Podcasts about District court

My co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you the episode 176 of the IP Fridays Podcast. Today's interview guest is returning guest Franklin Graves, who is a senior counsel at Linkedin and teaching IP law at Emerson College. With my co-host Ken Suzan he is discussing how the law for creators has dramatically changed in the past years. Franklin Graves is expressing his personal views and not the views of Linkedin or Microsoft. He is talking about the paper “Upload Complete” before he joined Linkedin. Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/franklingraves/ Paper: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5271442 Website: https://creatoreconomylaw.com/ But before we jump into this interview, I have news for you! Richard Meade, a judge on the UK High Court and one of the most prominent figures in European patent law, was appointed Lord Justice of Appeal at the British Court of Appeal on June 12, 2026. Meade played a key role in numerous landmark British patent decisions, particularly in the area of standard-essential patents (SEPs) and FRAND licenses. In Insulet Corp. v. EOFlow Co., No. 2025-1807, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit completely overturned the original $452 million judgment (which had already been reduced by the District Court to $59.4 million) in favor of Insulet. In its decision of June 2, 2026, in the case of Fujifilm v. Kodak, the UPC Board of Appeal provided comprehensive clarifications regarding so-called “long-arm jurisdiction”—that is, the question of whether the UPC can also rule on national patent claims outside the UPC territory (such as in the United Kingdom). In 14 guiding principles, the judges established specific procedural rules for various categories of cases. There is no automatic UPC jurisdiction over national patent claims outside the UPC territory. The Munich Regional Court has issued an arrest warrant against the managing director of Polytech Health & Aesthetics GmbH because he is alleged to have continued to exploit the Brazilian company Silimed's patent for breast implants despite a preliminary injunction. A number of IT and automotive industry associations—which are among the most frequent users of Inter Partes Reviews (IPR) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office—have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, urging the Court to grant Google's certiorari petition. An attorney for a Las Vegas performer has asked a California federal judge to temporarily prohibit Taylor Swift from using “The Life of a Showgirl” as a trademark while the trademark lawsuit is pending. Swift's attorney called the lawsuit baseless. And now let's hear Ken discuss creator law with Franklin! AI, Platform Law, and the Creator Economy: What Businesses Need to Know Now Franklin Graves has spent his entire career watching digital content move through systems that most people never see. He started in marketing at a major music label right out of law school, then represented individual creators on YouTube in a pro bono capacity, then moved to the platform side at Eventbrite, and today works as Senior Product Counsel at LinkedIn, where he focuses on AI, data, and the regulatory questions that come with both. His recently published law review article, Upload Complete: An Introduction to Creator Economy Law, is the first academic paper to address the creator economy as a distinct legal field. In a recent episode of the IP Fridays podcast, he spoke with host Kenneth Suzan about responsible AI development, platform regulation, and what it actually means to own your audience in a world where the rules keep changing overnight. From Content Creator to Platform Lawyer The through-line in Graves’ career is a genuine understanding of how content moves from an idea in someone’s head to an audience on a screen. That experience, he argues, is precisely what in-house counsel needs right now. Lawyers working on AI and product development cannot afford to sit at a distance from the technology they are advising on. They need to use the tools, experience them as a creator or end user would, and understand the nuances of how a product actually operates before it reaches the public. Understanding the product first is the precondition for everything else. That philosophy translates directly into how he approaches responsible AI implementation. The landscape of AI standards is crowded: NIST frameworks, the EU AI Act, sector-specific guidance, and a growing body of industry-adopted best practices. The challenge for in-house counsel is not knowing that these standards exist. It is making them actionable for the engineering and product teams they support. Abstract principles need to become concrete controls and workflows. Graves offers one practical shortcut: most companies already have open source software review processes that involve the right stakeholders, the right sign-off levels, and the right security checks. Layering the specifics of generative AI or large language models onto those existing processes is far more efficient than building something new from scratch. A Fragmented Regulatory World The geopolitical dimension of AI regulation is something Graves thinks about constantly in his role at LinkedIn. The EU AI Act, shifting US executive orders, and country-specific approaches to data privacy have created a regulatory environment that can change the rules of the game without warning. His analogy is instructive: creators have long understood what it means to build a community on a platform they do not own. An algorithm change, a policy update, or a government ban can wipe out years of audience-building overnight. Businesses deploying AI tools globally now face a structurally similar problem. The response, for creators and for platforms alike, is to build resilience rather than rely on stability that may not last. TikTok is the clearest recent example. When the platform faced the prospect of being shut down in the United States on national security grounds, it triggered a broader conversation about platform dependence that had been building for years. Creators who had invested their entire business in one platform suddenly confronted the possibility that their audience could simply disappear. The lesson is not that platforms are bad. It is that concentration of any kind, whether it is your audience, your data pipeline, or your regulatory compliance strategy, creates fragility. What Is a Creator, Legally Speaking? One of the central contributions of Graves’ law review article is definitional. The terminology matters more than it might seem. When courts and regulators talk about creators without a shared understanding of what that word means, the resulting legal analysis tends to miss the mark. Graves draws a distinction between users who post content, creators who post with the intent to build an audience and eventually monetize it, and influencers, a subset of creators who are actively running a small business through their content. The difference is intent. A parent posting family photos on Facebook is a user. Someone building a subscription community around their professional expertise is running a business, and the legal framework that applies to them should reflect that. That distinction matters practically when it comes to liability. As more creators build their own platforms, whether through custom membership sites, open source tools like Ghost, or federated social networks, they take on obligations that previously fell to large platforms: content moderation policies, privacy notices, terms of service, and compliance with data regulations across multiple jurisdictions. A creator in Tennessee running a membership platform with subscribers in Germany is operating a global business, whether they think of themselves that way or not. Protecting Children Online: A Question Without a Clean Answer The tension between age verification and privacy is one of the more difficult problems in platform law right now. Australia, several European countries, and a growing number of US states have introduced or passed minimum age requirements for social media accounts. The technical challenge is real: verifying age online requires collecting identifying information, and collecting identifying information creates privacy risk, particularly for the young people the laws are designed to protect. Who should bear the responsibility for that verification is also unresolved. Is it the platform? The app store? The mobile operating system? Graves does not pretend there is a clean answer, but he points to the mobile layer as an underexplored option. The Apple App Store and Google Play Store already have significant leverage over which apps reach users on their devices. Whether that leverage should extend to age verification is a question that deserves more attention than it currently receives. The Right of Publicity in the Age of AI Voice cloning, digital replicas, and AI-generated synthetic media have pushed the right of publicity into territory that traditional IP law was not designed to cover. Trademark law, copyright law, and existing publicity rights each capture part of the problem but none of them covers it completely. The result, as Graves describes it, is a period of experimentation: lawyers filing trademarks on vocal sounds and phrases, states updating their publicity statutes to explicitly mention artificial intelligence, and entertainment unions negotiating over who controls a performance and any AI-generated iterations of it. Tennessee’s Elvis Act is a concrete example of the legislative response: the state updated its right of publicity law to include voice and to reference AI directly. Similar efforts are underway elsewhere. The underlying challenge is calibrating protection so that it gives creators and performers meaningful control over their likeness and voice without foreclosing the development of generative AI systems that depend on broad rights to process and learn from content. Somewhere between those two interests, a workable legal framework needs to emerge. The brand deal context may be where the issue becomes most immediately practical. When a brand partners with an influencer and the campaign involves generative AI in any form, the contract needs to address control explicitly. Who has final approval over how the influencer’s likeness or voice is used in AI-generated deliverables? What happens to those assets after the campaign ends? These are not hypothetical questions. They are contract drafting problems that any brand counsel or creator attorney should be addressing today. What Comes Next Graves is cautious about predictions, but his sense of direction is clear. The regulatory environment will continue to fragment before it converges. The right of publicity will be updated, imperfectly, in more jurisdictions. Creators will continue to move toward owning more of their infrastructure. And the lawyers who do this work best will be the ones who understand the technology well enough to translate it into practical, defensible decisions for the people they advise. Full Transcript: Ken Suzan: Thank you, Rolf. Our returning guest today is Franklin Graves. Franklin is the founder and editor of Creator Economy Law, a website and newsletter that educates creator economy professionals on the intersection of law and policy with the world of creators, brands, and platforms. Franklin also published the first law review article focused on the creator economy, Upload Complete, an introduction to creator economy law. He regularly appears across news and media outlets as a commentator and contributor with a focus on educating creators and raising awareness of all legal aspects of the creator economy. Franklin is based in Nashville, Tennessee. Ken Suzan: Franklin was invited to participate as one of the creators and creator economy professionals in the first ever White House creator economy conference. Franklin works full time as a product counsel at LinkedIn Corporation. As a member of the product and data team, he focuses on emerging issues in AI and data. Franklin previously held roles on the technology law group at HCA Healthcare, the commercial legal team at Eventbrite, and the business and legal affairs team at Naxos Music Group. Welcome back Franklin to the IP Fridays podcast. Franklin Graves: Thank you so much for having me. It is exciting to be back and reflecting over the last decade since I last joined and also the paper that I wrote that dives into this in more detail. So I really appreciate it. And yes, full disclosure, I currently work for LinkedIn, which is a subsidiary of Microsoft. I’m here in my personal capacity to talk about this, the paper I wrote before joining LinkedIn and all of that. So thank you so much for having me back. Ken Suzan: Excellent. So Franklin, since your last appearance on IP Fridays in 2017, your career has evolved significantly. You are now senior product counsel at LinkedIn focusing on AI and data. How has working inside a major tech platform changed your perspective on the legal frameworks governing digital content compared to when you were viewing it purely from the creator side? Franklin Graves: I appreciate that question because when I wrote the article, I did not work for LinkedIn. And I had been coming from a history in my career where I, right out of law school, worked for a record label like we talked about almost 10 years ago. And I was on the content creation side. I’ve represented a major distributor of classical music digitally at the time. And that was my first exposure to understanding how content was taken from the initial inception stage from creators and routed through all the various digital platforms that were at the time still evolving and even arguably still today continue to evolve. The early days of YouTube Music launching and then Apple Music launching, and then going through all the phases of high-res audio and everything that came after that. So that was an interesting perspective to start my career with. And then I went to Eventbrite, which is a ticketing platform, but was also focused on elevating event creators. They kind of took on that moniker of “Hey, we are event creators that we support.” And that was arguably my first exposure to the platform side, the tech platform side of it, because Eventbrite is a platform. And so then I evolved from there in my personal capacity, in a pro bono capacity representing individual creators across the YouTube space. And that’s what we talked about a little bit back when I first came on the podcast. Franklin Graves: Over the last decade, it’s been a chance to grow my own understanding of the creator economy. The terminology “creator economy” came around. And then now on the other side of it, having written the article and all that, and now being fully in-house at LinkedIn, I truly am experiencing a social media platform. LinkedIn is of course arguably way more than just the platform itself. There are so many different avenues to it, but it is a chance for me to understand what it is like working for a company that is operating the platform that people are distributing content on. There’s a user journey to content and all of that. So it’s definitely enhanced and given me a different perspective from a major tech platform side. And part of my role at LinkedIn is really heavily focused on understanding regulation and how that from an AI and data perspective impacts the company. And so I’ve been really leveling up my game over the last year and a half that I’ve been here, understanding mostly EU regulations, but also US regulations that are still in their infancy when it comes to AI. But really when it comes to privacy and data, those are pretty well established across the board. It’s been kind of a combination of what I learned at Eventbrite, because I went to Eventbrite when GDPR was going into effect. And so that was an eyes-wide-open moment of getting in the weeds with negotiating data processing agreements, understanding data transfers and cross-border data transfers and the like. So it’s been kind of an evolution as the laws and regulations have evolved. So has my career, so has my own understanding, so have the platforms’ responses to those laws and regulations. And I’m sure that probably resonates with a lot of your listeners who have also been growing their practice and their understanding as the laws and regulations in this realm have been evolving too. Ken Suzan: Yes, indeed. Now let’s switch gears and talk about AI. You advise on AI and data daily. As platforms integrate generative AI tools into their tech stacks, what are the most critical best practices in-house counsel should be adopting right now to embed responsible AI principles into product development? Franklin Graves: So as an attorney, one of my key roles is to understand the technology. Even representing creators and working for creator platforms, that’s something I’m constantly trying to do: put myself in the shoes of being a creator. And I think I talked about this last time I was on, but I come from a background where I was working for a major label doing marketing, video editing, social media work. And I was creating content. I understood the whole life cycle from the inception point of an idea to execution and then to the final delivery and distribution of that content to an audience within a major music label. And so part of that is the same thing that I think attorneys, especially in-house, should be doing: using the tools that the product and engineering teams are either developing in-house or partnering with third parties to develop, or a combination of the two. Using them, understanding them, using them as a creator would, using them as an end user or a client or customer would. And making sure that if you understand the product and understand the nuances of how it operates, and being a part of the iterations of that internally before it fully ramps, that really gives you a chance to understand: okay, we have a lot of responsible AI principles and standards and protocols that are in existence right now, whether it’s NIST, whether it’s based on the EU AI Act or anything and everything in between. It’s understanding how to apply those and bring those into a product and an engineering environment in a way that is practical and actionable for the people that you’re supporting, the stakeholders you’re supporting. So I think one of the critical best practices is, number one, understand the product or features that you’re supporting. Franklin Graves: And then understand how you as an attorney can use your expertise and understanding of responsible AI practices, whether it’s a regulatory standard or an industry-adopted standard or a hybrid of the two, to leverage those and implement those, break those down and make them into actionable controls and processes and flows that work within your existing infrastructure. That’s a lot of high-level talk, but that’s the general idea. One concrete example we talk about frequently is with open source AI. If you’re working with a product team or an engineering team that is taking an off-the-shelf open source model and bringing that in-house, a lot of times companies have pre-existing open source processes that cover the use of open source software or code. Piggyback on that. That’s the easiest quick win for attorneys: leveraging your existing open source processes to just build on top of that the AI flavor and layering. It’s not very much that you have to do, but the underlying process of the key stakeholders that need to be involved in the review, whether it’s security, whether it’s executive sign-off if it gets to that point, even export control considerations should already be part of your existing open source software process. So layering in on those existing processes the specifics of generative AI or large language models that you’re trying to bring in is a great way to put this into practice. Ken Suzan: Now looking at the geopolitical landscape that we currently have, we have the EU AI Act setting strict standards and shifting US executive orders. How should platforms and brands prepare for this fragmented regulatory environment when deploying AI tools to a global user base? Franklin Graves: It’s a great question. It’s something that is still evolving, I think is fair to say. I would equate it, as I do in the paper that I wrote, to how creators and arguably brands don’t own the platforms that they’re building their communities on. That spawned this concept of de-platforming or going into building your own platform, a decentralized platform of sorts, and owning your community. That gives you that control and takes away the level of instability that can come for creators trying to build a business on a platform they don’t own, they don’t control when certain updates happen, when algorithms change, when tools and functionalities either become available or go away completely. So it’s very similar to what we’ve been experiencing in a regulatory environment where we have geopolitical complexities, for lack of a better term, that can overnight seemingly disrupt the way in which a platform or even a multinational brand is able to connect and reach an audience or continue to leverage the user base that they’ve built. I think TikTok is a great example of that, where it became a national security concern and suddenly it was facing an executive order that required it to be effectively disabled in the US or completely owned and operated by a US entity. All the mechanics and technicalities of whether it’s actually possible and still have a global platform with a global user base is a whole different discussion. But that’s an example of very similar considerations that are now not just a discussion point at the creator level or the individual brand level, but also in a much broader context at a platform level as well. Ken Suzan: Franklin, let’s now shift gears and talk about your article. In your recently published journal article, Upload Complete, which we will have linked in our show notes, you advocate for a shift in terminology from internet creator law, a term used during our first podcast almost a decade ago, to creator economy law. Why is this distinction important and how does it change the way legal practitioners should view the ecosystem of creators, brands, and platforms? Franklin Graves: Oh yes, this is part of the reason why I wanted to write the article: to lay this foundation of understanding. Because at the time I’d written the article, the term creator economy and creator had really not appeared but for maybe once in an actual court decision. And it was kind of focused on influencers and this concept, and it was just not getting it right. And so it was also, as you mentioned, when we first spoke I was even using the term internet creators. And I think that was something that was common at the time. The “internet” portion as a qualifier has since dropped off. And now for purposes of the creator economy, the term creators refers to individuals, it can be small businesses, which is what we’ve seen from a regulatory standpoint, how these small businesses are being impacted by regulations. But essentially creators in the article I pin in the context of intent. What is the intent behind the person or the small business that is posting content, trying to build a community and form a community in a virtual environment? And then that can even spill over into real physical world environments. And so the intent is kind of what I look at. Franklin Graves: And I have a chart in the article that has a diagram showcasing the overlap of what I refer to as “users generating content.” It’s a play on the concept of user-generated content, UGC. Users generating content is that large bucket of anyone posting on a platform of some kind. And within that large bucket, that large circle, are smaller subsets. You have creators, you have brands. Those are really the two buckets you can put people into. Otherwise it’s like your grandmother or your parents posting content on Facebook or Instagram, and those are everyday users of a platform. The distinction to get into that subcategory of being a creator more so has been analyzing the intent behind the posting. Are you posting content to build an audience, to build a community, to eventually have a chance to monetize the following that you’re bringing in or sell services or something like that? Brands are posting for that reason. Creators are maybe posting for that same reason. But even within the creator category, there’s a subcategory of influencers that are trying to sell something, that are trying to build more than just an awareness of who they are, their influence. They are trying to do brand deals, partnership deals, upsells and all that, and start an actual small business aside from just the content itself that they’re creating. So that’s kind of the distinctions that I make in the paper. And that’s why it’s important to understand and lay that foundation, that anyone can post content online, but the intent, the why behind their posting that content, really does ultimately matter, especially when you’re looking at it from a court case or from a regulatory standpoint. Ken Suzan: Now, Franklin, we’re seeing unprecedented geopolitical activity around platform ownership. For example, the US legislation targeting TikTok and Brazil’s recent temporary ban of X. How do these macro-level battles impact the day-to-day livelihood of creators? And how can they legally and operationally protect themselves? Franklin Graves: So the shift that we’re seeing, and I alluded to this earlier in our conversation, is this concept of Web 3. And that term may or may not be really popular anymore, but that’s essentially what we’re looking at: a shift into a federated, decentralized operation of a platform. So instead of one owner, one company, one entity owning and operating the platform, it’s decentralized. Anyone can start up a server, and it’s interoperable, meaning anyone can plug and play and connect to that larger network. And it creates this unified social network experience. Within each operating node of that network, there can be your own decisions around content moderation, your own decisions around the hosting providers you use, where you’re operating out of, the terms and conditions that apply to that. But the flip side is that instead of creators posting and sharing in a closed environment run and controlled by a singular entity, you’re now experiencing a peer-to-peer type operation where your experience can change based on which server, which node, which user you’re engaging with. You might have content that’s acceptable in one area but not acceptable in another, and maybe it just doesn’t even show up in that other area. Franklin Graves: But from a liability standpoint, as creators start to build their own networks and communities, even outside of a concept like the fediverse, it’s even down to creators building their own communities through online courses, subscription membership-based platforms that they run on their own website. There’s open source software out there, even something called Ghost, where you have memberships. And that is a creator or a small business in the creator economy that is now taking on the obligations that would typically fall upon a platform. They need to take into consideration terms and conditions, privacy policies, legal aspects, and regulatory considerations for running a platform, especially in a global world. So it’s a lot of liability that then shifts over to those small businesses and even brands sometimes that are doing the same thing. Whether it is something as simple or complex as content moderation or all the way up to monetizing an audience, this new world where creators can spin up and run a platform all dovetails back to the concept of creators not feeling like they have control in reaching the audience and the community that they’re building on an individual platform. And so this really became more mainstream conversation with TikTok and the issues around it potentially being shut down in the US. That was kind of the mindset shift and eyes opening for many creators, especially within the influencer subset, of realizing: we need to make sure that we have a way to reach the audience we’ve built if the individual platform that we’ve committed to over the last year or three years or so is no longer available. We need a way to continue that relationship outside of that one platform controlling it. Ken Suzan: Franklin, we have a few minutes left and a number of topics. So I’m going to switch gears and talk about a few issues. First, a major emerging topic in your paper is the evolution of protecting kids online. With state-level age-gating laws like the CAADCA and the recent FTC updates to COPPA, how should platforms navigate the significant tension between strict age verification mandates and the privacy and First Amendment rights of their users? Franklin Graves: Man, that is a whole discussion to unravel. It is a consideration that we’re seeing happen again, going back to the geopolitical nature of everything. Countries like Australia and certain countries in Europe and now even individual states in the US are trying to look at ways, and some of them have already put into place minimum age requirements before you can even sign up for an account with a social media platform. One of the things I’d just highlight quickly here is that one of the tensions is around how you verify someone’s age online and still maintain the ability to be at least pseudonymous. How do you still have a level of privacy, autonomy, and protection when it comes to having to provide something like a driver’s license or have parental consent tied and connected to an account managed by a parent in a situation where maybe it’s not appropriate or not beneficial to the child in that manner? But then maybe there are counterbalancing factors that outweigh that. All of that comes down to the technicalities of how it’s actually implemented and maintaining the sense of openness and freedom that we’ve had on the internet to date. And then the other element there is, since a lot of the internet that we think of today is more so through mobile applications, is it something that the mobile operating system providers and app store providers should be thinking about? So whether that’s the Google Play Store or the Apple App Store, where does that initial age verification need to fall? Is it at the platform level? Is it the app store or mobile device management level or something else? Yeah, there’s a lot to discuss there. And a lot of the issues we’re seeing with how the internet is changing in terms of being able to browse a website without disclosing personal information that might not have been required before is largely stemming from a focus on protecting children online. Ken Suzan: It sounds like, Franklin, we could have another episode covering lots of issues connected with that one topic alone. Franklin Graves: I would absolutely agree with that. There’s a lot going on there. And again, it’s different across the world. And so I know you all have a global listener base. And so there’s a lot of nuances to that whole discussion too, that are worth exploring. Ken Suzan: Last question for today’s episode is regarding the right of publicity. With the explosion of AI-generated synthetic media, digital replicas, and voice cloning, the right of publicity is taking center stage. What are the biggest legal risks for brands partnering with influencers right now? And how can creators protect their most valuable asset, their likeness? Franklin Graves: That’s a great question. I think we’re seeing kind of a throwing-spaghetti-against-the-wall-to-see-what-sticks approach right now by a lot of different parties, whether it’s trademark attorneys, whether it’s general entertainment attorneys or whoever. For example, we’ve seen Taylor Swift filing trademarks to protect certain sounds of her voice and phrasing that she uses. It’s a difficult area because in the realm of generative AI with deep fakes and virtual avatars, that is where it gets tricky, because traditional IP laws are just not able to fully cover that spectrum. It’s a piecemeal approach, but even then it doesn’t fully cover it. So for example, I’m based in Tennessee and a couple of years ago we had the Elvis Act that updated our right of publicity law to add voice and to explicitly reference artificial intelligence. And so that’s the kind of effort we’re probably going to continue to see: efforts to develop some framework around protecting what is essentially a privacy right, in a manner that doesn’t restrict generative AI systems from continuing to develop and operate the way they’re operating now, while layering in those protections so that in the US at least a First Amendment right doesn’t necessarily get squashed, and those traditional well-recognized efforts to not overregulate a technology in its early stages are respected. Franklin Graves: And so I think a lot of what we’re seeing is just a need to update laws. The SAG-AFTRA debate and the strikes that happened around maintaining control of your performance and any iterations of that, or building upon that by a media company that might come later, it’s all on the table right now and still being discussed, still being worked out. I think in the short run, a lot of times if it’s in a brand deal, the key question is: if you are using generative AI to enhance in some way the final deliverable for the campaign, who has control over that? Who has final say and sign-off on how that likeness or that digital replica or that person’s voice is represented? And even outside of the brand space, we’ve seen actors like James Earl Jones signing over certain aspects like their voice and allowing it to continue to be used in these manners powered by generative AI as Darth Vader. And I think I saw something that Boy George was even starting up an AI company that allows musicians, the original recording artist, to rerecord new versions of their masters so that they don’t miss out on that revenue. It’s powered by generative AI, by taking their voice now, which is significantly different than it was back in the 80s, and using generative AI to make it sound closer to the original, but all based on their current performance. So I think it’s still an evolving area. And what’s interesting too is on the platform side, we’re seeing the early stages of platforms like Google starting to acknowledge and rely on the license grant contained in their terms of service for YouTube, which grants them broad rights to use the content to run their platform. So all that to be said, it’s still early stages. I’m very interested to see where we go from here in the future, especially from a global perspective as well. Ken Suzan: Franklin, I could spend hours talking to you about this. You’re such a knowledgeable person on these topics. Maybe in a few years, will we connect again and talk further on AI and all the things that are yet to be developed? Franklin Graves: Thank you. Yeah, it doesn’t have to be another decade. Maybe we can cut it to half a decade, given the pace at which technology is going now. Ken Suzan: Sounds good, Franklin. Thanks again for being on the IP Fridays podcast.

This week, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington sided with the Center for Food Safety and the Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat in a suit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The ruling means that nine industrial shellfish operations that were approved by the Army Corps of Engineers off of Washington’s coast are unlawful. The plaintiffs argue that the USACE violated the law when relying on streamlined permitting procedures for the shellfish operations. Kristina Sinclair is the staff attorney for the Center for Food Safety. She joins us to share more.  

In this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.Innovation is at the heart of the American economy, fueled by a patent system that represented a deliberate radical break from the British model. Under English practice, the Crown granted patents as royal favors, monopolies awarded at the sovereign's pleasure, with no requirement of genuine novelty or utility. The Framers rejected this. They believed that intellectual property rights should both reward ingenuity and advance society. By drawing Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 almost verbatim from the South Carolina Constitution, they tied the grant of patents to the mandate to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts."This system democratized invention, where anyone could apply for a patent, and set the stage for centuries of American innovative dominance. The U.S. model has largely been adopted globally.As we approach the Semiquincentennial, join our panel to explore the inventive spirit unleashed after the Founding. How did the Constitution break with British common law? Why did the Framers embed IP rights in the Constitution itself rather than the Bill of Rights? What does it mean that the provision passed without recorded controversy? And how healthy are those rights today?Featuring:Prof. Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityProf. David S. Olson, Associate Professor, Boston College Law SchoolProf. Zvi Rosen, Associate Professor, UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law(Moderator) Hon. John D. Love, Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas

In this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.Innovation is at the heart of the American economy, fueled by a patent system that represented a deliberate radical break from the British model. Under English practice, the Crown granted patents as royal favors, monopolies awarded at the sovereign's pleasure, with no requirement of genuine novelty or utility. The Framers rejected this. They believed that intellectual property rights should both reward ingenuity and advance society. By drawing Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 almost verbatim from the South Carolina Constitution, they tied the grant of patents to the mandate to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts."This system democratized invention, where anyone could apply for a patent, and set the stage for centuries of American innovative dominance. The U.S. model has largely been adopted globally.As we approach the Semiquincentennial, join our panel to explore the inventive spirit unleashed after the Founding. How did the Constitution break with British common law? Why did the Framers embed IP rights in the Constitution itself rather than the Bill of Rights? What does it mean that the provision passed without recorded controversy? And how healthy are those rights today?Featuring:Prof. Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityProf. David S. Olson, Associate Professor, Boston College Law SchoolProf. Zvi Rosen, Associate Professor, UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law(Moderator) Hon. John D. Love, Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas

The Fifth Court marks Episode 150 with Part 1 of a wide-ranging conversation with recently retired Supreme Court judge, Peter Charleton.To mark Episode 150 of The Fifth Court, Peter Leonard BL and Mark Tottenham BL are joined by Mr Justice Peter Charleton, recently retired from the Supreme Court.In Part 1 of this extended interview, he reflects on republicanism and nationalism, growing up near Seán Lemass and Theodore Kingsmill Moore, music, Trinity, the King's Inns, devilling with Peter Sutherland, early years at the Bar, criminal law, defending accused persons, and the deeper questions of crime, morality and human nature.It is a thoughtful, personal and sometimes unexpectedly funny conversation with one of Ireland's best-known jurists.Before the interview, Mark and Peter discuss three recent cases from the Decisis.ie casebook.The Decisis.ie case-law section is sponsored by Charlton Solicitors and Collaborative Practitioners of Dún Laoghaire.Case 1: The High Court quashed a District Court judge's refusal to convict in speed-limit cases, holding that judges must apply the law rather than substitute their own views on whether limits are fair.Case 2: In DPP v O'Hara, the Court of Appeal upheld a murder and burglary conviction, rejecting challenges to DNA and search-warrant evidence.Case 3: In a Hague Convention child-abduction case, the court refused to return a child to New Zealand because of concerns about the mother's depression and risk of relapse.This is Part 1 of a two-part interview. Part II will be posted next week. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The separation of powers, federalism, and the rule of law are critical elements of American constitutional democracy. Judge Bernice Donald, formerly of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; Judge Robert Kugler, formerly of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey and U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court; and Judge Thomas Griffith, formerly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, explore the current state of these fundamental constitutional principles. Julie Silverbrook, the chief content and learning officer at the National Constitution Center, moderates. This program was presented in partnership with Keep Our Republic's Article III Coalition, a bipartisan group of retired federal district and circuit court judges dedicated to safeguarding the separation of powers and preserving an independent judiciary. The Coalition's civic education work informs citizens why an independent judiciary matters, how courts safeguard rights and maintain constitutional checks and balances, and the critical role that impartial justice plays in keeping our republic. Resources  Constitution 101: Separation of Powers and Federalism, National Constitution Center Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr Explore the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Support our important work ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

This Day in Legal History: Magna Carta Sealed at RunnymedeOn this day in 1215, in a meadow at Runnymede on the south bank of the Thames, King John of England affixed his seal to a document the rebellious English barons had drafted, in which the king conceded a series of limits on his own royal authority. We call it Magna Carta — the Great Charter. The immediate political context was a baronial revolt against John's tax exactions for his disastrous French wars, and most of the sixty-three chapters as drafted in 1215 are concerned with the highly specific grievances of a feudal aristocracy: scutage, wardship, the inheritance fees of widows, the freedom of the church, the standardization of weights and measures in the king's markets. The two chapters that the centuries have remembered are 39 and 40. Chapter 39 says that no free man shall be taken or imprisoned or dispossessed except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land. Chapter 40 says that to no one will the king sell, deny, or delay right or justice. The Charter was annulled by Pope Innocent III within ten weeks of sealing — the pope held that John, as a vassal of the Holy See, could not be bound by a treaty extracted under duress — and the country immediately collapsed into the First Barons' War. But John died in October 1216, his nine-year-old son Henry III's regents reissued the Charter as a tactical concession the next month, it was reissued again in 1217 and 1225, and by the late thirteenth century the 1225 version had been confirmed by successive kings as a foundational statute of the realm. Edward Coke, writing in the seventeenth century, transformed Chapter 39's “law of the land” into the doctrine of due process, and the founding generation of the American Republic picked up Coke's reading and wrote it directly into the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. The phrase “due process of law” in those amendments is the most consequential American inheritance from the Runnymede document. The principle the barons were trying to extract from a beleaguered king — that the law constrains the sovereign too — is the substrate on which everything we recognize as constitutionalism is built. Eight hundred and eleven years on, the principle is still the work.The Rhode Island travel-ban lawsuit we covered on June 8 took a sharp turn on Friday. Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr., of the District of Rhode Island held a status conference in Dorcas International Institute v. USCIS at which he was openly frustrated with the Justice Department for failing to immediately implement his June 5 vacatur of the four USCIS benefit-freeze policies for nationals of the thirty-nine travel-ban countries. The judge's message, in plain terms, was that vacatur under the Administrative Procedure Act is self-executing — the moment the order was entered, the policies ceased to exist, and the agency was obligated to resume processing affirmative benefits, asylum claims, and adjudicator-instruction reviews on the prior pre-freeze basis. The Trump administration, after the hearing, told the court it would comply, restart adjudications, and clear the backlog. It also did what defendants typically do when they have lost on the merits and lost again on compliance: it filed a notice of appeal with the First Circuit and asked the appellate court to stay the vacatur pending appeal. That is the live question now. The First Circuit's stay analysis runs through the standard Nken v. Holder factors — likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, the balance of equities, and the public interest — and the administration's strongest argument on each is going to be familiar: the executive needs administrative breathing room to implement a travel ban, mass restoration of adjudications creates national-security risk, the harm to applicants is reversible if their adjudications are paused for a few more weeks. The plaintiffs' strongest counterarguments are also familiar: the policies were unlawful when adopted and the agency had no business adopting them, the harm to applicants from continued delay is concrete and accruing daily, and the First Circuit is not in the business of staying vacaturs of unlawful agency action in order to let the agency continue acting unlawfully. Watch the First Circuit's calendar this week. The stay motion is the next inflection point.Trump officials agree to resume asylum processing after being scolded by judge | The Washington PostGoogle filed suit on Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against a China-based cybercrime network it calls the “Outsider Enterprise,” alleging that the network's members used Google's Gemini large-language model to generate the code, copy, and templates for a phishing-as-a-service platform that has built more than nine thousand fraudulent websites and sent two and a half million scam text messages in the two weeks ending June 1 alone. The complaint is significant for two reasons. First, it is, to Google's knowledge, the first time the company has affirmatively sued threat actors for using its own generative-AI product as the input to a scaled criminal operation, as distinct from the more usual posture of suing scammers who impersonate Google brands. The legal theories are a mix of Lanham Act false-designation-of-origin and trademark-infringement counts, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act counts based on Outsider's unauthorized access to Google services, breach-of-contract counts on the Gemini terms of service, and a RICO count. Second, the factual record will be a road map for the next decade of AI-misuse litigation. The complaint describes Telegram channels in which Outsider members trade prompts that get Gemini to write phishing code, a library of two hundred and ninety prebuilt templates impersonating brands ranging from the U.S. Postal Service to state DMVs to E-ZPass, and an FBI estimate that the broader campaign Outsider participates in has stolen roughly 3.87 million card numbers and caused $1.9 billion in losses since July 2023. The remedy Google is seeking is a permanent injunction shutting the operation down, plus domain seizures and account terminations across Google's services and at major U.S. carriers, which Google says it has been coordinating with the FBI, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon. The deeper legal question the case may end up clarifying is whether and to what extent platforms can use private civil suits as the front-line enforcement mechanism against AI-augmented criminal activity that the public criminal-justice system has had trouble keeping up with.Google sues Chinese cybercrime ring that weaponized Gemini AI for phishing scams | TechCrunchA federal district judge in Washington on Friday issued a preliminary injunction barring the Trump administration from continuing to implement Executive Order 14253, the order under which the National Park Service had been scrubbing exhibits, signage, and online materials at sites administered by the Department of the Interior. The judge gave the administration three weeks to restore the materials it had already removed. The order at issue, signed in March, directed federal cultural agencies to identify and remove content that, in the executive's view, reflected “improper, divisive, or anti-American ideology” or “partisan” framing. In the months that followed, the National Park Service had taken down or altered displays addressing slavery, the Civil Rights Movement, the internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War, climate change, and the histories of Native American dispossession at sites including the Stonewall National Monument, Independence Hall, and the Manzanar National Historic Site. The case is American Historical Association v. Department of the Interior, brought by historians' professional associations and a coalition of plaintiffs that includes affected park employees and visitor-experience contractors. The legal theory pleaded was multi-strand: First Amendment viewpoint discrimination as applied to government speech that has taken on a public-forum character, Administrative Procedure Act challenges on the ground that the agency failed to provide a reasoned basis for the removals and failed to consider statutory commands under the Organic Act of 1916, and a Federal Records Act challenge to the destruction of materials that constituted federal records. The judge held that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the First Amendment claim and the APA claim, found irreparable harm in the ongoing loss of public access to the underlying historical materials, and found that the public interest was best served by restoration. The administration is widely expected to appeal to the D.C. Circuit. In the meantime, the three-week restoration clock is running.Judge blocks Trump national parks order, calling it “censorship” | The Washington Post 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

We're hearing an awful lot of talk the past several days concerning the behavior of both athletes and the fans who claim to be supporters of those athletes. The New York Knicks (with the help of a top notch choke job by San Antonio) came from 29 points behind in the second half Wednesday night to beat the Spurs 107-106.  It was a mesmerizing comeback for the Knicks with an “out of nowhere” tip-in sealing the win with 1.2 seconds remaining. The Knicks pulled off the biggest comeback in NBA Finals history. New York hasn't won an NBA title since 1973.  They now have a 3-1 lead over San Antonio in this best-of-seven series.  The Spurs will host Game 5 on Saturday night at 7:30PM on ABC. That's the good news. Taylor Swift, Ben Stiller, Jerry Seinfeld and a host of celebrities partied inside Madison Square Garden.  Meanwhile, thousands of loco locals took to the streets of New York City to cheer and, sadly, cause significant property damage following the game. Remember – this was just Game 4. The Knicks haven't won anything yet. San Antonio center Victor Wembanyama had eggs thrown at him while walking into the team's hotel following the game. He said, “I mean, we can't forget it's a game.  And I'm all for passion, but to the respect of each other.  It's unacceptable”. There were 56 arrests in New York related to outdoor crowd antics following Wednesday night's NBA Finals game. You have to believe that the crazies are just warming up. One way or the other, New York fans are likely to tear-up Manhattan whether the Knicks win OR lose this series The city of New York hasn't won a major sports title in 15 years since the NFL's New York Giants won the 2011 Super Bowl.  Sports fans in America's largest city are enthralled by the playoff run of the New York Knicks basketball team. A combination of youthful enthusiasm, excessive alcoholic refreshments, and a faction of seasoned troublemakers could, quite literally, set New York on fire in the next week. Jubilant fans will likely turn cars upside down and do massive property damage in Manhattan if the Knicks should close out this series in Game 5 Saturday night in San Antonio. Can you imagine the property damage the Knicks Knuckleheads might do if their NBA team should somehow blow a 3-1 series and lose in San Antonio in Game 7 next Friday night? If this series should go to seven games, building owners in downtown Manhattan should board-up their windows prior to next Friday (if they aren't already doing so today). Meanwhile, in Lubbock, Texas… The legal and moral issues surrounding Texas Tech's $5 million transfer quarterback Brendan Sorsby boiled over this week. In a nutshell, the former University of Cincinnati QB has admitted that he bet more than $90,000 on college football games (and on most every other sport) during his first four years in college. He even bet on his own team at the time (Indiana) to win on more than one occasion while riding the bench as a back-up quarterback for the Hoosiers. The NCAA recently ruled Brendan Sorsby ineligible to play college football this fall due to violating a number of collegiate rules concerning gambling. The young man voluntarily entered and has completed a gambling addiction treatment program in recent months. After the NCAA made him ineligible to play college football this fall, Sorsby sued the NCAA in an effort to regain his final year of eligibility (and the $5 million NIL money). In a surprising ruling earlier this week, a Texas judge granted Brendan Sorsby an injunction which will allow the transfer quarterback to suit-up for the Texas Tech Red Raiders this fall. Even more ironic, the 99th District Court in Lubbock County, Texas (where every judge is a graduate of Texas Tech Law School) scheduled the actual trial to hear Sorsby's case on February 8, 2027.  That would be a few weeks following the upcoming season's college football championship game. As NBC Saturday Night Live's legendary Church Lady might say, “How conveeeeenient?” Most rational sports fans expected that Brendan Sorsby would lose this week's legal skirmish.  As a consolation prize, the quarterback is still eligible to enter the NFL after playing last season for the University of Cincinnati. The NFL will hold its annual Supplemental draft in August. Sorsby must declare his intention to enter that Supplemental draft by June 22.  The talented college quarterback is likely to find a pro football team willing to take a chance on him this fall. While many in the Texas panhandle celebrated this week's legal outcomes, the majority of other major college sports programs are angry and/or in a state of shock. Athletic directors at major universities such as Georgia and Ohio State have advised their departments to not schedule any future games (in any sport) against Texas Tech. The board of directors for the Big 12 Conference (home of Texas Tech) will hold a conference call on this subject this coming Monday, June 15.  Big 12 members such as TCU and Kansas State have voiced the possibility that their schools might decline playing football against Texas Tech this fall if Sorsby participates. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (who is running for the US Senate in November) decided to weigh in on the Brendan Sorsby matter Thursday. He warned Big 12 Conference leaders from taking any legal action against Texas Tech or be sued by the state of Texas (reminder – Texas Tech is a public university). Not be outdone, the state of Oklahoma’s Attorney General called-out Texas AG Ken Paxton on Friday.  The Oklahoma AG wants the Big 12 Conference to immediately and permanently suspend Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby for gambling violations. Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond said that the Big 12 Conference was not a party to the Sorsby vs. NCAA proceedings.  The league should send a message to college sports by suspending Sorsby for the upcoming season. “It’s leadership (Texas Tech) has prioritized winning over sport, over honor and integrity. If Texas Tech will not do the right thing, the Big 12 should,” said Drummond. Meanwhile, Fort Worth energy billionaire Cody Campbell (a Texas Tech alumnus) is fully supporting the legal position of Sorsby and his alma mater. Campbell gives millions to the university and its athletic programs annually.  The school’s athletics department can pay for the best lawyers money can buy. SwampSwami believes that Brendan Sorsby should consider moving on to the NFL for a different (but very good) reason Texas Tech's transfer quarterback will become the biggest target of every defensive football player in college football this fall.  Every school which plays football against the Red Raiders in 2026 will focus on ending Sorsby’s season on the field. Bounties are not legal or ethical.  That said, the player who ends Brendan Sorsby's college football career will be long remembered. The Sorsby Circus is bringing the worst type of spotlight to Texas Tech University’s football program along with the entire athletics department at the school. Like it or not, Texas Tech is now wearing a villain's (red and) black hat due to the school's vigorous defense of an expensive transfer quarterback who admittedly violated NCAA rules on gambling. Don’t forget.  There is one person who can quickly put an end to this mess Brendan Sorsby made many mistakes over the past several years.  He has admitted to having a serious gambling addiction.  He entered and completed a treatment program and is hopefully on the right track. As the public focuses on Sorsby, there are countless other college athletes in the same boat.  We just haven’t heard their names yet. This young man accepted an NIL offer of $5 million to transfer to Texas Tech to utilize his final year of college eligibility.  That large sum of money is much higher than Sorsby would have earned as a middle-round draft pick in April’s NFL draft. Texas Tech made it into the College Football Playoffs last year for the first time in school history.  The West Texas school is excited about its chances to make it that far again this year, too. Did you know that there are five other quarterbacks on the Texas Tech football roster today?  Brendan Sorsby is the most experienced, but the Red Raiders do have a number of other options available at their quarterback position. The June 22 deadline to enter the NFL’s Supplemental draft is a little more than one week away. Brendan Sorsby could announce that he is moving into the NFL.  That would end all of the bickering surrounding his college playing status this fall. There is also a chance that Texas Tech – without Sorsby – still might have an outstanding year with one of those five other quarterbacks emerging to lead the Red Raiders football team this season. Now, wouldn’t that be interesting? The post What Happened to Sportsmanship and Class? appeared first on SwampSwamiSports.com.

Journalist and legal analyst Katie Phang filed a landmark lawsuit (Phang v. Blanche) against the Department of Justice and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche alleging failures to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, this action is the first brought under the transparency statute.Todd Blanche opted NOT to deny Katie's assertion in her lawsuit that he violated federal law - the Epstein Files Transparency Act - in at least five ways. Phang's legal team filed a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction to force immediate compliance.Hearing Date: A federal judge scheduled the preliminary injunction hearing for June 30thGlenn explains the latest in the case and how he plans on attending the hearing.Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Journalist and legal analyst Katie Phang filed a landmark lawsuit (Phang v. Blanche) against the Department of Justice and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche alleging failures to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, this action is the first brought under the transparency statute.Todd Blanche opted NOT to deny Katie's assertion in her lawsuit that he violated federal law - the Epstein Files Transparency Act - in at least five ways. Phang's legal team filed a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction to force immediate compliance.Hearing Date: A federal judge scheduled the preliminary injunction hearing for June 30thGlenn explains the latest in the case and how he plans on attending the hearing.Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This Day in Legal History: Wallace Stands in the Schoolhouse DoorOn this day in 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace physically stood in the doorway of Foster Auditorium at the University of Alabama to block the registration of Vivian Malone and James Hood, the two Black students whose enrollment had been ordered by a federal district court. Wallace's “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door” was the culmination of a long campaign of state defiance of federal desegregation orders that ran from Brown v. Board in 1954 through Cooper v. Aaron in 1958 — the case in which a unanimous Supreme Court told the Little Rock school district, and by extension every state actor, that federal constitutional rulings are the supreme law of the land and that state officials may not nullify them.President Kennedy responded to Wallace's stand by issuing Executive Order 11111, which federalized the Alabama National Guard, and ordering Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach down to Tuscaloosa to confront the governor. Wallace gave a long speech invoking states' rights and Tenth Amendment sovereignty, then stepped aside, and Malone and Hood walked in and registered. That night, Kennedy went on national television and delivered the civil rights address that put the Civil Rights Act of 1964 onto the national agenda. The legal and political throughline matters: the schoolhouse door, the executive order federalizing the Guard, the televised address, and the omnibus civil rights legislation that followed were a single coordinated federal response to massive resistance, and the institutional habit they built — the willingness of the federal political branches to back federal court orders with whatever force is necessary — is the substrate on which the modern enforcement of civil rights law sits. Whether that habit holds up under contemporary pressure is one of the live constitutional questions of our moment.The “Anti-Weaponization Fund” saga we have been following all week reached at least a partial resolution on Wednesday when Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia declined to extend her temporary restraining order against the program into a preliminary injunction. The reason, in essence, is that the Justice Department has now formally represented to the court, in writing and through acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, that the $1.8 billion fund is “not going forward.” Brinkema took DOJ at its word for present purposes and dissolved the TRO, which under standard mootness doctrine is the right call when a defendant credibly commits to abandoning the challenged program. But she also did something practical: she warned the government in plain terms not to “play possum with this court,” language that gives the plaintiffs a built-in mechanism to come back fast if the fund quietly re-emerges under a different name.The substantive theory the plaintiffs were pressing — that the fund is an unappropriated expenditure of public money, that the underlying Trump-IRS settlement was a litigation in which the United States was never really adverse to the President in his personal capacity, and that the program's payout criteria are based on political characterizations of past prosecutions rather than any neutral standard — is now preserved for another day rather than litigated to judgment. The practical lesson is the durability of voluntary-cessation doctrine: a government defendant who is willing to abandon a program in court usually wins on mootness, but the cost is real, because future revivals get scrutinized against the prior representation. Watch the Federal Register and the DOJ component-level budget submissions for the next six months — if there is a successor program coming, those are where the first signal appears.Judge declines to halt “anti-weaponization fund” since Blanche says it's dead, but warns DOJ not to “play possum” | CBS NewsA coalition of environmental and tribal-nation plaintiffs filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Wednesday seeking to block a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-approved land exchange that would transfer 715 acres of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge to SpaceX, in return for 683 acres of privately owned land elsewhere. The plaintiffs are the Center for Biological Diversity, Save RGV, the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas, and the South Texas Environmental Justice Network.The legal theory of the case is unusually multi-statute: the complaint alleges violations of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, the National Historic Preservation Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act, with the central administrative-law argument being that the Fish and Wildlife Service's environmental analysis failed to grapple seriously with impacts on endangered ocelots, aplomado falcons, and a long list of migratory species whose habitat the refuge was designed to protect when Congress created it in 1979. The plaintiffs describe this as one of the largest national-wildlife-refuge land exchanges outside Alaska, and the suit asks for vacatur of the exchange decision rather than damages — the standard APA remedy.The political and infrastructural backdrop is hard to miss: SpaceX's Starbase facility at Boca Chica has been expanding into the Lower Rio Grande Valley for years now, and the exchange would consolidate the company's footprint on land previously held for the protection of one of the last remaining ocelot ranges in the country. The merits of the case will turn on the rigor of the FWS environmental analysis. Expect a request for a preliminary injunction within weeks.Lawsuit challenges Trump administration's land swap with SpaceX in Texas | The Washington PostA Los Angeles County jury on Wednesday added $22 million in punitive damages to the $176 million compensatory verdict already entered against socialite and former philanthropist Rebecca Grossman and former Major League Baseball pitcher Scott Erickson, bringing the total civil award to the Iskander family to roughly $198 million.The underlying facts of the case are stark: in September 2020, Grossman and Erickson left a Westlake Village restaurant after drinking and street-raced separate Mercedes SUVs through a residential neighborhood, with Grossman striking and killing two young brothers, Mark and Jacob Iskander, then 11 and 8, as they crossed a marked crosswalk with their parents.Grossman was convicted of two counts of murder in 2024 and is serving 15 years to life. The civil case the family brought is the wrongful-death companion, and the punitive damages award the jury added on Wednesday is the part that does the most policy work: the jury split the punitive award $21 million against Grossman, $1.17 million against Erickson, which under California's reprehensibility-and-net-worth framework reflects both the much greater direct culpability of Grossman as the driver and the substantial disparity in their respective financial positions.The case is notable beyond the parties involved because of how clean it is on the standard punitive-damages analysis the Supreme Court laid out in BMW v. Gore and State Farm v. Campbell: high reprehensibility, a relatively modest single-digit ratio of punitive-to-compensatory damages, and an underlying compensatory award that itself was supported by the gravity of the loss. Watch for an appeal that focuses on the compensatory rather than the punitive number — that is where the appellate leverage actually is.Jury Ups Philanthropist, Ex-Pitcher Crash Verdict To $198M | Law360 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

(00:00-23:10) – Query & Company opens a Tuesday with Jake Query & producer Eddie Garrison discussing Caitlin Clark’s game winning shot to elevate the Indiana Fever over the Washington Mystics. They also get into the San Antonio Spurs getting on the board by winning game three last night in the NBA Finals. Is there more pressure on the Spurs or Knicks in game four? (23:10-30:21) – Yesterday, Brendan Sorsby was deemed eligible for the 2026 college football season because Judge Ken Curry of the 99th District Court of Lubbock County granted a temporary injunction. Jake gives his thoughts on the entire situation. (30:21-50:59) – Indianapolis Colts right tackle Jalen Travis joins Jake Query this afternoon to discuss how he prepared this off-season knowing that he will be the starting tackle and how his back is feeling. Jake asks him how his anthropology degree from Princeton helps him within the locker room and how training camp last year was so critical to showing the coaching staff he can do a multitude of things. (50:59-1:19:14) – Mac Engel from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram joins Jake Query to inform Jake as to how this entire Brendan Sorsby has transpired down in Lubbock County. He explains the step-by-step process as to how Sorsby received an injunction, what it means moving forward for both Sorsby and Texas Tech, and makes a prediction as to whether he believes that Sorsby will play this fall for the Red Raiders. (1:12:34-1:26:26) – Last night Jake observed a sense of relief from Caitlin Clark shortly after knocking down the game winning shot for the Indiana Fever. He gives his observation on the shot and asks Eddie for his input as to why it was such a relief. (1:26:26-1:34:08) – Hour number two of Query & Company concludes with Jake revealing the three most common trends that he is seeing on his social media to compare with his young & hip producer, Eddie Garrison. (1:34:08-1:56:16) – Scott Agness from Fieldhouse Files makes an appearance on Query & Company to recap last night’s win for the Indiana Fever and join in on the Indiana Pacers discussion. Jake asks Scott why he saw a sense of relief from Caitlin Clark last night, the number of former Pacers that have transitioned into good broadcasters, and previews some of the stories that he has coming out. (1:56:16-2:15:05) – Jake Query has some questions for Eddie about the NBA Finals moving forward with the Spurs defeating the Knicks last night. Plus, they list some of the true diehard Knicks fans that first come to mind and do the same thing for the Pacers. (2:15:05-2:20:48) – Today’s show ends with JMV joining Jake in studio to preview his show!Support the show: https://1075thefan.com/query-and-company/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We Like Shooting - Ep 666 This episode of We Like Shooting is brought to you by: Foxtrot Mike (Code: WLSISLIFE) C&G Holsters (Code: WLSISLIFE) Midwest Industries (Code: WLSISLIFE) Gideon Optics (Code: WLSISLIFE) Flatline Fiber Co (Code: WLS15) Otis Technology (Code: WELIKESHOOTING15) Second Call Defense Text Dear WLS or Reviews +1 743 500 2171 Public   Show Titles   GOA GOALS Aug 1-2 in Iowa. https://goals.goa.org/ JUNE 20th, 2026 GunCon.net Tickets on sale now. Use code AGENCY171 GEAR CHAT Note Mike 102 – foxtrot mike products CANCONTRAST(Nick) CanContrast Suppressor Comparison Tool Choose a can CanContrast is an online database and interactive comparison tool for suppressors (“cans”). It enables users to select, compare, and contrast the physical size and weight of over 500 suppressor models from dozens of brands, with automatic adjustments for mounts. The site emphasizes data-only with no sales, featuring visual representations such as ruler overlays or weight bars. TRIGGER KICKER – HOFFMAN TACTICAL Hoffman Tactical Trigger Kicker Investigating some site issues, will restock in the morning. The Trigger Kicker is an active reset mechanism that replaces the disconnector in a standard AR-15 fire control group. It is contacted by the hammer to reset the trigger, then tucks under the standard safety selector to lock the trigger in the reset position until the bolt carrier returns to battery. Manufactured from hardened 4130 alloy steel, it is designed for AR-15 rifles with standard mil-spec bolt carriers and fire control groups. BULLET POINTS GUN FIGHTS Play the best Price Is Right-style GunBroker game on the internet. BANGRANK A live cast ranking segment for anything and everything in the gun world, powered by questionable certainty, strong opinions, and audience voting. THE AGENCY BRIEF WLS IS LIFESTYLE Masters of the Universe Masters of the Universe ODYSEE NVG Mono PVS-14 Hat Clip Adapter by stankycheeseman Lets you clip a PVS-14 or similar monocular to a hat. How neat is that?? It's going to be as sturdy as the hat you select for the job. Mount is pretty solid. Peep the readme. This is a 3D-printable CAD model (available as STEP files) for a hat clip adapter designed to mount a PVS-14 night vision monocular directly to a hat or cap. It includes components such as an IPD Knuckle and J Arm for compatibility with standard PVS-14 mounting interfaces. The design enables a lightweight, non-helmet alternative for monocular NVG use. GOING BALLISTIC PEW REPORT(Savage) Aero Precision, LLC and Ballistic Advantage, LLC Court-Appointed Receivership (Pierce County Superior Court Case No. 26-2-08316-4) Aero Precision and Ballistic Advantage Enter Court-Appointed Receivership Aero Precision and Ballistic Advantage are now under court-appointed receivership following an order entered in Pierce County Superior Court in Washington State on May 5, 2026. According to a public legal notice published in the Tacoma Daily Index, the court appointed J.S. Held LLC as receiver over […] On May 5, 2026, Pierce County Superior Court in Washington State appointed J.S. Held LLC as general receiver over the assets of Aero Precision, LLC (Lakewood, WA) and Ballistic Advantage, LLC (Ocoee, FL). Creditors must submit claims to the receiver; it is currently unclear whether assets will be available for distribution to general unsecured creditors. The public notice does not disclose the underlying causes or petitioner, and no filings indicate the companies have ceased operations. AMMOLAND SHOOTING SPORTS NEWS(Savage) Wilson v. Katz: Lynchburg Circuit Court Judge Patrick Yeatts Reaffirms Injunction Blocking Virginia HB 1525 Universal Background Checks A Lynchburg judge rejected Virginia's attempt to revive universal background checks on private firearm sales, keeping the injunction against State Police enforcement in place. On June 3, 2026, Lynchburg Circuit Court Judge Patrick Yeatts denied the Virginia State Police and Attorney General's motion to dissolve his October 2025 permanent injunction. The injunction struck down Virginia's universal background check requirement for private firearm sales (originally enacted in 2020 and codified at Va. Code § 18.2-308.2:5) after finding it unconstitutional under Article I, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution, particularly as applied to those under 21, and non-severable. The ruling came after the legislature passed and Gov. Abigail Spanberger signed HB 1525 in April 2026 with an emergency clause directing VSP to resume checks; plaintiffs including Gun Owners of America, Virginia Citizens Defense League, and individuals filed to enforce the existing injunction. YouTube DOES RAREBREED HAVE A GOVERNMENT SANCTIONED MONOPOLY?(Savage) Rare Breed Triggers v. DOJ Settlement and ATF Director Robert Cekada Congressional Testimony on Forced Reset Triggers YouTubeVideo | Does RareBreed Have a Government Sanctioned Monopoly? Today we are going to be discussing the most recent development in the RareBreed Triggers situation. Since the settlement with the Department of Justice there have been many lawsuits filed and a major discussion about the legality of other devices that are similar to the FRT-15. Recently the new director of the ATF, Robert Cekada, testified in front of congress and had some interesting things to say about Forced Reset Triggers. ALL LINKS, Join the Email List, and get discounts from the affiliates page: https://linktr.ee/vso_gun_channel #vsogunchannel #rarebreeds #atf #gunlaw #MONOPOLY The VSO Gun Channel video in the Going Ballistic series examines the DOJ settlement with Rare Breed Triggers allowing continued FRT-15 sales contingent on patent enforcement, alongside recent congressional testimony by the new ATF director (referred to as Robert Cekada or Sacuta in sources) clarifying the settlement's narrow scope to Rare Breed's specific forced reset trigger design rather than all similar devices. The discussion covers legal distinctions between rate of fire, trigger function, drop-in auto sears, and potential implications for competing forced reset trigger products. AMMOLAND SHOOTING SPORTS NEWS(Savage) United States v. DeBorba (9th Cir. 2026): Suppressors Not Protected as 'Arms' Under Second Amendment The Ninth Circuit ruled suppressors are not Second Amendment arms in United States v. DeBorba, a bad-facts illegal alien gun case that may hurt future suppressor challenges. The Ninth Circuit affirmed João Ricardo DeBorba's convictions for unlawful possession of firearms, ammunition, and an unregistered silencer under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The court held that silencers/suppressors are optional accessories or ‘accoutrements' rather than ‘arms' covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment, citing prior precedent such as Duncan v. Bonta. It further ruled the NFA's shall-issue registration and taxation regime is constitutional as DeBorba failed to show abusive enforcement. NRA BLOWS WHISTLE ON NRA FOUNDATION, FILES LAWSUIT IN COURT(Savage) National Rifle Association of America v. NRA Foundation (1:26-cv-00015, D.D.C.) The National Rifle Association filed a lawsuit against the NRA Foundation, asserting ownership of intellectual property and alleging the foundation's leadership is operating in bad faith and withholding funds. NRA CEO Doug Hamlin stated the foundation has declined to approve 2026 grant funding, jeopardizing programs like the NRA National Firearms Museum and Eddie Eagle GunSafe program. On January 5, 2026, the National Rifle Association filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against its affiliated charitable arm, the NRA Foundation. The complaint asserts NRA ownership of trademarks and intellectual property used by the Foundation, alleges the Foundation's leadership (described as a disgruntled faction of former NRA directors) is operating in bad faith, misleading donors, withholding or misappropriating funds intended for NRA charitable programs, and attempting to break away. The suit seeks to prevent trademark infringement, unfair competition, and separation from the NRA. REVIEWS by Listener What's frustrating you most in gun culture right now? Review: Roadrunner gunner If you haver ever heard the phrase “hes got a face for radio.” Refering to someone who is ugly. Then Savage has the charisma to stand in a field like steel fucking gong. He means well but jesus christ, im a grown man with a stutter, but everytime he reads the news, i catch myself saying “T -T- T – today jr!” I never thought id say it but i wish AAron would come back, just to read the news even he couldn'tfuck that one up. Anyways the rest of you are sufficient enough that i dont regret being in the agency/cult or whatever it is now. Thanks for tickling my ear pu$$y twice a week. Review: Kyle R. from Iowa Dear WLS,Question I'm turning into a product review because I'm glad to hear about Foxtrot Mike signing on. What is the oddest, or most expensive fix you've ever done to get a trash gun running? For yourself, friend, customer, anyone. I got a Turkish 410 AR upper to play around with. Put it on a known functioning lower with their supplied modified buffer because the proprietary BCG is slightly longer. Slam fired half a magazine. Looked it over, tried a different lower with their other buffer they supplied. Slam fired 3 rounds, had an out of battery, sheared the bolt off. Sent it back. They sent me a whole new upper right around the same time I listened to the last episode you had Foxtrot Mike on. They were talking about slam firing 9mm and buffer weights. I immediately picked up a couple recoil mitigation buffers for PCCs. When the new 410 upper showed up I weighed the supplied buffers to

Leah and Melissa break down what may be a new low for the Court: granting Alabama's request to reinstate racially discriminatory voting maps. Then, they turn to the big questions: how dead is Trump's slush fund for insurrectionists? Just how awful are Acting AG Todd Blanche and Acting DNI Bill Pulte? Will Michigan's Democratic senators stand up to Trump's appalling nominee for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan? They also cover three SCOTUS opinions from last week before Melissa speaks with Yale Law Professor Judith Resnik about her recent book, Impermissible Punishments: How Prison Became a Problem for Democracy.Favorite things: Leah: Maria Collett's speech to the PA Senate on LA v. Callais; Autocratic Judging, Rebecca L. Brown and Lee Epstein (UCLA Law Review); AOC for President, Megan Wachspress (Liberal Currents); A Shocking Betrayal of Black Americans, Mara Gay (NYT) Melissa: Imar Lyman at the Kreeger Museum in DC Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2026! 6/20/26 – New York CityLearn more: http://crooked.com/events Preorder Lawless in paperback (out June 16)Buy Melissa's bestselling book, The U.S. Constitution: A Comprehensive and Annotated Guide for the Modern ReaderFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

This Day in Legal History: Madison Introduces the Bill of RightsOn this day in 1789, James Madison rose from his seat in New York's Federal Hall — then the temporary capital of the new federal government — and gave the speech in which he introduced a list of amendments to the Constitution that we now know as the Bill of Rights. Madison had been, until quite recently, a skeptic of attaching a bill of rights to the federal Constitution: he had argued at the Constitutional Convention and in The Federalist that the structure of enumerated and separated powers was a better protection of liberty than a “parchment barrier” of textual rights, and he worried that any enumeration would be read to imply that whatever was not enumerated was not protected. What changed his mind was politics. The Antifederalist opposition in several states had made ratification conditional on amendments protecting individual rights, and Madison — by then a member of the First Congress — concluded that introducing such amendments himself was the surest way to defuse a broader constitutional convention movement that might unravel the work of 1787. The list he proposed on June 8 was longer and somewhat different from what eventually became the Bill of Rights; the House debated it through the summer, passed seventeen amendments in August, the Senate reduced them to twelve in September, and ten of those — the ones we now call Amendments I through X — were ratified by the states on December 15, 1791. June 8 is the date a reluctant convert stood up and made the case that has carried American constitutional law ever since: the proposition that the government's structural restraint is necessary but not sufficient, and that the rights of speech, conscience, due process, and the rest deserve to be written down where everyone can read them.Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr., of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island on Friday vacated four U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services policies that had, since late last year, frozen work permits, green-card adjudications, naturalization, and asylum claims for nationals of roughly 39 countries on the second Trump administration's travel ban list. The case, Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS, No. 1:26-cv-00132, was brought by a coalition of immigrant-service organizations and labor unions. Judge McConnell held that all four policies — a “Benefits Hold” freezing affirmative benefits for travel-ban country nationals, a Global Asylum Hold halting asylum processing across the board regardless of country of origin, a Comprehensive Re-Review Policy requiring USCIS to re-examine previously approved benefits, and a separate adjudicator-instruction policy treating travel-ban country origin as a negative factor — are unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act. The legal hook is familiar APA territory: the agency, McConnell concluded, failed to provide a reasoned explanation for the freezes and failed to account for the substantial reliance interests of hundreds of thousands of pending applicants. What makes this ruling stand out is the remedy. Other district courts that had blocked these policies in the last six months issued preliminary injunctions limited to named plaintiffs; McConnell vacated the policies themselves, which under standard APA practice means they cease to operate nationwide. That puts USCIS in the position of either rescinding the policies, going back to the drawing board with proper rulemaking, or appealing to the First Circuit and trying to get the vacatur stayed. Expect movement on all three fronts this week.US Judge Strikes Down Trump Policies Targeting Immigrants From 39 Countries | US NewsU.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia entered a temporary restraining order on Friday blocking the Trump administration's $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” from disbursing any money while the underlying lawsuit proceeds. The fund — created by executive order earlier this year and funded out of a settlement the administration brokered in the Trump-IRS litigation we covered in early June — was meant to compensate people the administration described as victims of the Biden Justice Department's “weaponization” of federal law enforcement, with the first contemplated payments going to defendants and witnesses from the January 6 prosecutions. Plaintiffs include former DOJ attorney Andrew Floyd and other former federal prosecutors who argue, in essence, that the fund is an unauthorized expenditure of public money: Congress never appropriated it, the settlement that supposedly funds it is itself under judicial review for whether the United States was actually adverse to the President in his personal capacity, and the program's payout criteria are based on political characterizations of past prosecutions rather than any neutral standard. Judge Brinkema's order, narrowly drawn to “ensure that no funds are irreversibly disbursed,” set a June 12 hearing on whether the freeze should be extended into a preliminary injunction. By the end of last week the situation had escalated further: on June 5 the Justice Department told two federal judges, in writing, that it would stop work on the fund altogether and that the lawsuits challenging it are now moot. That representation will be tested at this Friday's hearing, because the plaintiffs are not satisfied with a unilateral DOJ promise and want a binding court order before they go away. Watch for what Brinkema does with that disagreement on Friday.Justice Department says it will stop work on $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” after judge's ruling | CBS NewsA divided Seventh Circuit panel on Friday upheld Indiana's law restricting who may attend an execution at the Indiana State Prison, holding that the First Amendment does not give reporters a right of access to be present at the execution itself. Judge Michael Scudder wrote the 2-1 majority. The plaintiffs — the Associated Press, the Indiana Capital Chronicle, Gannett, WISH-TV, and TEGNA, represented by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press — had argued that the long line of Supreme Court cases recognizing a First Amendment right of press and public access to criminal proceedings, from Richmond Newspapers forward, extends to the carrying out of capital sentences, particularly given Indiana's recent resumption of executions after a long pause and a 2024 statute that omitted journalists from the list of permitted witnesses. The panel disagreed. The majority emphasized that Indiana's witness list — the warden, execution staff, the prison physician, a chaplain, the prisoner's spiritual adviser, up to eight family members of the victim, and up to five unspecified additional witnesses — leaves journalists free to interview those who did attend, report on every other aspect of the proceeding, and comment on the state's choice to impose or carry out the sentence, and that there is no constitutional difference between watching the execution and reporting on it secondhand. The opinion's most striking passage, candidly weighed against the press claim: allowing “uninvited strangers with no immediate connection to the underlying crime” to watch a prisoner die “risks offending the dignity of their final moments.” The dissent argued the press's structural role in informing public deliberation over the death penalty depends on first-hand observation. The split sets up a possible petition for rehearing en banc and, in the longer run, a circuit-split-ready vehicle if other circuits go the other way.7th Circ. Says Ind. Can Bar Press From Attending Executions | Law360 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

Docket Alerts:   Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard led a raid on the Fulton County Election Hub and Operating Center in Atlanta. ProPublica got the warrant. Mo Ivory, a Democratic commissioner for Fulton County, breaks it down on Instagram.   In Chicago, Marimar Martinez has moved to unseal evidence from DOJ's failed effort to prosecute her for getting shot by ICE.   Reuters reports that Marcos Charles, the top official in ICE's Enforcement and Removal Operations division, issued new guidance instructing ICE to target only immigrants who have been arrested or convicted of crimes. This would be a huge improvement, but DHS won't comment.   Main Show:   Once again, this is all the Supreme Court's fault. Specifically, its rulings in J.G.G. v. Trump and Trump v. CASA led directly to the mayhem in Minnesota. First the Court forced immigrants challenging their detention to file thousands of individual habeas cases. And then they drastically limited the power of federal judges to issue relief when it "discovered" that nationwide injunctions are illegal.    The Trump administration took this as an invitation to break the law, irrespective of how many courts tell them not to, on the theory that CASA means precedent doesn't count any more. DHS dummied up a memo saying that actually everyone without a green card must be held indefinitely. This is a gross misstatement of the law, as literally hundreds of courts have already ruled. But the Trump administration says because of CASA, they can continue to lock up people who've lived here for decades, checking in with DHS, working, paying taxes, and taking care of their families.   Judges are deluged with habeas petitions, which differ from each other only in the particulars of the cruelty being visited upon the individual immigrant. After ICE failed to obey a court order to release a habeas petitioner, Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz in the District Court of Minnesota ordered Todd Lyons, the Acting Director of ICE, to either release the guy or show up and explain why he shouldn't be held in contempt of court.    ICE released the petitioner, but Judge Schiltz was still furious. He published a list of 96 violations of court orders in January alone — and that's only in Minnesota! Thanks, Chief Justice Roberts!   On the plus side, Judge Schiltz's colleague Judge John Tunheim issued a TRO ordering ICE to release every refugee detained under the erroneous memo and quit kidnapping them and spiriting them away to Texas.   And for subscribers, we'll discuss the Ninth Circuit's ruling that bars Kristi Noem from unilaterally canceling temporary protected status for a million Venezuelans and Haitians.   Hundreds of judges reject Trump's mandatory detention policy, with no end in sight https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/05/trump-administration-immigrants-mandatory-detention-00709494   Fulton County Election Hub Warrant https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26513986-1-28-26-fulton-warrant/   Marimar Martinez Motion to Unseal https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.487595/gov.uscourts.ilnd.487595.100.0.pdf   Exclusive: ICE officers in Minnesota directed not to interact with 'agitators' in new orders https://www.reuters.com/world/ice-officers-minnesota-directed-not-interact-with-agitators-new-orders-2026-01-29/   J.G.G. v. Trump https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a931_2c83.pdf   Trump v. CASA https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf   Tobay Robles v. Noem https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72120823/tobay-robles-v-noem   Judge Tunheim TRO https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.230526/gov.uscourts.mnd.230526.41.0.pdf   Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod  

As judges continue to weigh in, President Trump is finding that despite his litigious efforts, he can't always get what he wants. Mary and Andrew begin this week with the latest fallout from his $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund, which is now under judicial review after a group of federal judges filed a motion arguing that the original lawsuit that prompted the fund was “itself a fraud on the court.” This prompted the news, first reported by Axios, that the Trump administration would abandon the fund altogether. Mary and Andrew tie this into another instance in which the administration is losing in the courts, with Judge Mehta's decision refusing to dismiss the indictment of Oath Keepers' leader Stewart Rhodes, among others whose sentences were commuted. They then move to a ruling ordering the removal of Trump's name from the Kennedy Center facade, a setback in his attempt to reshape the renowned preforming arts center. And after an update on the criminal case against the Southern Poverty Law Center, Andrew shares some insight into his recent New York Times op-ed which offers a path to stop vindictive prosecutions altogether. Further Reading: Here is Andrew's recent New York Times op ed: This Is How to Stop Trump's Vindictive Prosecutions Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

AlabamaSen. Tuberville calls out the Democratic Party for support of Graham PlatnerALGOP sets final hearing on the residency challenge to Tuberville in his gubernatorial raceDemocrat state lawmaker calls for moratorium on data centers here in stateRepublican who ran in Lt. Governor primary now endorsing John Wahl in runoff raceCarnival Cruise lines has data breach affecting info on 5.9M travelersNationalDC appeals court says transgender troops can stay and fulfill military serviceDOJ will drop its compensation fund after District Court ruling in VAUS Dept. of Transportation subpeonas docs from state of NY re: bus driver and fatal accident in VATN nurse stole fentanyl from surgery center, AI tracking system failed to flag the discrepanciesControversial section of NDAA integrates 6 sections of US military with Israel

Case Law Update   •          Jawad A. Shah, P.C., Alliance Anesthesia, PLLC, Insight Anesthesia, PLLC and Insight Radiologists, P.C. v Auto Club Ins Assoc, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued April 20, 2026 (Docket No. 372543) •          MemberSelect Ins Co v Michael James Clancy, PR of the Estate of Connor James Clancy and Anthony Dwayne Magee and Debbie Magee, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued April 23, 2026 (Docket No. 372802)   Trending Topics in PIP Litigation   •          Staged accident fraud recovery •          Uber Technologies, Inc., et al. v Powell, et al., 2:26-cv-02195, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, filed April 14, 2026

fWotD Episode 3307: Menora v. Illinois High School Association Welcome to featured Wiki of the Day, your daily dose of knowledge from Wikipedia's finest articles.The featured article for Monday, 25 May 2026, is Menora v. Illinois High School Association.Menora v. Illinois High School Association, 683 F.2d 1030 (7th Cir. 1982), is a case heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit centered on two Jewish schools seeking to play in an interscholastic basketball tournament run by the Illinois High School Association (IHSA). The IHSA would not let the schools compete unless their students removed their religious head-coverings, called kippot (sg. kippah). The kippot violated a rule against players wearing headgear on the court, according to the IHSA, but the students refused to play without them. They, along with their parents and schools, sued the IHSA in 1981, arguing that their First Amendment right of freedom of religion had been violated. The IHSA responded that the safety concern was reasonable because a kippah could fall off during play, causing injury.The Supreme Court's ruling in Sherbert v. Verner (1963) sets out a two-part test of government restrictions on religious freedom, known as the Sherbert test. Under the test, the restriction has to be justified by a compelling interest that outweighs the loss of religious freedom, and it has to preserve religious freedom as much as possible. The District Court for the Northern District of Illinois issued an injunction, allowing the students to play with kippot on while the case was ongoing. Months later, the district court issued its judgment in favor of the schools, citing the Sherbert test. Judge Milton Shadur found that the IHSA did not have a compelling interest because the IHSA could not provide any evidence that kippot had ever caused an injury.The Seventh Circuit vacated the district court's ruling, forgoing the Sherbert test in favor of the false conflict doctrine – under this approach, the court rigorously defines the interests of the two parties, and in doing so, may find that little to no conflict actually exists between them. The court reasoned that if the schools could design a head-covering that met the IHSA's safety concerns, which the court felt were reasonable, the conflict would be resolved. The dissent argued that the district court had correctly interpreted Sherbert and that the ruling should not have put the burden of resolving the conflict on the schools. A settlement was reached in June 1983, allowing kippot to be worn when secured with contour clips. Legal scholars criticized the Seventh Circuit's false conflict approach as unsupported by precedent, writing that if the Sherbert test were properly applied, the court would have put the burden on the IHSA to uphold safety without infringing on religious freedom, not the schools. American Jewish communities largely took it as a victory that the students were allowed to play with kippot on. The Supreme Court's later ruling in Employment Division v. Smith (1990) limited the reach of the Sherbert test, possibly making it inapplicable to cases like Menora.This recording reflects the Wikipedia text as of 00:17 UTC on Monday, 25 May 2026.For the full current version of the article, see Menora v. Illinois High School Association on Wikipedia.This podcast uses content from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Visit our archives at wikioftheday.com and subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Follow us on Bluesky at @wikioftheday.com.Also check out Curmudgeon's Corner, a current events podcast.Until next time, I'm generative Aria.

OA1263 - Two of the most egregiously impeachable things ever to happen in the United States have just occurred on the same day this week:  The so-called “settlement” between Donald Trump and his own IRS which guarantees his immunity from consequences for any financial  a slush fund for his friends and family and  A Texas federal judge forcing a Rhode Island hospital to turn over records for trans kids while also attempting to specifically limit where this order can be challenged--and making absurd threats to anyone who even thinks about talking about challenging it We take a closer look at the alleged legal basis for both actions and how the Trump “settlement” compares to the previous record-holder for Presidential financial corruption set 123 years ago before getting on to much better news in today's footnote: an underdog Boston lawyer who has taken to the mic to call out some much bigger law dogs. “Settlement” Agreement, President Donald Trump et al. v. Internal Revenue Service et al. (5/18/2026) Untitled document, Office of the Attorney General (5/19/2026) Order Closing Case, President Donald Trump et al. v. Internal Revenue Service et al., Southern District of Florida (5/18/2026) Complaint, Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges v. Donald J. Trump, D.C. District Court (5/20/2026) Order of Court, In RE: Motion to Quash Administrative Subpoena to Rhode Island Hospital, First Cir. (5/19/2026) Emergency Motion to Quash Subpoena In Duces Tecum, In Re: Administrative Subpoena 25-1431-032 to Rhode Island Hospital, Rhode Island District Court (5/4/2026) @joerezlaw on Instagram Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

Attorneys representing the Montezuma County board of commissioners and a corporation seeking to build a Dollar General store here made their cases in District Court on Thursday.

Two Ghanaian brothers, Jamal and Kamal Abubakari, together with U.S.-based woman Amanda Joy Opoku-Boachie, have been indicted in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio for their alleged involvement in an international romance scam that defrauded elderly Americans of millions of dollars... Listen for MORE!!

Who will stand firm when constitutional limits are tested? In this short clip, Robin Frazer Clark reflects on the role district court judges may play as a first line of defense in protecting the rule of law. This moment comes from a larger See You In Court conversation with Professor Steven Vladek about the shadow docket, the Supreme Court, due process, judicial independence, and the pressure being placed on courts and lawyers in this moment. Watch and listen to more from See You In Court: https://seeyouincourtpodcast.org/ https://www.youtube.com/@seeyouincourtpodcast https://seeyouincourt.podbean.com/

A Cortez man accused of brutally beating three men in Veterans Park in 2025, killing one of them, entered a not-guilty plea in District Court on Wednesday. In other news, a man who was struck by a plane and killed after he trespassed onto a runway at Denver International Airport on Friday reportedly had lived in Montezuma County.

This episode with Daniel Radigan is one I have been looking forward to for a while. Danny is a 3L at Case Western Reserve University School of Law and a finalist for Rhetoric's Moot Court Madness competition. Danny takes us down his journey, from growing up in Cleveland to playing Division I soccer as a goalie at Duquesne University, to working for his distant cousin Scott Lynch at a small probate firm in Chardon, Ohio, that ultimately sold him on going to law school.What stands out about Danny is just how much he has taken advantage of his time in law school. He has stacked clerkships and externships at the Milton Kramer Law Clinic, the U.S. Attorney's Office, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, and a summer associate position at Porter Wright, all leading up to a summer at Baker Hostetler and a federal clerkship lined up after graduation with a Judge in Pittsburgh, who he actually took a pre-law class with as a junior in undergrad. A full-circle moment if there ever was one. Danny also gets into his love of moot court, his thoughts on AI in legal writing, and his honest take on using Cicero throughout the Moot Court Madness competition.This was a fantastic conversation with a guy who is clearly going to make a great attorney one day!Danny's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/daniel-radiganBe sure to check out the Official Sponsors for the Lawyers in the Making Podcast:Rhetoric - Empowers your teaching and training with AI that strengthens learning, protects integrity, and proves authentic understanding, for students and professionals alike, with CICERO. Find them here: userhetoric.comThe Law School Operating System™ Recorded Course - This course is for ambitious law students who want a proven, simple system to learn every topic in their classes to excel in class and on exams. Go to www.lisablasser.com, check out the student tab with course offerings, and use code LSOSNATE10 at checkout for 10% off Lisa's recorded course!Start LSAT - Founded by former guest and 22-year-old superstar, Alden Spratt, Start LSAT was built upon breaking down barriers, allowing anyone access to high-quality LSAT Prep. For $110, you get the Start LSAT self-paced course, and using code LITM10, you get 10% off the self-paced course! Check out Alden and Start LSAT at startlsat.com and use codeLITM10 for 10% off the self-paced course!Lawyers in the Making Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Lawyers in the Making Podcast at lawyersinthemaking.substack.com/subscribe

In this reprise episode, Judge Julia Smith Gibbons of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit shares how the relationships she formed throughout her career paved the way for her to become the first woman trial judge of a court of record in Tennessee, followed by distinguished service on both the U.S. District Court and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. She is the recipient of the Devitt Award, the highest honor awarded to an Article III judge, for significant contributions to the administration of justice, the advancement of the rule of law, and improvement of society as a whole. Listen in as Judge Gibbons shares insights gained throughout her trailblazing career.

In a recent joint update to Judge Paul A. Engelmayer and Judge Richard M. Berman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, top Department of Justice officials — including Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, and U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton — acknowledged the massive scope and challenges involved in releasing millions of pages of investigative materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. In a letter filed with both judges, the DOJ said it has reviewed “millions of pages” of files including documents, audio, and video recordings, and made “substantial progress” in identifying and redacting materials to protect victim identities. However, the department stressed that it cannot provide a specific completion date for when the entire review and release process will be finished, citing continued quality-control checks, document management preparation, and redaction efforts as necessary steps to comply with the law while safeguarding sensitive information.The update came amid political and legal pressure after the statutory deadline of Dec. 19, 2025 passed with only a small fraction of the files publicly released. While the DOJ insists it is working toward releasing the materials “in the near term,” lawmakers, victims' advocates, and the public have sharply criticized the slow pace and heavy redactions, arguing the department is failing to meet both the letter and spirit of the transparency law. Separate court actions around the same time saw Judges Engelmayer and Berman grant motions to unseal certain grand jury and investigative records in the Maxwell and Epstein matters — interpreting the new law as overriding traditional secrecy protections — but the broader document release effort remains ongoing.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ says it will finish releasing Epstein files "in the near term," but doesn't offer specific date - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The MacVoices Live! panel reviews the latest on the evolving legal battle between Apple and Masimo, highlighting recent rulings favoring Apple while leaving key issues  like blood oxygen features and damages unresolved. Chuck Joiner, David Ginsburg, Web Bixby, Guy Serle, Jim Rea, Jeff Gamet, Marty Jencius, Brian Flanigan-Arthurs and Eric Bolden also explore whether AI-driven devices could challenge the iPhone, and how ecosystem lock-in, user habits, and app ecosystems figure into the equation.  MacVoices is supported by NordLayer. Secure your network & stay compliant with one toggle-ready platform. Get an exclusive offer: up to 22% off NordLayer yearly plans plus 10% on top with the coupon code: MACVOICES10 at NordLayer.com/macvoices. Try it risk-free—14-day money-back guarantee. Show Notes: Chapters: 0:00 Introduction to Apple–Masimo legal developments 0:12 Status of Apple Watch blood oxygen limitations 1:32 Legal implications and ongoing appeals 3:46 Trade Commission vs. court cases explained 5:19 Apple's position and potential damages 7:05 Patent dispute and financial stakes 10:15 Transition to AI and smartphone discussion 11:45 AI impact on iPhone relevance 12:27 OpenAI phone speculation and ecosystem lock-in 15:03 Market stability and barriers to entry 18:20 Privacy concerns and user behavior 19:49 Blackphone and niche security devices 23:07 iPhone battery issue anecdote and tips Links: The new iPhones have a problem turning back on after the battery runs out - 9to5Mac https://9to5mac.com/2026/04/26/iphone-turned-off-dead-how-to-turn-back-on/   Massimo's Apple Watch ban complaint dismissed by U.S. District Court https://appleinsider.com/articles/26/04/25/massimos-apple-watch-ban-complaint-dismissed-by-us-district-court   iPhone gets more important as every AI improves, Perplexity CEO says https://appleinsider.com/articles/26/04/23/iphone-gets-more-important-as-every-ai-improves-perplexity-ceo-says   The iPhone is 'not getting disrupted' at all by AI, says Perplexity CEO - 9to5Mac https://9to5mac.com/2026/04/23/the-iphone-is-not-getting-disrupted-at-all-by-ai-says-perplexity-ceo/ Guests: Web Bixby has been in the insurance business for 40 years and has been an Apple user for longer than that.You can catch up with him on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, but prefers Bluesky. Eric Bolden is into macOS, plants, sci-fi, food, and is a rural internet supporter. You can connect with him on Twitter, by email at embolden@mac.com, on Mastodon at @eabolden@techhub.social, on his blog, Trending At Work, and as co-host on The Vision ProFiles podcast. Brian Flanigan-Arthurs is an educator with a passion for providing results-driven, innovative learning strategies for all students, but particularly those who are at-risk. He is also a tech enthusiast who has a particular affinity for Apple since he first used the Apple IIGS as a student. You can contact Brian on twitter as @brian8944. He also recently opened a Mastodon account at @brian8944@mastodon.cloud. Jeff Gamet is a technology blogger, podcaster, author, and public speaker. Previously, he was The Mac Observer's Managing Editor, and the TextExpander Evangelist for Smile. He has presented at Macworld Expo, RSA Conference, several WordCamp events, along with many other conferences. You can find him on several podcasts such as The Mac Show, The Big Show, MacVoices, Mac OS Ken, This Week in iOS, and more. Jeff is easy to find on social media as @jgamet on Twitter and Instagram, jeffgamet on LinkedIn., @jgamet@mastodon.social on Mastodon, and on his YouTube Channel at YouTube.com/jgamet. David Ginsburg is the host of the weekly podcast In Touch With iOS where he discusses all things iOS, iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Apple Watch, and related technologies. He is an IT professional supporting Mac, iOS and Windows users. Visit his YouTube channel at https://youtube.com/daveg65 and find and follow him on Twitter @daveg65 and on Mastodon at @daveg65@mastodon.cloud. Marty Jencius, Ph.D.,is a counselor educator and technology pioneer who has spent 30 years bringing emerging tech into his field — from founding one of the first professional listservs (CESNET-L) to podcasting, virtual reality, and now AI and AR. He is the founder of ThePodTalk.net, where he produces Vision ProFiles, The Old Mac Gang, A.I. Productivity Workflow, The Tech Savvy Professor, 15 Minute Bytes, The Neo Notebook, and Fade to Chat: Golden Age Cinema. He is also a regular panelist on MacVoices Live!, In Touch with iOS, and The Mac Show. Find him on Bluesky and Mastodon. Jim Rea built his own computer from scratch in 1975, started programming in 1977, and has been an independent Mac developer continuously since 1984. He is the founder of ProVUE Development, and the author of Panorama X, ProVUE's ultra fast RAM based database software for the macOS platform. He's been a speaker at MacTech, MacWorld Expo and other industry conferences. Follow Jim at provue.com and via @provuejim@techhub.social on Mastodon. Guy Serle, best known for being one of the co-hosts of the MyMac Podcast, sincerely apologizes for anything he has done or caused to have happened while in possession of dangerous podcasting equipment. He should know better but being a blonde from Florida means he's probably incapable of understanding the damage he has wrought. Guy is also the author of the novel, The Maltese Cube. You can follow his exploits on Twitter, catch him on Mac to the Future on Facebook, at @Macparrot@mastodon.social, and find everything at VertShark.com.   Support:      Become a MacVoices Patron on Patreon      http://patreon.com/macvoices      Enjoy this episode? Make a one-time donation with PayPal Connect:      Web:      http://macvoices.com      Twitter:      http://www.twitter.com/chuckjoiner      http://www.twitter.com/macvoices      Mastodon:      https://mastodon.cloud/@chuckjoiner      Facebook:      http://www.facebook.com/chuck.joiner      MacVoices Page on Facebook:      http://www.facebook.com/macvoices/      MacVoices Group on Facebook:      http://www.facebook.com/groups/macvoice      LinkedIn:      https://www.linkedin.com/in/chuckjoiner/      Instagram:      https://www.instagram.com/chuckjoiner/ Subscribe:      Audio in iTunes      Video in iTunes      Subscribe manually via iTunes or any podcatcher:      Audio: http://www.macvoices.com/rss/macvoicesrss      Video: http://www.macvoices.com/rss/macvoicesvideorss

All-time highs – SP500 up 9% MTD – NAS100 even more Balanced risk – up or down from here is evenly matched All tech right now (Example Monday Equal Weighted up 0.33%, SP500 down 0.35%) Worried about No More Mr. Nice Guy The new “Blockchain” , “SPAC”, “MEME” that is pushing stocks PLUS we are now on Spotify and Amazon Music/Podcasts! Click HERE for Show Notes and Links DHUnplugged is now streaming live - with listener chat. Click on link on the right sidebar. Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter Warm-Up - HUGE MOVES - All from Tweets - Earnings seasons - banks did goooood -- Earnings season - carrot ahead of next week when the tech giants report (lots of bulls on this) - A belated 420 day to all you stoners out there! Grab a gummy, come back in about 45 minutes and listen - show will be much better... - Tariff refunds now available Markets - All-time highs - SP500 up 9% MTD - NAS100 even more - Balanced risk - up or down from here is evenly matched -- All tech right now (One day Equal Weighted up 0.33%, SP500 down 0.35%,) - Equal weight up 4.5% MTD, S&P up 9% - Worried about No More Mr. Nice Guy ? - Seems like Trump is bored with the Iran thing... - The new "Blockchain" , "SPAC", "MEME" that is pushing stocks Announcing the Winner of the Closest to the Pin for NetGear... Open /Closed - Straits of Hormuz closed again, and again - The brief opening allowed for a cruise ship to sneak through last week. - Celestyal Discovery, a 1,360-guest vessel operated by Greece-based Celestyal Cruises, departed Port Rashid in Dubai, U.A.E., on April 17 at 11:36 a.m. local time, becoming the first cruise ship known to exit the strait since the crisis began earlier this year. - No passengers aboard - aside from Captain and Crew. - - That must have been a pretty scary passing.... OIL - Oil hovering in the $80-$90 range for a while, now topping $100 - WTI and Brent flipped back to the normal relationship - UAE leaving OPEC - (accounts for 12% of OPEC and 4% of global oil) ---- They need more flexibility and there seems to be a rift  with Saudi Arabia and others as they have not been protected -- China! China to begin exporting jet fuel, diesel and gasoline - DOES THIS MEAN PRICED IN YUAN? Economics - Retail sales up more than expected. - Some is due to the high cost of gas - but stripping out gas prices - still beat expectations - How do we square this with the UMich at all-time lows? Consumer Confidence Retail Sales YoY Chips - MRVL Shares jumped more than 7% after a report by The Information said the company is in talks with Google to build two new AI chips. - AVGO (Broadcom) dipped as they had a deal announced prior and this seems to have watered down some of the importance. - Fast forward a few days and then we see a story about OpenAi missing user and revenue projections. Commentary about concern that if they do not meet their numbers, may not have enough money to fund all the build-outs they promised. (Lots of names dropping on this concern) Tim Apple - Apple announces that Tim Cook will become executive chairman of Apple's board of directors and John Ternus, senior vice president of Hardware Engineering, will become Apple's next chief executive officer effective on September 1, 2026. - Ternus joined Apple's product design team in 2001 and became a vice president of Hardware Engineering in 2013. He joined the executive team in 2021 as senior vice president of Hardware Engineering. Throughout his tenure at Apple, Ternus has overseen hardware engineering work on a variety of groundbreaking products across every category. He was instrumental in the introduction of multiple new product lines, including iPad® and AirPods, as well as many generations of products across iPhone®, Mac®, and Apple Watch. - Ternus's work on Mac has helped the category become more powerful and more popular globally than at any time in its 40-year history. Prior to Apple, Ternus worked as a mechanical engineer at Virtual Research Systems. He holds a bachelor's degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Pennsylvania. Mo Money - Vendor Financing - Anthropic to secure up to 5 gigawatts (GW) of current and future generations of Amazon's Trainium chips to train and power their advanced AI models. - Anthropic's Claude Platform available on AWS, providing their full AI developer experience in one place. - Amazon to invest $5 bln in Anthropic today and up to an additional $20 bln in the future. Operation Vaccu Suck - AST SpaceMobile — Shares fell 15% after a satellite launched  was placed into the wrong orbit. - The company said in a release it expects the cost of the satellite to be recovered by an insurance policy, and it still plans to conduct orbital launches once every month to two months in 2026. - DH Space Cleanup - this is going to be huge. Like the Spaceballs Mega Maid Scene - goes from suck to blow. Mega maid cleaning up space trash - Operation Vaccu Suck Fed Chair Nominee - Fed Chair nominee Kevin Warsh told Senate hearing that Fed must stay independent and "stay in its lane" - Opening statement (Senate) : "I do not believe the operational independence of monetary policy is particularly threatened when elected officials—presidents, senators, or members of the House—state their views on interest rates. Central bankers must be strong enough to listen to a diversity of views from all corners. - But the actual confirmation may still be stuck until the lawsuit against Powell is dropped (Which it seems is in process) Drugs man... - Compass Pathways — The biotechnology company surged nearly 25% after President Donald Trump signed an executive order that directs his administration to speed up reviews of psychedelic drugs. - Compass is conducting studies of psychedelics to create drugs for treatment-resistant depression and PTSD. HOW? - A refund system for businesses that paid tariffs which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled President Donald Trump imposed without the constitutional authority to do so is scheduled to launch Monday. - Importers and their brokers will be able to begin claiming refunds through an online portal beginning at 8 a.m., according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the agency administering the system. - It's the first step in a complicated process that also might eventually lead to refunds for consumers who were billed for some or all of the tariffs on products shipped to them from outside the United States. SUBS Emerging - Sandwich chain Jersey Mike's has confidentially filed for an IPO. - - Blackstone bought a majority stake in the sandwich chain in 2024 in a deal that valued the company at roughly $8 billion. - - - With more than 3,000 locations nationwide, Jersey Mike's is the second-largest hoagie sandwich chain in the U.S. -- Did some research - typical franchisee makes about $100-$200k per store. ----- Initial cost to get store going ~ $700k (3-7 year make-good on initial investment plus risks) NEW Stock MOVER - SPACS were HOT - now by all accounts one of the worst performance groups EVER - AI Pivot - - - Not sure this has legs like some of the ones in the past... - Myseum shares more than doubled after the social media firm became the latest company to refocus efforts on artificial intelligence. -----Shares of Myseum, which has been renamed Myseum.AI, will still trade under the MYSE ticker - The New Jersey-based company announced Wednesday that it would change its name to Myseum.AI amid a concentration on integrating AI into its platforms like Picture Party and DatChat. Myseum will use AI agents to manage personal media in a way that adapts to users' preferences while also maintaining privacy, the company said. - Allbirds' shares during the previous session after the struggling shoemaker announced a pivot to AI (Went from $3 to $24 and now $11) Crypto News - Charles Schwab is rolling out crypto trading, allowing clients to buy bitcoin and ether in the coming weeks. - The move places the brokerage in direct competition with Robinhood and Coinbase, both of which tend to serve younger clients and offer commission-free trading on stocks (but still carry a fee on crypto). - Schwab is the latest example of increasing crypto acceptance by traditional financial firms that previously were waiting on the sidelines to launch crypto offerings. (Only Ether and Bitcoin) -- Stock was down on this news an some earnings hangover (8% from recent high) - Robinhood and Coinbase had some selling on the news too.... OpenAi - Nastyness - Sam Altman is seeking the dismissal of punitive damages claims in his sister's civil lawsuit accusing the OpenAI co-founder and chief executive of repeated sexual abuse more than two decades ago, an accusation he denies. - Annie Altman accused her brother of sexually abusing and raping her between 1997 and 2006 at the family home in suburban Clayton, Missouri, starting when she was three and he was 12. She said the "last acts of sexual abuse and rape" occurred when Sam Altman was an adult. He is now 40. - Sam Altman is countersuing his sister for defamation over her posts, including a video that said "an almost tech billionaire" molested her. (He is seeking $1) Other Strange - FBI Director Kash Patel filed a defamation lawsuit against the Atlantic and its reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick following the publication of an article on Friday alleging the director had a drinking problem that could pose a threat to national security. - The magazine's story, initially titled “Kash Patel's Erratic Behavior Could Cost Him His Job," cited more than two dozen anonymous sources expressing concern about Patel's “conspicuous inebriation and unexplained absences” that “alarmed officials at the FBI and the Department of Justice.” - The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks $250 million in damages. Netflix News - Netflix beat Wall Street expectations for first-quarter revenue and reported a big jump in earnings per share thanks in part to a termination fee related to its proposed Warner Bros. Discovery deal. - The company said it expects second-quarter revenue to increase 13% and reiterated its earlier warning that content spending would be weighted in the first half of the year due to the timing of title launches. - The company announced Reed Hastings, Netflix's co-founder and current chairman, would exit the board in June when his term expires. - Netflix reiterated that it's on track to reach $3 billion in advertising revenue in 2026, which would mark a doubling year over year, as that newer revenue line shows growth. ----Shares fell 9% after the announcement QVC - QVC Group Inc. has filed for bankruptcy protection in an effort to shed $5 billion in debt, as the company struggles with declining network viewership and stiff competition for its e-commerce operation. - QVC's business model, which relies on live sales sessions and call-in ordering, gave customers a sense of a personal relationship with their favorite peddlers, but the company's best year ever was in 2020, during the Covid-19 pandemic, and its revenue has dropped by more than a third since then. - The rise of short-form video platforms like TikTok, which has seen success with live shopping and has brought in more than $15 billion in US revenue in 2025, poses a significant challenge to QVC as it tries to restructure its debt and evolve its business model. - There will still be QVC for a while - really just a debt restructure - but eventually they are toast Spirit - 9 Lives? - Spirit Aviation Holdings Inc. has floated offering the US government an equity stake in the discount carrier to help stave off its potential liquidation, according to people familiar with the matter. - The Air Current first reported that Spirit is seeking a bailout from the US government. - Any proposed bailout is likely to get pushback from competitors that are also struggling with a spike in jet fuel prices during the conflict in the Middle East, some of the people said. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy plans to meet with low-cost airline chief executives this week to discuss their challenges, the people said. Just IN - Jetblue CEO told employees it isn't considering filing for bankruptcy protection this year. - Geraghty's comments come amid higher fuel costs and speculation sparked by the New York-based carrier's founder that the airline could go bust. - The airline has sufficient liquidity and access to additional capital, Geraghty said in an internal memo reviewed by Bloomberg. That includes a recently secured $500 million loan backed by aircraft, with an option to raise another $250 million. Robot 1/2 Marathon - A humanoid robot completed a half-marathon in 50 minutes and 26 seconds, about seven minutes faster than the men's world record. - The second annual robot half marathon showed rapid advances in artificial intelligence, with 40% of the robots running autonomously and demonstrating improvement in handling generalized environments. - The race, which featured over 100 teams and 300 robots, showcased China's industrial policy priorities, including progress in artificial intelligence and robotics to mitigate the economic risks of an aging population. - About 40% of the robots this year rant autonomously Crazy Short Squeeze AVIS Earnings on the way... Microsoft EPS: ~$4.00–$4.05 (+15–17% YoY) Revenue: ~$81–82 billion (+15–16% YoY) Focus: Azure growth, AI monetization, and whether heavy AI spending is translating into margins. Alphabet (Google) EPS: ~$2.60–$2.70 (~5% YoY decline, due to higher depreciation) Revenue: ~$106–107 billion (+18–20% YoY) Focus: Strong Cloud growth and proof that AI investment is turning into sustainable revenue. Meta Platforms EPS: ~$6.60–$6.70 (+20%+ YoY) Revenue: ~$55–56 billion (+18–22% YoY) Focus: AI?driven advertising performance, core margins, and cost discipline outside Reality Labs. Amazon EPS: ~$1.60–$1.65 (+10–12% YoY) Revenue: ~$177–180 billion (+13–14% YoY) Focus: AWS growth, advertising margins, and clarity around large AI capital spending plans. Apple EPS: ~$1.90–$2.00 (+15–16% YoY) Revenue: ~$90–95 billion (mid?teens YoY growth) Focus: Services growth, iPhone demand stability, and capital return priorities.       Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? THE WINNER OF THE CLOSEST TO THE PIN for NETGEAR Winners will be getting great stuff like the new "OFFICIAL" DHUnplugged Shirt!     FED AND CRYPTO LIMERICKS   See this week's stock picks HERE Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter

In this mini episode, Sheyahshe provides an update on the case of Ella Mae Begay, a Navajo elder who disappeared from her home in Sweetwater, Arizona in June 2021.After a federal judge ruled a key confession inadmissible in 2024, prosecutors moved forward with a plea agreement that would have allowed Preston Henry Tolth to plead guilty to a single robbery charge, potentially avoiding additional prison time and any future prosecution for murder or manslaughter.Earlier this month, a U.S. District Court judge rejected that agreement following testimony from Begay's family, who continue to seek accountability and the return of their loved one.Sources:https://apnews.com/article/ella-mae-begay-missing-murdered-indigenous-tolth-ddef9fd5bdaf4b29a0553fd532ead458https://www.abqjournal.com/news/suspect-enters-new-guilty-plea-in-the-case-of-missing-navajo-grandmother/3024048https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2026-04-09/judge-rejects-plea-agreement-in-case-of-missing-navajo-elder-ella-mae-begaySupport the show

In 2021, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York allowed Virginia Giuffre's civil lawsuit against Prince Andrew to proceed, rejecting the Duke's attempts to have the case dismissed. Andrew's legal team had argued that Giuffre's 2009 settlement agreement with Jeffrey Epstein protected him from liability, but Kaplan ruled that the document's language was too vague to guarantee immunity for the prince. The judge also rejected efforts by Andrew's attorneys to delay proceedings or challenge jurisdiction, stating that service had been properly carried out and that the court had the authority to move forward.Throughout the pretrial stages, Judge Kaplan issued several pointed warnings to Andrew's legal team, cautioning them against what he saw as stalling and procedural gamesmanship. At one point, he rebuked their reliance on “technical arguments” instead of addressing the substantive claims, making it clear he would not tolerate obstruction. His firm handling of the case underscored that no one, royal or otherwise, was above the law. Ultimately, the case never went to trial—Prince Andrew settled with Giuffre in early 2022—but Kaplan's rulings were pivotal in ensuring that the lawsuit could not be quietly swept aside.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Cole Allen, the suspect in Saturday night's shooting at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner, is expected to be arraigned in U.S. District Court this afternoon.   We have ABC News Reporter Sasha Pezenik with more

Montgomery Blair Sibley is a former American lawyer who had his Florida Bar license suspended in 2008, and is best known for defending Deborah Palfrey, the "DC Madam", in 2007-2008.[1][2]Blair wrote a book about Palfrey, and his defense of her, entitled Why Just Her: The Judicial Lynching of the D.C. Madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey.[2] Henry Vinson, author of Confessions of a D.C. Madam, wrote that Sibley "had to contend with the feds judicial chicanery and sleight of hand."[3]In 2008, The Florida Bar suspended Sibley's right to practice law in that state for three years.[4] Sibley was later determined to be a vexatious litigator.[5]In 2012, Sibley unsuccessfully sued President Barack Obama, alleging that he was not a natural-born citizen.[6][7]2016 Presidential ElectionIn 2016, Sibley, who claims to have Palfrey's phone records, unsuccessfully attempted to have her records unsealed.[8] Sibley claims the information they contain would be highly relevant to voters in the upcoming 2016 presidential election.[6][7]In February 2016, Sibley sued then-Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts, and his clerk, for failing to file his motion to lift the restraining order (gag order) that prevents Sibley from releasing her records.[9][10]Sibley then requested that the U.S. Supreme Court release him from the lower court's restraining order, stating: “To be clear, if Sibley is not allowed to file his Motion to Modify the Restraining Order and thereafter does not promptly receive a fair and impartial hearing on that Motion, he will justifiably consider the Restraining Order void as a result of being denied such a hearing by the District Court, the D.C. Circuit Court and now this Court.”[11][12]Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

The Atlantic published an article citing more than two dozen anonymous sources alleging that Kash Patel, the current FBI director, is frequently drunk at work, misses meetings, and has engaged in conduct that raises serious national security concerns. Within days, Patel filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Hawk walks through the legal standards that apply to public figures in defamation cases, including the actual malice standard established in New York Times v. Sullivan, and explains why Patel faces an extraordinarily high burden of proof. The lawsuit is represented by attorney Jesse Benall, who previously represented Donald Trump in efforts to overturn the 2020 election, the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, and multiple January 6th related civil suits. The complaint itself is examined in detail, from its self-serving denials lacking evidentiary support, to its repetitive structure, to its irrelevant sections touting FBI statistics. Hawk also covers the court's same-day dismissal of Patel's earlier defamation suit against former FBI official Frank Figliuzzi, and what the discovery process could mean for Patel if this lawsuit proceeds. 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

Mark Astor has been an attorney since 1994, beginning his career as a Palm Beach County Assistant State Attorney, where he served as Chief of two County Court Divisions and later handled felony cases ranging from misdemeanors to capital murder. He is admitted to the Florida Bar, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the District of Columbia Bar, and the Massachusetts Bar, where he established a Boston office. Mark holds a BA from the University of Michigan, a JD from Nova Southeastern University, and an LLM from American University. In 2016, he founded Drug and Alcohol Attorneys, followed by co-founding Astor Simovitch Law with his wife, Audra Simovitch, in 2017. The firm is dedicated to helping families navigate substance use and mental health crises. In 2020, he launched Baker Act Attorneys, focusing on protecting individuals' rights within Florida's mental health system. Outside of law, Mark teaches Krav Maga and prioritizes physical fitness.

Today is Monday, April 20. Here are the latest headlines from the Fargo, North Dakota area. InForum Minute is produced by Forum Communications and brought to you by reporters from The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead and WDAY TV. For more news from throughout the day, visit InForum.com.

Judge Titiana Frausto always knew she wanted to serve on the bench—she just didn't expect it to happen so early in her career. In this episode, she shares what it looked like to move through law school and into practice, working in both criminal and family law and the realities that come with each. We talk about the weight of that work, the perspective it builds, and how those experiences prepared her for what came next. Judge Frausto was first appointed by the governor and later elected to serve as district judge for the 181st District Court, covering Potter and Randall Counties. She reflects on that transition—from practicing attorney to judge—and what it means to step into a role that carries both authority and responsibility in a very public way. We also spend time on something more personal: the moment she began to understand her role in representation. As a young Black woman serving in this position, she reflects on when that realization came into focus, and how it continues to shape the way she shows up in her work today. It's a thoughtful conversation about ambition, timing, and stepping into a role you've been working toward—sometimes sooner than expected.

Lawmakers on Thursday held a hearing on a bill meant to make grooming a felony. The bill, which has bipartisan support, suggests a series of changes to the state criminal code, teacher licensing requirements, mandatory reporter training and school field trip requirements. HCMC, the state's busiest trauma center, is struggling financially. A bipartisan bill that would use revenue from a ballpark tax to help fund it got its first hearing in the legislature Thursday.For many immigrants in Minnesota, the final step to becoming a U.S. citizen is taking longer than expected. Oath ceremonies have dropped from about four a month to just one, according to the U.S. District Court of Minnesota.

It's Wednesday, April 8th, A.D. 2026. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Jonathan Clark and Adam McManus Hindu nationalists attacked two pastors in India Hindu nationalists attacked two pastors in India last week ahead of Resurrection Sunday. The pastors were distributing Christian literature in a village in Karnataka State. The Hindu nationalists verbally abused the pastors before physically assaulting them and taking their literature.  One of the pastors, aged 60, required emergency medical care after the attack. He told International Christian Concern, “We would have been killed if police had not intervened in time. The police eventually arrived at the scene, rescued us, and took us to the hospital for treatment.” India's new census In other India-related news, the country began the world's largest census last week. The year-long census will collect information from the country's 1.4 billion citizens. India conducted its last census back in 2011. Since then, the country surpassed China as the world's most populated nation.  For the first time in decades, India's census will ask people what caste they belong to. The census already includes questions about religion. Religious freedom groups warn the government could use these data points to discriminate against religious minorities like Christians.  55% of Russians do not attend church The Russian research organization Levada Centre published a new survey on church attendance in the country.  A record 55% of respondents said they do not attend religious services. That's up 11 percentage points since last year.  The lack of church attendance was particularly common among men, young people, and students. Only 16% of respondents said they attend services at least once a month.  Trump announced 2-week suspension of Iran attack At 5:32pm ET on April 7th, President Donald Trump shared a major update on Truth Social about the war with Iran. He wrote, “Based on conversations with [Pakistani] Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and [Pakistani] Field Marshal Asim Munir and wherein they requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran, and subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz, I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks. “This will be a double-sided CEASEFIRE!  The reason for doing so is that we have already met and exceeded all military objectives, and are very far along with a definitive agreement concerning long-term PEACE with Iran, and PEACE in the Middle East.” President Trump concluded with these words. “On behalf of the United States of America, as President, and also representing the countries of the Middle East, it is an honor to have this long-term problem close to resolution.” Vice President Vance: “Very shortly, this war is going to conclude” Vice President J.D. Vance, who was meeting with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in Hungary, said the war in Iran is coming to an end soon, reports Real Clear Politics. Listen. VANCE: “First of all, the United States has largely accomplished its military objectives. There are still some things that we'd like to do, for example, on Iranian ability to manufacture weapons that we'd like to do a little bit more work on militarily. But fundamentally, the military objectives of the United States have been completed. “So, that means, as the President has said, very shortly, this war is going to conclude. And I think the nature of the conclusion is ultimately up to the Iranians. “I think there really are two pathways. I'm oversimplifying this a little bit, but I think pathway one is where the Iranians decide they're going to be a normal country. They're not going to fund terrorism anymore. They're going to be part of the world system of commerce and exchange, and that's going to mean much better things for them economically. It's going to mean better things for the peace and safety of the world. That's option A. Okay? “Option B is that the Iranians don't come to [the] table and they stay committed to terrorism, to terrorizing their neighbors, not just Israel, but of course, their Arab neighbors too. Then, the economic situation in Iran is going to continue to be very, very bad, and frankly, it will probably get worse.” California dropped prosecution of undercover pro-life videographer In the United States, California finally dropped its prosecution of pro-lifer David Daleiden. The undercover journalist is the president and founder of The Center for Medical Progress. In 2015, the group exposed Planned Parenthood's illegal sale of baby body parts.  Daleiden faced years of legal battles since then. He posted a statement on X last week, saying, “As promised, the final charge has been DISMISSED and the case completely expunged.” Court: California must pay $4.5 million over gender confusion case In other Golden State news, California must pay $4.5 million in a case involving its promotion of gender confusion in public schools. The state passed a law in 2024 that prohibited schools from informing parents if their child identified with a sexually perverted lifestyle.  On Monday, a U.S. District Court ruled in favor of teachers and parents who challenged the law. Peter Breen with the Thomas More Society commented on the victory. He said, “California threw everything it had at this case. It lost at summary judgment, lost at the Supreme Court, and now Californians will foot the bill for their government officials' refusal to respect the fundamental rights of families.” Isaiah 10:1 says, “Woe to those who decree unrighteous decrees, who write misfortune, which they have prescribed.” 29% of Americans believe revival will happen within the year A new survey from the Barna Group found a growing share of Americans believe a spiritual revival is coming. Twenty-nine percent of U.S. adults believe a revival is likely to happen in the next 12 months. That number rose to 38 percent among Gen Z, those between the ages of 14 and 29.  Top reasons respondents gave for why a revival might happen included prayer, younger generations turning to God, and the search for meaning and purpose.  David Kinnaman, CEO of Barna, said, “The research doesn't predict a revival. … Yet, it reveals something worth paying attention to: a large number of Americans believe one is possible—and for younger adults especially, that belief is being forged in some of the most difficult circumstances of their lives.” Trump called Christ's resurrection “the most glorious miracle in all of time!” And finally, President Donald Trump delivered a message to Christians around the world over Easter weekend. In fact, he quoted John 3:16 in his message. TRUMP: “This Holy Week, I'm proud to join with Christians across the country, and around the world, to celebrate the most glorious miracle in all of time: the resurrection of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. “In His life, Christ displayed true humility. In His death, He modeled true love. And in His resurrection from the tomb, He proved that even death itself will not silence those who place their trust in Almighty God. As it says in Gospel of John, ‘For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son for whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Wednesday, April 8th, in the year of our Lord 2026. Follow us on X or subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com.  Plus, you can get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

On a quiet summer afternoon in Inverness, Florida, a 911 call shattered the stillness of a lakeside home. Inside, Denise Hallowell was found barely alive in her bedroom, the victim of a brutal attack that made no immediate sense.At first, the story pointed outward toward an unknown intruder. But as investigators began to piece together the timeline, the evidence started pointing somewhere far more unsettling.Because sometimes, the truth isn't hidden outside the home.It's already inside.A video version of this episode is available on YouTube and SpotifyHow to support:For extra perks including exclusive content, early release, and ad-free episodes -Go to - PatreonHow to connect:WebsiteInstagramFacebookTwitterTheme and Closing Track:Original compositions created for The Minds of MadnessPlease check out our sponsors and help support the podcast:Shopify - Sign up for a one-dollar-per-month trial period at shopify.com/madnessQuince - Upgrade your wardrobe with pieces made to last with Quince. Go to Quince.com/madness for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns.Raycon - The Essential Open Earbuds are perfect for refreshing your routine this spring. Go to buyraycon.com/mindsofmadnessOPEN to get 20% off!HERS - Feel like your best self again, Visit forhers.com/MADNESS to get a personalized, affordable plan that gets you.NOCD - If you're struggling with OCD or unrelenting intrusive thoughts, NOCD can help. Book a free 15 minute call to get started: https://learn.nocd.com/MADNESSGranola - If meetings are eating up your day, Granola is a no-brainer. You can try it totally free for three months - just head to granola.ai/MADNESSNutrafol - Start your hair growth journey with Nutrafol. For a limited time, Nutrafol is offering our listeners ten dollars off your first month's subscription and free shipping when you go to Nutrafol.com and enter the promo code MADNESSSources:FOX 13 Tampa Bay – “Citrus County man sentenced to life in prison for murder of adoptive mother, former teacher”FOX 13 Tampa Bay – “Son who once defended mother against allegations of abuse now charged with her murder”Citrus County Chronicle – “Hallowell found guilty of murder” (PDF)Bay News 9 – “Authorities: Son Facing Charges in Death of Citrus County Teacher”NBC Miami – “Parricide: The Act of Killing a Parent – The Axe Murder”Justia – Florida 5th District Court of Appeal – “Carlos Antonio Hallowell v. State of Florida”

A professional cornhole player and quadruple amputee has been formally charged with murder and multiple related offenses in connection with a deadly shooting that occurred in Charles County on March 22, 2026. Dayton James Webber, 27, of La Plata, Md., was arraigned in the District Court of Maryland for Charles County after being located in Charlottesville, Virginia, and arrested following the fatal shooting of 27‑year‑old Bradrick Michael Wells, according to court documents. United Airlines is launching the North American version of the Air New Zealand Skycouch idea: a dedicated row of three economy seats whose leg rests flip up after takeoff to create a couch or bed-like surface, with a mattress pad, extra bedding, pillows, and family-oriented amenities.It launches next year, sits between Economy and Premium Plus, and United calls it the “Relax Row.” They plan for ‘up to' 12 sections per widebody aircraft and a rollout to 200+ widebodies by 2030.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We Like Shooting - Ep 656 This episode of We Like Shooting is brought to you by: Gideon Optics (Code: WLSISLIFE) Night Fision (Code: WLSISLIFE) Die Free Co. (Code: WLSISLIFE) Rost Martin (Code: WLSISLIFE) Flatline Fiber Co (Code: WLS15) Second Call Defense Guests: David Warner – www.nextlevelarms.com www.nextlevelmfg.com Next Level Arms (@nextlevelarms)    Text Dear WLS or Reviews +1 743 500 2171  Public   Show Titles GunCon.net Tickets on sale now. Use code AGENCY171 GEAR CHAT [NickLynch] MP5 Speed Loader – Remix This is a remix of Jackmnb's speed loader designed for MP5, with the cartridge slot moved to allow dropping cartridges bullet-first from the back side. A chamfer has been added to facilitate faster and easier filling of the loader. Angles have been modified to enable printing without supports. Note MP5 Mag loader [Benelli] Lupo The Benelli Lupo is a bolt-action rifle highlighted in the ‘Art of Performance' video series for its proprietary barrel engineering. It features a three-step manufacturing process including vacuum heat treatment, electrochemical rifling, and cryogenic Crio treatment to achieve superior accuracy and consistency. The rifle's rigid chassis and harmonized action ensure minimal flex, precise alignment, and out-of-box performance. [Infinite Zero Targets] Rifle Zeroing Targets Infinite Zero Targets provides free printable rifle zeroing targets designed for precise firearm sighting. The page promotes these paper targets alongside the Ballistics Report app for ballistic calculations. No hardware technical gear such as optics or mechanical devices is detailed. Note (Nick) Sig P229 BULLET POINTS GUN FIGHTS No one stepped into the arena this week. GOING BALLISTIC Colorado HB 26-1144: Democrats Amend 3D-Printed Firearms Bill to Avoid Veto Colorado House Bill 1144 (HB 26-1144) targets the use of 3D printers to manufacture guns or gun parts, making it a crime in the state. Democrats revised the bill by removing a provision banning the distribution of digital printing instructions to secure passage and avoid a veto from Gov. Jared Polis. The amended version classifies first offenses as Class I misdemeanors and subsequent offenses as Class 5 felonies. Heeter v. James: Challenge to New York's Body Armor Ban Under the Second Amendment Heeter v. James is a federal lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York challenging New York's body armor ban under the Concealed Carry Improvement Act as a Second Amendment violation. Plaintiffs argue body armor qualifies as an ‘arm' for self-defense, supported by historical precedents like Heller and Bruen, common civilian use, and lack of historical bans. The ban prohibits purchase, acquisition, or sale of protective body coverings by non-eligible civilians, with enforcement by state police. National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. v. Letitia James: SAF Amicus Brief Urging Supreme Court to Protect Firearms Industry under PLCAA The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), along with NRA and Independence Institute, filed an amicus brief on March 30, 2026, in National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. v. Letitia James, challenging New York's law that circumvents the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). SAF argues that New York's statute enables abusive public nuisance lawsuits against firearms manufacturers and dealers, undermining PLCAA's protections against meritless litigation campaigns aimed at bankrupting the industry. The brief urges the Supreme Court to grant certiorari and reaffirm PLCAA's safeguards for lawful commerce and Second Amendment rights. Colorado House Bill 1144: 3D Gun Printing Ban Drops Digital Instructions Provision to Avoid Veto (Savage) Colorado's House Bill 1144 originally aimed to ban the manufacture of 3D printed guns and components like high-capacity magazines and receivers, as well as the sale or distribution of digital instructions for printing them. Lawmakers removed the provision on digital instructions after Gov. Jared Polis indicated he would veto the bill otherwise. The amended bill passed a preliminary Senate vote and is expected to be signed into law. Warren-Meeks Letter Demands Data on U.S. Semi-Automatic Firearm Export Licenses (Savage) U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY) sent a letter to the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security requesting detailed data on semi-automatic firearm export licenses approved since January 2025. They cite ATF data linking U.S. exports to 20% of crime gun traces in Central America and 37% worldwide outside North America, demanding info on licenses, recipients, and monitoring by April 13, 2026. This follows Biden administration pauses on certain exports and Warren's recent legislation targeting ammunition sales and military-grade weapons. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson: Pro-Gun Control Policies with $30 Million Taxpayer-Funded Armed Security (Savage) Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson supports Illinois' restrictive gun control measures, including a ban on assault-style weapons upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in 2023, while employing an armed security detail of up to 150 Chicago Police Department officers. This security costs taxpayers approximately $30 million annually. The arrangement highlights a perceived double standard where officials enjoy armed protection amid public firearm restrictions. Rep. Fry Files Amicus Brief in NSSF v. James Seeking SCOTUS Review to Defend Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) (Savage) Rep. Russell Fry (R-SC), leading 54 House colleagues, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) with Senate colleagues, filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Second Circuit's decision in NSSF v. James. The brief defends the PLCAA, a 2005 federal law preempting state liability suits against gun manufacturers for criminal misuse of firearms, against New York's public nuisance law. It argues the Second Circuit ruling undermines congressional intent and enables similar state circumventions. Armed Citizen Fights Off Attackers at Arundel Mills Mall, Hanover, Maryland (Savage) On March 28, 2026, an armed citizen at Arundel Mills Mall in Hanover, Maryland, drew a firearm during an assault by three attackers outside Burlington Coat Factory, discharging it and wounding one in the wrist. The attackers fled, leading to a police chase and crash on I-97, resulting in three arrests. The incident highlights civilian self-defense in a Maryland jurisdiction.0 Michigan Lawyer Barton Morris Helps Non-Violent Felons Restore Gun Rights via Federal DOJ Program (Savage) A Michigan lawyer, Barton Morris, assists non-violent felons who have completed their sentences in petitioning for firearm rights restoration through a proposed U.S. Department of Justice program. Michigan state law currently prohibits these individuals, such as those convicted of drug offenses, drunk driving, or theft, from owning guns post-sentence. An example is Clarence Overstreet, who filed a petition after a past cocaine possession conviction to protect his family and hunt. Calce v. City of New York Calce v. City of New York challenges New York City's ban on civilian possession of stun guns and tasers in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (docket 25-861). The district court granted summary judgment to the city in March 2025, ruling plaintiffs failed to prove common use for Second Amendment protection. Oral arguments occurred, focusing on whether ‘common use' is a plaintiff burden under Bruen or shifts to the government. Ohio SB 392: Freedom to Carry Act Ohio Senate Bill 392, introduced on March 23, 2026, seeks to reform state weapons carry laws by expanding concealed carry beyond handguns to other deadly weapons, renaming licenses to concealed weapons licenses, and lowering the licensing age from 21 to 18. It permits licensed carry of concealed deadly weapons excluding ‘exclusive deadly weapons' defined as dangerous ordnance or federally/state-prohibited items, and allows loaded firearm possession in vehicles. The bill remains in the introduced stage amid Ohio's Republican legislative supermajorities. REVIEWS Review: The 5th cast member from Oregon From The 5th cast member If I visited each of the cast members. Sean First I would ask to see vault and when he took me to the gun vault I'd say no I mean the vault of money but you don't tell the other cast members about. Then we would take some time digging through all of the boxes of gear that he has been given by sponsors of the show over the years that he's never even opened or look at. Poring me a drink of something suspicious but claim it is some sort of Old world drink to see you. Sure few drinks probably want to show me a smooth child by balls which of course would scar me for life but they're really weird part would be with his pants down asking me if I want to play some hockey. Savige He would show me all of his communist compliant guns. Which wouldn't really actually be very many. Explain to me all of the conspiracy theories around the government in the state and federal. To ask if I wanted to join him secret group that was planning the next January 6th type event only he would call it January 7th as if that was enough secret seat to avoid being obvious. I received there believing I was just been trapped by an FBI informed. Aaron Quickly after meeting Erin he would want to show me the book he's been working on “the art of working” I'm genuinely act interested not to crushes dreams of becoming some sort of Tom Clancy. Then he would give me a 2 hour tutorial on how to use indeed. Followed by a house to get fired but still get the maximum unemployment benefits. Jarami I probably meet him at his gun store first. Shoot his “Part 2 because you wouldn't let me text the whole story. Nick

When something feels wrong with your medical care, your instinct may be to trust and move on, but that instinct could cost you more than you realize. In this episode of Sharkpreneur, Seth Greene interviews Russell R. Reynolds, JD, Co-founder of The Law Offices of Reynolds & Reynolds, a seasoned Texas trial attorney specializing in medical malpractice and personal injury law. With a background in healthcare administration and decades of courtroom experience navigating tort reform, ERISA challenges, and complex expert testimony requirements, Russell has built a firm dedicated to holding healthcare providers accountable. He shares how feasibility, case selection, and patient advocacy determine whether justice is even possible and why most potential claims never make it to court. Key Takeaways:→ Medical malpractice cases are extremely costly to pursue due to the high cost of expert witnesses→ Most firms operate on contingency, meaning attorneys personally finance cases and only recover fees if they win. → Cognitive dissonance prevents many patients from questioning their doctors even when something feels off. → Getting second or third medical opinions is both a right and an essential safeguard. → Most malpractice inquiries are rejected due to economic and legal constraints, despite genuine harm. Russell R. Reynolds, JD, earned his Juris Doctor from Thomas M. Cooley Law School and was admitted to the State Bar of Texas in 2000. He is also authorized to practice before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. Over the past 25 years, Rusty has dedicated his career to representing individuals who have suffered personal injuries caused by others' negligence. Rusty has built a reputation as a trusted Motor Vehicle Accident Lawyer. He collaborates with the Reynolds & Reynolds team to ensure victims of Medical Malpractice, Personal Injury, Wrongful Death, and Premises Liability cases receive the compensation they deserve. Rusty co-founded The Law Offices of Reynolds & Reynolds with his sister-in-law, Debra Reynolds, in 2005. When he is not working on cases, Rusty enjoys spending time with his wife, Valerie, and their two daughters. Connect With Russell:Website: https://rrlfirm.com/

It's an Emmajority Report Thursday on The Majority Report On today's program: Donald Trump admits that his war in Iran is violating the constitution at a fund-raising dinner where he said, "they don't like the word war because you have to get approval, so I'll just say military operation". Trump lashes out at reporting that he is desperate to find a way out of Iran and claims that Iran is begging him for a deal. Andrew Arsan, Professor of Arab and Global History at the University of Cambridge joins Emma for a conversation about his piece in Equator entitled, "Tearing up the Map - Netanyahu's War to Remake the Middle East". Ed Zitron, publisher of the Where's Your Ed At? newsletter and host of the Better Offline podcast join the program to discuss his piece "The AI Industry is Lying to You". In the Fun Half Brandon Sutton and Matt Binder join. Emerson Polling shows Graham Platner with a massive on Janet Mills as well as a solid lead over Susan Collins. Melania Trump introduces a robot meant to replace teachers and childcare providers. Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security dodges questions from Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) on whether or not Israel has nuclear capabilities. Former Secretary of State under Biden, Antony Blinken is confronted by a student at an event at Harvard Law School over his role in the genocide in Palestine. Blinken responds with his usual smarmy condescension. Adam Schiff has a hilarious exchange with the child lawyer that Donald Trump nominated for the U.S. District Court in Montana. all that and more   No Kings Protests across the country this Saturday, March 28. Check out NoKings.Org to find the protest closest to you.   Check out longtime MR listener Jim Di Bartolo's new graphic novel F*ck Billionaires   To connect and organize with your local ICE rapid response team visit ICERRT.com The Congress switchboard number is (202) 224-3121. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today's sponsors: LIQUID IV: Go to LIQUIDIV.com and use code MAJORITYREP at checkout for 20% off your first order. SUNSET LAKE: Use coupon code "Left Is Best" (all one word) for 20% off of your entire order at SunsetLakeCBD.com  Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech On Instagram: @MrBryanVokey Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com

A professional cornhole player and quadruple amputee has been formally charged with murder and multiple related offenses in connection with a deadly shooting that occurred in Charles County on March 22, 2026. Dayton James Webber, 27, of La Plata, Md., was arraigned in the District Court of Maryland for Charles County after being located in Charlottesville, Virginia, and arrested following the fatal shooting of 27‑year‑old Bradrick Michael Wells, according to court documents. United Airlines is launching the North American version of the Air New Zealand Skycouch idea: a dedicated row of three economy seats whose leg rests flip up after takeoff to create a couch or bed-like surface, with a mattress pad, extra bedding, pillows, and family-oriented amenities.It launches next year, sits between Economy and Premium Plus, and United calls it the “Relax Row.” They plan for ‘up to' 12 sections per widebody aircraft and a rollout to 200+ widebodies by 2030.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Leah, Kate, and Melissa preview this week's arguments at the Court, including Watson v. Republican National Committee, a challenge over when election offices must receive absentee ballots in order for them to be counted. They also cover a flood of legal news, including the quagmire that is the New Jersey U.S. Attorney's Office, rulings from lower courts both encouraging (U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia) and grim (the wrong-like-clockwork Fifth Circuit), and the showdown between Senator Rand Paul and Trump's pick for DHS head, Markwayne “NOSPACES” Mullin.Favorite things: Kate: How to stop a dictator, Zack Beauchamp (Vox); The Case of Kristie Metcalfe (NYT's The Daily); Project Hail Mary, Andy Weir Leah: The Epic transcript from NJ; luck…or something, Hilary Duff (producer Melody's pick: Future Tripping; producer Michael's pick: Adult Size Medium); Her giveaway to celebrate Melissa's new book (enter here);  Melissa: Love Story Official Playlist (Spotify); Paradise (Hulu); Risk and Resistance: How Feminists Transformed the Law and Science of AIDS, Aziza Ahmed. Preorder Melissa's book, The U.S. Constitution: A Comprehensive and Annotated Guide for the Modern Reader and enter the giveaway for a t-shirt HERE.Buy Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad VibesFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – Think of how many recent decisions in the District Court were most likely based on an attempt to protect the American people from the so-called evil Donald Trump. How many rights have been trampled in these judges' attempts to protect us from their caricature of the current president? How many government agencies have been created...

In February, 21 states, 60 members of Congress, and 58 pro-life groups filed friend-of-the-court briefs which call for a U.S. District Court tto hold the FDA accountable over the Abortion Kill Pill. Sue Liebel, from the Susan B. Anthony List will join us to discuss the dangers swirling around this self-aborting drug. Then, Elizabeth Carlyle will tell us about a powerful news book that will inspire us to pray for America on her 250th birthday. Great conversation coming your way, so join us!Become a Parshall Partner: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/inthemarket/partnersSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

John once again talks about the War in the Middle East. Pentagon officials told Congress the first week of war in Iran has cost the people of the United States more than $11 Billion. Refineries and tankers in and around the Strait of Hormuz continue to come under attack from Iranian drones and missiles, with new supreme leader Khamenei promising the fun will continue until the US feels the economic pain of its actions. Then, he interviews democrat Crystal Rhoades who has been the Douglas County Clerk of the District Court in Nebraska. Rhoades is running for election to the House to represent Nebraska's 2nd Congressional District in the Democratic primary scheduled on May 12th. Rhoades served as a public service commissioner from 2015 to 2023.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.