a crime for a person summoned by Congress to deliberately refuse to provide relevant testimony or requested documents. Congress cannot prosecute the offense itself, however, so a committee must approve a referral, followed by the full Senate or House, before the Justice Department decides whether to pursue charges. Reuters reported that a Senate referral would likely require 60 votes, meaning some Democratic support would be necessary. Prosecutors would then need to persuade a grand jury that Fauci intentionally refused to answer questions that fell within the committee's legitimate investigation. Fauci would likely argue that the Fifth Amendment allowed him to remain silent because his testimony could expose him to criminal liability. President Joe Biden previously pardoned Fauci for possible federal offenses committed between 2014 and January 2025, but that pardon does not cover conduct occurring after Biden left office. The pardon creates an unsettled legal issue because courts have not clearly decided whether a witness may invoke the Fifth Amendment regarding conduct already covered by a presidential pardon. Even if Congress approves a referral, the Justice Department and a Washington grand jury would still have separate opportunities to decline the case.Could Fauci face criminal charges for refusing Senate COVID questions? | 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

Mandy Wiener speaks to Political Analyst, Dr Mpumelelo Mkhabela about his News24 opinion piece about parliament’s self-inflicted wounds. 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/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

COURTS OF THE DAMNEDWriters: Emily Cambias, Martin Ericsson, Freja Gyldenstrøm, Chris Jones, Merrit K, Anna-Karin Linder, Roosa Melkko, Juhana Pettersson, Kevin Schluter, and Rachel J. Wilkinson "Why do vampires fight over Blood, Force, Secrets, Shelter, and Territory? What do those resources reveal about Kindred society? How do different political frameworks—from Monarchies to Firms and Families—shape the stories told at your table? And are the Six Traditions really ancient laws... or carefully engineered solutions designed to keep immortal predators from destroying one another?"In this episode: What the five political Stakes reveal about Kindred society.  Why governments are really systems for distributing resources.  The Political Frameworks of Courts of the Damned and the kinds of stories they create.  The Six Traditions as survival mechanisms rather than commandments.  Why the Herald may be Fifth Edition's smartest update to Camarilla politics.  Questions every Storyteller should ask when building a believable domain.Support the showhttps://linktr.ee/25YearsOfVtM

The dismissal follows a Texas judge tossing Patel's case against former FBI official Frank Figliuzzi, whose on-air remarks the court called protected hyperbole. Patel has also sued the Atlantic and reporter over an article about his tenure, a suit Hawk expects to be dismissed as well, and he plans a separate video on that motion. Hawk's larger point is about why these suits get filed at all. He compares them to Donald Trump's defamation claims against ABC and CBS, which produced large settlements despite what Hawk argues were weak legal footings, and suggests Patel is following that playbook without the leverage that produced those payouts. Along the way Hawk lays out the core principle that truth is an absolute defense to defamation, which is why many of these cases falter. 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

Courts reporter, Vivienne Traynor looks ahead to a High Court challenge to the new criminal legal aid payments scheme.

Today's West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy Podcast for our especially special Daily Special, Metro Shrimp & Grits Thursdays is now available on the Spreaker Player!Starting off in the Bistro Cafe, Trump missed a critical court deadline, so the judge ordered all of Trump's private tax and business records from “January 1, 2023 to present,” to be immediately turned over to the BBC.Then, on the rest of the menu, the legality of Trump's ballroom is still being contested; Elon Musk sued Minnesota over its first-in-the-nation law banning his artificial intelligence ‘nudification' technology; and, an Urban League report reveals the Trump administration is harming Black Americans' chances at the American Dream.After the break, we move to the Chef's Table where Courts in Myanmar have sentenced nine activists up to thirty-seven years in prison for a protest calling to boycott the elections last December; and, a French student plead guilty and was fined for a straw-licking stunt in Singapore.All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!The Netroots Radio Live PlayerKeep Your Resistance Radio Beaming 24/7/365!“Everyone in this good city enjoys the full right to pursue their own inclinations in all reasonable and, unreasonable ways.” — The Daily Picayune, New Orleans, March 5, 1851Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/west-coast-cookbook-speakeasy--2802999/support.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi's announcement to set up fast-track courts to hear paper leak cases has once again brought these specialised courts into focus and revived the debate over whether they are the silver bullet to India's chronic judicial delays. Both the government and the judiciary have, over the years, relied on fast-track courts to expedite the trial of specific categories of high-priority cases. Following the announcement, the Delhi High Court has constituted a fast-track court at the Rouse Avenue Courts Complex to exclusively hear cases under the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024. However, stakeholders have cautioned that fast-track courts are struggling with mounting pendency and resource constraints, raising doubts about whether they can truly deliver speedy justice. Have fast-track courts delivered on the promise of speedy justice?  Guest: Bharat Chugh and Shruthi Naik Host: Aaratrika Bhaumik Producer: Jude Weston Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sustainability conversations usually center on ecosystems, emissions targets, and corporate pledges, but this episode makes the case that people belong at the center of that conversation too. Andrew looks at how communities living closest to refineries, extraction sites, and industrial waterfronts carry a disproportionate share of the pollution burden, often without having consented to the risk in the first place. Using a Philadelphia refinery as a case study, Andrew walks through how fenceline communities experience higher poverty rates, higher rates of residents of color, and elevated cancer and respiratory risk compared to their surrounding cities. He extends that pattern to wildfire response, contrasting how affluent California communities were able to evacuate and rebuild after the Santa Ana wind fires with how remote Northern Ontario and Arctic communities, some with only one road in and one road out, had to be airlifted out entirely. The episode also revisits New York's Hudson River, once devastated by industrial chemical runoff and now home to returning oysters, menhaden, and whales after decades of restoration work. The back half of the episode turns to policy. As federal environmental justice efforts recede in 2026, states including Minnesota, Illinois, and Massachusetts are stepping into that gap, and nonprofit legal teams are winning court challenges against federal rollbacks. Andrew closes with a reminder that protecting the environment and protecting people are frequently the same fight, and that sustainable business practices tend to protect local economies as much as they protect public health. Takeaways Communities near industrial facilities carry a disproportionate pollution burden, often without their consent Fenceline communities show higher poverty rates, higher percentages of residents of color, and elevated cancer and respiratory risk Wildfire evacuation capacity varies sharply by community resources and infrastructure The Hudson River's recovery shows environmental restoration is possible after decades of industrial damage States are advancing environmental justice policy as federal efforts recede in 2026 Courts have blocked some federal rollbacks of environmental justice funding Protecting the environment and protecting public health are frequently the same fight Support Independent Podcasts: https://www.speakupforblue.com/patreon Need help with your ocean non-profit, company, or project? Get the help you need with Pisces Oceans Inc.: https://www.piscesoceans.ca Connect with Speak Up For Blue Website: https://bit.ly/3fOF3Wf Instagram: https://bit.ly/3rIaJSG TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@speakupforblue Twitter: https://bit.ly/3rHZxpc YouTube: www.speakupforblue.com/youtube  

The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: Showing just how embedded Marxist and racist activism of the Left is into public education, Texas has had to demand that the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards revise its materials. Read this Dallas Express story and be sure to read the short section of examples of what needs revision, the second section of the story. Just to be a certified teacher from this national group, you are supposed be engaged in indoctrinating students into Leftist political theory and turning them into Leftwing activists. This isn't made up stuff from conservatives, it is in the groups standards.Our Lone Star story of the day is sponsored by Allied Compliance Services providing the best service in DOT, business and personal drug and alcohol testing since 1995.Governor Abbott Reappoints Ten Judges To Texas Business Court. This is a very interesting story about the new business court system and how it works with the governor appointing and reappointing its judges.5th Circuit Court of Appeals uphold the age verification part of the Texas SCOPE Act but leaves on hold the requirement for companies to monitor and filter content for minors.Texas Judge Extends SCOTUS Admission Case to Municipal Contracts. More: Houston's minority business contracting program ruled unconstitutional. Be sure and note the last section of the Chronicle story.Federal judge declines to reinstate Muslim woman as Fort Worth ISD campus principal. She was never harmed and the district acted because of serious threats that could jeopardize the safety and operation of the school.Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com

Courts reporter Vivienne Traynor reports on the changes to the controversial new criminal legal aid scheme, following a meeting between the Justice Minister and the Law Society.

Artificial intelligence is everywhere in the headlines—but how far along are courts and justice agencies actually? In this episode, we cut through the noise to give court leaders an honest, grounded view of where the sector really stands on AI adoption, what's working right now, and the practical first steps any organization can take today, regardless of size or budget.From establishing an AI governance policy to getting data organized to piloting small, high-impact use cases, our guests share the real-world playbook courts are using to move forward without overextending. If you've felt behind with AI, this episode will both reassure you and give you a clear path forward. Key Themes The gap between AI perception and reality in state and local courts Why “not being ahead” doesn't mean you're behind How “show me” culture is shaping client expectations Three foundational actions courts can take right now

Karen Conti, Chicago trial attorney, joins Bob Sirott to talk about what homeowners insurance will cover concerning storm damage and Bryan Kohberger’s plan to pursue an ineffective lawyer appeal. She also discusses the increased penalties for Scott’s Law and if Mexico can hold the U.S. accountable over the deaths of immigrants.

John Maytham speaks to Mbekezeli Benjamin, Research and Advocacy Officer at Judges Matter, to unpack the legal and constitutional significance of the JSC's recommendation, the role President Ramaphosa and Parliament will now play, and what the case means for judicial independence and accountability. Mbenenge, who is accused of making unwanted sexual advances towards a junior court employee between 2021 and 2022, is challenging both the Tribunal's and the JSC's findings in court and is seeking to prevent the President from suspending or removing him while his legal review is underway. Presenter John Maytham is an actor and author-turned-talk radio veteran and seasoned journalist. His show serves a round-up of local and international news coupled with the latest in business, sport, traffic and weather. The host’s eclectic interests mean the program often surprises the audience with intriguing book reviews and inspiring interviews profiling artists. A daily highlight is Rapid Fire, just after 5:30pm. CapeTalk fans call in, to stump the presenter with their general knowledge questions. Another firm favourite is the humorous Thursday crossing with award-winning journalist Rebecca Davis, called “Plan B”. Thank you for listening to a podcast from Afternoon Drive with John Maytham Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 15:00 and 18:00 (SA Time) to Afternoon Drive with John Maytham broadcast on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/BSFy4Cn or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/n8nWt4x Subscribe to the CapeTalk Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/sbvVZD5 Follow us on social media: 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/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Here's your local news for Tuesday, July 28, 2026:We detail the latest legal dispute over absentee voting in Wisconsin,Find out why Dane County is turning to an AI assistant to handle non-emergency calls,Explain how recent drought conditions are impacting American agriculture,Check out the eats at a local farmers market,Share some fun facts about brown-headed cowbirds,And much more.

Senate Judiciary A Chairman Brice Wiggins has worked for years to reform Mississippi's notoriously opaque youth courts. He sat down with Mississippi Today to discuss why the courts are now somewhat open to the public, what happened during the the recent special legislative session and why having a uniform youth court system is crucial to to the state.

Discover what counts as fighting words, why it matters for free speech, and how hate speech laws are challenged in court.You've heard the phrase, but did you know “fighting words” are more than just cartoon banter? We break down where this legal doctrine comes from—and why it matters for free speech today.The HistoryThe concept goes way back to Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942). Walter Chaplinsky was arrested for calling a city marshal a “GD racketeer” and “damned fascist.” The law at the time allowed arrest for any “offensive, derisive, or annoying word” spoken in public. The Supreme Court unanimously concluded that “fighting words”—those which by their very utterance inflict injury or incite immediate breach of peace—are not protected speech 01:28.Modern ImplicationsWhat about today's hottest speech debates?Many believe causing offense or being subjected to hate speech should be criminalized. But modern courts have limited the fighting words doctrine, instead requiring that the words would provoke a reasonable person—not just offend someone subjectively 04:26.In R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, the Supreme Court struck down selective bans targeting specific viewpoints, meaning laws can't target speech based on its message alone 05:47.Virginia v. Black established “true threats” as separate: burning a cross with an intent to intimidate is not protected, but burning a cross at a rally, without specific threats, is classified as protected expressive conduct 06:41.“That's Offensive!”—Is It a Crime?Calling someone the wrong pronoun, yelling insults at police, or using crude language? Most of these are still protected under the First Amendment—unless there's a credible, specific threat behind them 12:38. Police even have to put up with some name-calling in the line of duty—courts say you need thick skin if you're going to wear the badge in America!Confused? So are we! The fight over fighting words is always evolving. Drop your questions, comments, or legal hypotheticals on our episode page or at lawyertalkpodcast.com. We'll dive even deeper if you want to geek out on the legal details.5 Frequently Asked Questions about Fighting WordsWhat are fighting words? Fighting words are those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace, as defined in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.Is hate speech protected by the First Amendment? Generally, yes. Courts have ruled that the government cannot ban speech based on content or viewpoint, although true threats and certain conduct can be restricted.Can you be punished for insulting a police officer? Insulting a police officer (calling them a name) is typically protected speech, but direct threats (such as threatening harm) are not.What is the difference between fighting words and true threats? Fighting words are those that provoke immediate violence from the person addressed; true threats are statements meant to communicate a serious intent to harm.How do disorderly conduct laws interact with free speech? Disorderly conduct laws can validly restrict speech based on time, place, and manner, but not solely on the content of the speech unless it rises to the level of fighting words or true threats.Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At LawMentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

Courts Ready Cash 98.1 The One COHOBBLOPOT by Level Vibes

Karen Conti, Partner at Conti & Dolan, LLC, joins Lisa Dent to the charges against ex-Olympian, David Hearn, who allegedly damaged the Lincoln Memorial’s Reflecting Pool back in June. She brings up Hearn’s lawyer who has hinted at potential misconduct on the part of the grand jury handling the proceedings. Later she provides an update […]

durée : 00:01:42 - Le 6/9 de l'été - Dimanche, je suis allé au cinéma pour voir "De la Comédie-Française". 1h10 ! Alléluia, enfin un film court ! 80 secondes, ce matin, pour dire mon plaisir de ce format resserré au cinéma. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:01:42 - Les 80'' - Dimanche, je suis allé au cinéma pour voir "De la Comédie-Française". 1h10 ! Alléluia, enfin un film court ! 80 secondes, ce matin, pour dire mon plaisir de ce format resserré au cinéma. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

"Mind Over Murder" hosts Bill Thomas and Kristin Dilley discuss the 1982 murder of Dominique Dunne, whose killer got off with serving only 2.5 years on a shocking reduced manslaughter charge. Her father Dominick Dunne and brother Griffin Dunne have both written about her murder and the travesty of justice in how the justice system mishandled her case.The Friday Afternoon Club: A Family Memoir by Griffin Dunnehttps://www.goodreads.com/book/show/203708995-the-friday-afternoon-clubNational Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC):  https://victimsofcrime.org/CrimeCon CLUE Awards Unveil 2026 Winners:https://podnews.net/press-release/crimecon-clue-winners-2026CrimeCon Clue Awards 2026:https://www.clueawards.com/NBC: FBI Norfolk field office links deceased suspect to additional Colonial Parkway Murders In January 2026, the FBI announced Alan Wade Wilmer Sr. is responsible for the 1986 Virginia murders of Cathleen Thomas and Rebecca Dowski.https://www.nbcnews.com/dateline/cold-case-spotlight/colonial-parkway-murders-cathleen-thomas-rebecca-dowski-resolved-rcna255097American Detective TV series: Colonial Parkway Murders:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fp3rNRZnL0EWashingtonian: A Murder on the Rappahannock River:https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/06/27/murder-on-the-rappahannock-river-emerson-stevens-mary-harding-innocence-project/WTKR News 3: One year after development in Colonial Parkway Murders, where do things stand?https://www.wtkr.com/news/in-the-community/historic-triangle/one-year-after-development-in-colonial-parkway-murders-where-do-things-standWon't you help the Mind Over Murder podcast increase our visibility and shine the spotlight on the "Colonial Parkway Murders" and other unsolved cases? Contribute any amount you can here:https://www.gofundme.com/f/mind-over-murder-podcast-expenses?utm_campaign=p_lico+share-sheet&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_source=customerWTVR CBS News:  Colonial Parkway murders victims' families keep hope cases will be solved:https://www.wtvr.com/news/local-news/colonial-parkway-murders-update-april-19-2024WAVY TV 10 News:  New questions raised in Colonial Parkway murders:https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news/new-questions-raised-in-colonial-parkway-murders/Alan Wade Wilmer, Sr. has been named as the killer of Robin Edwards and David Knobling in the Colonial Parkway Murders in September 1987, as well as the murderer of Teresa Howell in June 1989. He has also been linked to the April 1988 disappearance and likely murder of Keith Call and Cassandra Hailey, another pair in the Colonial Parkway Murders.13News Now investigates: A serial killer's DNA will not be entered into CODIS database:https://www.13newsnow.com/video/news/local/13news-now-investigates/291-e82a9e0b-38e3-4f95-982a-40e960a71e49WAVY TV 10 on the Colonial Parkway Murders Announcement with photos:https://www.wavy.com/news/crime/deceased-man-identified-as-suspect-in-decades-old-homicides/WTKR News 3https://www.wtkr.com/news/is-man-linked-to-one-of-the-colonial-parkway-murders-connected-to-the-other-casesVirginian Pilot: Who was Alan Wade Wilmer Sr.? Man suspected in two ‘Colonial Parkway' murders died alone in 2017https://www.pilotonline.com/2024/01/14/who-was-alan-wade-wilmer-sr-man-suspected-in-colonial-parkway-murders-died-alone-in-2017/Colonial Parkway Murders Facebook page with more than 18,000 followers: https://www.facebook.com/ColonialParkwayCaseYou can also participate in an in-depth discussion of the Colonial Parkway Murders here:https://earonsgsk.proboards.com/board/50/colonial-parkway-murdersMind Over Murder is proud to be a Spreaker Prime Podcaster:https://www.spreaker.comJoin the discussion on our Mind Over MurderColonial Parkway Murders website: https://colonialparkwaymurders.com Mind Over Murder Podcast website: https://mindovermurderpodcast.comPlease subscribe and rate us at your favorite podcast sites. Ratings and reviews are very important. Please share and tell your friends!We launch a new episode of "Mind Over Murder" every Monday morning, and a bonus episode every Thursday morning.Sponsors: Othram and DNAsolves.comContribute Your DNA to help solve cases: https://dnasolves.com/user/registerFollow "Mind Over Murder" on Twitter: https://twitter.com/MurderOverFollow Bill Thomas on Twitter: https://twitter.com/BillThomas56Follow "Colonial Parkway Murders" on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ColonialParkwayCase/Follow us on InstaGram:: https://www.instagram.com/colonialparkwaymurders/Check out the entire Crawlspace Media network at http://crawlspace-media.com/All rights reserved. Mind Over Murder, Copyright Bill Thomas and Kristin Dilley, Another Dog Productions/Absolute Zero ProductionsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/mind-over-murder--4847179/support.

What happens when one of the internet's most well-known paranormal storytellers sits down with Nephilim Death Squad for a deep discussion about cryptids, demonic encounters, spiritual warfare, the Courts of Heaven, sleep paralysis, Bigfoot, Dogman, Leviathan, and biblical discernment?In this episode, David Lee Corbo (The Raven) and TopLobsta welcome James Williams of Dark Waters for an unforgettable conversation that goes far beyond scary stories. James shares how he transitioned from collecting real paranormal testimonies to teaching Christians about prayer, spiritual authority, and seeking God's justice through the Courts of Heaven. The discussion explores why so many people report encounters with unexplained entities, how to distinguish genuine spiritual experiences from deception, and why Christians should approach the paranormal through a thoroughly biblical worldview.The conversation dives into eyewitness accounts involving Bigfoot, Dogman, cryptids, UFOs, alien encounters, sleep paralysis, demonic oppression, Leviathan, water spirits, deliverance ministry, and the Flood of Noah, while emphasizing the importance of testing every experience against Scripture. James explains how years of interviewing witnesses shaped his understanding of the unseen realm and why prayer, repentance, and faith in Jesus Christ remain central to spiritual victory.Whether you're interested in Nephilim, supernatural encounters, biblical prophecy, conspiracy research, or spiritual warfare, this episode offers thoughtful discussion without abandoning biblical foundations. The hosts also discuss discernment, deception, and the growing public fascination with the paranormal, encouraging believers to remain grounded in God's Word rather than sensationalism.What do you think explains these encounters? Are cryptids physical creatures, spiritual manifestations, or something else entirely? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.► Subscribe for more Biblical analysis, Christian worldview discussions, and conspiracy research through a Biblical lens.Listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and everywhere podcasts are available.Connect with James Williams (Dark Waters)

⚖️ What Happens If My Ex Refuses to Follow the Child Custody Agreement? | Los Angeles Divorce

In 1867, an 8-year-old girl named Elizabeth Turner became the epicenter of a legal battle that would help define what freedom really meant after the Civil War. Days after Maryland abolished slavery, her former enslaver had her re-indentured under a sham "apprenticeship" law used to seize Black children. Elizabeth's mother—and thousands of other parents—refused to accept it. In this second episode of By the People, legal scholar Lyle Cherneff guides Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern through a Union Army general's archive of letters that documented the plight of Black parents who petitioned, marched, and filed habeas corpus claims to win their children back. These parents read the new constitutional guarantees of freedom for themselves, and demanded they be enforced, long before any Supreme Court told them what those words meant.The resulting case, In re: Turner, helped end the practice of racialized child "apprenticeship" and shaped the meaning of the 13th and 14th amendments. But the parents who fought for it were nearly written out of the story. In this episode, we seek to restore that record, tracing a direct line from their fight to ordinary Americans' resistance to ICE raids today. By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A Ninth Circuit judge calls for SCOTUS to "bench slap" anti-2A courts while Paul Markel joins Mark Walters to explain why major Second Amendment victories may be just ahead. Plus DOJ action, Bruen, magazine bans and the future of gun rights.

In 1867, an 8-year-old girl named Elizabeth Turner became the epicenter of a legal battle that would help define what freedom really meant after the Civil War. Days after Maryland abolished slavery, her former enslaver had her re-indentured under a sham "apprenticeship" law used to seize Black children. Elizabeth's mother—and thousands of other parents—refused to accept it. In this second episode of By the People, legal scholar Lyle Cherneff guides Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern through a Union Army general's archive of letters that documented the plight of Black parents who petitioned, marched, and filed habeas corpus claims to win their children back. These parents read the new constitutional guarantees of freedom for themselves, and demanded they be enforced, long before any Supreme Court told them what those words meant.The resulting case, In re: Turner, helped end the practice of racialized child "apprenticeship" and shaped the meaning of the 13th and 14th amendments. But the parents who fought for it were nearly written out of the story. In this episode, we seek to restore that record, tracing a direct line from their fight to ordinary Americans' resistance to ICE raids today. By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In today's episode I will be praying over us, reading Psalm 65, and saying whatever the Holy Spirit prompts me to say after I read the scripture. This is day 65 of a series where I will be reading a Psalm everyday on here for 150 days. I challenge you to come to join me everyday as we use scripture to fight off the enemy and grow us in ways that we can't even imagine.   My First Christian Children's book, "You Are Loved" is now available for purchase on Amazon!! Thank you to everyone that has purchased, been praying, supporting, and sharing. All glory goes to God!! Here is the link to purchase: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GZKSPJNB   Link to partner with me and give towards my future mission projects: https://pushpay.com/g/globalventurescatoosa?fnd=missionary&fndv=hide&ru=prod&sr=58535&ad=%7b+%22PledgeID%22%3a%22Y01TRFR1VlklMmJMYkY5NmRNJTJiU2dHU21oWVBXQjN2OXRVNkdsNWpjMUFzamRkRkNBUmN2Z2R0MjdmdTZ2eGduc1U%3d%22%7d&nt=Partner%3aMs+Lorena+Espy+   If you want to receive newsletters: submit your info here: www.postable.com/lorenaespy If you want to check out previous Bible studies, click here To Purchase my "Christ Transforms Me" Journal, click here   Email me: faithfuelsmyfire@gmail.com Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/486483515603028/ YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmBsSKktGU_8WHVNIxhFuzg The Bible App that I use: http://bible.com/app Instagram: @_lorenacamille_ Never Forget to Choose Faith Over Fear, -Lorena Espy

⚖️ How to Enforce a Child Support Order in California | Los Angeles Divorce

⚖️ What Factors Determine Who Gets Custody of a Child? | Los Angeles Divorce ⚖️ Child custody decisions are not based on one single factor. In California, courts generally focus on what is in the child's best interests when determining custody arrangements. Factors such as each parent's relationship with the child, caregiving history, stability, and ability to support a healthy relationship with the other parent may all be considered. Understanding what courts look at can help parents prepare, communicate effectively, and create custody arrangements that prioritize their child's well-being.

Our weekly news roundup includes an update on the cyclospora outbreak, stream health monitoring, new housing development in Monterey, and more.

Jen Psaki points out that it wouldn't be unreasonable for someone to hear the news that Trump suffered another "subpoena fail" and ask, which one? Most recently, Trump has tried to bully the New York Times after he was embarrassed by reports that his new Qatari jet was not properly outfitted. But as everyone by now has learned, pushback works, and the Times pushed back and Trump is left looking foolish again. Marty Baron, former executive editor of The Washington Post You may have anticipated that Donald Trump's peace "understanding" with Iran would fall apart and the war would flare back up and oil prices would surge again. But that isn't the whole story. Iran's widening attacks, Houthi attacks on Red Sea vessels, and Ukrainian attacks on Russian oil infrastructure and the ripple effects of that in neighboring countries has made things exponentially worse. And there has been no increase in Donald Trump's competence to deal with any of it. Amos Hochstein, former White House senior advisor, talks with Jen Psaki about how all of the gears are turning. Andrew Weissmann, former FBI general counsel, talks with Jen about the absurdity of the Jack Smith criminal referral. New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez discusses the difficulty he is having getting the Justice Department to cooperate in his investigation of Jeffrey Epstein's New Mexico ranch. To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week on Breaking Battlegrounds, Chuck Warren and Sam Stone are joined by former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould, former Congressman Mike Garcia, comedian Lou Perez, and Utah County Commissioner Amelia Powers Gardner. Plus, B breaks down the ongoing search for accused murderer Isabella Rose Johnson in this week's B's Crime Corner. Andrew Gould, a partner at Holtzman Vogel and former justice of the Arizona Supreme Court, joins the show to explain the major differences between serving as a judge and working as a litigator. While litigators advocate for a specific client or interest, judges are required to remain neutral, follow the Constitution, and apply the law regardless of political pressure. Gould discusses his transition between the bench and private practice and shares his concerns about the increasing politicization of the judiciary. He explains why judges should not be attacked for following the Constitution and addresses recent cases in which state and federal courts have been accused of resisting or defying Supreme Court rulings. The conversation also examines claims that the Trump administration has ignored court orders. Gould argues that while the administration has pushed the boundaries of executive authority, it has followed court decisions after losing its legal challenges. Gould also discusses a major Supreme Court campaign-finance case involving mandatory donor disclosure. He explains how forcing organizations to reveal their donors can expose individuals to harassment, retaliation, and political intimidation. The discussion expands into the importance of anonymous political speech, from the Federalist Papers to the Supreme Court's decision in NAACP v. Alabama. Gould also raises concerns about threats against conservative Supreme Court justices and the growing impact of government surveillance, private data collection, drones, and new technology on Americans' Fourth Amendment rights. Learn more about Andrew Gould and his work at Holtzman Vogel. Mike Garcia, chair of the California State Chapter for the America First Policy Institute and former U.S. representative for California's 27th Congressional District, joins the show to discuss biological males competing in women's sports, the political pressure driving Democrats further left, and why Republicans must move beyond social media and connect directly with voters through town halls, door knocking, and grassroots outreach. He also explains AFPI's role in developing policy and influencing White House executive orders. Follow Mike Garcia on X: @mikegarcia1776 In this week's B's Crime Corner, B examines the ongoing manhunt for Isabella Rose Johnson, who is wanted in connection with the murder of Jason Coulthart. Authorities say Johnson remains on the run and may be using aliases to conceal her identity. Five people accused of helping her avoid capture have now been arrested. As the search continues, the reward for information leading to her arrest has increased to $11,000. Comedian, producer, and author Lou Perez returns to the show to discuss the controversy surrounding Sophie Cunningham's comments about transgender athletes competing in women's sports. Lou examines the WNBA's position on the issue and points out that the league currently has no transgender women playing in it. The conversation then takes an unexpected turn as Lou breaks down a 2007 University of New Mexico study examining whether a lap dancer's ovulatory cycle affected her earnings. The study found that dancers earned more money in tips while ovulating, raising questions about biology, attraction, and whether customers were responding to subtle signals without realizing it. Lou also previews his upcoming "Parental Advisory" comedy show in New York City on July 30. Follow Lou Perez on X: @LouPerez Book: THAT JOKE ISN'T FUNNY ANYMORE: ON THE DEATH AND REBIRTH OF COMEDY Finally, Utah County Commissioner Amelia Powers Gardner joins the show to discuss the massive financial and logistical burden the Charlie Kirk murder trial is placing on Utah County. Gardner estimates that security, staffing, court operations, and other trial-related expenses could cost the county between $2 million and $2.5 million through 2028. She explains how a nationally watched murder trial can strain local resources for years and why taxpayers may ultimately be responsible for much of the cost. Follow Amelia Powers Gardner on X: @Amelia4Utah Listen now to Breaking Battlegrounds, the radio show covering Arizona politics, campus unrest, election integrity, national campaigns, and the true crime cases everyone is talking about. Catch Breaking Battlegrounds live on 960 AM in Phoenix every Saturday at 9:00 AM, with full episodes and exclusive podcast-only segments dropping every Friday wherever you get your podcasts or watch on Youtube. Stay connected with Breaking Battlegrounds: • Substack: https://substack.com/@breakingbattlegrounds • Website: https://breakingbattlegrounds.vote • News: https://breakingbattlegrounds.news • X: https://x.com/breaking_battle • Instagram: @breakingbattlegrounds • Facebook: Breaking Battlegrounds If you enjoy the show, please leave us a 5-star review and share it with a friend. Your support helps keep the podcast growing. Breaking Battlegrounds is one of the top 2.5% most popular shows out of 3,779,399 podcasts globally. We interview policymakers, elected officials, and nationally and world-recognized reporters about the opportunities and hurdles the United States faces.

Howie covers some illegals in the news, then the appeals court overturns the ruling calling for the release of Mohsen Mahdawi. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Join Locals! https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/BUY A BOOK! https://amzn.to/4qBXikSSEND ME SOMETHING! David Freiheit 20423 SR 7 Ste F6319 Boca Raton 33498TIP WITH CRYPTO! bc1qt0umnqna63pyw5j8uesphsfz0dyrtmqcq5ugwmFor advertising inquiries please email sponsorships@rumble.comTHAT IS ALL!

Six days before a federal rule was set to take effect, the courts stepped in. The Department of Education tried to redefine who counts as a professional, a move that would have capped student loans for nurse anesthetists and the advanced-practice clinicians training behind them. The courts said the challenge is likely to succeed and hit pause. This week I sat down with Tracy Young, twenty-six years in the field, and Randy Moore, who runs anesthesia at enterprise scale, to work through what the ruling actually means and what it does not. It is a win in a battle, not the war. We get into the argument a federal regulator made that landed harder than we wanted to admit, why a rule written to require supervision is now being used against us, and where the line sits between what government should decide and what the people doing the work should. Plus the student-loan fight both parties get half-right, and why credentials stopped predicting who can lead. Good information first. Then the honest conversation about where anesthesia goes next. TAKEAWAYS The court blocked the rule on a preliminary injunction, not the merits. It buys time. It does not end the fight. The professional designation fight has real money behind it. Redefining the term caps federal loans for CRNAs, PAs, and nurse practitioners. The strongest argument against us was ours to fix. A federal statute still references supervision, and that language is being used to question our standing. Both sides of the student-loan debate are right. Treat the subsidy as a return question, and CRNAs are a good bet. We pass boards 95 percent of the time. Regulators are the wrong body to design clinical practice. The people closest to the work adapt faster than any rule can. Want more Dr. Joe Rodriguez? Tik Tok: @jrodcrna21 Instagram: @jrod.crna & @abouttherestpod YouTube: @AboutTheRest Thanks for my co-hosts: Randy Moore (EVP & National Chief CRNA, NorthStar Anesthesia) Tracy Young: Incoming President of the American Association of Nurse Anesthesiology To Learn More about Human Content Visit: ⁠⁠⁠http://www.human-content.com⁠⁠⁠ To Learn More about About The Rest Visit: www.abouttherest.com Got a Question? hello@abouttherest.com Part of the Human Content Podcast Network Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For the better part of two centuries of U.S. history, the American people understood that they—and not the Supreme Court—were the final arbiters of the Constitution. But in recent decades, nine unelected justices have claimed that mantle for themselves. Now, with the high court's claim of neutrality and legitimacy crumbling, an urgent question must be answered: Can "We the People" restore our power to interpret the Constitution—and if so, how?In the first installment of the series By the People, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern try to find out how and when this notion of judicial supremacy took over, with the help of Larry Kramer, legal scholar and author of The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.