Podcasts about Federal court

Former Coalition minister Linda Reynolds, victorious in her court battles against Brittany Higgins and David Sharaz, is now taking aim at Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. Plus, is this Sussan Ley’s last week as leader?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this  installment of the Gutowski Files we sit down with investigative reporter Stephen Gutowski of thereload.com and discuss a recent ruling in federal court related to a Delaware law requiring people to acquire a permit not to CARRY a firearm but to purchase one. Active Self Protection exists to help good, sane, sober, moral, prudent people in all walks of life to more effectively protect themselves and their loved ones from criminal violence. On the ASP Podcast you will hear the true stories of life or death self defense encounters from the men and women that lived them. If you are interested in the Second Amendment, self defense and defensive firearms use, martial arts or the use of less lethal tools used in the real world to defend life and family, you will find this show riveting.  Join host and career federal agent Mike Willever as he talks to real life survivors and hear their stories in depth. You'll hear about these incidents and the self defenders from well before the encounter occurred on through the legal and emotional aftermath. Music: bensound.com

Steve Gruber talks with Hans A. Von Spakovsky, Manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative and Senior Legal Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, about the latest redistricting battles across the country. They dive deep into the recent federal court ruling blocking Texas from using its new congressional map in the 2026 midterms, what it means for voters, and the broader implications of gerrymandering and election law reform nationwide. Von Spakovsky explains how these legal decisions shape political power and why Americans need to stay informed about the maps that determine their representation.

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica Levinson unpacks a significant federal court decision blocking the Trump administration from withholding or conditioning federal funds to UCLA in exchange for major campus policy changes. The discussion covers the court's reasoning under the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and 10th Amendments, and why the judge deemed the administration's actions coercive. Join us for a breakdown of this breaking legal news and its broader implications for university autonomy.Here are three key takeaways from the episode:Federal Funding Leverage Challenged: A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction preventing the Trump administration from freezing, terminating, or conditioning UC research funds—pointing out that the administration's approach may violate legal requirements, including the Administrative Procedures Act, the First Amendment, and the Tenth Amendment.Academic Freedom & Speech Protected: The court found that forcing changes to speech policies, DEI efforts, gender healthcare, protest rules, and admissions could unlawfully coerce universities and chill free speech, especially among public university faculty and students.States' Rights and Spending Clause Limits: The judge ruled that federal conditions on funding can't be so extreme they essentially take away states' ability to decide their own policies—a “gun to the head” tactic that threatens economic stability and state sovereignty.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

A ruling out of West Texas has upended Republican redistricting efforts to get more seats in Congress. Where things stand now that a federal judge in El Paso has struck down Texas' new congressional map.We’ve reported before on how Texas school district leadership seems to have become increasingly partisan. We'll take a closer look at […] The post Federal court blocks redrawn Texas congressional map appeared first on KUT & KUTX Studios -- Podcasts.

A federal court has ruled that Texas cannot use its newly redrawn congressional map for the 2026 midterms, citing substantial evidence that the map racially gerrymanders Black and Hispanic voters. The judges ordered the state to revert to its 2021 map while the legal battle continues. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

American Democracy Minute Radio News Report & Podcast for Nov. 20, 2025Trump-Requested Texas Congressional District Gerrymandering Blocked by Federal Court PanelIn June, President Donald Trump asked Texas to redistrict and deliver five additional congressional seats before the 2026 midterm, igniting a multi-state gerrymandering arms race.  Nov. 18th, a federal court ruling halted the new districts and said “substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map.”Some podcasting platforms strip out our links.  To read our resources and see the whole script of today's report, please go to our website at https://AmericanDemocracyMinute.orgToday's LinksArticles & Resources: Politico - Trump on Texas redistricting: ‘We are entitled to 5 more seats'American Democracy Minute - (Sept) Texas Senate Republicans Approve Gerrymandered Congressional Map; California Democrats Pass Bill to Put Retaliatory Maps on the Ballot  League of United Latin American Citizens (via Democracy Docket) - Complaint Alleging Racially Gerrymandered Districts in 2025 Maps (1 of 4 complaints from pro-voter groups)U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas - El Paso - MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDERGRANTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION  Texas Tribune - Federal court blocks Texas from using new congressional gerrymander in 2026 midtermsGroups Taking Action:LULAC, MALDEF, NAACP Legal Defense FundRegister or Check Your Voter Registration:U.S. Election Assistance Commission – How to Register And Vote in Your StatePlease follow us on Facebook and Bluesky Social, and SHARE! Find all of our reports at AmericanDemocracyMinute.orgWant ADM sent to your email?  Sign up here!#News #Democracy  #DemocracyNews #RacialGerrymandering #FairMaps #BlackVoters #LatinoVoters #Texas #2026Midterms

Wednesday Headlines: Outage takes down popular apps and Aussie airport sites, US lawmakers to vote on Epstein files, skilled migrants and international students could be slashed under Libs, Roblox to roll out age-verification checks in Australia despite social media ban exemption, and Eminem sues Aussie swim company. Deep Dive: A new claim for native title rights has been filed with the Federal Court, which, if successful, will cover Melbourne and its surrounds. While corners of the community might react with concern and even anger at new native title claims, what exactly are they? And is the criticism justified? In this episode of The Briefing, Helen Smith is joined by Kieren Murray, a Wiradjuri man and lawyer at the First Nations Legal & Research Services to unpack it. Follow The Briefing: TikTok: @thebriefingpodInstagram: @thebriefingpodcast YouTube: @TheBriefingPodcastFacebook: @LiSTNR Newsroom See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Understanding Subject Matter Jurisdiction: A Key to Navigating Federal CourtsThis conversation delves into the complexities of subject matter jurisdiction (SMJ) in federal courts, emphasizing its foundational importance for legal exams and practice. The discussion covers federal question jurisdiction, diversity jurisdiction, supplemental jurisdiction, and the removal process, providing insights into key rules and exceptions that govern these areas. The speakers aim to equip listeners with a structured analysis to navigate jurisdictional issues effectively, highlighting the critical distinctions and procedural nuances that can impact case outcomes.Subject Matter Jurisdiction (SMJ) is a fundamental concept in the legal world, especially for those preparing for exams like the bar or Civ Pro finals. It's the gatekeeper to the federal court system, determining whether a court has the authority to hear a particular type of case. Understanding SMJ is crucial, as a misstep can lead to a case being dismissed outright.Federal Question Jurisdiction: One of the primary ways to establish SMJ is through federal question jurisdiction, which applies to cases arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. The well-pleaded complaint rule is central here, requiring that the federal issue be a necessary element of the plaintiff's claim. The landmark case of Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Motley illustrates this principle, emphasizing that anticipated defenses do not suffice to establish federal jurisdiction.Diversity Jurisdiction: Another pathway into federal court is diversity jurisdiction, which requires complete diversity of citizenship between parties and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. This jurisdictional basis aims to protect out-of-state litigants from potential local bias. However, the rules are strict, with complete diversity being a non-negotiable requirement.Supplemental Jurisdiction: Supplemental jurisdiction allows federal courts to hear additional state law claims related to a case already under federal jurisdiction. This is governed by Section 1367, which codifies older doctrines like pendant and ancillary jurisdiction. However, in diversity-only cases, Section 1367B imposes limitations to prevent plaintiffs from circumventing the complete diversity requirement.Removal and Remand: The process of moving a case from state to federal court is known as removal, a tool available exclusively to defendants. The rules are stringent, with a 30-day deadline for filing a notice of removal and a one-year cap for diversity cases. The forum defendant rule further restricts removal in diversity cases if any defendant is a citizen of the state where the action is pending.Navigating the intricacies of subject matter jurisdiction is essential for legal practitioners. By understanding the pathways and limitations of federal question and diversity jurisdiction, as well as the nuances of supplemental jurisdiction and removal, one can effectively maneuver through the federal court system. For those preparing for exams, mastering these concepts is key to success.Subscribe now to stay updated on more legal insights and deepen your understanding of complex legal topics.TakeawaysSMJ is crucial for federal court access.Federal courts have limited jurisdiction defined by the Constitution and Congress.The well-pleaded complaint rule is essential for federal question jurisdiction.Diversity jurisdiction requires complete diversity and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000.The Grable exception allows state law claims with significant federal issues to be heard in federal court.Supplemental jurisdiction allows related claims to be heard together in federal court.Subject Matter Jurisdiction, SMJ, Federal Question, Diversity Jurisdiction, Supplemental Jurisdiction, Removal Process, Legal Exam Tips, Civil Procedure, Federal Courts, Jurisdictional Analysis

(CERTAIN INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC)Canadian Patent No. 2,655,335 (“'335 Patent”), which was issued to Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V. for INVEGA SUSTENNA, involves a suspension of paliperidone palmitate for the treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders. The '335 Patent teaches a dosing regimen to achieve an optimum plasma concentration-time profile. Its claims have been construed in previous litigation and are not in issue: Janssen Inc. v. Teva Canada Ltd., 2020 FC 593,; Janssen Inc. v. Pharmascience Inc., 2022 FC 62, aff'd 2024 FCA 10 (“PMS Paliperidone”)). Its disclosure indicated that “[t]hose of ordinary skill in the art will understand that the maintenance dose may be [adjusted] up or down in view of patients condition (response to the medication and renal function)”.Pharmascience Inc. has served two Notices of Allegation in respect of pms-PALIPERIDONE PALMITATE, its proposed generic version of INVEGA SUSTENNA. In 2020, Janssen's infringement action related to Pharmascience's Abbreviated New Drug Submission No. 236094 was discontinued on consent. Shortly thereafter, Pharmascience served a Notice of Allegation and Detailed Statement in respect of a different Abbreviated New Drug Submission — No. 244641 — seeking approval to market and sell doses of pms-PALIPERIDONE PALMITATE. Janssen again commenced an infringement action under s. 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133. In that proceeding, Pharmascience moved for summary trial. It was found that if Pharmascience's pms-PALIPERIDONE PALMITATE was made, constructed, used or sold as set out in the Abbreviated New Drug Submission, it would influence prescribers to prescribe the dosing regimen claimed in the '335 Patent, leading to direct infringement: PMS Paliperidone. The defence of invalidity went forward, with Janssen seeking a declaration that Pharmascience would infringe the '335 Patent if it were to make, use or sell pms-PALIPERIDONE PALMITATE in 50, 75, 100 and 150 mg doses.The Federal Court found that the Patent was not invalid based on obviousness or for lack of patentable subject matter. The claims provided specified dosing regimens meant to produce a concentration of the medication within the therapeutic range. If a physician chose to use a dose other than that claimed, to stop treatment or to change therapies, they would no longer be practicing the claimed invention. The Court of Appeal dismissed Pharmascience's appeal, finding that the use of the invention did not require the exercise of skill and judgment. Argued Date 2025-10-09 Keywords Intellectual property — Patents — Validity — Lack of patentable subject matter — Method of medical treatment — Vendible product — Skill and judgment — Fixed or variable dosing regimen — Canadian Patent No. 2,655,335 teaches dosing regimen that includes first loading dose, second loading dose and monthly maintenance doses — Regimen incorporates dosing windows of +/- 2 days for the second loading dose and +/- 7 days for the maintenance doses — Whether patent is invalid in that it claims an unpatentable method of medical treatment. Notes (Federal) (Civil) (By Leave) (Sealing order) (Certain information not available to the public) Language English Audio Disclaimers This podcast is created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada's highest court. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. The original version of this hearing may be found on the Supreme Court of Canada's website. The above case summary was prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch).

Despite feeling like ick, your 'umble 'ostess crawled in behind the mic for three hours of stellar, independent radio. And now I need a shower. Those Epstein emails get worse and worse and worse. Dribble, dribble, dribble. Guess who came to dinner with DonOLD on Thanksgiving, 2017? Yup! Itttttttt's JEFFREY! Nitwit Nero may never do another press conference again. Oh, and the CHILD that Matt Gaetz paid to sexually abuse has come forward. Do the honorable thing, Matt. And I don't mean marry her. Lindsey Hooligan gets exposed in Federal Court. The Hon Cameron Currie doesn't appear to be amused. 

Six people charged with conspiring to interfere with a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent at the Broadview ICE facility have plead not guilty. The indictment against the "Broadview Six" alleges they surrounded a government vehicle, “with the intent to hinder and impede” a federal agent from proceeding to the west suburban processing facility back in September.

Six people charged with conspiring to interfere with a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent at the Broadview ICE facility have plead not guilty. The indictment against the "Broadview Six" alleges they surrounded a government vehicle, “with the intent to hinder and impede” a federal agent from proceeding to the west suburban processing facility back in September.

Six people charged with conspiring to interfere with a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent at the Broadview ICE facility have plead not guilty. The indictment against the "Broadview Six" alleges they surrounded a government vehicle, “with the intent to hinder and impede” a federal agent from proceeding to the west suburban processing facility back in September.

Acknowledgement of Country// HeadlinesStand with Sudan RallyWhistleblowers speak out on corrupt Nauru refugee dealVictoria Legal Aid employees accuse management of censorship on Palestine Allan Labor government introduces draconian "Adult Time for Violent Crime” billYarra City Councillors urged to save Medically Supervised Injecting Rooms// AnnouncementsListeners are urged to email Yarra City Mayor Councillor Stephen Jolly and Deputy Mayor Councillor Sarah McKenzie before 10:30am, to rescind last night's motion to withdraw long-standing support of the Medically Supervised Injecting Rooms Initiative in Richmond. You can find Yarra City Councillors email addresses here, and more information about the issue on Councillor Sophie Wade's Instagram.// Rally for SudanWe listened to speeches from the Rally for Sudan at the State Library on Sunday 9th November. We heard from organisers, community, and those in solidarity on honouring the martyrs, collective ongoing grief, the challenges and urgent need for mutual aid, the history and current counter revolutionary violence taking place in Sudan. You can support ongoing mutual aid efforts for Sudan by following Bakri Mahmoud and Sawt Al Sudan on Instagram.// Mparntwe for Falastin UpdatesWe heard an interview with journalist and horticulturalist Jorgen from Mparntwe for Falastin, discussing ongoing efforts to close Pine Gap, renewed in response to the genocide in Gaza.// Footscray Belongs To EveryoneOskar from Footscray Community Response joined us in-studio to discuss an upcoming protest, 11am this Saturday 15th November, in Nicholson Street Mall, Footscray,  the Maribyrnong City Council's decision to hire private security to harass and displace homeless people from Footscray CBD.// PSEUDA on ‘This Is All'Songwriter, producer and FAMILI collective member PSEUDA joined us in-studio to talk about their latest album ‘This Is All'. Six years in the making, it is a masterfully produced and dynamic album with dreamy vocals. From a distance, ‘This Is All' presents itself as an electronic pop record, but up close, its intricate sound design and restless experimentation draws from the fringes of breakbeat, prog-rock, classical and hybrid trap.// Racial Discrimination Challenge Against Bail ChecksGrace Gooley, Senior Solicitor at the Justice and Equity Centre (JEC), joined us to discuss a racial discrimination case launched in the Federal Court by two young Aboriginal brothers against the New South Wales Police. The brothers, aged 11 and 13, were subjected to over 150 "bail compliance" checks by NSW Police over a 20 month period, raising serious concerns about the level of police intervention in the lives of Aboriginal children and young people, including in their own homes.//

In this special live recording from the 2025 Whitlam Symposium, Mark hosts a star-studded panel discussing the 50th anniversary of the Dismissal.Was Sir John Kerr's decision to dismiss Gough Whitlam constitutionally correct but politically catastrophic? Did Malcolm Fraser's blocking of supply in the Senate represent an abuse of power, or legitimate opposition tactics? And has the Dismissal left lasting scars on Australia's public trust in democratic institutions?Distinguished Professor George Williams AO is Vice-Chancellor of Western Sydney University and one of Australia's leading constitutional lawyers.The Hon Mark Dreyfus KC MP is the Member for Isaacs and former Commonwealth Attorney-General.The Hon Justice Michael Lee serves on the Federal Court of Australia.Julia Baird is an ABC journalist, broadcaster, and author.Troy Bramston is a journalist with The Australian and author of the new biography Gough Whitlam: The Vista of the New.The Hon Amanda Vanstone AO is a former Liberal Senator for South Australia and Howard Government minister.Democracy Sausage with Mark Kenny is available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. We'd love to hear your feedback on this series, so send in your questions, comments or suggestions for future episodes to democracysausage@anu.edu.au.Recorded live at ANU in partnership with the Whitlam Institute (whitlam.org). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

“What's Buggin' You” segment for Tuesday 11-11-25

In this monthly episode, John Q. Khosravi, Esq. sits down with Kevin A. Gregg, Esq. to break down key new immigration cases and developments from the federal courts. They discuss the latest in: - Notice and due process in Rivera-Valdes (9th Cir.) - Police reports and discretion in Maurice v. Bondi (1st Cir.) - Conspiracy and particularly serious crimes in Amos v. Att'y Gen. (3d Cir.) Plus, Kevin shares updates on habeas litigation trends and practical tips for removal defense attorneys.

     Slam the Gavel welcomes back Marc Fishman who was last on the podcast Season 5, Episodes 202, 224, 240, 264, 276 and 292. Marc discussed what parents go through with being retaliated on during family court proceedings.    Marc also gave the update to his case where Judge Cannataro GRANTED an EXPEDITED processing of hearing the Motion to Stay the Jailing of Marc Fishman! There is NO WAY this man should be jailed as his disabilities are extensive. Marc encourages the public to write a letter to Judge Cannataro on his behalf to: press@newrochellepoliceabuse.com.https://www.change.org/p/justice-for-marc-fishman-stop-the-jailing-of-a-disabled-father-in-new-york?signed=trueTo Reach Marc Fishman: press@newrocehellepoliceabuse.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook:  https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/  YouTube:  https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536  Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com   https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/about*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. For information only and no affiliation with legislation, bills or laws. Not financial, medical nor legal advice as the content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user's should consult with the relevant professionals. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. Podcast is protected by owner. The content creator maintains the exclusive right and any unauthorized copyright.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/

Trump's callous attack on the poor, and his failed economy have been brought into stark relief by the Shutdown. And as Trump makes clueless statements about a “golden era” for the economy, the voters know better.  That attack on struggling Americans and those that oppose his policies made their way into Federal Courts across America this past week, as Trump and his DOJ suffered losses in 9 cases in 8 courts from Rhode Island to Oregon.  Michael Popok solo hosts the Legal AF Podcast tonight to brief the audience on critical developments you need to know about at the Supreme Court, the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and Federal Courts in Oregon, Rhode Island, DC, Virginia, South Carolina, and Chicago. Support Our Sponsors: 
 IQ Bar: Get 20% off all IQBAR products. Text LEGALAF to 64000. (Message and data rates may apply)
Lola Blankets: Get 40% off your entire order at https://lolablankets.com by using code LEGALAF at checkout. Experience the world's #1 blanket with Lola Blankets.
Veracity: For up to 45% off your order, head to https://VeracitySelfCare.com and use promo code: LEGALAF
Miracle Made: Upgrade your sleep with Miracle Made! Go to https://TryMiracle.com/LEGALAF and use the code LEGLAF to claim your FREE 3 PIECE TOWEL SET and SAVE over 40% OFF.

Learn more about the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Subscribe to Legal AF Substack: https://substack.com/@legalaf Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane
 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Trump folded again in the face of a Federal Court emergency order, and Trump finally figured out that starving the poor was bad for him politically. Popok reports on a fast moving story that tonight, because of the actions of Blue State Attorneys' General and Public interest groups and their 2 suits, tthe Government is immediately paying the full $8 billion in SNAP anti hunger payments today to 42 hungry and disadvantaged Americans including 16 million children. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this segment, Mark is joined by Reardon Roundtable regular and local attorney Jane Dueker. Dueker explains the Cory Elliott story, her guilty plead in federal court, and the connection to the Former St Louis Mayor.

In breaking news, a Trump-appointed Federal Judge issued a late Sunday night emergency Preliminary Injunction continuing to block Trump's attempts to violate State Sovereignty and federalize and deploy state militia/national guard on the streets of Portland. Michael Popok explains that the Judge will be entering the final Permanent Injunction against The Trump Administration by Friday, but because Trump refused to give her the time to issue her final order, she was forced to enter an emergency preliminary injunction. Popok also explains how this case and its legal arguments may impact the United States Supreme Court's ultimate decision on whether Trump can send federalized troops into Blue States and Cities because he says so. Upgrade your sleep with Miracle Made! Go to TryMiracle.com/LEGALAF and use the code LEGLAF to claim your FREE 3 PIECE TOWEL SET and SAVE over 40% OFF. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us a textIn this “go vote on Tuesday, deadass” episode, Ernest shares the latest on Trump's nuclear interests, the consequential upcoming election, City Council challenges Philly Mayor Cherelle Parker's affordable Housing Plan, the racial nuances of SNAP benefits, the straights DL crisis, about Keke Palmer's new Southern Fried Rice show, and much more. Ernestly Speaking! is executively produced and hosted by Ernest Owens. Check him out at ernestowens.com and follow him @MrErnestOwens on Twitter & Instagram.

Follow Dan on LinkedIn at linkedin.com/in/cotterdanFollow Pat on LinkedIn athttps://www.linkedin.com/in/donald-patrick-eckler-610290824/ Predictions Sure To Wrong: Riggs: Affirm Callais: Affirm Bilbrey: AffirmRiggs:https://mycourts.in.gov/arguments/default.aspx?&id=3028&view=detail&yr=&when=&page=1&court=app&search=&direction=%20ASC&future=False&sort=&judge=&county=&admin=False&pageSize=20  Callais:https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/24-109_2IL app:https://www.illinoiscourts.gov/courts/appellate-court/oral-argument-audio/

High-profile politician Alex Greenwich is used to the robust world of public office, but he says he had never experienced such an intense attack on his sexuality after his public stoush with Mark Latham. Latham, the former Labor leader turned political pariah, was ordered to pay Greenwich $140,000 for a vile social media post the Federal Court found defamed the gay Sydney independent MP. It’s a judgment Latham, who is also an independent MP in the NSW parliament, is appealing. All of this is not new, but Greenwich is now speaking out about the extent the saga has affected him in the latest episode of The Morning Edition with Samantha Selinger-MorrisSubscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

High-profile politician Alex Greenwich is used to the robust world of public office, but he says he had never experienced such an intense attack on his sexuality after his public stoush with Mark Latham. Latham, the former Labor leader turned political pariah, was ordered to pay Greenwich $140,000 for a vile social media post the Federal Court found defamed the gay Sydney independent MP. It’s a judgment Latham, who is also an independent MP in the NSW parliament, is appealing. All of this is not new, but Greenwich is now speaking out about the extent the saga has affected him in the latest episode of The Morning Edition with Samantha Selinger-MorrisSubscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A federal judge orders the administration to continue paying SNAP benefits during the government shutdown. Also, concern is growing about the fate of Head Start as the shutdown heads into its second month. Then, as Trump refuses to restart trade talks with Canada, that nation is making overtures to America's biggest trade rival, China. Plus, if you think the quality of digital platforms is getting worse -- you may not be imagining things. Catherine Rampell hosts as Evan McMorris-Santoro, Mychael Schnell, Philip Bump, Ron Insana, Brendan Greeley, Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner and Cory Doctorow join The 11th Hour. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we tackle the Supreme Court battle over Louisiana's redistricting and its far-reaching implications for voting rights. Host Jessica Levinson and NPR's Hansi Lo Wang unpack the legal fight over Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, explaining how redistricting shapes the power of racial minorities and the future of partisan gerrymandering. Join us as we break down what's at stake for Congress, the states, and the promise of equal representation.Here are three key takeaways from the episode:Redistricting = Real Voting Power: How district lines are drawn can dramatically dilute or amplify your vote. Redistricting is a complex, often opaque process with huge, tangible consequences for representation.Supreme Court Decisions Have National Impact: The outcome of Louisiana's case (and similar cases) could directly affect minority representation in Congress and potentially lock in partisan advantages for years to come.Tension Between Race & Partisan Politics: The debate isn't just about protecting minority voters. The Court is grappling with whether racial considerations in redistricting are required or unconstitutional, especially since partisan gerrymandering is now out of reach for federal courts.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

A native title claim in the region where Captain James Cook made landfall after his ship crashed into the Great Barrier Reef in 1770 is among one of three to finally be settled by the Federal Court this week.

Plaintiffs support a 10-district system used twice in Virginia Beach following the original suit. The city, awaiting the referendum result, has asked to dismiss the case.

Plaintiffs support a 10-district system used twice in Virginia Beach following the original suit. The city, awaiting the referendum result, has asked to dismiss the case.

In this episode, the hosts delve into the ongoing controversy surrounding the NCAA's treatment of Tyon Grant Foster, exploring the ethical implications of their decisions. They discuss Gonzaga's new recruits and the team's dynamics, highlighting the emotional toll on players affected by NCAA rulings. The conversation shifts to a recap of Gonzaga's exhibition game against Northwest University, analyzing player performances and the team's strengths and weaknesses. The hosts express excitement for the upcoming season while acknowledging the challenges ahead, including injuries and eligibility issues. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to the NCAA Controversy 04:44 The Tyon Grant Foster Case 15:38 Recruiting Updates and Player Signings 18:56 Previewing the Upcoming Game Against Northwest University 23:00 Injury Concerns and Team Depth 24:15 Player Performances: Fogle's Impact 25:54 Worley's Versatility and Contributions 27:23 Fast Breaks and Transition Play 28:34 Mario's Development and Team Dynamics 30:26 Braden Smith's Role and Team Defense 32:24 Areas for Improvement: Free Throws and Uniforms 38:08 Three-Point Shooting and Player Consistency 43:07 Final Thoughts and Season Outlook

The legal battles against President Donald Trump took a dramatic turn this past week, with federal courts issuing significant rulings that could reshape the boundaries of executive power. On October 4th, a federal district court in Oregon granted a temporary restraining order against Trump and his administration in a case that strikes at the heart of presidential authority and state sovereignty.The case centers on Trump's decision to federalize the Oregon National Guard and deploy them to Portland. On September 27th, Trump posted on Truth Social that he was directing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to provide troops to protect what he called war-ravaged Portland from Antifa and other domestic terrorists, authorizing full force if necessary. The very next day, Secretary Hegseth issued a memorandum authorizing the deployment and federalization of 200 Oregon National Guard service members, completely overriding the objections of Oregon Governor Tina Kotek.The State of Oregon and the City of Portland immediately filed suit, arguing that Trump exceeded his statutory authority under federal law and violated Oregon's sovereign rights protected by the Tenth Amendment. What makes this case particularly compelling is the timing and justification. The court found that unlike previous situations where such deployments might have been warranted, there was minimal evidence of significant unrest in Portland during September 2025. While there had been protests at a Portland ICE facility that peaked back in June, federal and local law enforcement had successfully managed the situation. In the month leading up to the federalization order, there were only four minor incidents involving protesters and federal officers.The district court sided with Oregon and Portland, issuing the temporary restraining order on October 4th. But Trump's legal team immediately appealed, and by October 20th, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was considering whether to stay that order. The three-judge panel consisting of Judges Susan Graber, Ryan Nelson, and Bridget Bade heard arguments about whether the President acted within his authority under Title 10 of the United States Code, specifically Section 12406.This case joins a growing list of legal challenges against the Trump administration's actions in 2025. According to Lawfare's litigation tracker, similar cases have emerged in other jurisdictions, including challenges to immigration enforcement in sanctuary cities.What happens next could have lasting implications. If the courts ultimately rule against Trump, it would represent a significant check on presidential power to deploy military forces domestically. For Oregon and Portland, it's about preserving state sovereignty and preventing what they see as federal overreach.Thank you for tuning in. Come back next week for more updates on this developing story and other important legal news. This has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out Quiet Please dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

JOIN US FOR THE MEMBERS-ONLY BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: INSERT HERE:   https://youtube.com/live/lpiNTk7fEgMJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~16 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join TRUMP WINS AGAIN IN FEDERAL COURT!  This time the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals—traditionally recognized as the MOST LIBERAL of the federal court circuits, has handed Trump a RESOUNDING VICTORY on his authority to call out the National Guard and deploy it to Portland OR.In a 2-1 vote this three-judge panel ruled to toss out the temporary restraining order issued against Trump by an unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior federal district trial court Judge Karin—not kidding, Karin—Immelgut, citing reasoning error after reasoning error in her TRO against Trump.  The two judges in the majority—Judge Bridget Bade and Judge Ryan Nelson—were both appointed by Trump. Even better, Judge Nelson wrote a concurrence not only supporting the reasonableness and lawfulness of Trump's deployment of the National Guard, he also argued strenuously that such this exercise of Article II authority by the President simply was not subject to judicial review AT ALL. There was also a histrionic dissent by 76-year-old Judge Susan Graber, a Clinton appointee, class of 1997. Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down into plain English!NOTE: I previously covered Judge Immelgut's unconstitutional TRO decision here:  "Lawless Democrat Rogue Judge VIOLATES Constitution AGAIN!" https://youtube.com/live/IrjYOD-gvSII also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! EVEN BETTER, BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1050

John Bolton surrenders to face charges of sharing classified information after indictment, Candidates for New York Mayor and Virginia Attorney General face off at debates, Brett Tolman and Rep Mike Lawler join the show. Check Out Our Partners: 120Life: “120/Life is a natural drink that supports healthy blood pressure. See better numbers in 2 weeks or your money back by saving 20% with code BENNY at http://www.120life.com/ ” Patriot Mobile: Go to https://www.PatriotMobile.com/Benny and get A FREE MONTH MASA CHIPS: Go to http://www.masachips.com/BENNY and use code BENNY for 25% off your first order Allio Capital: Text ”BENNY” to 511511 Blackout Coffee: http://www.blackoutcoffee.com/benny and use coupon code BENNY for 20% OFF your first order Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's fall, it's October and the US Supreme Court is back in session. On today's episode, we have a special guest from the AFJ Justice team. We are joined by our colleague Jamal Lockings. With Jamall we will cover the big cases to be heard by the court. Then we will talk about how nonprofits can get involved with supreme court advocacy, nominees, and more while staying nonpartisan and being mindful of lobbying limits.    Attorneys for this Episode  Brittany Hacker  Susan Finkle Sourlis  Jamaal Lockings     Intro to Justice Program  Our justice team works on both federal and state judicial appointments and elections and runs numerous invaluable resources including our judicial vacancy tracker and helps keep us and the public informed about nominees. This includes the decisions they make after they've been confirmed, and how cases in federal courts – especially the supreme court – are impacting our civil rights and democracy.     Today, we are thrilled to be joined on the pod by our friend and colleague Jamaal Lockings. Jamaal is a fellow attorney who serves as a Dorot Fellow on the Federal Courts team.   Today we want to talk about the upcoming cases in this supreme court term, what we should be keeping an eye on, the potential impacts for our c3 partners, and what nonprofits can do during this term and future terms to advocate.     Cases to watch out for this term  Voting Rights and Money In Politics  Louisiana v. Callais  Issue: Whether a states efforts to comply with the VRA is, in itself, a form of racial discrimination   (1) Rehearing from last term (2) The Court is playing politics (3) the VRA is on the chopping block   Consequences: A final blow to the VRA, and increased difficulty for minority voters to participate in free and fair elections   National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC  Issue: Whether to maintain the federal limits on political party coordination w/ candidates in campaign advertising.   (1) Could render campaign contribution limits meaningless, increasing the already outsized influence of money in politics (2) These cases on elections and voting rights can't be observed in a vacuum     LGBTQ+   Chiles v. Salazar   Issue: Whether Colorado's ban on “conversion therapy” for minors violates First Amendment protections of free speech and religious exercise   (1) Religious litigants have been notoriously successful in this court (2) free speech and religious exercise have been used not to ensure equity or equality but to prop up Christian nationalist ideology.   West Virginia v. B.P.J.   Issue: Title IX and barring Trans athletes   (1) This court continues to wade into culture wars (2) It's ruling in Skrmetti and Justice Barrett's assertion that Trans isn't a protected states (3) Embolden lawmakers to continue to write oppressive laws against trans individuals    Executive Power & Civil Liberties   Trump v. Slaughter   Issue: whether statutory removal protections for members of the FTC – and agencies like it – “violate” the separation of powers.    (1) The Court's emergency orders this summer (2) growing belief in the unitary executive theory (3) Likely to overrule Humphrey's executor  Consequences: Collapse of independent agencies and with it, governing stability.     What c3s can do:  Supreme court advocacy is nonpartisan—you are free to stand for or against cases before any court or get involved in the cases.   Litigation at the supreme court: c3s are often the best voice and represent groups who otherwise would not be heard or could not bring such large scale cases  Amicus briefs   Educating the public about cases and impacts of opinions  As you know c3 public charities may engage in lobbying and there are ways through lobbying that can affect the courts at the federal or maybe the state level  Nominee advocacy—Advocate for or against nominees to supreme court (lobbying)  Remember the lower district courts and circuit courts as well  Remember the lobbying rules if you are a c3: must track and report your lobbying the IRS and stay within your lobbying limits. Great place for c4s to get involved because they can lobbying in an unlimited amount.  Ethics advocacy—ask congress for more oversight or ethics rules (Lobbying if it will require a legislative vote).   Resources  Alliance for Justice, Being a Player  Alliance for Justice, Confirmation of Supreme Court Justices  Alliance for Justice, Judicial Nominee Tracker  Alliance for Justice, Supreme Court Reform 

In this episode of the Great Trials Podcast, host Steve Lowry interviews Nathan Werksman of Merson Law and Sam Martin of Patrick Malone & Associates to dissect their recent $2.3 million medical malpractice verdict in the case Weil v. Dr. Alhindawi. (More details on the case) Guest Bio: Nathan Werksman As a trial attorney at Merson Law PLLC, Nathan Werksman fights for the injured and wronged in catastrophic personal injury and wrongful death litigation and is a leader in the New York legal community. His work on behalf of injured New Yorkers has been featured on Good Morning America and Eyewitness News ABC 7 New York and in The New York Times, The New York Post, and Rolling Stone Magazine. Nathan is very involved in the New York legal community and in making New York a more just place for the injured. He is the Deputy Treasurer of the New York State Trial Lawyers Association, is the Chair of the Products Liability Committee at the New York City Bar Association and is on the Executive Committee of the UJA's Young Lawyers Division. He was also selected to serve on the 2024 Supreme Court Independent Judicial Screening Panel, which plays a critical role in selecting the Supreme Court judges in Manhattan. Read Full Bio Sam Martin Sam Martin joins the team at Patrick Malone & Associates having already represented plaintiffs in a variety of cases including individual injuries, discrimination lawsuits, consumer class actions and mass torts. Sam grew up in West Warwick, Rhode Island. He earned a B.A. in Political Science at Yale University. While at Yale, he captained the men's varsity basketball team, and he received the Roosevelt L. Thompson Prize for his dedication to serving his class and community. Sam earned his J.D. from Stanford Law School, where professors awarded him the Gerald Gunther and John Hart Ely Prizes for outstanding performance in classwork, including receiving the top grade in Federal Courts. Sam has been named as a top "40 under 40" lawyer by the National Trial Lawyers. Read Full Bio CONNECT WITH OUR GUESTS: Nathan Werksman on LinkedIn Merson Law, PLLC on Instagram Sam Martin on LinkedIn LISTEN TO PREVIOUS EPISODES & MEET THE TEAM: Great Trials Podcast Show Sponsors: Legal Technology Services  Harris Lowry Manton LLP - hlmlawfirm.com Production Team: Dee Daniels Media Podcast Production   Free Resources: Stages Of A Jury Trial - Part 1 Stages Of A Jury Trial - Part 2

In Episode 427 of the Immigration Lawyers Toolbox® Podcast, host John Q. Khosravi, Esq. welcomes back Kevin A. Gregg, Esq. for the monthly federal court and BIA decision roundup. Together, they dive into the September 2025 cases shaping U.S. immigration law — from the Fourth Circuit's major ruling redefining “material support” for terrorism, to the impact of Loper Bright on Chevron deference, and what these shifts mean for practitioners handling removal defense, asylum, and appellate work. They also explore key developments in CAT protection, vacated convictions, and the importance of Article I immigration judges in a time of judicial upheaval.

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we cover the arraignment of former FBI Director James Comey. Host Jessica Levinson explains the charges against Comey and outlines his defense strategies, including claims of vindictive prosecution and challenges to the validity of the prosecutor's appointment. Tune in as Jessica breaks down the legal complexities and what this high-profile case means for the broader landscape of justice.Here are three key takeaways from the episode:Challenge to Validity of Appointment: Comey's defense intends to argue that the U.S. attorney who brought the indictment, Lindsey Halligan, may not have been validly appointed. If successful, the charges can't simply be refiled due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.Selective and Vindictive Prosecution Motions: The defense plans to file motions asserting that the prosecution was brought with political animus and lacked objective justification—raising important questions about equal protection and due process under the law.High Bar for Prosecution: To secure a conviction, prosecutors must prove that Comey knowingly made false statements and intentionally obstructed Congress—standards that can be difficult to meet, especially with the complex context and timing of the indictment.Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports on a legal challenge to President Trump's Chicago-area National Guard deployment.

Former FBI Director James Comey pleads not guilty in federal court in Alexandria to two felony charges related to previous testimony before Congress. We will talk with The Hill's courts reporter Ella Lee, who was in the courtroom, about the arraignment and what is next in this case (1); President Donald Trump holds a roundtable at the White House with journalists he says were attacked by anti-ICE Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon; Federal government shutdown now at Day 8 and the situation remains the same: Senate again votes down competing Republican and Democratic temporary government funding bills; Arizona's two Democratic U.S. Senators confront Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson over the delayed swearing-in of a newly elected Democratic Congresswoman from Arizona, who would provide the crucial 218 signature on a discharge petition to force release of the federal files on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein; IMF Managing Director gives an update on the world economy ahead of next week's IMF/World Bank meetings; Supreme Court hears oral argument in a case brought by Rep. Mike Bost (R-IL), who seeks standing to sue over Illinois' mail-in voting law that allows ballots postmarked by election day but which arrive later to be counted. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sean "Diddy" Combs has been sentenced to four years and two months in prison on charges of transportation to engage in prostitution, avoiding a life sentence from his more severe charges of sex trafficking and racketeering. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

FBI Director Kash Patel admits to covering up the Epstein child sex trafficking files to protect Trump in response to Democratic questioning; Trump throwing everything he has at news media and protected first amendment speech is already backfiring in Federal Courts and about Jimmy Kimmel; Trump sets a trap for the MAGA on the US Supreme Court that they are trying hard not to step in; the Trump DOJ's reputation is so bad that grand jurors, jurors, and judges are throwing their cases out of court, DOJ leadership is quitting the Trump Administration in response to being ordered to falsely charge Trump's political rivals. Ben and Popok are together again to make sense of it all on the top rated Legal AF podcast, exclusively on the Meidas Touch Network. Support Our Sponsors: Miracle Made: Upgrade your sleep with Miracle Made! Go to https://TryMiracle.com/LEGALAF and use the code LEGALAF to claim your FREE 3 PIECE TOWEL SET and SAVE over 40% OFF. Trust & Will: Get 10% off plus free shipping of your estate plan documents by visiting https://trustandwill.com/LEGALAF Fast Growing Trees: Head to https://www.fast-growing-trees.com/collections/sale?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=description&utm_campaign=legalaf right now to get 15% off your entire order with code LegalAF! Laundry Sauce: For 20% off your order head to https://LaundrySauce.com/LEGALAF20 and use code LEGALAF20 Check Out The Popok Firm: ⁠https://thepopokfirm.com/⁠ Subscribe to the NEW Legal AF Substack: ⁠https://substack.com/@legalaf⁠ Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast⁠ Legal AF: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af⁠ MissTrial: ⁠https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial⁠ The PoliticsGirl Podcast: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast⁠ Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan⁠ Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen⁠ The Weekend Show: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show⁠ Burn the Boats: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats⁠ Majority 54: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54⁠ Political Beatdown: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown⁠ On Democracy with FP Wellman: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman⁠ Uncovered: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

PREVIEW 2: A conversation with Professor Richard Epstein regarding federal court judges and their relationship with the chief executive and the Supreme Court. Epstein analyzes judicial independence, constitutional interpretation, and the balance of power between branches of government. The discussion explores how federal courts navigate political pressures while maintaining their constitutional role.

Professor Josh Blackman Judicial Defiance: Lower Courts Challenge Supreme Court and Trump AdministrationProfessor Josh Blackman details an unprecedented judicial "revolt" where lower federal courts, particularly in Boston, repeatedly defy Supreme Court rulings and temporary restraining orders against the Trump Administration. Cases involve deportation and presidential firing power. Chief Justice Roberts is struggling to make lower courts "get in line," prompting a rare concurrence from Justice Gorsuch criticizing the defiance.1115-1130

CONTINUED Professor Josh Blackman Judicial Defiance: Lower Courts Challenge Supreme Court and Trump AdministrationProfessor Josh Blackman details an unprecedented judicial "revolt" where lower federal courts, particularly in Boston, repeatedly defy Supreme Court rulings and temporary restraining orders against the Trump Administration. Cases involve deportation and presidential firing power. Chief Justice Roberts is struggling to make lower courts "get in line," prompting a rare concurrence from Justice Gorsuch criticizing the defiance. 1888 GAR OHIO