Podcasts about Dred Scott

This week's episode of Hotel Bar Sessions brings political theorist Laura K. Field (author of Furious Minds: The Making of the MAGA New Right) into the bar to talk about the intellectuals cranking the rhetoric up to eleven while insisting they're just “doing Great Books.” We follow the trail from Straussian seminar rooms and conservative think tanks to Trump rallies and “no kings” protests, asking what happens when a self-styled aristocracy of the mind decides liberal democracy is played out.Field guides us through the angry energy behind this movement, the “furious minds” driving it, and why she turns to Aeschylus' treatment of the ancient Furies (in his Oresteia trilogy) and Abraham Lincoln's Dred Scott speech to think about justice, vengeance, and the dangers of sacralizing politics. Along the way we talk MAGA as quasi-religion, liberalism as a way of life, why so many young men are adopting Jordan Peterson's 12 Rules for Life, and what it means to refuse the invitation to become furious.Full episode notes available at this link:https://hotelbarpodcast.com/furrious-minds---------------------SUBSCRIBE to the podcast now to automatically download new episodes!SUPPORT Hotel Bar Podcast on Patreon here! (Or by contributing one-time donations here!)BOOKMARK the Hotel Bar Sessions website here for detailed show notes and reading lists, and contact any of our co-hosts here.Hotel Bar Sessions is also on Facebook, YouTube, BlueSky, and TikTok. Like, follow, share, duet, whatever... just make sure your friends know about us! ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

How has the classical music industry approached representation and how has the new music community forged new paths to embrace diverse musics? On tonight's episode of Obbligato on APEX Express, Isabel Li is joined by violinist Shalini Vijayan, who discusses her vibrant career and reflects upon the ways contemporary classical music can build community.  Violinist Shalini Vijayan, deemed “a vibrant violinist” by Mark Swed of the Los Angeles Times is an established performer and collaborator on both coasts. Always an advocate for modern music, Shalini was a founding member and Principal Second Violin of Kristjan Jarvi's Absolute Ensemble, having recorded several albums with them including 2001 Grammy nominee, Absolution. Shalini was also a founding member of the Lyris Quartet, one of Los Angeles' most beloved chamber ensembles. With Lyris, she has performed regularly at Walt Disney Concert Hall on the Green Umbrella series, for Jacaranda Music and helped to found the Hear Now Music Festival in Venice, California, a festival dedicated to the music of living composers in Los Angeles.  Shalini performed for over a decade with Southwest Chamber Music and can be heard on their Grammy nominated Complete Chamber Works of Carlos Chávez, Vol. 3. She has been a featured soloist with the Los Angeles Master Chorale in Chinary Ung's Spiral XII and Tan Dun's Water Passion, including performances at the Ravinia Festival. As a chamber musician, Shalini has collaborated with such luminaries as Billy Childs, Chinary Ung, Gabriela Ortiz, and Wadada Leo Smith on whose Ten Freedom Summers she was a soloist. Shalini joined acclaimed LA ensemble, Brightwork New Music in 2019 and also serves as the curator for Brightwork's Tuesdays@Monkspace series, a home for contemporary music and performance in Los Angeles. As a teacher, she has been on the faculty of the Nirmita Composers Workshop in both Siem Reap and Bangkok and coaches composition students through the Impulse New Music Festival.  Shalini received her B.M. and M.M. degrees from Manhattan School of Music as a student of Lucie Robert and Ariana Bronne. As a member of the New World Symphony in Miami Beach, Florida, Shalini served as concertmaster for Michael Tilson Thomas, John Adams, Reinbert de Leeuw and Oliver Knussen. She was also concertmaster for the world premiere performances and recording of Steven Mackey's Tuck and Roll for RCA records in 2000. Shalini was a member of the Pacific Symphony Orchestra for ten seasons and also served as Principal Second Violin of Opera Pacific. She lives in Los Angeles with her son, husband and two dogs and spends her free time cooking Indian food and exploring the culinary landscape of Southern California.  Check out more of her work at:  https://brightworknewmusic.com/tuesdays-at-monk-space/  https://www.lyrisquartet.com/    Transcript  Opening: [00:00:00] Apex Express Asian Pacific expression. Community and cultural coverage, music and calendar, new visions and voices, coming to you with an Asian Pacific Islander point of view. It's time to get on board the APEX Express.    00:01:03 Isabel Li  You're listening to Obbligato, which is a segment about the Asian American Pacific Islander community, specifically in classical music.  00:01:11 Isabel Li  I'm your host, Isabel Li, and today joining me is Shalini Vijayan, who is a violinist, established performer, and always an advocate for modern music.  00:01:21 Isabel Li  Shalini is also a founding member of the Lyris Quartet, one of Los Angeles most beloved chamber ensembles. With Lyris, she has performed regularly at Walt Disney Concert Hall on the Green Umbrella series for Jacaranda Music, and helped to found the Here and Now Music Festival in Venice, California, a festival dedicated to the music of living composers in Los Angeles. She joined acclaimed LA ensemble Brightwork New Music in 2019, and also serves as the curator for Brightwork's Tuesdays at Monk Space series. She currently lives in Los Angeles with her son, husband and two dogs, and spends her free time cooking Indian food and exploring the culinary landscape of Southern California.  00:02:04 Isabel Li  Well, Shalini, thank you so much for joining me in this conversation today.  00:02:09 Shalini Vijayan  I'm so happy to be with you.  00:02:11 Isabel Li  Awesome. I'd like to just get to know you and your story. How do you identify and what communities do you consider yourself a part of?  00:02:18 Shalini Vijayan  I use the pronouns she, her, and I. Um, I identify as South Asian. I grew up in an Indian family. My parents immigrated to the US in the sixties to teach at medical school. And I grew up with a great deal of Indian culture. And I've spent a lot of time going back and forth to India from the time that I was very young. You know, it's interesting because I feel like in LA, where I live and work specifically, there is so much overlap between all of our different musical communities. You know, I went to school in New York, and I feel like there I was much more, I'm very connected to the new music community in New York and felt really kind of entrenched in that at the time I was there. And after coming to LA, I realized that, um, there are a lot of musicians doing so many different things. That's one of the things I love about Los Angeles, actually. And, you know, I'm definitely very, very rooted in the new music community in LA. And that was where I made my first sort of connections when I first moved to Los Angeles. But I also, you know, worked in an orchestra when I first came to LA. I played in the Pacific Symphony for almost ten seasons, and so I became a part of that community as well. And you know, as the years went on, I also became much more involved in the studio music community of LA studio musicians playing on movie scores, playing on television shows, records, what have you, Awards shows, all sorts of things. And these are all very distinct communities in LA in music. But I see a ton of overlap between all of them. There are so many incredibly versatile musicians in Los Angeles that people are able to really very easily move from one of these groups to the other and, you know, with a great deal of success. And I feel like it gives us so much variety in our lives as musicians in LA, you don't feel like you're ever just in one lane. You can really occupy all these different kinds of spaces.  00:04:23 Isabel Li  Right, yeah. So you're classically trained, from what I know, and you describe yourself as an advocate for modern music. So why modern music?  00:04:33 Shalini Vijayan  That's a great question. I have have had to answer this question quite a bit over the years, especially to non-musicians. And it's always an interesting story for me. You know, as a violinist in particular, you know, we have such a storied history of repertoire and pedagogy, and there is such an incredible, um, library of music that we have access to from the very standard classical repertoire. And there is a great deal to be learned about the instrument and about music from playing all that repertoire. I think at some point when I was in high school, I started to become interested in more modern music. And actually I grew up in Davis in Northern California.   My parents both taught at the university there, at the medical school and in Sacramento. Nearby there was a festival of modern American music that I think still goes on to this day at Cal State University, Sacramento. And it was really a great festival. And at that time, you know, they would bring professional artists, they'd have composers, they'd have commissions, all sorts of things. But at the time that I was like in high school, they also had a junior division to the festival, and I was asked to play a couple pieces in the Festival of, um, Modern Works, and I can't remember at this time what the pieces were, but it left such a huge impression on me. And I think what I really took away from that experience as a kid is that in my studies as a violinist, I was always being asked to sort of live up to this history and this legacy of violin music and violin playing in Western classical music. And it's a very high bar. And it's, um, you know, of course, there's so much great stuff there. But there was something so freeing about playing this music that had either never been played or not been recorded. So there was nothing to reference in terms of listening to a recording, um, and listening to how you, you know, quote, should be playing it that it made me feel, uh, you know, all this, this freedom to really interpret the music, how I felt, rather than feeling like I had to live up to a standard that had been set for me, you know, decades or centuries before. And I think that really something really clicked for me with that, that I wanted to have that kind of freedom when I, when I was playing. And so from there on out, um, you know, when I went to college and I really sought out opportunities in new music as much as I could.  00:07:00 Isabel Li  So you were first exposed to new music when you were in high school. Did that influence your decision to become a musician at all? Or were you already set on becoming a musician and that was just part of what shaped your works over the years.  00:07:15 Shalini Vijayan  I think by that time, I had already decided that I wanted to be a musician. I mean, as you know, so many of us as musicians and I think particularly string players, we decide so young because we start our instruments at such a young age and we start studying so early. Um, that I think by that time I, I had decided I wanted to do music, but this sort of opened another door for me that made me realize that it wasn't just one path in music necessarily. I think it's very easy as a, as a kid and as a violinist to think you admire these great soloists that you see and, you know, people like Perlman and, you know, Isaac Stern, who were the stars of the time when I was growing up. But, you know, you get to be in high school and you realize that hasn't happened yet. It's probably not going to happen. And so, you know, what's then then what's your path forward? How do you find a life in music if you're not going to be one of these stars? And I think, you know, new music really opened up that opportunity for me. And yeah, made me look at things a little differently for sure.  00:08:18 Isabel Li  And currently you're in the contemporary classical music ensemble, Brightwork newmusic, and you curate the ensemble's concert series, Tuesdays @ Monk Space. So how do you go about curating concerts with music by contemporary or living composers? What do you look for?  00:08:33 Shalini Vijayan  Well, right now I'm really focused on trying to represent our new music community in LA at Monk Space, which is such, you know, we have such a diverse community of musicians, not just in the makeup of who the people are making the music or writing the music, but also in just the styles of music. And so I think I try to really represent a very diverse set of aesthetics in our season. Um, you know, everything from, you know, last season we had, uh, Niloufar Shiri, who is a traditional Persian kamancheh player, but she also she can play very in a very traditional way, but she also plays with a jazz pianist. And, you know, it does all this very improvisatory stuff. And, you know, then we would have other programs where everything is very much written out and very through, composed and you know, it's been a very wide variety. And, you know, when I try to build the season, I try to make sure that it's really balanced in terms of, you know, the different types of things you'll be hearing because not every audience member is going to want to engage with every type of music. Um, or, you know, if we if we really stuck to one style and it was just in that language for the whole season, then I feel like we would, you know, alienate potential audience members. But with this, I feel like if we can bring people in for one concert and they're really into it, then hopefully they'll come to something else that is new and different for them and be exposed to something that they may really get into after that. So yeah, I think diversity and variety is really where I try to start from.  00:10:09 Isabel Li  How does that engage the community? Have you observed audience reception to this type of new music when there are composers from all different types of backgrounds?  00:10:20 Shalini Vijayan  Yeah, definitely. I mean, I think that each composer and each artist brings their own community into the space, which and so that's another. I feel like another strong reason why I try to make things very different from concert to concert. And, you know, we have some younger players who come in and bring in, you know, everyone from college students to, you know, their friends and family. And then, you know, really established composers. Like this season we have Bill Roper, who is kind of a legend in the music community in LA. Mult instrumentalist and composer who has been around for decades. And, you know, I think people will come out just because they want to see him and he's such a draw. And, um, you know, I, I also would love to be able to incorporate more world music into the series. Like I said, we did do Niloufar concert, which I felt like I really hoped would like engage with the Persian community in LA as well. And a couple seasons ago we had Rajna Swaminathan, who is, I just think, an incredible artist. Um, she plays mridangam, which is a South Indian percussion instrument, but she also writes for Western instruments, uh, and herself. And we had her and a pianist and then Ganavya, who's a vocalist who's amazing. And, you know, Ganavya had her own following. So we had and Rajna has her own following. So we had a whole full audience that night of people who I had never seen in the space before. And that was for me. That's a success because we're bringing in new friends and new engagement. And, um, I was really excited about that. When I'm able to make those kinds of connections with new people, then that feels like a success to me.  00:12:05 Isabel Li  Certainly.  00:12:06 Isabel Li  Let's hear one of Shalini's performances. This is an excerpt from the 10th of William Kraft's “Encounters”, a duologue for violin and marimba, performed here by Shalini Vijayan with Southwest Chamber Music.  00:12:20 [MUSIC – Encounters X: Duologue for Violin & Marimba]  00:17:18 Isabel Li  An excerpt from William Kraft's Encounters, the 10th of which is called Duologue for Violin and Marimba, that was performed by Shalini Vijayan, the violinist, with Southwest Chamber Music.  00:17:31 Isabel Li  And Shalini is here with me in conversation today. We've been discussing contemporary music and her involvement in the new music scene, specifically in Los Angeles.  00:17:40 Isabel Li  Music is all about community, drawing people together. So going back to how you describe yourself as an advocate for modern music, what are other ways that you have advocated for modern music besides curating the concert series?  00:17:53 Shalini Vijayan  Well, over the years, um, you know, I feel like in all the ensembles I've been in, there's been a real focus on commissioning composers and on performing works that have not been, uh, either performed or recorded before. And I feel like the only way to really get the music out there is to, obviously, is to play it and hopefully to be able to record it. We've worked especially with the lyrics quartet. We've worked with so many young composers in LA either just strictly, you know, contemporary classical composers or even film composers who, um, have works that they'd like to have recorded. And, you know, it's been great to see a lot of those people go on to really amazing things and to be a part of their journey, uh, and to help support them. And, uh, the other thing that the quartet has been heavily involved in and now Bright Work Ensemble has been involved in as well, is the Here Now music festival, which has been going on in LA for well over a decade now. We were involved in the first, um, seasons of that festival. We've been one of the resident ensembles since the very beginning, and that festival is dedicated to the music of LA and Southern California composers. And, um, we have a call for scores every year that we, the four of us in the quartet, are part of the panel that reviews all the scores, along with a lot of our other colleagues, um, who are involved with the festival, and Hugh Levick, who is the artistic director of the festival and has we've worked side by side with him on this for a very long time. And that's also been a fantastic avenue for, um, meeting new composers, hearing new works, having them performed. And the thing I always say about that festival every time it comes around, usually in the spring we have at least three concerts. It's this incredible coming together of the new music community in Southern California, where all these great composers and all these amazing players come together and play these series of concerts, because there's such a vast number of pieces that end up getting programmed. They can't rely on just like one group or one or two groups to play them. So it really pulls in a lot of players from all over town. And I don't know, it always just feels like a really fun time, a fun weekend for all of us to see each other and connect. And, um, and again, just build our community to be even stronger.  00:20:20 Isabel Li  That's really cool. How do you ignite interest in new music? Because this is a genre that I think is slightly underrepresented or just underrepresented in general in both the classical music community and the music industry as a whole.  00:20:35 Shalini Vijayan  That's a great question, and I think it's a really important question for our whole industry and community. How do you engage people in new music and get them into a concert? Um, you know, I think one of the biggest hurdles for classical music in general, I will say, um, when I talk to people about why they don't want to come to a concert or why they don't want to, you know, let's say, go see the LA Phil or, you know, wherever, whatever city they're in, the major cultural music institution. I think there is a misconception generally that, oh, it's, you know, I have to be dressed a certain way or I it's going to be really stuffy. And, um, I, you know, I don't know what to wear or I don't know how I'm supposed to dress or how I'm supposed to act when I'm in the concert. Am I going to clap at the wrong time? You know, is it going to be really long? And, you know, and I and I get it, you know, I mean, I understand why that would be uncomfortable for a lot of people.   And it's not, um, it's something that necessarily everyone has grown up with or that it's been a part of their life. So I think it's really up to us, as you know, when we're on the side of programming concerts or putting together festivals or whatever, um, that we make things more accessible in terms of, um, concert length and interaction with audience. And, um, you know, I think it's I know I've been told so many times and I really think it's important that I think audiences love it when performers talk to them, when they talk about the music and, and set things up for a listener. I think that puts a kind of context on things that makes it so much easier for perhaps a new audience member, someone who's never come to a concert before to feel at ease and feel like, okay, I know what I'm getting into.   One of our, actually our former executive director at Brightwork, Sarah Wass, who was fantastic, and I was very happy to work with when I was just starting out programming, Monk Space had the idea of putting on the program the running time of the pieces, and I think even that is just something that, like, can prepare people for what they're getting into when they're about to listen to something new. And in terms of the music itself, I think that if someone, especially a younger person, doesn't feel like they have any connection to Beethoven or Brahms or Mozart, they might actually feel more connected to someone who is their age or a little older.   Someone who has had similar life experiences to them, or grown up in the same era as them, rather than someone who grew up, you know, in the seventeen hundreds. You know, there can be more of a real connection there, and that that person is writing this music and reflection of their life and their experiences. And, um, you know, again, I think that kind of context is important for a listener. And yeah. And then just lastly, I would say also, I feel like our space at Monk space is very inviting. It's very low key. It's, um, you know, it's casual, it's comfortable. Role. Um, we have, you know, snacks and a bar and, you know, everyone is very relaxed at intermission and has a good time. And I mean, for me, every time we host one of those concerts, I feel like I'm hosting a little party, you know? That's what it feels like for me. And that's what I want it to feel like for the audience as well.  00:23:52 Isabel Li  That brings up a really good point in that new music can make classical music or a new classical music, contemporary music, more accessible to different audiences. And certainly I've definitely heard the complaint from people over the years about classical music being a little too uptight. Would you say that these are two different genres?  00:24:11 Shalini Vijayan  I think that there is overlap, and I think, you know, for an ensemble like ours, like Brightwork, we have chosen to make our focus new music. So that's our thing. That's what we do. Um, and, uh, all of our concerts and our programming reflect that. Very rarely do we do anything that's not considered a contemporary piece. Um, but, you know, if you do look at some of our major institutions, like I think the LA Phil and I think the San Francisco Symphony, um, earlier, you know, like in the nineties under MTT, really started to pave the way for incorporating contemporary music into a standard classical format. And, you know, I think that's been very important. And I think it's really changed the way that orchestras have programmed across the country. And there has been such a nurturing of contemporary music in larger spaces. Now that I think that kind of overlap has started to happen much more frequently. I think that in more conservative settings, sometimes there's pushback against that. And even even, you know, in some of the places that I play, you know, sometimes with with the lyrics quartet, um, we are asked to just purely program standard classical repertoire, and we will occasionally throw in a little short piece, you know, just to try and put something in there, you know, something that's very accessible. Um, and, uh, you know that we know the audience will like so that we can help them, you know, kind of get over that fear of connecting to a newer piece. And I, I think in some ways, that's where the path forward lies, is that we have to integrate those things, you know, in order to keep kind of the old traditions of classical music alive. I think we have to keep the newer tradition alive as well, and find a way to put them in the same space.  00:26:00 Isabel Li  I certainly agree with that.  00:26:01 Isabel Li  Let's hear more of Shalini's work in new music. This is a performance of the first movement of Atlas Pumas by Gabriela Ortiz. Violinist Shalini Vijayan is joined by percussionist Lynn Vartan.  00:26:18 [MUSIC – Atlas Pumas, mvt 1 by Gabriela Ortiz]  00:29:21 Isabel Li  The first movement of Gabriela Ortiz's Atlas Pumas played here by violinist Shalini Vijian, and Lynn Vartan plays the marimba.  00:29:30 Isabel Li  And Shalini is actually joining us here for a conversation about new music, performances, identity, and representation.  00:29:38 Isabel Li  Many Asian American Pacific Islander artists in music have varying relationships between their art and their identity. I was wondering, to what extent do you feel that perhaps your South Asian identity intersects or influences the work that you do with music?  00:29:54 Shalini Vijayan  Growing up, um, you know, I grew up in a in a university town in Northern California and, you know, a lot of highly educated and, you know, kids of professors and, you know, but still not the most terribly diverse place. And then going into classical music. And this was, you know, in the early nineties when I went to college, um, it still was not a particularly it was very much not a diverse place at all. And, um, there certainly were a lot of Asian students at, um, Manhattan School of Music where I did my my studies.   But I would say it was a solid decade before I was ever in any sort of classical music situation where there was another South Asian musician. I very, very rarely met any South Asian musicians, and it wasn't until I went to the New World Symphony in the early late nineties, early two thousand, and I was a musician there. I was a fellow in that program there for three years that I walked into the first rehearsal, and there were three other South Asian, I think, of Indian descent musicians in the orchestra, and I was absolutely blown away because I literally had not, um, other than here and there at some festivals, I had not met any other South Asian classical musicians.   So it was really like that was the hallmark moment for me. It was a really big deal. And coming with my family, coming from India, you know, there is such a strong tradition of Indian classical music, of Carnatic music and Hindustani music. And, um, it's such a long, long tradition. And, you know, the people who have studied it and lived with it are, you know, they study it their whole lives to be proficient in it. And it's such an incredible, incredible art form and something that I admire so much. And I did as a kid. Take a few lessons here and there. I took some Carnatic singing lessons, um, and a little bit of tabla lessons when I was very young. Um, but I think somewhere in middle school or high school, I kind of realized that it was, for me at least, I wasn't, um, able to put enough time into both because both of them, you know, playing the violin in a Western classical style and then studying Indian classical music require a tremendous amount of effort and a tremendous amount of study. And I at that point chose to go with Western classical music, because that's what I'd been doing since I was five years old. But there has always kind of been this longing for me to be more connected to Indian classical music. Um, I'll go back again to Rajna. When I presented Rajna Swaminathan on Monk Space a couple of years ago, it was a really meaningful thing for me, because that's kind of what I'd always wanted to see was a joining together of that tradition, the Indian tradition with the Western tradition. And, um, I'm so happy that I'm starting to see that more and more with a lot of the artists that are coming up now. But at the time when I was young, it just it felt almost insurmountable that to to find a way to bring the two together. And, um, I remember very clearly as a kid listening to this, um, there was an album that Philip Glass did with Ravi Shankar, and I thought that was so cool at the time. And I used to listen to it over and over again because I just again, I was so amazed that these things could come together and in a, in a kind of successful way. Um, but yeah, there is, you know, there there's a part of me that would still love to go back and explore that more that, that side of it. Um, and but I will say also, I'm very happy now to see a lot more South Asian faces when I, you know, go to concerts on stage and in the audience. And, you know, a lot of composers that I've worked with now, um, of South Asian descent, it's been, you know, I've worked with Reena Esmail and Anuj Bhutani and Rajna and, um, there's so many more, and I'm so glad to see how they're all incorporating their connection to their culture to, to this, you know, Western kind of format of classical music. And they're all doing it in different ways. And it's it's really amazing.  00:34:22 Isabel Li  That's fantastic.  00:34:24 Isabel Li  I was wondering if you could maybe describe what this merging or combination of different styles entails. Do you think this makes it more accessible to audiences of two different cultures?  00:34:36 Shalini Vijayan  For me, one example, before I started running the series at Tuesdays at Monk Space, Aron Kallay, who is our Bright Work artistic director, had asked me to come and do a solo show on Monk Space, which I did in November of 2019.  00:34:52 Shalini Vijayan  And at the time, I wanted to commission a piece that did exactly that, that, that, um, involved some sort of Indian classical instrument or kind of the language of Indian classical music. And so I actually did reach out to Reena Esmail, and she wrote me a very cool piece called blaze that was for tabla and violin. Um, and I really had so much fun doing that. And Reena, Reena really has a very fluid way of writing for the violin, which she actually was a violinist, too. So she's she's really good at doing that. But being able to write for any melodic instrument or for the voice, which she does quite a bit as well, and incorporating sort of the tonality of Indian classical music, which obviously has its own scales and, um, has its own harmonic, harmonic world that is different from the Western world, um, but finds a way to translate that into the written note notation that we require as, uh, Western classical musicians. And, you know, I think that's the biggest gap to bridge, is that in Indian classical music, nothing is notated. Everything is handed down in an oral tradition, um, over the generations. And for us, everything is notated. And in Indian classical music, you know, there's much more improvisation. And now, of course, with modern classical music, there now is a lot more improvisation involved. But in our old standard tradition, obviously there isn't. And in the way that we're trained, mostly we're not trained to be improvisers. And um, so it's it was great. She has a great way of writing so that it kind of sounds like things are being tossed off and sounding sounds like they're being improvised, but they are actually fully notated, um, which I really appreciated.  00:36:50 Isabel Li  Yeah.  00:36:51 Isabel Li  So your career has spanned orchestras, recording ensembles, chamber music. Having had so much experience in these types of performance, what does representation in classical music mean to you?  00:37:04 Shalini Vijayan  Well, representation is is very important because we're talking about a tradition that was built on white men from centuries ago, European white men. And and it's again, it's an incredible tradition and there's so much great repertoire. But I'm going to circle back to what you were saying or what you asked me about connecting to audiences and, you know, connecting to audiences with new music. It's I think people like to see themselves reflected in the art that they choose. They choose to consume. And, you know, whether that's movies or television or music, I think that's how you connect with your audience is by being a bit of a mirror.  I think the only way that we can really continue to connect with a diverse audience is by having that type of diverse representation on our stages and on our recordings. And again, also not just the people, but the types of music, too. You know, musical tastes run wide, genres run wide as well. And it's I think It's good for all of us to be exposed to a lot of different kinds of music, to figure out what we connect with the most. And, um, yeah, the only way we can do that is by really, you know, opening our arms to a, a much wider variety of styles of music. And so I, you know, I mentioned improvisation, improvisation earlier. And I think that is something that's now starting to happen so much more in modern classical music. And, you know, I think there's something about the energy that a player has when they're improvising that is maybe not something that an audience member could quantify verbally, but there's a looseness and a freedom there that I think, you know, for a lot of audience members, they probably really can connect to. And, you know, that's a lot of why people go and listen to jazz is because there's so much freedom and there's so much improvisation.   I've been very lucky to be able to work with, um, Wadada Leo Smith, who's a trumpet player and composer. I've worked with him for probably almost ten years now. And um, through Wadada, actually, I have learned to become much more comfortable with improvising on stage and not within a jazz language of any kind or any kind of harmonic structure necessarily, but within the language of his music, which is very unique and very open and very free and, um, but also has a really strong core in its connection to history. And, um, you know, he's written a lot of amazing works about the civil rights movement and about a lot of, you know, important moments in history for our country. And, um, that's been a real learning experience for me to connect with him in that, in that way and learn from him and learn to be more comfortable with improvisation. Because I think growing up, improvisation for me always meant jazz, and that was not a language I was comfortable in. And um, or even, you know, jazz or rock music or folk music or whatever, you know, it was just not something that came naturally to me as a kid to, I mean, I listened to all of it. I listened to everything when I was a kid, but I never played in any of those styles. And I think the older you get, the scarier it gets to start branching out in those ways. But, um, I think, uh, that's been a an incredible, like, new branch of my life in the last decade has been working with Wadada.  [MUSIC – “Dred Scott, 1857,” from Ten Freedom Summers, by Wadada Leo Smith]  00:42:23 Isabel Li  An excerpt of Wadada Leo Smith's music to give you a sense of the jazz influences in these types of contemporary new music pieces that also touch on pieces of history. This was an excerpt from his album, Ten Freedom Summers, which also consists of compositions based on pieces of American history. For example, what we just heard was from a piece called Dred Scott, 1857.  00:42:49 Isabel Li  Now that I realize that we've been having a conversation about new music, I realize that, hmm, when does new music really start? So if you take a look at maybe music history, when does new music really become new music?  00:43:07 Shalini Vijayan  I guess it depends on who you ask, probably. Um, it's it's pretty recent. You know, it has to be really legitimately pretty new. And, um, again, you know, if you ask an audience member, um, and I think of some of my friends or family who are maybe who are not musicians who come to concerts, and I'm always so interested in talking to them and hearing their opinions about things. Um, you know, they will listen to Bartok and say, oh, that sounds like new music to me. But, you know, Bartok, Bartok passed away a long time ago, and it's, you know, and for me, that's more like canon now. You know, that's like now for me, part of the the standard repertoire. But there was a time when Bartok was new music. And I think for, you know, maybe the listeners who are more comfortable with the very diatonic, you know, world of Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, then something like Bartok really does sound so modern for me. Boy, maybe around the time that minimalism started, you know, John Adams and Steve Reich, Terry Riley, Philip Glass, all of that for me feels like maybe that's the older like the The edge of new music now even though that was that would be the eighties, probably seventies 80s, you know, but that we're talking about like, you know, fifty years ago. So yeah, I mean, it's not that new, but those are all still living composers. So maybe, maybe that's part of what it is for me is that it's the composers of our era, the composers who are alive, who we can communicate with and ask questions of. And, um, you know, at the very least, if you can't talk to John Adams, you can talk to somebody who has worked directly with him and get their impressions of how something should be played, um, as opposed to composers who have been gone for hundreds of years. And you can't have that level of communication with them. I think that, for me is what new music, new music is about. It's about working with living composers and, um, having that type of interaction.  00:45:15 Isabel Li  Yeah. So would the word or the phrase contemporary classical music, be a little oxymoronic in a sense?  00:45:26 Shalini Vijayan  No, I don't think so. I think it's still part of the same tradition. Um, yeah. I really do think it is, because I think there is a lineage there. Um, for a lot of composers, not all of them, um, that I mean, I think particularly if you're writing for, let's say, an orchestra or a string quartet or sort of one of these very standard classical ensembles. Um, even if you're writing in a very new language and you're writing in a very different way, I think there is still a through line to the canon of classical music. I guess for me, new music and classical music are not mutually exclusive. I think they can be the same. So I don't I don't think they're totally different. I think that there is a lot of a lot of overlap.  00:46:16 Isabel Li  For sure, considering how new music fits into the classical music or the classical music industry as a whole. Have you noticed any sorts of shifts in the classical music industry in the past several decades in regards to diversity, equity, inclusion? And have you just noticed any changes?  00:46:35 Shalini Vijayan  I have noticed some changes. I mean, I think that most organizations in this country are making an effort to be more inclusive in their programming now. And, um, you know, another another South Asian composer who I just think is fantastic is Nina Shekhar. And, um, she has had pieces played by the New York Phil for the last couple seasons. I mean, you know, so on on major, major stages, I feel like now I'm seeing more representation and that is definitely Encouraging and, um, you know, uh, same for Anuj and Rajna and Reena. They've all, you know, had their works done by major ensembles. And, um, I think I think there is definitely movement in that direction, for sure. I think it could always be more.   I think also for women and women composers, women performers, I think that has also always been a struggle to find enough representation of women composers and you know, especially if like as I mentioned before, when you're in a situation where an organization asks you to program a concert, like, let's say, for our quartet and wants much more standard repertoire than it does limit you, you know, how because there isn't much from the older canon. You know, there is. You know, there's Fanny Mendelssohn and Clara Schumann and, um, you know, I think in the last five to ten years they've both been played a lot more, which is great. But, you know, I think, uh, there's so many amazing female composers right now that I think are starting to get much more recognition. And I think that just needs to be more, more and more, um, but, uh, you know, that is why, again, like on those programs, sometimes we try to just sneak one modern piece in because it's important for those voices to be heard as well. But yes, I do see some forward movement in that direction with, um, classical programming. And, you know, you just have to hope that the intent is always genuine in those situations. And I think, um, you know, I think that's the most important thing. And giving a platform to those voices is really important.  00:48:59 Isabel Li  How would you go about arts advocacy during this current time when, well, the arts are being defunded and devalued by our current administration and how everything is going on right now?  00:49:10 Shalini Vijayan  Yeah, it's really, really difficult right now. And, um, you know, I think a lot of arts organizations are losing a lot of government funding. Obviously, I know of a couple projects that lost their NEA funding because of DEI, and which is so disheartening. And, um, I think, you know, there's going to be a lot of leaning on private donors to try and, uh, make up that difference or, you know, private foundations to make up the difference in funding, hopefully. And, um, uh, you know, it's yeah, it's scary. It's  a scary time. And I think, you know, even for private funding and, um, private donors, it's, you know, everyone is feeling stressed and feeling concerned about our future right now, just as a country. and there's so much uncertainty. And, um, but I think people who really rely on the arts for all the things that it can provide, you know, an escape and pleasure and, you know, stimulation of a different kind. And especially in a time like this, when you want to be able to get away from maybe what's going on around you, you know, I'm hoping we can find a way to really come together and, um, kind of, you know, rally around each other and find a way to support each other. But, um, I think it is going to be hard for the next few years if we can't find ways to replace that funding that so many people have lost. And I certainly don't think that anyone wants to back away from the progress that's been made with inclusion and representation, you know, just to get funding. So I know we have to be very creative with our path ahead and find a way to, to keep doing what we're doing in this current environment.  00:51:07 Isabel Li  Yeah, on a brighter note, I read about your work with Lyris Quartet earlier this year when you presented a concert with Melodia Mariposa called Altadena Strong with the Lyris Quartet, raising funds for those who have been affected by the LA fires. Can you talk a bit about the power of music? And we're going to end on a stronger note here about the power of music in bringing communities together and accelerating community healing.  00:51:31 Shalini Vijayan  Well, I have to say that concert was really a special one for us. You know, um, so many musicians were affected by the fires in LA. And, you know, I, I've lived in LA for over twenty years now, almost twenty five years and, um, certainly seen my share of wildfires and disasters, but this one hit so much more close to home than any of the other ones have. And, you know, I know at least twenty five people who lost their homes in between the Palisades and Altadena and Altadena in particular.   When I moved to LA, it was a place where a lot of musicians were moving to because you could it was cheaper and you could get a lot of space, and it's beautiful. And, you know, they really built a beautiful community there among all the musicians out there. And it's just heartbreaking, um, to see how many of them have lost everything. And I have to say, Irina Voloshina, who is the woman who runs Melodia Mariposa, and just an amazing violinist and an amazing, wonderful, warm, generous person. You know, she started that series in her driveway during COVID as a way to just keep music going during the pandemic, and it really turned into something so great. And she's, you know, got a whole organization with her now and puts on multiple concerts a year. And when she asked us if we would play that concert for the community in Altadena is, you know, there's no question that we were going to do it. I mean, we absolutely jumped at the chance to support her and support the organization and that community. And people really came out for that concert and were so excited to be there and were so warm and, um, you know, and and she talked to the crowd and really connected with everybody on a very personal level, because she also lost her home in Altadena and, um, you know, it was it was a really meaningful show for all of us. And again, those are the moments where you realize that you can use this art to really connect with people that you may have never met before and show your your love for them, you know, through music, as corny as that may sound, but it's true.  00:53:54 Isabel Li  Yeah, definitely. Well, thank you so much, Shalini, for sharing your visions, your knowledge with new music and community building with us today. Thank you so much for being on Obbligato.  00:54:07 Shalini Vijayan  Thank you so much for having me, Isabel. It was really a pleasure.  00:54:10 Isabel Li  What a wonderful conversation that was with LA-based violinist Shalini Vijayan. If you go to kpfa.org, you can check out more of her work. I put the links to two of her ensembles, Brightwork New Music and Lyris Quartet up on kpfa.org. And thank you for listening to our conversation here on Obbligato on Apex Express.  00:54:32 Isabel Li  We thank all of you listeners out there. Keep resisting, keep organizing, keep creating, and sharing your visions with the world. Your voices are important.  00:54:42 Isabel Li  APEX Express is produced by Miko Lee, Jalena Keane-Lee, Preeti Mangala Shekar, Anuj Vaidya, Swati Rayasam, and Cheryl Truong. Tonight's show was produced by Isabel Li. Thanks to the team at KPFA for their support. Have a great night.  [OUTRO MUSIC]  The post APEX Express – 11.13.25 – Obbligato with Violinist Shalini Vijayan appeared first on KPFA.

A Supreme Court decision that sent shockwaves across America. Dred Scott v Sandford, 1857. Who was the Chief Justice responsible for the decision? On what grounds did he rule that Dred Scott, and by extension all African Americans, was not a citizen of the US? Don is joined by renowned historian Kate Masur, author of "Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement".Edited by Aidan Lonergan. Producer is Freddy Chick.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe.  You can take part in our listener survey here.All music from Epidemic Sounds.American History Hit is a History Hit podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

 Nia and Aughie talk about the fifth U.S. Supreme Court's Chief Justice, Roger Brooke Taney.  Taney's Court lasted from 1836 - 1864, notably presiding over the Dred Scott case as well as cases that further defined the Commerce Clause and set into stone the idea that the Court should consider the Political Question Doctrine when taking a case. 

Sarah Isgur and David French walk listeners through the entire history of the Constitution, the Supreme Court, some of the biggest cases ... all prompted by one listener question. Plus: Grifter Sarah makes a reappearance. The Agenda:—Understanding substantive due process—Supreme Court to consider whether to hear challenge to same-sex marriage on November 7—Dred Scott v. Sandford being the worst decision ever—Scaring our libertarian friends with Slaughter-House cases—The dissent everyone knows was right—Liberty to brutally oppress your workers—‘Grown-ass men' and their group chats—The Based Ritual Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this final episode of the miniseries, Erica Moiah James speaks with her friend and colleague, Sora Han. Erica and Sora were fellows at the Clark Art Institute together in 2024. While Erica was working on this project about representation in the Caribbean, Sora was working on a project about Charles Gaines, and his work Manifestos 4, which is a visual engagement with the Dred Scott decision of 1857, which denied Black people the right to citizenship, and therefore also the right to sue for their right to freedom. Sora is a legal scholar and comes to art history with a background in law. In this conversation, they discuss the stakes of naming, of using Black bodies and lives for “evidence,” and the ways in which seeking to name a portrait takes part in a discourse that extends beyond art history and into the legal sphere. In this concluding discussion, Erica discusses the stakes in art history, and the possibilities for art history as a discipline to allow society more broadly to rethink how images are deployed as evidence––on social media, in the courtroom, and beyond.

In this inspiring episode, host Alison Burns sits down with Wayne Hsiung, a prominent attorney, co-founder of Direct Action Everywhere (DxE), and the force behind his new initiative, The Simple Heart. Wayne shares his remarkable journey from a top academic and lawyer to a leading animal rights activist. He explains his philosophy that law is not a fixed concept but a dynamic force shaped by social movements. This conversation explores the pivotal moments that led him to embrace direct action, including a powerful childhood experience with his family's dog and a jarring trip to China. Wayne delves into his strategy of using the courtroom as a stage for public opinion, likening his approach to historical figures like Susan B. Anthony and Martin Luther King Jr.. He also discusses the nuances of legal victories and losses, the significance of his California appeal, and the contrasting approaches of the animal rights movements in the US and the UK. Wayne's insights offer a powerful and hopeful vision for the future of animal law and personhood.       Timestamps 00:00 - 02:22 — Introduction of Wayne Hsiung and his background. 02:22 - 05:18 — The professional background: How a lawyer sees the law as a social construct. 05:18 - 09:58 — The personal reason: A childhood experience with bullying and a pivotal moment with a dog in China. 09:58 - 18:48 — The pivotal moments: From a failing vegan outreach to entering a slaughterhouse. 18:48 - 25:11 — Using the courtroom as a platform: The strategy of combining legal challenges with public opinion. 25:11 - 28:03 — The effectiveness of direct action and the attention-grabbing nature of courtroom drama. 28:03 - 34:18 — Legal setbacks as a tool for progress: The strategy behind the California appeal and the concept of credibility-enhancing displays. 34:18 - 38:46 — The significance of the Nonhuman Rights Project and the legal argument for animal personhood. 38:46 - 41:57 — The concept of the "reasonable person" and the opportunity presented by outdated laws. 41:57 - 45:17 — International activism: Differences between the animal rights movements in the US and the UK. 45:17 - 47:45 — The future of the movement: The importance of institutional scaffolding and learning from past mistakes. 47:45 - 52:22 — A hopeful message for the future of the animal rights movement and actionable advice for listeners.     Topics Covered The Law as a Social Construct: Wayne's legal background and the "mythology" that law is a fixed thing. He argues that social movements, not just legislation or judicial decisions, are the primary drivers of legal change. Personal Motivation: A childhood marked by bullying and racism shaped his worldview. A transformative trip to China, where he saw a dog in a restaurant, made him realize that if a rule is wrong, it must be broken. The Power of Direct Action: Wayne recounts how his early vegan outreach efforts were ineffective. A pivotal experience of walking into a slaughterhouse showed him that these boundaries were not as "impenetrable" as he once believed. Courtroom Strategy: The concept of using the courtroom as a platform for public opinion, drawing parallels with historic figures like Susan B. Anthony and her trial. Losing to Win: Wayne argues that legal losses can be more valuable than victories. He introduces the concepts of credibility-enhancing displays and the backlash effect, explaining how his incarceration and felony conviction in California have generated enormous public support. Animal Personhood: The significance of the Nonhuman Rights Project's amicus curiae brief in his appeal. Wayne challenges the legal idea that animals are "something" rather than "someone," and draws a parallel to the Dred Scott case and the fight for personhood for people of color. International Differences: The contrast between the US movement's focus on legal defense and the UK movement's emphasis on direct action. Wayne highlights the "dishonesty" element in UK theft law as a huge opportunity for activists and lawyers. Hope for the Future: Wayne expresses his confidence that institutionalized animal exploitation will be abolished within his lifetime. He shares his advice for activists: "find your voice, find some friends and fight like hell".     Key Quotes "The primary mechanism to which it's changed has been social movements, political movements." "If this is the rule, this rule must be broken." "There's something about the battle in the courtroom that really draws an enormous amount of attention." "I suspect...that losing in court is more valuable than winning." "If a corporation can be a person, so can an animal." "This is one area where the law just is not in alignment with the basic common sense intuitions that most people have." "I would be stunned if by the end of my lifetime, factory farming hadn't been completely abolished."     #WayneHsiung #AnimalLaw #AnimalRights #DirectAction #TheSimpleHeart #DXE #AnimalAdvocacy #LegalStrategy #SocialJustice #AnimalPersonhood #OpenRescue #LawForAnimals #AnimalCruelty

It's Fun Day Monday on the Majority Report On today's show: The Trump administration is hinting at a link between Acetaminophen and autism. Border Czar Tom Homan was investigated for receiving $50,000 in cash back in 2024 for a promise of employment in the Trump Administration. Oddly, after Trump's victory the DOJ shut down the FBI investigation. Professor of immigration and citizenship law at the University of Virginia, Amanda Frost joins the show to discuss her book You Are Not American: Citizen Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers. In the Fun Half: Despite saying himself that we are on a path to a dictatorship, Chuck Schumer still won't commit to a government shutdown or doing anything at all. When asked about how House Democrats can resist fascism Hakeem Jeffries says the answer is more protest, more speeches and offers nothing else. The Charlie Kirk Memorial in Glendale, Arizona had Donald Trump feeling like dancing. Stephen Miller addresses the Kirk mourners with a Goebbels inspired speech. The patriots leaving the memorial left an incomprehensible amount of garbage throughout the streets of Glendale. All that and more. 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. Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join 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: HELLOFRESH: Go to HelloFresh.com/majority10fm to get 10 Free Meals + a Free Item for Life! One per box with active subscription. Free meals applied as discount on first box, new subscribers only, varies by plan. COZY EARTH: Go to cozyearth.com/MAJORITYREPORT for up to 40% off the best pants, joggers, shirts, everything SUNSET LAKE:  Head to SunsetLakeCBD.com and use the code FlowerPower25 to save 40% on all their sun grown flower, pre rolls, and even vapor cartridges. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech 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/

L. Joy opens class with reflections on Brooklyn's Dance Africa festival and the importance of taking a break, before turning to the central theme: the role—and limits—of the courts in advancing justice. She notes how people increasingly view the judiciary as the ultimate arbiter of the nation's values, citing recent Supreme Court decisions and public reactions. However, L. Joy cautions that courts have historically upheld the status quo, especially for Black and marginalized communities, referencing landmark cases from Dred Scott v. Sandford, Brown v. Board of Education and Mendez v. Westminster. She brings Janai Nelson, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF) to the front of the class to break down the four major pillars that span their work: political participation, criminal justice, economic justice, and educational equity.

In 1857, this country told Dred Scott that Black people like him could never be citizens. Then, our ancestors secured our birthright citizenship. Today, Trump is threatening to make the “impossible” possible, filing to end birthright citizenship. What does that mean for Black Americans? _____________ 2-Minute Black History is produced by PushBlack, the nation's largest non-profit Black media company. PushBlack exists to amplify the stories of Black history you didn't learn in school. You make PushBlack happen with your contributions at BlackHistoryYear.com — most people donate $10 a month, but every dollar makes a difference. If this episode moved you, share it with your people! Thanks for supporting the work. The production team for this podcast includes Cydney Smith and Len Webb. Our editors are Lance John and Avery Phillips from Gifted Sounds Network. Lilly Workneh serves as executive producer. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Over the last two centuries, the US government has revoked citizenship to cast out its unwanted, suppress dissent, and deny civil rights to all considered “un-American”—whether due to their race, ethnicity, marriage partner, or beliefs. Drawing on the narratives of those who have struggled to be treated as full members of “We the People,” law professor Amanda Frost exposes a hidden history of discrimination and xenophobia that continues to this day.The Supreme Court's rejection of Black citizenship in Dred Scott was among the first and most notorious examples of citizenship stripping, but the phenomenon did not end there. Women who married noncitizens, persecuted racial groups, labor leaders, and political activists were all denied their citizenship, and sometimes deported, by a government that wanted to redefine the meaning of “American.” You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers (Beacon Press, 2021) grapples with what it means to be American and the issues surrounding membership, identity, belonging, and exclusion that still occupy and divide the nation in the twenty-first century. Our guest is: Professor Amanda Frost, who writes and teaches in the fields of immigration and citizenship law, federal courts and jurisdiction, and judicial ethics. Her scholarship has been cited by dozens of state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, and she has been invited to testify on the topics of her articles before both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. You Are Not American was named a “New & Noteworthy” book by The New York Times Book Review, and shortlisted for the Mark Lynton History Prize. She is writing a book on birthright citizenship, publishing in 2026. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who works as a developmental editor, dissertation and writing coach for scholars in the humanities. She is the producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter with weekly bonus material on her Substack found here. Playlist: Dear Miss Perkins Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed We Take Our Cities With Us The House on Henry Street Immigration Realities The Ungrateful Refugee Sin Padres Ni Papeles Reunited Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Over the last two centuries, the US government has revoked citizenship to cast out its unwanted, suppress dissent, and deny civil rights to all considered “un-American”—whether due to their race, ethnicity, marriage partner, or beliefs. Drawing on the narratives of those who have struggled to be treated as full members of “We the People,” law professor Amanda Frost exposes a hidden history of discrimination and xenophobia that continues to this day.The Supreme Court's rejection of Black citizenship in Dred Scott was among the first and most notorious examples of citizenship stripping, but the phenomenon did not end there. Women who married noncitizens, persecuted racial groups, labor leaders, and political activists were all denied their citizenship, and sometimes deported, by a government that wanted to redefine the meaning of “American.” You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers (Beacon Press, 2021) grapples with what it means to be American and the issues surrounding membership, identity, belonging, and exclusion that still occupy and divide the nation in the twenty-first century. Our guest is: Professor Amanda Frost, who writes and teaches in the fields of immigration and citizenship law, federal courts and jurisdiction, and judicial ethics. Her scholarship has been cited by dozens of state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, and she has been invited to testify on the topics of her articles before both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. You Are Not American was named a “New & Noteworthy” book by The New York Times Book Review, and shortlisted for the Mark Lynton History Prize. She is writing a book on birthright citizenship, publishing in 2026. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who works as a developmental editor, dissertation and writing coach for scholars in the humanities. She is the producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter with weekly bonus material on her Substack found here. Playlist: Dear Miss Perkins Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed We Take Our Cities With Us The House on Henry Street Immigration Realities The Ungrateful Refugee Sin Padres Ni Papeles Reunited Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Over the last two centuries, the US government has revoked citizenship to cast out its unwanted, suppress dissent, and deny civil rights to all considered “un-American”—whether due to their race, ethnicity, marriage partner, or beliefs. Drawing on the narratives of those who have struggled to be treated as full members of “We the People,” law professor Amanda Frost exposes a hidden history of discrimination and xenophobia that continues to this day.The Supreme Court's rejection of Black citizenship in Dred Scott was among the first and most notorious examples of citizenship stripping, but the phenomenon did not end there. Women who married noncitizens, persecuted racial groups, labor leaders, and political activists were all denied their citizenship, and sometimes deported, by a government that wanted to redefine the meaning of “American.” You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers (Beacon Press, 2021) grapples with what it means to be American and the issues surrounding membership, identity, belonging, and exclusion that still occupy and divide the nation in the twenty-first century. Our guest is: Professor Amanda Frost, who writes and teaches in the fields of immigration and citizenship law, federal courts and jurisdiction, and judicial ethics. Her scholarship has been cited by dozens of state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, and she has been invited to testify on the topics of her articles before both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. You Are Not American was named a “New & Noteworthy” book by The New York Times Book Review, and shortlisted for the Mark Lynton History Prize. She is writing a book on birthright citizenship, publishing in 2026. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who works as a developmental editor, dissertation and writing coach for scholars in the humanities. She is the producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter with weekly bonus material on her Substack found here. Playlist: Dear Miss Perkins Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed We Take Our Cities With Us The House on Henry Street Immigration Realities The Ungrateful Refugee Sin Padres Ni Papeles Reunited Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Over the last two centuries, the US government has revoked citizenship to cast out its unwanted, suppress dissent, and deny civil rights to all considered “un-American”—whether due to their race, ethnicity, marriage partner, or beliefs. Drawing on the narratives of those who have struggled to be treated as full members of “We the People,” law professor Amanda Frost exposes a hidden history of discrimination and xenophobia that continues to this day.The Supreme Court's rejection of Black citizenship in Dred Scott was among the first and most notorious examples of citizenship stripping, but the phenomenon did not end there. Women who married noncitizens, persecuted racial groups, labor leaders, and political activists were all denied their citizenship, and sometimes deported, by a government that wanted to redefine the meaning of “American.” You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers (Beacon Press, 2021) grapples with what it means to be American and the issues surrounding membership, identity, belonging, and exclusion that still occupy and divide the nation in the twenty-first century. Our guest is: Professor Amanda Frost, who writes and teaches in the fields of immigration and citizenship law, federal courts and jurisdiction, and judicial ethics. Her scholarship has been cited by dozens of state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, and she has been invited to testify on the topics of her articles before both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. You Are Not American was named a “New & Noteworthy” book by The New York Times Book Review, and shortlisted for the Mark Lynton History Prize. She is writing a book on birthright citizenship, publishing in 2026. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who works as a developmental editor, dissertation and writing coach for scholars in the humanities. She is the producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter with weekly bonus material on her Substack found here. Playlist: Dear Miss Perkins Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed We Take Our Cities With Us The House on Henry Street Immigration Realities The Ungrateful Refugee Sin Padres Ni Papeles Reunited Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/academic-life

Over the last two centuries, the US government has revoked citizenship to cast out its unwanted, suppress dissent, and deny civil rights to all considered “un-American”—whether due to their race, ethnicity, marriage partner, or beliefs. Drawing on the narratives of those who have struggled to be treated as full members of “We the People,” law professor Amanda Frost exposes a hidden history of discrimination and xenophobia that continues to this day.The Supreme Court's rejection of Black citizenship in Dred Scott was among the first and most notorious examples of citizenship stripping, but the phenomenon did not end there. Women who married noncitizens, persecuted racial groups, labor leaders, and political activists were all denied their citizenship, and sometimes deported, by a government that wanted to redefine the meaning of “American.” You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers (Beacon Press, 2021) grapples with what it means to be American and the issues surrounding membership, identity, belonging, and exclusion that still occupy and divide the nation in the twenty-first century. Our guest is: Professor Amanda Frost, who writes and teaches in the fields of immigration and citizenship law, federal courts and jurisdiction, and judicial ethics. Her scholarship has been cited by dozens of state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, and she has been invited to testify on the topics of her articles before both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. You Are Not American was named a “New & Noteworthy” book by The New York Times Book Review, and shortlisted for the Mark Lynton History Prize. She is writing a book on birthright citizenship, publishing in 2026. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who works as a developmental editor, dissertation and writing coach for scholars in the humanities. She is the producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter with weekly bonus material on her Substack found here. Playlist: Dear Miss Perkins Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed We Take Our Cities With Us The House on Henry Street Immigration Realities The Ungrateful Refugee Sin Padres Ni Papeles Reunited Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Over the last two centuries, the US government has revoked citizenship to cast out its unwanted, suppress dissent, and deny civil rights to all considered “un-American”—whether due to their race, ethnicity, marriage partner, or beliefs. Drawing on the narratives of those who have struggled to be treated as full members of “We the People,” law professor Amanda Frost exposes a hidden history of discrimination and xenophobia that continues to this day.The Supreme Court's rejection of Black citizenship in Dred Scott was among the first and most notorious examples of citizenship stripping, but the phenomenon did not end there. Women who married noncitizens, persecuted racial groups, labor leaders, and political activists were all denied their citizenship, and sometimes deported, by a government that wanted to redefine the meaning of “American.” You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers (Beacon Press, 2021) grapples with what it means to be American and the issues surrounding membership, identity, belonging, and exclusion that still occupy and divide the nation in the twenty-first century. Our guest is: Professor Amanda Frost, who writes and teaches in the fields of immigration and citizenship law, federal courts and jurisdiction, and judicial ethics. Her scholarship has been cited by dozens of state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, and she has been invited to testify on the topics of her articles before both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. You Are Not American was named a “New & Noteworthy” book by The New York Times Book Review, and shortlisted for the Mark Lynton History Prize. She is writing a book on birthright citizenship, publishing in 2026. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who works as a developmental editor, dissertation and writing coach for scholars in the humanities. She is the producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter with weekly bonus material on her Substack found here. Playlist: Dear Miss Perkins Secret Harvests Who Gets Believed We Take Our Cities With Us The House on Henry Street Immigration Realities The Ungrateful Refugee Sin Padres Ni Papeles Reunited Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this candid conversation, Timothy Hayden shares the discipline, vision, and perseverance that carried him from prison life to holding his first published book. He talks about the strict daily schedule that keeps him focused, the mental challenges of lockdowns, and the deep meaning of belonging explored in Two Views, One Vision. Timothy reflects on the power of proving doubters wrong, the lessons of patience learned behind bars, and the joy of collaborating on a beautifully designed book series. Along the way, the discussion ranges from the Dred Scott decision to Tom Brady's “next ring” mindset—reminding us that purpose is about more than a single win; it's about showing up again and again for the life you're building. Timothy on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/__timmay3/ Subscribe to the email newsletter for inspiration, self-development, & updates

We welcome you to this in-depth, investigative, fact-finding episode of Light ‘Em Up.Thank you for joining us — as we march one step closer to achieving an enormous milestone, our 100th episode!In this episode we are diving into complex and impactful topics. We'll drill down on the concept of Birthright Citizenship — enshrined by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  The 14th Amendment does not equivocate. It states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States.”  A president cannot change those facts with a stroke of his pen.We will introduce to you in detail the concepts of jus soli and jus sanguinis.Jus soli: The principle of law also known as birthright citizenship is the principle that a person's citizenship is determined by the place of their birth, regardless of the parents' nationality.It contrasts with jus sanguinis, which determines citizenship based on parentage.On January 20, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order trying to end birthright citizenship. Specifically, the order states that after February 19, 2025, citizenship will only be granted to babies born in the United States if at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.Birthright citizenship stems from the principle of jus soli, that all children born in the United States are U.S. citizens. Birthright citizenship has remained a bedrock of our country and was enshrined in our constitution in 1868 when the states ratified the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified to repudiate the infamous Dred Scott decision that denied Black people the protections of U.S. citizenship. In 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that children born in the U.S. to immigrant parents were entitled to U.S. citizenship in the case United States v. Wong Kim Ark.Over 250 years ago our founding fathers, in the constitution, established 3 separate branches of government: the Executive, Judicial and Legislative. The Supreme Court (and the MAGA 6 on the court) have ceded a great deal of the other 2 branches' power to the Executive Branch — doing tremendous harm to the country.Chief Justice John Marshall famously said, “It has always been the duty and responsibility of the Federal Judiciary to say what the law is, both as to constitutional and statutory law” The Federal Judiciary is not a political role, at all.  Donald Trump has sought to “weaponize” the law and the judiciary to appease his whims.  Rich people can afford their whims.We examine in depth how Trump's large-scale deportations will have devastating impact on employment across our nation.  The nativist Trump administration is waging a war against the rule of law.When all the migrant workers who pick and process the oranges in sunny Florida are arrested, detained and deported and when a glass of orange juice at your golf course county club will cost $35 — you'll clearly understand the true costs and the real human effects of Trump's campaign of xenophobic arrests, detentions and deportations will have on the economy and workforce of the U.S.Barely 2 months into his administration he has issued over 100 executive orders. More shenanigans will ensue.  Trump has declared war on the Federal Judiciary and the rule of law.America is in a crisis, and many aren't even aware of it.  The Constitution is being tested like never before.  Will it break?  Will the Supreme Court continue to help make Donald Trump a dictator?  The courts gave power to Adolph Hitler and Benito Mussolini.Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.Tune in for all the powerful facts and figures.Follow our sponsoWe want to hear from you!

This Day in Legal History: Fourteenth Amendment RatifiedOn July 28, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was officially adopted, reshaping the legal and constitutional landscape of the nation. Ratified in the wake of the Civil War, it was one of the Reconstruction Amendments designed to integrate formerly enslaved people into American civic life. Section 1 of the amendment granted citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States," effectively nullifying the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had held that Black people could not be citizens.The amendment also introduced two foundational legal principles: the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause. These clauses placed new limitations on state governments, barring them from infringing on individual rights and mandating that laws be applied equally to all people. The Due Process Clause would later become a cornerstone in expanding civil liberties, providing the basis for numerous Supreme Court decisions involving privacy, marriage, and bodily autonomy. The Equal Protection Clause became instrumental in the fight against racial segregation and discrimination, notably underpinning Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which dismantled “separate but equal” doctrine in public education.Initially resisted by many Southern states, the amendment's ratification was made a condition for reentry into the Union. Over time, its scope grew far beyond the post-Civil War context, influencing legal battles on gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, and immigration. It also played a critical role in the doctrine of incorporation, through which many protections in the Bill of Rights became applicable to state governments. The Fourteenth Amendment remains one of the most litigated and interpreted sections of the Constitution, central to the American concept of civil rights and liberties.A&O Shearman has postponed the start date for some of its incoming associates until January, according to a source familiar with the matter. The firm typically offers new associates a choice between two start dates and provides a salary advance to those opting for the later one. The decision comes amid broader industry trends of delaying associate onboarding as a cost-management strategy in response to uneven client demand, despite overall revenue growth among top firms.Formed through the May 2024 merger of Shearman & Sterling and Allen & Overy, A&O Shearman is now the fourth-largest law firm by revenue. While the firm's revenue has benefited from broader sector gains, it faces challenges tied to economic uncertainty and trade tensions. Internally, a cohort of associates had reportedly resisted leadership shortly before the firm joined other legal powerhouses in agreements involving legal services to President Trump—moves seen as efforts to fend off sanctions and settle federal investigations into workplace diversity practices. The firm also experienced a recent exodus in its London office, with nine lawyers, including eight associates, departing in June.A&O Shearman Pushes Start Date to January for Some AssociatesA New York state appeals court has ruled that social media companies cannot be held legally responsible for the 2022 mass shooting in Buffalo that left 10 people dead. The court reversed a lower court's decision, finding that platforms like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Reddit are shielded by Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which grants online platforms immunity from liability for user-generated content. The lawsuit alleged that these platforms were designed to addict and radicalize users, including the shooter, Payton Gendron.Justice Stephen Lindley, writing for the 3-2 majority, argued that holding platforms liable would threaten the open nature of the internet and contradict Congress's intent to foster innovation and limit government interference. He acknowledged the horrific nature of the shooting and the hateful content that influenced it but warned that allowing liability would cause the internet to collapse into tightly restricted message boards.Dissenting justices contended that the platforms actively pushed extremist content through targeted algorithms, suggesting that this behavior went beyond neutral hosting. Other platforms used by Gendron, including Amazon, Discord, 4chan, Snap, and Twitch, were also named in the lawsuit. Gendron is currently serving a life sentence without parole after pleading guilty to state charges, and he still faces federal charges that may lead to the death penalty.Social media companies not liable for 2022 Buffalo mass shooting, New York court rules | ReutersA federal judge in Massachusetts has reaffirmed a nationwide injunction blocking President Donald Trump's executive order that sought to limit birthright citizenship. Judge Leo Sorokin ruled that only a nationwide halt could fully protect the coalition of 22 Democratic-led states challenging the policy, rejecting arguments from the Trump administration that a narrower ruling would suffice following a recent Supreme Court decision. The executive order, signed on Trump's first day back in office in January, directed federal agencies to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children unless at least one parent was a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.Judge Sorokin found that allowing the policy to take effect even in some states would harm immigrant families and disrupt federal benefits programs like Medicaid. Plaintiffs argued it would create a confusing and unfair patchwork of citizenship rules and overwhelm states not enforcing the order. The Trump administration maintained that the Constitution was being misinterpreted, and signaled plans to appeal.Although the Supreme Court recently limited the use of nationwide injunctions, it allowed exceptions under certain conditions—exceptions Sorokin found applicable here. Meanwhile, a separate federal appeals court in California also ruled that Trump's executive order violated the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause and blocked it nationwide.US judge reaffirms nationwide injunction blocking Trump executive order on birthright citizenship | ReutersCalifornia has dropped plans to require Internet service providers (ISPs) to offer $15-per-month broadband plans to low-income residents, following pressure from both the Trump administration and major telecom companies. Assemblymember Tasha Boerner, who led the effort, said her office was warned that enforcing such a law could jeopardize California's access to $1.86 billion in federal Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) funding. The administration's revised BEAD rules prohibit states from setting explicit or implicit broadband pricing requirements.Despite earlier court wins by New York upholding a similar law, Boerner chose to pull the bill after the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) confirmed that even applying for BEAD funds could exempt ISPs from state pricing rules. Advocates and lawmakers criticized the move as a giveaway to large corporations, arguing it undermines efforts to ensure affordable internet access. Boerner had already watered down the bill in negotiations with ISPs, reducing required speeds and allowing ISPs to handle eligibility verification—both points that drew backlash from digital equity groups.Advocates argued the BEAD funding was intended for new broadband infrastructure, while the California bill focused on existing networks, meaning the NTIA's restrictions shouldn't apply. Critics also pointed out that the proposed speed standards were below the federal definition of broadband, and that delegating verification to ISPs risked privacy and access issues. While Boerner acknowledged the need for affordable broadband, she said the risk of losing billions in federal funds wasn't worth pushing the mandate. A separate Senate bill aims to encourage, but not require, ISPs to offer low-cost plans by linking them to subsidies.California backs down to Trump admin, won't force ISPs to offer $15 broadband - Ars Technica 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

EIGHT (+3) TRISTANO COMPOSITIONS 1989 FOR WARNE MARSH Hollywood, CA, December 10 & 11, 1989“Two Not One” Anthony Braxton (as-1,sopranino-2,fl-3) Jon Raskin (bar) Dred Scott (p) Cecil McBee (b) Andrew Cyrille (d) ALAN BROADBENT TRIO IN MOTION New Jersey, January & June & August 2020 Lennie's PenniesAlan Broadbent (p) Harvie S (b) Billy Mintz (d) CONNIE CROTHERS “PERCEPTION” Jamaica, NY, June 21, 1974 Lennie's sceneConnie Crothers (p) Joe Solomon (b) Roger Mancuso (d) PEGGY LEE “ECHO PAINTING” Vancouver, BC, April 16 & 17, 2017 Out on a LimbBrad Turner (tp,flhrn) Rod Murray (tb) Jon Bentley (sop,ts) John Paton (ts) Cole Schmidt (el-g,g) Bradshaw Pack (pedal-steel-g) Meredith Bates (vln) Peggy Lee (cello) James Meger (el-b,b) Dylan van der Schyff (d,perc) CLAUDIO RUBIO “TRISTANO!” Live “Thelonious”, Santiago, Chile, August 20, 2010 FeatherbedClaudio Rubio (ts) Federico Dannemann (g) Eduardo Pena (b) Daniel Rodriguez (d) ETHAN IVERSON “COSTUMES ARE MANDATORY” Brooklyn, NY, August, 2012 317 East 32ndLee Konitz (as-1,vcl) Ethan Iverson (p) Larry Grenadier (b) Jorge “Jordi” Rossy (d) MARK TURNER “MARK TURNER MEETS GARY FOSTER“ Claremont, CA, 2003 “Subconscious-LeeGary Foster (as) Mark Turner (ts) Putter Smith (b) Joe LaBarbera (d) En substack.com he publicado una nota más detallada; https://rbarahona.substack.com/p/lennie-tristano-influencia-y-legado Continue reading Puro Jazz 18 de julio, 2025 – LENNIE TRISTANO INFLUENCIA Y LEGADO (II) at PuroJazz.

This Day in Legal History: 14th Amendment RatifiedOn July 9, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified—one of the most sweeping and hotly contested legal transformations in American history. Drafted during Reconstruction, its promise was bold: birthright citizenship, due process, and equal protection under the law. In theory, it was the legal nail in the coffin for Dred Scott v. Sandford, the 1857 decision that declared Black people could never be citizens. In practice? A more complicated story.The amendment aimed to redefine American citizenship in the wake of emancipation—but its language proved a double-edged sword. While Section 1 is the cornerstone of modern civil rights litigation, it was also the platform for corporate personhood and Lochner-era judicial activism. The same equal protection clause used to dismantle segregation in Brown v. Board (1954) was first deployed to protect railroad companies from state taxes. So the question isn't whether the Fourteenth Amendment mattered—it's whether it served the people it was meant to protect.Southern states ratified the amendment under duress, often as a condition for rejoining the Union. The Supreme Court, for decades, narrowed its reach, refusing to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states and sidestepping racial injustice entirely. Only in the 20th century—through selective incorporation and the civil rights movement—did its full potential begin to manifest.Today, the Fourteenth Amendment remains a constitutional battleground: cited in cases on abortion, marriage equality, affirmative action, and beyond. But the fight over its meaning is far from settled. July 9 isn't just a date on the calendar—it's a reminder that even the most powerful legal language is hostage to interpretation, and that equality under the law has always been a work in progress.Retired NBA star Charles Oakley is seeking sanctions against Madison Square Garden (MSG) and Randy Mastro, a top NYC official and MSG attorney, alleging they made false statements in a long-running legal battle over Oakley's 2017 ejection from a Knicks game. In a recent court filing, Oakley accused Mastro of repeatedly lying to the court about MSG owner James Dolan's involvement, despite Dolan admitting under oath that he played a role. Oakley wants the judge to award attorney fees, censure Mastro, and require him to attend an ethics class.This move follows MSG's own motion last month asking the court to sanction Oakley and his lawyers for allegedly promoting a "false narrative" and to dismiss the case. The dueling motions are part of an eight-year legal dispute that began after Oakley was forcibly removed from MSG. Oakley, a Knicks fan favorite from 1988–1998, has claimed excessive force was used during the incident and has recently amended his lawsuit to focus on assault and battery.Ex-NBA player seeks sanctions against Madison Square Garden, lawyer Mastro | ReutersLaw school deans across Texas are pushing back against a proposal to eliminate the requirement that attorneys graduate from American Bar Association (ABA)-accredited schools. In a letter to the Texas Supreme Court, deans from eight of the state's ten ABA-accredited law schools argue that scrapping the rule—which has been in place since 1983—would hinder graduates' ability to practice in other states and reduce transparency for students and consumers.The court's review of the ABA requirement follows a similar move by Florida, where justices cited the ABA's paused diversity mandate and political activity as reasons for reconsideration. Critics of the proposal warn that removing ABA accreditation could isolate Texas law schools, make legal education less portable, and ultimately increase costs for students.Notably, the dean of the University of Texas School of Law, Robert Chesney, did not join the group letter. Instead, he suggested the court explore alternative or supplementary accreditation pathways. Texas A&M's law dean, Robert Ahdieh, also withheld endorsement but emphasized the importance of maintaining national recognition for Texas law degrees. The state's high court, composed entirely of Republican-elected judges, has not indicated when it will issue a decision.Eliminating ABA accreditation for Texas law schools is flawed proposal, some deans say | ReutersA U.S. district judge temporarily halted the bankruptcy sale of genetic testing company 23andMe, giving California three days to argue that the deal violates its genetic privacy law. California had earlier failed to convince a bankruptcy judge to block the $305 million sale to TTAM Research, a nonprofit founded by 23andMe co-founder Anne Wojcicki.The state contends that transferring genetic data to TTAM without explicit consumer consent breaches California's Genetic Information Privacy Act. With roughly 1.8 million California residents among 23andMe's 10 million users, the state argues the sale could lead to unauthorized data transfers.Bankruptcy Judge Brian Walsh previously ruled that consumers could delete their data post-sale, minimizing potential harm. TTAM has promised to honor 23andMe's existing privacy policies. A federal court hearing on whether to extend the pause is scheduled for Thursday. The bankruptcy follows declining demand and a major 2023 data breach at 23andMe.Judge briefly pauses 23andMe bankruptcy sale amid California's appeal | ReutersThe IRS has agreed—at least for now—not to penalize churches for discussing political candidates or campaigns during religious services, provided that such speech is framed as a matter of faith. This move comes as part of a proposed consent decree intended to resolve a constitutional challenge to the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 law barring 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations—including churches—from participating in political campaigns.The settlement, filed in a Texas federal court, reinterprets the Johnson Amendment narrowly: religious speech about politics during worship services is not “political intervention” if it occurs through traditional, faith-based communication. The IRS now claims enforcing the Johnson Amendment against such speech could raise serious First Amendment concerns, especially if it treats politically silent religious organizations more favorably than outspoken ones.Critics warn this reinterpretation risks turning churches into tax-sheltered political operations. Diane Yentel of the Council of Nonprofits argues it opens the door to tax-deductible donations for de facto political activity—effectively subsidized by taxpayers who may disagree.While the lawsuit originally sought to strike down the Johnson Amendment entirely, this settlement attempts to sidestep the constitutional minefield through interpretation, not invalidation. But here's the legal paradox: the IRS is effectively rewriting statutory law without legislative input, relying on what it calls "constitutional avoidance." That raises real questions—can an executive agency unilaterally redefine the scope of a congressional statute to avoid a constitutional fight? Or is this a policy pivot masquerading as judicial restraint?For now, the constitutional showdown is paused. But if this consent decree is approved, it will mark a major shift in the legal boundaries between church, state, and campaign finance—without any actual change to the law's text. Whether that holds up under future scrutiny remains very much an open question.IRS Says Religious Groups Can Discuss Politics During Services (1) 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

Award-winning author DL Fowler (the Lincoln Guy) transports readers into his characters' inner worlds. His bestselling work, Lincoln Raw-a biographical novel, imagines how Lincoln viewed the world in which he came of age.  DL Fowler's book, Lincoln Raw is curated in the Lincoln Collection of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library. Dorothy says, "I am proud to say I am responsible for Larry Fowler being called "The Lincoln Guy" - He'll talk about how Lincoln's era contrasted with ours. On Bill Radke's November 8, 2024, KUOW podcast The Week in Review, his panel wrestled over whether we should continue to focus on divisions and whether we should react differently to hateful rhetoric. I've noticed listeners frequently register surprise when they discover how current controversies often spring from wounds of long ago that fester and remain unhealed. Let's be real. Our nation has always wrangled over the meaning of liberty and the question of who is entitled to it—sometimes at a severe cost.  During Stephen Douglas's 1860 presidential campaign, he championed the idea of government by, for, and of the white man, in contrast with Abraham Lincoln's hopes for a government of, by, and for the people. Larry Fowler notes, "I am Larry Fowler, often called The Lincoln Guy. During the tenth anniversary celebration of my multi-award-winning series, Abraham Lincoln's Lost Stories, I have been struck by how the results of the 2024 election may reveal what might have happened had Stephen Douglas won the White House instead of Lincoln. Two constitutional amendments, the 13th which abolished slavery and the 14th which diminished States Rights and enshrined birthright citizenship in the Constitution, would never have passed. Both increased resentment in the southern states when ratified, and attacks on the latter will likely escalate in the coming months. Larry shares these stories with our listeners on today's show: 1) Lincoln feared that Douglas's election would open the door for white supremacy to dominate the entire Western Hemisphere. 2) Lincoln fretted that slavery might no longer be limited to race and that others who fell outside societal norms were at risk of enslavement. 3) In the decade before the Civil War, mounting threats validated Lincoln's anxieties (e.g. the “filibuster” movement, Bleeding Kansas, and the Dred Scott decision).  Lincoln's determination to stop the spread of Douglas's ideology was at the root of a bloody war that cost nearly a million American lives and left many more maimed. Leila Fadel's NPR interview with actor Jude Law and screenwriter Zach Baylin underscored how their recently released film, The Order, demonstrates that threats similar to those that fueled Lincoln's angst are still alive today. The question is not whether advancement of the American dream will continue to demand a high price, rather it is will we have the resolve to pay the piper. The three titles in Abraham Lincoln's Lost Stories Series have been honored by various organizations including American Writing Awards, the Hawthorne Prize, the Pacific Northwest Writers Association, Chanticleer International Book Awards, Midwest Book Review, Readers' Favorite, Historical Fiction Find more at the author's website at https://www.dlfowler.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's another week with multiple champions, and for some reason, the Jeopardy! fans are FUMING about it! They complain when a champ wins too many games, but also when they win not enough. But hey, we have a nice time, as we get to meet a slew of new players this week, almost all of whom we like. Ken also basically says "shitpoo" on national TV, the noble "dik-dik" once again appears, and we go very, very deep on Dred Scott. If you want to go deeper on our show, why not donate to the Patreon? By donating $5/month at patreon.com/jeopardypodcast, you'll get a brand-new bonus episode every month, access to our Discord, and MORE! With the Masters almost over, we will have our exclusive coverage of the tournament only available on our Patreon, and last month, Andy Richter joined us to discuss his three appearances on Celebrity Jeopardy! It was a blast and you won't wanna miss it. SOURCE: Missouri Digital Heritage: "Missouri's Dred Scott Case:, 1846-1857" Special thank you as always to the J-Archive and The Jeopardy! Fan. This episode was produced by Producer Dan. Music by Nate Heller. Art by Max Wittert.

Nestled in the heart of St. Louis, the Field House Museum recently reopened its doors after an unexpected restoration from a dramatic pipe burst that turned the historic house into a water park. Stephanie Bliss, the museum's dynamic executive director, joins hosts Arnold Stricker and Mark Langston to wade into the saga of recovery and renovation that the museum has undergone. The discussion kicks off with a vivid recounting of the unfortunate Christmas Eve incident when water cascaded down three floors of the historic site, leading to a restoration project that was both extensive and essential. Stephanie shares the behind-the-scenes efforts, including the artisans who meticulously restored the building's historical features, ensuring it remains a tribute to its past while embracing the future. As the conversation flows, we learn about the rich history of the Field House, tied intricately to the life of Roswell Field (Dred and Harriet Scott's attorney) and his famous son, poet Eugene Field. Stephanie shares the fascinating backstory of the house, built in 1845, and how it became a significant landmark in St. Louis due to the family's contributions to history, especially in the context of the Dred Scott case. The dynamic between the hosts and the guest is playful and engaging, peppered with light-hearted banter that keeps the audience entertained while educating them about the importance of preserving local history. Listeners will also get a glimpse into the museum's current exhibits, including a look at Eugene Field's life and works, as well as the intriguing toy collection honoring the poet's childhood passions. Stephanie's enthusiasm for the Field House Museum and its rich legacy is infectious, making this episode a delightful blend of humor, history, and a call to action for local heritage appreciation. Join us for a journey through time and community spirit at the Field House Museum, where every corner tells a story, and every story deserves to be heard![00:00] Introduction to St. Louis Hidden Gem: Field House Museum[00:36] Hosts' Coffee Chat and Sponsor Acknowledgment[03:03] Community Announcements and Tornado Cleanup[04:03] Field House Museum's Water Damage Incident[07:18] Restoration Efforts and Historical Significance[10:52] Roswell Field and the Dred Scott Case[15:36] Eugene Field: The Poet and Prankster[19:40] Current Exhibits at the Field House Museum[27:05] The Evolution of Little People Toys[27:32] Exploring the Music Exhibit[28:39] Eugene Field's Legacy and the Museum's History[31:51 The Field House Museum's Name Changes and Expansion[34:58] Reciprocal Programs and Community Engagement[38:28] Upcoming Events and Croquet Tournament[46:12] Fun Facts and Closing RemarksTakeaways: The Field House Museum is a hidden gem in St. Louis, and it just reopened after extensive renovations. Stephanie Bliss, the executive director, shared fascinating stories about the museum's history and its connection to Roswell and Eugene Field. The museum is not just about history; it hosts fun events like croquet tournaments and exhibits about toys and music. Eugene Field, born in the house, became renowned for his poetry, notably 'Wynken, Blynken, and Nod', which has inspired musicians and artists alike. The museum's toy collection honors Eugene's passion for toys, and currently features a Fisher Price exhibit that's a blast from the past. With its rich historical significance, the Field House Museum is a must-visit for anyone wanting to learn about St. Louis' cultural heritage. Field House MuseumCroquet in the Lou | Field House Museum

President Trump's order that would end automatic citizenship for the children of many categories of immigrants has been blocked from going into effect by three separate federal judges. Those injunctions have been upheld by three separate appeals courts.So Thursday's case at the Supreme Court was really about two questions: Whether the constitution guarantees birthright citizenship and whether judges can issue nationwide injunctions against federal policies.University of Virginia law professor Amanda Frost, author of the book You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers, followed the arguments and breaks down clues that point to the Justices' thinking.For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.Email us at considerthis@npr.org.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Whether it's attempting to overturn birthright citizenship, effectively stripping citizenship from American children, or claiming Alien Enemy Act war powers under an imaginary invasion, Trump's anti-immigrant moves are outlandishly unconstitutional. They are also being met with significant pushback from judges, even conservative ones. On this week's Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern who explains the landmark ruling from a Trump-appointed judge in the southern district of Texas that declared the administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act is unlawful. Next, Amanda Frost, University of Virginia law professor and author of  You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers, joins Dahlia to explain what Birthright Citizenship really means, and all the ways Trump is working to redefine what it means to be an American, including stripping citizenship from children and denaturalizing adults.  Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Whether it's attempting to overturn birthright citizenship, effectively stripping citizenship from American children, or claiming Alien Enemy Act war powers under an imaginary invasion, Trump's anti-immigrant moves are outlandishly unconstitutional. They are also being met with significant pushback from judges, even conservative ones. On this week's Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern who explains the landmark ruling from a Trump-appointed judge in the southern district of Texas that declared the administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act is unlawful. Next, Amanda Frost, University of Virginia law professor and author of  You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers, joins Dahlia to explain what Birthright Citizenship really means, and all the ways Trump is working to redefine what it means to be an American, including stripping citizenship from children and denaturalizing adults.  Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Whether it's attempting to overturn birthright citizenship, effectively stripping citizenship from American children, or claiming Alien Enemy Act war powers under an imaginary invasion, Trump's anti-immigrant moves are outlandishly unconstitutional. They are also being met with significant pushback from judges, even conservative ones. On this week's Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern who explains the landmark ruling from a Trump-appointed judge in the southern district of Texas that declared the administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act is unlawful. Next, Amanda Frost, University of Virginia law professor and author of  You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers, joins Dahlia to explain what Birthright Citizenship really means, and all the ways Trump is working to redefine what it means to be an American, including stripping citizenship from children and denaturalizing adults.  Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we take a look at the landmark case of Dred Scott v. Sandford, which in March of 1857, the United States Supreme Court ruled that African Americans are not Citizens of the United States. The case stems from a slave named Dred Scott who sued his owner claiming that the owner took him out of state and brought him to a free state where he argued he should be free.  Subscribe to our YouTube! https://www.youtube.com/@bangdangnetwork

In light of recent national news involving young citizens being sent out of the country, I revisited an interview from 2021 about historical efforts to strip citizenship rights, including the right to remain, from Americans. In the inverview, I spoke with Amanda Frost about her book on the topic. You can find her book here: You Are Not American: Citizen Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers by Amanda Frost

President Donald Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship has reignited debates over the 14th Amendment and the meaning of citizenship in America. Legal experts Gabriel Chin of the University of California, Davis School of Law; Amanda Frost of the University of Virginia School of Law; Kurt Lash of the University of Richmond School of Law; and Ilan Wurman of the University of Minnesota Law School analyze the legal challenges surrounding birthright citizenship, explore the constitutional and historical arguments on all sides of this debate, and discuss its broader implications for immigration. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources Trump v. CASA, Inc., United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (2025) Trump v. Washington, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2025) Trump v. New Jersey, United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (2025) Amanda Frost, You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers (2021) Amanda Frost, “The Coming Assault on Birthright Citizenship,” The Atlantic (Jan. 7, 2025) Ilan Wurman and Randy Barnett, “Trump Might Have a Case on Birthright Citizenship,” The New York Times (Feb. 15, 2025) Ilan Wurman, “Jurisdiction and Citizenship,” Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 25-27 (April 14, 2025) Gabriel “Jack” Chin and Paul Finkelman, “Birthright Citizenship, Slave Trade Legislation, and the Origins of Federal Immigration Regulation,” UC Davis Law Review, Vol. 54 (April 8, 2021) Gabriel J. Chin, “America Has Freaked Out Over Birthright Citizenship For Centuries,” Talking Points Memo (Aug. 2015) Kurt Lash, “Prima Facie Citizenship: Birth, Allegiance and the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause,” SSRN (Feb. 22, 2025) Kurt Lash, The Fourteenth Amendment and the Privileges and Immunities of American Citizenship (2014) 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. ⁠Sign up⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming ⁠live program⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠YouTube⁠. Support our important work. ⁠Donate

Today Dr. Scott Spillman joins in to talk about how historians have conceptualized slavery and its role in the development of the United States. Get ready for a history of the history of slavery.About our guest:Scott Spillman is an American historian and the author of the book Making Sense of Slavery: America's Long Reckoning, from the Founding Era to Today (2025). His essays and reviews have appeared in The Point, Liberties, The New Yorker, The New Republic, n+1, the Chronicle Review, and the Los Angeles Review of Books, and he has published academic articles in Reviews in American History, History of Education Quarterly, and North Carolina Historical Review.Scott has a PhD in history from Stanford University, and before that he studied history, English, and political philosophy at the University of North Carolina (and Duke University) as a Robertson Scholar. Originally from Atlanta, he now lives in Denver with his partner and their twin daughters. He also spends part of his time in Leadville, where he serves as chair of the city's historic preservation commission. When he is not reading and writing, he enjoys running in the mountains.

First Chris and Amy discuss President Trump's announcement of new tariffs and the potential effects on the economy, including rising consumer prices and strained international relations. Ryan McClure joins to talk about the historic reopening of St. Louis' Old Courthouse, highlighting renovations, new exhibits, and its connection to the Dred Scott case. Major Garrett and financial expert Dave Simons dive deeper into the global impact of the tariffs, political pushback, and the stock market reaction. Later, Samantha Waigand shares details about Waigand Wheels, a nonprofit that pairs adults with special needs with a buddy for community deliveries, while promoting their Wagon Wheel Speedway Spectacular fundraiser on April 26th. Matt Pauley breaks down the early season for the Cardinals, including Ivan Herrera's standout performances. Lastly, Lukas Denis calls in to discuss his key interception in the Battlehawks' victory over the Houston Roughnecks and previews the upcoming game against the San Antonio Brahmas.

After the Civil War, it took a century of protests, boycotts, demonstrations, and legal challenges to end the Jim Crow system of segregation and legal discrimination. Learn about the brave men, women, and children that risked their personal safety, and sometimes their lives, in the quest for Black Americans to achieve equal rights.

The One Stupid Fuck returns from ep. 130 with much more new information about how to liberate yourself from the corporate controlled matrix & how to truly be a sovereign person without being deceived & manipulated by your "country". Please check this one out on YouTube because Brandon presents a lot of screen sharing & you may want to pause & read along. It's a lot to take in so hold onto your hats! What are you waiting for? Visit https://onestupidfuck.com/ & breaking free now with his free courses! Please like, share, subscribe and leave a review on Apple Podcasts & Spotify!! Also you can feed Nigel the goat some extra shekels at my patreon if you would be so kind. He will love you for all eternity. Please like, share, subscribe and leave a review on Apple Podcasts & Spotify!! Also you can feed Nigel the goat some extra shekels at my patreon if you would be so kind. He will love you for all eternity. Patreon here: patreon.com/redpillcartelpodcast Always feel free to ask to get on the show! Email redpillcartelpod@gmail.com One stop shop for all links: https://linktr.ee/redpillcartelpodcast

This Day in Legal History: Dred Scott DecidedOn March 6, 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its infamous ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford, a decision that deepened national tensions over slavery. The Court held that Dred Scott, an enslaved man who had lived in free territories, was not a U.S. citizen and therefore had no legal standing to sue for his freedom. In a sweeping opinion by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the Court went further, declaring that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in federal territories. This effectively struck down the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had restricted the spread of slavery in certain parts of the country. The ruling was celebrated in the South but outraged abolitionists and many in the North, who saw it as an alarming expansion of pro-slavery power.The Dred Scott decision is widely regarded as one of the worst in Supreme Court history, as it denied citizenship and legal protections to Black Americans. It also emboldened pro-slavery forces while further alienating the growing anti-slavery movement. The backlash contributed to the intensifying sectional divide that would lead to the Civil War just four years later. During the war, President Abraham Lincoln and Congress took steps to undermine the decision, culminating in the passage of the 13th and 14th Amendments. These amendments abolished slavery and established birthright citizenship, directly overturning Dred Scott. Today, the case stands as a stark reminder of how the law has been used to uphold racial injustice—and how later legal reforms can correct such profound wrongs.The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 against President Donald Trump's effort to withhold payments from foreign aid organizations for work already completed. The decision upheld an order by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, requiring the government to release nearly $2 billion in funds owed to contractors and grant recipients under USAID and the State Department. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the Court's liberal justices to form the majority, while four conservative justices dissented. The Trump administration had paused all foreign aid on January 20, citing an “America First” agenda, which disrupted humanitarian efforts worldwide. Aid organizations sued, arguing Trump exceeded his authority by defunding programs approved by Congress. The administration contended that enforcing payments without proper review amounted to judicial overreach. Despite Ali's repeated orders, the administration largely kept the funds frozen, prompting legal battles over compliance. Plaintiffs warned that continued delays would cause “extraordinary and irreversible harm” to millions relying on aid. The Supreme Court did not provide a rationale for its order but instructed Ali to clarify compliance obligations. A hearing is scheduled for March 7 to determine the next steps.US Supreme Court won't let Trump withhold payment to foreign aid groups | ReutersDozens of U.S. hospital systems and healthcare providers have filed lawsuits against Blue Cross Blue Shield, alleging the insurer underpaid them by billions. These providers chose to opt out of a $2.8 billion class-action settlement in Alabama, which is awaiting final approval. The new lawsuits, filed in federal courts in California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania, argue that Blue Cross and its affiliates conspired to divide the market, reducing competition and driving down reimbursement rates in violation of antitrust laws. Plaintiffs, including Bon Secours Mercy Health and Temple University Health, believe they could recover more through individual lawsuits than the settlement. Blue Cross has denied wrongdoing and declined to comment. The final approval hearing for the Alabama settlement is scheduled for July 29. This litigation follows a separate $2.7 billion antitrust settlement in 2020 for commercial and individual subscribers, which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld last year. Some large companies also opted out of that settlement to pursue their own claims.Hospitals line up to sue Blue Cross, opting out of $2.8 bln settlement | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has the authority to license temporary nuclear waste storage sites, a case brought by Texas and oil industry interests. The dispute centers on a facility in western Texas, licensed by the NRC in 2021, which opponents argue poses environmental and security risks. Some conservative justices questioned whether "temporary" storage could last indefinitely, undermining efforts to establish a permanent waste site. Liberal justices focused on whether the plaintiffs had legal standing, as they did not initially challenge the NRC's decision through the agency's process. The case follows past failures to establish a permanent nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, despite significant federal investment. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled the NRC lacked authority under the Atomic Energy Act, prompting the Biden administration to appeal—a move continued under Trump. A decision is expected by June.US Supreme Court hears Texas nuclear waste storage dispute | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In the latest episode of Liberty and Learning, Mark Levin and Dr. Larry Arnn engage in a captivating discussion about the role of federal district judges and their impact on the executive branch. As the conversation unfolds, they explore the historical context of judicial power, the implications of overreach by judges, and the urgent need for Congress to take action to restore balance within the government. Levin and Arnn begin by discussing how federal judges are created by Congress and the limitations of their authority. They highlight the importance of the separation of powers, a fundamental principle that ensures no single branch of government can dominate the others. This principle is crucial for maintaining the rule of law and protecting the rights of citizens. One of the key points raised is the alarming trend of federal judges making nationwide rulings that disrupt the functioning of the executive branch. Levin and Arnn argue that this overreach not only violates the common sense understanding of judicial authority but also undermines the very foundation of our constitutional system. They emphasize that judges should only decide cases that directly involve the parties before them, rather than issuing sweeping injunctions that affect the entire nation. As the conversation progresses, the duo delves into the role of Congress in addressing judicial overreach. They stress that Congress has the power to legislate and could easily pass laws to limit the authority of district judges. This is a crucial point, as it highlights the responsibility of elected officials to uphold the Constitution and ensure that the government operates within its designated boundaries. The discussion also touches on the historical significance of the Dred Scott decision, which serves as a reminder of the potential consequences of judicial overreach. Levin and Arne draw parallels between past and present, suggesting that we are at a critical juncture in history where the balance of power is being tested once again. Liberty and Learning with Mark Levin and Larry Arnn is a 10-part series, hosted by veteran broadcaster and constitutional law expert, Mark Levin, and his good friend, Dr. Larry Arnn, President of Hillsdale College, dives deep into the founding principles of the U.S., as Americans face both crisis and opportunity. Levin and Arnn take listeners on a journey forward, as they unpack the country's basic foundations and the self-government they require. Mark Levin and Dr. Arnn bring their knowledge and wisdom to bear in a candid conversation between lifelong friends on today's latest news events. They will touch on the points of crisis in America, addressing each in light of our constitutional government, and tackling the pressing issues of our time to see how they fit into the grand tapestry of American history. The discussion will delve deep into the issues at the forefront of our nation's concerns, like education, borders, citizenship, separation of powers, state and local government, and much more. To learn more about Hillsdale College, go to https://www.hillsdale.edu/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the latest episode of Liberty and Learning, Mark Levin and Dr. Larry Arnn engage in a captivating discussion about the role of federal district judges and their impact on the executive branch. As the conversation unfolds, they explore the historical context of judicial power, the implications of overreach by judges, and the urgent need for Congress to take action to restore balance within the government. Levin and Arnn begin by discussing how federal judges are created by Congress and the limitations of their authority. They highlight the importance of the separation of powers, a fundamental principle that ensures no single branch of government can dominate the others. This principle is crucial for maintaining the rule of law and protecting the rights of citizens. One of the key points raised is the alarming trend of federal judges making nationwide rulings that disrupt the functioning of the executive branch. Levin and Arnn argue that this overreach not only violates the common sense understanding of judicial authority but also undermines the very foundation of our constitutional system. They emphasize that judges should only decide cases that directly involve the parties before them, rather than issuing sweeping injunctions that affect the entire nation. As the conversation progresses, the duo delves into the role of Congress in addressing judicial overreach. They stress that Congress has the power to legislate and could easily pass laws to limit the authority of district judges. This is a crucial point, as it highlights the responsibility of elected officials to uphold the Constitution and ensure that the government operates within its designated boundaries. The discussion also touches on the historical significance of the Dred Scott decision, which serves as a reminder of the potential consequences of judicial overreach. Levin and Arne draw parallels between past and present, suggesting that we are at a critical juncture in history where the balance of power is being tested once again. Liberty and Learning with Mark Levin and Larry Arnn is a 10-part series, hosted by veteran broadcaster and constitutional law expert, Mark Levin, and his good friend, Dr. Larry Arnn, President of Hillsdale College, dives deep into the founding principles of the U.S., as Americans face both crisis and opportunity. Levin and Arnn take listeners on a journey forward, as they unpack the country’s basic foundations and the self-government they require. Mark Levin and Dr. Arnn bring their knowledge and wisdom to bear in a candid conversation between lifelong friends on today’s latest news events. They will touch on the points of crisis in America, addressing each in light of our constitutional government, and tackling the pressing issues of our time to see how they fit into the grand tapestry of American history. The discussion will delve deep into the issues at the forefront of our nation’s concerns, like education, borders, citizenship, separation of powers, state and local government, and much more. To learn more about Hillsdale College, go to https://www.hillsdale.edu/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

DRED SCOTT “THE PACIFIC JAZZ GROUP” Los Angeles 2022Bernie's Tune, Nights At The Turntable, Utter ChaosEric Crystal (st) Dred Scott (p) John Wiitala (b) Smith Dobson (dr) VINCENT ARCHER “SHORT STORIES” New York, June 9, 2022Lighthouse, Mirai, Message to a friend, It takes two to know oneGerald Clayton (p) Vicente Archer (b) Bill Stewart (d) ROY CAMPBELL PYRAMID TRIO “ETHNIC STEW AND BREW” Chicago, IL, October 11 & 12, 2000Amadou diallo, Impressions of Yokohama (1)Roy Campbell (tp,flhrn,pocket-tp,perc) William Parker (b,perc,shakuhachi-fl-1) Hamid Drake (d,perc) Continue reading Puro Jazz 20 de febrero, 2025 at PuroJazz.

About this episode: In 1868, the 14th Amendment established birthright citizenship in the United States. In this episode: a look at the court cases, historical events, and people that shaped one of the Constitution's human rights provisions. Guest: Martha Jones is a writer, historian and legal scholar, and a professor of history at the SNF Agora Institute. Host: Dr. Josh Sharfstein is vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, a faculty member in health policy, a pediatrician, and former secretary of Maryland's Health Department. Show links and related content: Dred Scott v. Sandford—National Archives Opinion of the Maryland Court of Appeals, Hughes v. Jackson (1858)—National Constitution Center United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)—National Constitution Center The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed

In this captivating episode of Dave Does History on Bill Mick Live, Dave Bowman takes us on a thought-provoking journey through the legal, historical, and cultural ramifications of birthright citizenship. This discussion dives into the heart of the 14th Amendment, unpacking its revolutionary impact on defining citizenship in the United States, while tracing its origins back to the Reconstruction Era. With his signature mix of wit and analytical insight, Dave explains the challenges and controversies surrounding the interpretation of the citizenship clause. From its role in overturning the infamous Dred Scott decision to its enduring implications in modern debates on immigration, the episode lays bare the struggles of a nation reconciling its foundational ideals with its ever-evolving demographics. Bowman also highlights key moments in the legal battles, including the landmark Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which cemented the principle of jus soli—citizenship by birthright. Listeners are treated to an engaging exploration of the broader cultural and geopolitical impacts of U.S. immigration policy, such as the exclusionary Immigration Act of 1924 and its unintended consequences, including strained international relations with Japan. Bowman challenges listeners to consider the long-term implications of revisiting this issue, raising essential questions about the balance between legal precedent, constitutional interpretation, and the nation's values. This episode isn't just a lesson in history—it's a masterclass in connecting the past to the present, reminding us why understanding history is crucial for navigating today's challenges. Whether you're a history enthusiast or just curious about the roots of today's debates, this discussion offers a fresh and insightful take that shouldn't be missed.

Some legal “experts” are claiming that the Supreme Court‘s infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision is still used in current law. That, of course, is nonsense. In fact, soon after its passage, many northern states essentially nullified “Scott” at the state level.Original article: Dred Scott, Politics, and the “Living” Constitution

Welcome to another episode of The Round Table! This week, Daniel, Preena, and Viola sit down with C. Evan Stewart, author of The Worst Supreme Court Decisions Ever! and a professor at Cornell University. Stewart delves into America's legal history, examining cases like Dred Scott v. Sanford and the importance of addressing the uncomfortable truths of the legal system. Stewart discusses the role of lawyers, explaining that their job is to represent clients rather than determine guilt or innocence, which is the responsibility of the jury and judge. He underscores how this distinction is vital to maintaining fairness and integrity in the legal system, even when cases involve contentious or morally complex issues. As a professor, Stewart highlights the need to teach history in its entirety, including its darker moments. He emphasizes that avoiding uncomfortable truths risks creating a distorted view of history, which hinders society's ability to learn from past mistakes. Stewart also stresses the significance of civic engagement, encouraging people to get involved in local elections and explore a variety of sources to understand history and legal cases. Informed voting and critical thinking, he argues, are crucial for shaping a more equitable and effective legal system. Despite its flaws, there's optimism about America's legal system and its potential for positive change. The system's resilience, he believes, comes from its ability to evolve through democratic processes and active participation from citizens.

Seth on New Years' Resolutions. Peggy Noonan's Wall Street Journal opinion entitled "Signposts on the Wisdom Trail." Seth reads from Justice John McLean's dissent in the 1857 Supreme Court case Dred Scott v. Sandford.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

HOUR 1 CALLS: history, "reparations," education, crime. HOUR 2 GUEST Cam Higby: Border horrors. Trump picks. Pro-Palestinian violence. The Hake Report, Wednesday, November 20, 2024 AD GUEST LINKS: Cam Higby linktr.ee/camhigby  |  News site: todayisamerica.com TIMESTAMPS * (0:00:00) Start: Cam Higby coming * (0:04:56) Biden mad Putin said the "N-word" * (0:06:27) Hey, guys! * (0:08:15) WILLIAM: Antron Brown; 3/5ths, Illegal; Reparations * (0:23:57) WILLIAM: Black Panthers, CA gun control, BHI * (0:25:51) JEFF: Reparations research; Trump UFC; Matt Gaetz Sonny Hostin * (0:31:31) JOE, AZ… history, 3/5ths, Dred Scott, the Fed * (0:40:30) JOE: Not wanting to be nerdy, Ivy League * (0:45:26) MARK: Sweet. NY stabbing. History. Hostin apology. * (0:51:52) WILLIAM #7: Keystone Cops? "You search the scriptures…" -Jesus * (0:59:58) GUEST: Cam Higby, border documentary… "Unlocked"  * (1:10:00) Cam: Hake's illegal story, Tom Homan, Wall, Asylum problem * (1:16:08) Tom Homan, Welfare vs Taxpayers, Immigrant crime * (1:21:49) Matt Gaetz, Pete Hegseth, Dr. Oz * (1:30:00) Al Sharpton, black people * (1:32:28) MARK, Atlanta, 1st: Ramon Rivera, alleged stabbing suspect * (1:34:27) Today is America site, pro-Palestinian protester violence * (1:43:22) RICK, VA: Truth about Israel * (1:49:26) Closing: Follow Cam Higby… Supers tomorrow! * (1:49:58) Starflyer 59 - "Fell in Love at 22" - 1998, The Fashion Focus LINKS BLOG  https://www.thehakereport.com/blog/2024/11/20/hake-cam-higby-2nd-hour-wed-11-20-24 PODCAST / Substack  HAKE NEWS from JLP  https://www.thehakereport.com/jlp-news/2024/11/20/hake-news-wed-11-20-24 Hake is live M-F 9-11a PT (11-1CT/12-2ET) Call-in 1-888-775-3773 https://www.thehakereport.com/show VIDEO  YouTube  -  Rumble*  -  Facebook  -  X  -  BitChute  -  Odysee*  PODCAST  Substack  -  Apple  -  Spotify  -  Castbox  -  Podcast Addict  *SUPER CHAT on platforms* above or  BuyMeACoffee, etc.  SHOP  Spring  -  Cameo  |  All My Links  JLP Network:  JLP  -  Church  -  TFS  -  Nick  -  Joel  -  Punchie   Get full access to HAKE at thehakereport.substack.com/subscribe

We wrap up our coverage of the 2024 DNC with highlights from Kamala Harris's acceptance speech. Nick Offerman's "Kamala Man" song parody. Donald is chickening out of the debate again -- or is he? Sleepy Donald is sleepy. Weirdo RFK drops out and endorses Donald. RFK sawed off the head of a dead whale and drove home with it. Racist Republicans say Kamala is ineligible to be president because of Dred Scott? Michael Tomasky on ridiculing Donald. Blocking MAGA operatives in Georgia. With Buzz Burbank, music by Brad Brooks, I Hate You Just Kidding, and more!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Supreme Court didn't JUST rule that presidents have absolute presidential immunity. They actually ruled that presidents have absolute presidential immunity PLUS.Constitutional scholars left, right, and center are excoriating the new Supreme Court opinion that 1. contradicts the expressed language of our constitution, 2. actually repeals portions of our constitution, and, in essence, 3. declares the constitution is unconstitutional. Yes, that is illogical, but that is precisely what Chief Justice Roberts and the radical right-wing block of justices did in Trump vs. United States.This ruling gives Donald Trump a blueprint to convert America into a banana republic. And Donald Trump is exactly the kind of day-one-dictator who will do it. This ruling not only excuses lawless conduct by a corrupt president, it endorses such conduct, and thereby encourages future presidents to act lawlessly and to direct others to to the same then simply exercise his core constitutional power of the presidential pardon to pardon all of his criminal associates who carry out his unlawful commands. This is not just absolute presidential power. It is absolute presidential power PLUS. And like Dred Scott, Korematsu, and Plessy vs. Ferguson, this opinion must not stand.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

By granting Donald Trump immunity for the crimes he committed against the American people; the radical, right-wing block of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, actually encourages presidents to commit crimes.Eventually, this Supreme Court opinion will go the way of Dred Scott vs. Sanford, and Plessy vs. Ferguson - it will be reversed and will go down in American history as an opinion that sought to destroy honest and honorable governing, and accountability for crimes a president commits against the American people.But given that the opinion is in effect at the moment, President Joe Biden needs to exercise the powers the Supreme Court has given him to hold treasonous actors accountable and protect American democracy from the likes of Donald Trump and those who support his efforts to destroy American democracy.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.