System of courts that interprets and applies the law
POPULARITY
3 episodes with federal judiciary
3 episodes with federal judiciary
4 episodes with federal judiciary
3 episodes with federal judiciary
2 episodes with federal judiciary
2 episodes with federal judiciary
2 episodes with federal judiciary
2 episodes with federal judiciary
2 episodes with federal judiciary
Tuesday, March 11th, 2025Today, a damning affidavit is filed in the lawsuit against Musk gaining access to the Social Security Administration systems; the Department of Homeland Security has begun polygraph tests to determine who is leaking to the press; the Trump administration is backtracking on forcing Maine parents to visit Social Security offices to register newborns; Trump's Department of Justice is allowing the assassination attempt rifle to be shipped to Florida for inspection by the alleged shooter's lawyers; the Trump administration begs the court to vacate the order forcing the head of OPM to testify under oath in open court; the Supreme Court takes up a challenge to Colorado's conversion therapy ban; Ontario, Canada has slapped a 25% tax increase on electricity exports to the United States; protests erupt after ICE illegally detains a Columbia University Palestinian protester; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You Helix20% Off Sitewide when you go to HelixSleep.com/dailybeansThank You PiqueGet 20% off on the Radiant Skin Duo, plus a FREE starter kit at Piquelife.com/dailybeansStories:Supreme Court takes up challenge to Colorado conversion therapy ban | NBC NewsJudge says Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil can't be deported from U.S. as protesters call for his release | NBC NewsOntario slaps 25% tax increase on electricity exports to US in response to Trump's trade war | AP NewsTrump Administration Backtracks On Forcing Maine Parents To Visit Social Security Offices To Register Newborns - Arthur Delaney | HuffPostDHS has begun performing polygraph tests on employees to find leakers - Julia Ainsley and Jonathan Allen | NBC NewsDefense lawyers in Trump assassination attempt case tour Trump golf course, examine rifle from FBI evidence - Scott MacFarlane | CBS News Good Trouble: Members of the House of Representatives AND the Senate will be back on your home turf beginning Saturday, March 15 through Sunday, March 23. Below is everything you need to know about why recess matters, our demands, and the top actions we're recommending to get their attention. If you're ready to join the fight, sign up for updates and ways to take action against the Trump-Musk coup and the Republican tax scam. https://indivisible.org/muskorus From The Good NewsHold On - Matthew Schickele (official lyrics)Women's Sports Foundation and Women Sport InternationalLake ChargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamauggReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewroteDana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts
Monday, March 10th, 2025Today, a multi-state lawsuit seeks to reverse the purge of federal workers; Trump walks back his idiotic tariffs, but probably not after he dumped all of his stock in Canadian aluminum; Republicans joined Democrats in Montana to defeat anti-trans legislation; the Trump administration has said it will not comply with a court order to produce agency heads to testify; a federal judge rules that firing a member of the NLRB was illegal; another federal judge orders the Trump administration to pay our foreign aid bills; Trump is considering revoking the legal status of Ukrainians in the United States; the newly minted Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has filed his response to the Eric Adams case and repeats that the Department of Justice is asking to dismiss the bribery charges without prejudice; Trump's DEI purge at the Pentagon included a photo of the Enola Gay; the DHS announced that it's ending the TSA collective bargaining agreement; trans women are being transferred to men's prisons despite multiple court orders; trump has ordered swaths of U.S. forests cut down for timber; the USDA has eliminated two food safety advisory committees; and Allison delivers your Good News.Guest: David EnrichDavidenrich.bsky.social, twitter.com/davidenrichMurder the Truth – HarperCollinsDavid Enrich - The New York TimesThank You HomeChefGet 18 Free Meals, plus Free Shipping on your first box, and Free Dessert for Life, at HomeChef.com/DAILYBEANS. Must be an active subscriber to receive free dessert.Thank You LumenHead to http://lumen.me/dailybeans for 20% off your purchase.Stories:Trump admin 'will not produce' agency head for court-ordered testimony, plaintiffs say | Law And CrimeTrump weighs revoking legal status of Ukrainians as US steps up deportations | ReutersJudge orders Trump administration to pay some foreign-aid bills by Monday - JOSH GERSTEIN | POLITICOTrans women transferred to men's prisons despite rulings against Trump's order | US news | The GuardianTrump orders swathes of US forests to be cut down for timber | Donald Trump | The Guardian‘Stop these crazy bills': Republicans join Democrats to defeat anti-trans legislation in Montana | ReutersUSDA eliminates two food safety advisory committees | ReutersMultistate lawsuit seeks to reverse Trump administration purge of federal workersWar heroes and military firsts are among 26,000 images flagged for removal in Pentagon's DEI purge | AP NewsHomeland Security ends TSA collective bargaining agreement, in effort to dismantle union protections | AP NewsJudge finds Trump's firing of member of National Labor Relations Board was illegal | CBS News From The Good NewsFull Meeting between President Trump, VP Vance and Ukrainian President Zelensky in Oval OfficeReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewroteDana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts
People who work for the federal court system don't have the same kinds of job protections that most other Americans do. A nearly year-long NPR investigation has found problems with the way the courts police sexual harassment and bullying and a pervasive culture of fear about blowing the whistle. This episode: political correspondent Susan Davis, national justice correspondent Carrie Johnson, and senior national political correspondent Mara Liasson. The podcast is produced by Bria Suggs & Kelli Wessinger and edited by Casey Morell. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi.Listen to every episode of the NPR Politics Podcast sponsor-free, unlock access to bonus episodes with more from the NPR Politics team, and support public media when you sign up for The NPR Politics Podcast+ at plus.npr.org/politics.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
For Chris Dove, it started when he came upon articles in Above the Law about the saga of then-95-year-old federal Judge Pauline Newman. A giant in IP law, Judge Newman faced allegations of poor health and declining cognitive abilities in 2023. Those allegations led to a council's recommendation that the judge be suspended and a flurry of litigation. “When I started reading for myself,” Chris recalls to hosts Todd Smith and Jody Sanders, “I realized there is a whole system that goes on for policing and managing federal judges that I was unaware of.” Chris' investigation into the little-known system eventually led to his paper, “Who Judges The Judges? Judicial Qualification and Recusal,” and CLEs. With Todd and Jody, he discusses broader implications around the independence and accountability of federal judges. Connect and Learn More☑️ Chris Dove ☑️ Troutman Pepper Locke on LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook | X | YouTube☑️ Todd Smith | LinkedIn | X ☑️ Jody Sanders | LinkedIn | X ☑️ Texas Appellate Law Podcast on LinkedIn | X | Instagram☑️ Texas Appellate Counsel PLLC | LinkedIn ☑️ Kelly Hart & Hallman, LLP | LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts |
Co-hosts Jared Yates Sexton and Nick Hauselman discuss how Donald Trump is pushing the limits of our democracy by ignoring the Federal Judiciary. Meanwhile, billions of dollars are being slashed at the NIH, which will cause all manner of suffering by the American people. And it should come as no surprise that DOGE has its sights set on Social Security next. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Amid warnings of a constitutional crisis, Jen Psaki breaks down the ways that Donald Trump and Elon Musk are laying the groundwork to openly defy court orders, and may already have. Former Federal Judge Nancy Gertner joins to discuss the judiciary's ability to keep Trump's illegal actions in check, as he and his allies push the limits of the constitution. Next, Jen is joined by Senator Ron Wyden to discuss Trump and Elon Musk's takeover of the federal government and why he believes their infiltration of sensitive payment systems constitute a coup. Then, Jen is joined by Representative Jasmine Crockett and PA State Representative Malcom Kenyatta, the newly elected DNC vice chair, to discuss Democratic efforts to fight back, including the possibility of forcing a government shutdown to stop Trump and Musk's assault on federal agencies. Later, Jen breaks down Trump's efforts to stack our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with people who put loyalty first, including asking new hires whether January 6 was an "inside job." She is joined by Representative Jim Himes to discuss his concerns about Trump's loyal tests and potential national security vulnerabilities posed by Musk's DOGE team. Finally, Jen shares a preview of her wide-ranging conversation with Governor Wes Moore - the first guest on her new podcast 'The Blueprint'.Check out our social pages below:https://twitter.com/InsideWithPsakihttps://www.instagram.com/InsideWithPsaki/https://www.tiktok.com/@insidewithpsakihttps://www.msnbc.com/jen-psaki
Trump is losing his mind at the prospect of being sentenced Friday for his 34 felony business accounts. Now he's demanding that the case be stayed based on president-elect immunity, something his lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove made up yesterday. And, as always, Rudy Giuliani is wilding out in court. Links: Please Keep Shit Talking Judges https://www.lawandchaospod.com/p/please-keep-shit-talking-judges 2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2024year-endreport.pdf US v. Boeing docket https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/29089563/united-states-v-the-boeing-company/ Rudy demands courtroom sketch artist draw him “nice” https://www.reuters.com/world/us/judge-weigh-holding-giuliani-contempt-georgia-election-workers-case-2025-01-03/ Alex Jones - Trustee Motion for Approve PQPR settlement https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsb.459750/gov.uscourts.txsb.459750.1005.0.pdf Roberts EOY 2024 Report https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2024year-endreport.pdf Trump NY Docs via Law360 https://www.law360.com/newyork-vs-trump-tracker New York Article 78 https://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/cvp/article-78/7803/ Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod Patreon: patreon.com/LawAndChaosPod
OA1107 - Chief Justice John Roberts has used his annual end-of-the-year report to remind us that federal judges should not accept luxury vacations from billionaires, fly insurrectionist flags on any of their properties, or ever be criticized for any reason. Or, you know--at least one of those things. We also answer a patron question about what happens if Republicans can't get their House in order by the time that electoral votes are supposed to be certified on January 6th before getting to today's main story: the very real possibility that TikTok may not live to see the first day of the second Trump administration if the Supreme Court allows current law barring it from doing business in the US to take effect on January 19th. How could the US government shutting down one of our nation's favorite new ways to communicate not constitute a massive First Amendment problem? Why did a majority of Congressional Democrats, the Biden administration and pre-election Donald Trump all agree that TikTok is a threat to national security? And when is Matt going to finally release his signature TikTok dance video? We answer two of these questions before dropping a quick footnote to look back on a stupid Congressperson's idea of a smart person's legal argument in support of overturning a democratic election. DC Circuit decision in Tiktok v. Garland (12/6/24) “What If Free Speech Means Banning TikTok?,” Alan Rozhenstein, The Atlantic (12/13/24) Redacted transcript of U.S. intelligence briefing to House Energy and Commerce Committee on March 7, 2024 filed with DC Circuit ACLU amicus brief in Tiktok v. Garland (12/27/24) Donald Trump's amicus brief in Tiktok v. Garland (12/30/24) Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (signed into law 4/24/24) “2024 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary,” John Roberts (12/30/24) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
Last week, the House passed a bill to create 63 new permanent judgeships. Case backlogs and delays have had many lawmakers saying we need more federal judges. If the bill did become law, President-elect Donald Trump would have 22 new seats to fill. The legislation originally had bipartisan support, but President Joe Biden vowed to veto it, with the support of many Democrats. In his first term, Trump put more judges in place than almost any president in history. Biden has made his mark too, nearly matching that number. As of last week, he had also put more judges of color on the bench than any of his predecessors.Federal judges almost always serve life terms, meaning each of these picks can have lasting consequences for Americans.We look back and look ahead at our federal judiciary.Want to support 1A? Give to your local public radio station and subscribe to this podcast. Have questions? Connect with us. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
Dutch authorities ban demonstrations for 3 days after attacks on Israeli soccer fans following a game in Amsterdam. President-elect Donald Trump benefited from his relationship with billionaire Elon Musk during his campaign - how could Musk benefit once Trump returns to office? And with Republicans controlling the Senate next congress, what could this mean for the federal judiciary?Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
Mexico is undergoing a constitutional and institutional crisis that is eroding its already fragile democracy. This is due to a recently approved constitutional reform that jeopardises checks and balances, the division of powers, the rule of law, judicial independence and democracy itself. (For more context of this reform, please read this article by Mariana De Lucio on the Blavatnik School of Government blog.) These constitutional reforms have resulted in mass resignations among federal judges and even Supreme Court justices, who are stepping down from the judiciary. They will be replaced by candidates elected through popular votes, whose requirements to run for these positions are only holding a law degree with a minimum average of 8 out of 10 and providing five letters of recommendation. This fight for protecting democracy has led to authorities, including the executive and legislative branches, disregarding judicial rulings and, in essence, the Constitution itself.To discuss this situation further, we invited Lilia Monica Lopez Benitez, a current Counselor of Mexico's Federal Judiciary, with over 34 years of experience in the system. Her career includes roles as a federal district and circuit judge. During these challenging times, Lilia Monica has been a strong advocate against the erosion of democracy and for the protection of the separation of powers. As a woman, her leadership has inspired many Mexicans who are eager to help rebuild the democracy that has been weakened.During the week this episode was recorded, Lilia Mónica, in an act of dignity and integrity, submitted her withdrawal to the Senate regarding her candidacy in the judges' elections. She stated:"I withdraw because, according to democratic and republican principles, the Judicial Reform has weakened the most sacred pact of the Union: to ensure the balance of powers and to protect human rights. This reform contravenes the principle of the law's progressivity and undermines the patriotic values of the common good and national interest." When Lilia Mónica tried to present her withdrawal letter, she was denied entry to the Senate and subsequently escorted out by security, illustrating the unjust treatment and the restriction of freedom of speech judges face when they speak out.
Inflation isn’t going anywhere, and listeners wanna know what’s up with two of the government’s inflation measures. Today, we’re answering some nerdy econ questions about the consumer price index and personal consumption expenditures price index. We’ll also answer questions about how the Supreme Court gets funded and the ins and outs of joint fundraising committees. Got a question you’d like us to answer? Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voice mail at 508-U-B-SMART! Here’s everything we talked about today: “How does the government measure inflation?” from Brookings “Why the PCE is the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of inflation” from Marketplace “What is the Core PCE price index?” from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis “Courts, Programs, and Other Items Funded by Congressional Appropriations for the Federal Judiciary” from the Congressional Research Service “US judiciary set to receive modest spending boost from Congress” from Reuters “Judicial Compensation” from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts “Inside the Rent Inflation Measure That Economics Nerds Love to Hate” from The New York Times “A guide to political money: campaigns, PACs, super PACs” from Associated Press “Joint fundraising: A campaign strategy to increase contributions” from Marketplace “Fundraising for Super PACs by federal candidates” from the Federal Election Commission Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap! The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern. We'll have news, drinks and play a round of Half Full/Half Empty.
Inflation isn’t going anywhere, and listeners wanna know what’s up with two of the government’s inflation measures. Today, we’re answering some nerdy econ questions about the consumer price index and personal consumption expenditures price index. We’ll also answer questions about how the Supreme Court gets funded and the ins and outs of joint fundraising committees. Got a question you’d like us to answer? Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voice mail at 508-U-B-SMART! Here’s everything we talked about today: “How does the government measure inflation?” from Brookings “Why the PCE is the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of inflation” from Marketplace “What is the Core PCE price index?” from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis “Courts, Programs, and Other Items Funded by Congressional Appropriations for the Federal Judiciary” from the Congressional Research Service “US judiciary set to receive modest spending boost from Congress” from Reuters “Judicial Compensation” from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts “Inside the Rent Inflation Measure That Economics Nerds Love to Hate” from The New York Times “A guide to political money: campaigns, PACs, super PACs” from Associated Press “Joint fundraising: A campaign strategy to increase contributions” from Marketplace “Fundraising for Super PACs by federal candidates” from the Federal Election Commission Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap! The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern. We'll have news, drinks and play a round of Half Full/Half Empty.
Inflation isn’t going anywhere, and listeners wanna know what’s up with two of the government’s inflation measures. Today, we’re answering some nerdy econ questions about the consumer price index and personal consumption expenditures price index. We’ll also answer questions about how the Supreme Court gets funded and the ins and outs of joint fundraising committees. Got a question you’d like us to answer? Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voice mail at 508-U-B-SMART! Here’s everything we talked about today: “How does the government measure inflation?” from Brookings “Why the PCE is the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of inflation” from Marketplace “What is the Core PCE price index?” from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis “Courts, Programs, and Other Items Funded by Congressional Appropriations for the Federal Judiciary” from the Congressional Research Service “US judiciary set to receive modest spending boost from Congress” from Reuters “Judicial Compensation” from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts “Inside the Rent Inflation Measure That Economics Nerds Love to Hate” from The New York Times “A guide to political money: campaigns, PACs, super PACs” from Associated Press “Joint fundraising: A campaign strategy to increase contributions” from Marketplace “Fundraising for Super PACs by federal candidates” from the Federal Election Commission Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap! The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern. We'll have news, drinks and play a round of Half Full/Half Empty.
Victoria Wenger of NAACP-LDF joins Kate and Leah for an update on the four years of litigation trying to get fair voting maps for Louisiana residents. Then, a major update on a group of federal officials who plan to penalize a private institution for failing to censor certain speech-- you'll never guess who!If you would like to make a donation in honor of Brendan Jackson, Leah's student who recently passed away, you can do so at www.ruckercollierfoundation.com Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, Threads, and Bluesky
We typically begin these podcasts with three big ideas – here are three big ideas concerning Federalist 80. Big idea one: in Federalist 80, Hamilton stressed the need for the federal judiciary, rather than the state judiciaries or legislatures, to oversee a range of cases bearing upon the country as a whole, its sovereign status in international politics, or other matters of national importance. Big idea two: Hamilton's defense of the powers of the federal courts was cast in terms of the need to maintain peace, whether in the sense of international peace or of domestic tranquility. This implicated the privileges and immunities clause, which Hamilton described as the “basis of the union” Big idea three: Hamilton in Federalist 80 described the role of equity in judicial decision-making.
Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com
THE TIM JONES AND CHRIS ARPS SHOW 0:00 SEG 1 MOP Ladies aka the Missouri Precinct Project | Send an email to the MissouriPrecinctProject@gmail.com | Another congressperson is retiring this year 18:03 SEG 2 ZACK SMITH, Legal Fellow at The Heritage Foundation and Co-host of the SCOTUS 101 Podcast, talks about whether Trump can be held in contempt of court | His bond being lowered | mifepristone | Tipping the Scales of Justice to the Left? The Federal Judiciary's New ‘Guidance' for Assigning Cases | Julian Assange https://twitter.com/tzsmith https://www.heritage.org/staff/zack-smith 33:51 SEG 3 Joe Lieberman passed away at age 82 today CHRIS' CORNER https://newstalkstl.com/ FOLLOW TIM - https://twitter.com/SpeakerTimJones FOLLOW CHRIS - https://twitter.com/chris_arps 24/7 LIVESTREAM - http://bit.ly/newstalkstlstream RUMBLE - https://rumble.com/NewsTalkSTL See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
THE TIM JONES AND CHRIS ARPS SHOW 0:00 SEG 1 MOP Ladies aka the Missouri Precinct Project | Send an email to the MissouriPrecinctProject@gmail.com | Another congressperson is retiring this year 18:03 SEG 2 ZACK SMITH, Legal Fellow at The Heritage Foundation and Co-host of the SCOTUS 101 Podcast, talks about whether Trump can be held in contempt of court | His bond being lowered | mifepristone | Tipping the Scales of Justice to the Left? The Federal Judiciary's New ‘Guidance' for Assigning Cases | Julian Assange https://twitter.com/tzsmith https://www.heritage.org/staff/zack-smith 33:51 SEG 3 Joe Lieberman passed away at age 82 today CHRIS' CORNER https://newstalkstl.com/ FOLLOW TIM - https://twitter.com/SpeakerTimJones FOLLOW CHRIS - https://twitter.com/chris_arps 24/7 LIVESTREAM - http://bit.ly/newstalkstlstream RUMBLE - https://rumble.com/NewsTalkSTL See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com
David Lat is a lawyer-turned-writer, who publishes a weekly newsletter on Substack titled “Original Jurisdiction.” He joins Preet to discuss the federal judiciary, Trump's many trials, and the free speech controversies roiling universities and law schools around the country. Plus, what would a Trump DOJ look like the second time around? How will SCOTUS' decision to consider the presidential immunity issue affect Trump's trial calendar? And can an AI chatbot testify in court? For show notes and a transcript of the episode head to: https://cafe.com/stay-tuned/david-lat-federal-judges-trump-trials-supreme-court-free-speech/ Have a question for Preet? Ask @PreetBharara on Threads, or Twitter with the hashtag #AskPreet. Email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 669-247-7338 to leave a voicemail. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In this Special Edition of our show we are adding a third installment to the special series we ran in January looking back at the life and career of Senator Mitch McConnell, the longest serving Republican Leader in the history of the Senate. In our special series in January we profiled the leader and his historic role over the past 40 years in the Senate. We even labeled him as the Senator of the Century. It would be hard to find an argument against the statement. He totally changed the direction of the Federal Judiciary especially the Supreme Court. We added this episode due to the announcement that he would be stepping down in November after the 2024 election as the Senate Republican Leader. This announcement caught us here off-guard and we look at it with some level of actual fear. As far as we are concerned Senator Mitch McConnell has led not only with integrity, he has often been the only adult in Washington D.C. on either side of the aisle. In an era of midget sized leadership from literally almost every position in Government he has been a giant and often he has alone been the one voice of reason at the helm and without him there it is almost scary where things may actually go for our republic. In this episode, we will look at last week's announcement and this episode will feature the full Senate floor speech by Mitch McConnell. Questions or comments at , Randalrgw1@aol.com , https://twitter.com/randal_wallace , and http://www.randalwallace.com/Please Leave us a review at wherever you get your podcastsThanks for listening!!
The Chief Justice's 2023 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary If you would like to listen to this report from last year and the year before, you can find them in the show catalog by scrolling back to December 2022. Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get your podcasts, or at www.whatscotuswroteus.com
America is facing a judicial crisis. From lower courts to the U.S. Supreme Court, it's clear that reform is needed to protect democracy and secure our rights. And as the Supreme Court is about to start a new term, change is needed more than ever. Rakim Brooks, Democracy Docket contributor and president of the Alliance for Justice, joins to discuss the issues plaguing the judiciary and what reforms are needed. For a transcript of this episode, please email transcripts@democracydocket.com. Follow Democracy Docket! Twitter Post Facebook Instagram TikTok Subscribe to our free newsletters Related articles: Read Rakim's articles on Democracy Docket In a Major Victory, the Supreme Court Didn't Break Democracy by Marc Elias Here Are the Leading Reforms to the Federal Judiciary by Devon Hesano
In this episode, Sheppard Mullin attorneys Melissa Eaves and Ray Marshall join host Scott Maberry to explore how the best companies in the world are navigating between directly conflicting regulatory guidance on Environmental, Social and Governance initiatives. What We Discuss in this Episode: What is the SEC doing regarding Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) investing right now? What are state legislatures and Attorneys General doing? How do these enforcement contradict each other, and what should companies do? What should companies be doing to reduce the potential for ESG-related enforcement actions? How does "greenwashing" open the door to civil litigation? What steps should companies and investors take to mitigate risk in this complicated environment? About Ray Marshall Ray Marshall is Of Counsel in the Governmental Practice in Sheppard Mullen's San Francisco office, where his practice focuses on White Collar and Investigations, Fiduciary Duties, and Environmental, Social & Governance issues. Ray represents clients in both complex business litigation and white-collar defense. He has conducted a wide array of internal investigations and company inquiries, including cases alleging insider trading, stock options backdating, securities fraud, accounting irregularities, antitrust violations, public corruption, FCPA and other corporate and individual wrongdoing. He has represented clients in civil, criminal and administrative proceedings brought by governmental authorities, including the Department of Justice and the offices of various U.S. Attorneys, State Attorneys General and District Attorneys. In addition to serving on Sen. Dianne Feinstein's Judicial Advisory Committee for the Northern District of California, Raymond also serves as an adviser to the American Law Institute on the Model Penal Code Sentencing Project. He is past-President of the ABA Retirement Fund Board of Directors, a past member of the ABA Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, and former president of both the State Bar of California and the Bar Association of San Francisco. In 2004 and 2007, he was appointed by Chief Justice Ronald M. George to chair the California Supreme Court's Advisory Task Force on Multijurisdictional Practice. In addition to his professional affiliations, Ray is extremely active in community affairs, serving on the boards of the Giffords Law Center, the Equal Justice Society, the United Negro College Fund, and HomeBase/The Center for Common Concerns. In March 2009, he argued on behalf of five of the leading civil rights groups in the country (Asian Pacific American Legal Center, California State Conference of the NAACP, Equal Justice Society, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund) before the California Supreme Court, arguing that allowing Proposition 8 (a proposition which sought to outlaw gay marriage) to stand could be detrimental to other minority groups who could easily become the targets of initiative campaigns seeking to take away their rights. About Melissa Eaves Melissa Eaves is Special Counsel in the Governmental Practice in Sheppard Mullen's Los Angeles office. Melissa currently focuses her practice on complex civil litigation, fraud, investigations white collar criminal defense and False Claims Act litigation. She has substantial experience in compliance investigations, fiduciary counseling, ESG, American with Disabilities Act, FTC, SEC and TVPRA/human trafficking litigation. Melissa has successfully represented numerous individuals and entities in connection with a wide range of federal and state investigations and prosecutions. In civil litigation, she has successfully represented both clients in both state and federal court. In addition to complex litigation and white collar defense work, Melissa handles internal investigations for companies. She is an experienced and skilled investigator, handling investigatory matters involving whistleblower claims, harassment and workplace misconduct, criminal misconduct, and healthcare fraud. She has also worked with governmental agencies such as the OIG, DOJ, FTC, SEC, and HHS in connection with such investigations. Melissa was part of the team that recently won a complete defense victory in a human trafficking case, and she has also obtained complete defense verdicts in trials involving ADA claims. In addition, she has represented the California Insurance Commissioner in the Executive Life Insurance Company, First Capital and Mission Insurance Group insolvencies and reinsurance litigation, involving over 300 reinsurers worldwide, representing recoveries in excess of $1.3 billion. Melissa has substantial litigation experience in both state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, enforcing judgments abroad and supervising of domestic and foreign outside counsel. About Scott Maberry As an international trade partner in Governmental Practice, J. Scott Maberry counsels clients on global risk, international trade, and regulation. He is also a past co-chair of the Diversity and Inclusion Working Group for the Washington D.C. office, serves on the firm's pro bono committee, and is a founding member of the Sheppard Mullin Organizational Integrity Group. Scott's practice includes representing clients before the U.S. government agencies and international U.S. Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry & Security (BIS), the Department of Commerce Import Administration, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of State Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the International Trade Commission (ITC), and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS). He also represents clients in federal court and grand jury proceedings, as well as those pursuing negotiations and dispute resolution under the World Trade Organization (WTO), North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and other multilateral and bilateral agreements. A member of the World Economic Forum Expert Network, Scott also advises the WEF community in the areas of global risk, international trade, artificial intelligence and values. Contact Information: Melissa Eaves Raymond Marshall J. Scott Maberry Resources: Goldman Sachs SEC Settlement (2022) BNY SEC Settlement (2022) Texas AG Letter ISS Response Glass Lewis Response BlackRock Letter Kentucky AG Opinion Kentucky AG Letter Washington DC AG Letter ClientEarth Lawsuit Against Shell BNP Paribas Case Thank you for listening! Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE to the show to receive two new episodes delivered straight to your podcast player every month. If you enjoyed this episode, please help us get the word out about this podcast. Rate and Review this show on Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, Google Podcasts, Stitcher or Spotify. It helps other listeners find this show. This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not to be construed as legal advice specific to your circumstances. If you need help with any legal matter, be sure to consult with an attorney regarding your specific needs.
One of the enduring legacies of the Trump administration was a remaking of the Supreme Court and the rest of the federal judiciary. In four years, Trump appointed three Supreme Court justices and more than 220 federal judges, shifting the balance not only on the nation's highest court but also on a significant number of appellate courts, as well. Appointments to the federal bench are lifetime, and many of these appointees are relatively young, ensuring decades of influence. From their distinct vantage points, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Slate writer and podcast host Dahlia Lithwick see these shifts as presenting significant challenges for American society.rnrnFirst elected in 2006, Senator Whitehouse serves on the judiciary committee. He's also the author of The Scheme: How the Right Wing Used Dark Money to Capture the Supreme Court, which chronicles the efforts of major corporations and organizations to fill the bench with hard-line conservative judges. Whitehouse traces this movement from the Reagan administration to the landmark Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission to the present. Kirkus Reviews called the book "a maddening indictment of a corrupt and corrupted judiciary."rnrnLithwick is Slate's senior legal correspondent and host of the Slate podcast "?micus." She is also the author of Lady Justice: Women, the Law, and the Battle to Save America, highlighting the women who, in the wake of Donald Trump's election, worked to protect the country's most marginalized groups and safeguard the rights of Americans.rnrnSenator Whitehouse and Lithwick will join one another in conversation at the City Club to discuss their books and the state of the judiciary.
Looking Ahead to the 2024 primary season. Eric Adams is complaining about immigrants being shipped to New York City. A nominee for the Federal Judiciary doesn't know what's in the Constitution. Five former Memphis police officers have been charged with murder and other offenses in the beating death of Tyre Nichols.Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuckSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Chief Justice's 2022 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary (Dec. 31, 2022)
Audio of the Chief Justice's 2021 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary Happy New Year! At 6pm this New Year's Eve, the Supreme Court will release the Chief Justice's annual report. The Year-end Report on the Federal Judiciary is simply an opportunity for the Chief Justice to reflect on the year that has passed and share thoughts on the year ahead - not only as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but as the head of the Federal Judicial Branch. I'll be reading this year's report as soon as it's released - and I'll have it published long before it's time to toast to the new year on the West Coast! But, before I do that, I thought it might be a good idea to read for you the annual report that was issued last New Year's Eve (2021) so you can judge for yourself how well it stacks-up to the year that actually unfolded. Access past Chief Justice's Year-End Reports on the Federal Judiciary: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/year-endreports.aspx Music and Sound Effects by Epidemic Sound
Judges are suppose to be above the law. But even in the federal judicial branch, ethical and legal transgressions occur. The Government Accountability Office has found that the judiciary doesn't follow best practices for addressing waste, fraud and abuse. To get the details, Federal News Networks Eric White spoke with GAO's director of information and cybersecurity, Carol Harris.
Tonight on The Last Word: A Trump-picked judge offers no evidentiary basis to explain why she thinks the seized documents are not classified. Also, Sen. Marco Rubio calls Trump's documents scandal a “storage argument.” And Florida GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis flies migrants to Martha's Vineyard. Neal Katyal, Andrew Weissmann, Bradley Moss, Rep. Val Demings and Andrea Campbell join Lawrence O'Donnell.
Kate, Leah, and Melissa convene a panel to persuade you that the fight for progressive causes has to include state courts and state constitutions. To get the lay of the land and identify the challenges ahead, they welcome four guests: Miriam Seifter of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Jessica Bulman-Pozen of Columbia Law School, Daniel Nichanian of Bolts, and Alicia Bannon of the Brennan Center.
Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com
Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com
In Federalist Papers #78, Alexander Hamilton said that the the federal judiciary would be the branch of government least dangerous to our rights. But is that how the courts are working in the 21st century? What makes the courts today so injurious to our rights? We get a clue from current Associate Justice Elena Kagan in a speech she gave at a judicial conference in Montana this July. By comparing her statements to the Constitution and the writings of those who helped frame it, we should not only be able to answer what makes the court dangerous to our rights, but how to protect our rights from them.
Qudsiya is joined by Mamadi Corra, Professor of Sociology at East Carolina University (ECU). They discuss Professor Corra's research on access for people with disabilities in the US federal judicial system, his approach to disability and scholarship and his advice for disabled people of color pursuing an academic path.Transcript available here.If you want to learn even more about disability and the legal system, you should check out Season 4, Episode 4, Disabled in Court. Qudsiya interviews Erika Rickard of The Pew Charitable Trusts about their report, “How courts embraced technology, met the pandemic challenge, and Revolutionized their operations.”If you're enjoying the podcast, please spread the word by leaving a rating and review on Apple podcasts, tagging us @DownToTheStruts on social media, or sharing the podcast with a friend.Buy Qudsiya a coffeeDown to the Struts Substack
According to a lawsuit filed by some shareholders, Twitter may have failed to disclose important information about the Musk deal, and it might be Musk's doing! Get the full breakdown on this very interesting lawsuit that isn't getting much coverage elsewhere! Also, a Connecticut Bill paves the way for how other states might fight against abortion restrictions. Something to fight for in your state! Also, why Andrew is definitely right about Clarence Thomas. Links: Code of Conduct for US Judges, 2011 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, WHPA fails, CT bill, Orlando Police Pension Fund v Twitter, 8 Del. Code § 203, disclosure in merger agreement
Though most of the attention paid to the Federal Judiciary is paid to SCOTUS the lower courts have a massive influence. Rick Hasen, Professor of Law and Political Science at the University of California, Irvine is our guide. Plus, a Lucky Charms recall and the Micromort, a puckish li'l fellow here to tell you about the risk of death. Produced by Joel Patterson and Corey Wara Email us at thegist@mikepesca.com To advertise on the show, visit: https://advertisecast.com/TheGist Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
On February 13, 2020, Olivia Warren, staff attorney at the Center for the Death Penalty Litigation and former law clerk of the newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, brought national attention to the federal judiciary when she testified before the House Judiciary Committee. In her testimony, she gave a deeply personal testimony of the sexual harassment she faced while serving as a law clerk for the late LA-based, Appellate Judge Stephen Reinhardt. In her testimony, Warren alleged that Judge Reinhardt persistently sexually harassed her and that the system meant to protect people like her did just the opposite. Aliza Shatzman is a family law attorney and former law clerk in Washington D.C. and similarly to Warren's experience, she claims she too was a victim of gender discrimination and retaliation while clerking for a judge in D.C. Superior Court from 2019 to 2020. In a written Statement for the Record submitted to the House Committee on the Judiciary, she recalled her painful experience of harassment at the hands of a D.C. federal judge, including “[her] attempts to report the mistreatment, how the system failed [her] when she tried to report, and [her] efforts to seek justice for herself and accountability for the misbehaving former judge.” When she filed her complaint against the judge to the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure, she found out that there were very few legal protections from harassment and retaliation for law clerks who reported judges' misbehavior. Currently, judges are excluded from anti-discrimination laws, and in July 2021, Congress proposed a bill that would fix this: the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA). The law would empower judiciary employees who experience abuse, harassment, and retaliation to sue judges under Title VII, along with a number of other measures to that create more accountability for judges. For Shatzman, this is just the base level of change needed. She believes the federal judiciary needs meaningful structural change to occur within a system that does little to protect law clerks and other court employees from harassment. We spoke to her about how pervasive this issue is and the legislative efforts being taken to hold judges more accountable. Editor's note: We reached out to the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure for comment on this story and have not yet heard back. Any comments made available will be updated and made available ASAP.
On February 13, 2020, Olivia Warren, staff attorney at the Center for the Death Penalty Litigation and former law clerk of the newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, brought national attention to the federal judiciary when she testified before the House Judiciary Committee. In her testimony, she gave a deeply personal recount of the sexual harassment she says she faced while serving as a law clerk for the late LA-based, Appellate Judge Stephen Reinhardt. In her testimony, Warren alleged that Judge Reinhardt persistently sexually harassed her and that the system meant to protect people like her did just the opposite. Aliza Shatzman is a family law attorney and former law clerk in Washington D.C. and similarly to Warren's experience, she claims she too was a victim of gender discrimination and retaliation while clerking for a judge in D.C. Superior Court from 2019 to 2020. In a written Statement for the Record submitted to the House Committee on the Judiciary, she recalled her painful experience of harassment at the hands of a D.C. federal judge, including “[her] attempts to report the mistreatment, how the system failed [her] when she tried to report, and [her] efforts to seek justice for herself and accountability for the misbehaving former judge.” When she filed her complaint against the judge to the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure, she found out that there were very few legal protections from harassment and retaliation for law clerks who reported judges' misbehavior. Currently, judges are excluded from anti-discrimination laws, and in July 2021, Congress proposed a bill that would fix this: the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA). The law would empower judiciary employees who experience abuse, harassment, and retaliation to sue judges under Title VII, along with a number of other measures that create more accountability for judges. For Shatzman, this is just the base level of change needed. She believes the federal judiciary needs meaningful structural change to occur within a system that does little to protect law clerks and other court employees from harassment. We spoke to her about how pervasive this issue is and the legislative efforts being taken to hold judges more accountable. Editor's note: We reached out to the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure for comment on this story and have not yet heard back. Any comments will be updated and made available ASAP.
We air the final part of our March installment of Full Bio. Today, we discuss the latter part of Constance Baker Motley's life and career, including how she became the first Black woman to serve as a federal judge. Historian Tomiko Brown-Nagin, author of Civil Rights Queen: Constance Baker Motley and the Struggle for Equality, joins us again.
It is another big week in the U.S. Senate with a major push by President Biden to reshape American courts. As a candidate he pledged to diversify the federal bench and his decision to appoint a Black woman to the Supreme Court has dominated recent headlines. NewsHour's Lisa Desjardins joins Judy Woodruff to discuss. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders
It is another big week in the U.S. Senate with a major push by President Biden to reshape American courts. As a candidate he pledged to diversify the federal bench and his decision to appoint a Black woman to the Supreme Court has dominated recent headlines. NewsHour's Lisa Desjardins joins Judy Woodruff to discuss. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders
#Abolition #PatrisseCullors #BlackLivesMatterSHOW NOTES:(0:00) Intro and #s On Black/White Wealth Divide(20:10) Abolition? Marc Lamont Hill Interview of Patrisse Cullors Juxtaposed to Ours with The #BLM10, Drs. Joy James and Dylan Rodriguez(1:08:13) Larry Elder Tells on Himself and on The Fakery of Political Punditry(1:20:05) New Shows / Old Ways of Promoting Black Capitalism (1:36:03) Bill Cosby(1:50:30) The Flint Water Crisis and the "8 Year Pandemic"(1:55:45) Dr. Greg Carr Says, "Shut Up" To Critics of Voting, SCOTUS and the Federal Judiciary(2:26:30) Mad Skillz and the Death of Lyricism(2:33:34) The Pepsi Challenge v. The After Party Explained via Improv Comedy(2:39:02) The Root Proves the Dominance of Advertising in Media2:56:46) Free Sundiata Acoli and Leonard PeltierThe #BLM10 Speak: It's Time For Accountabilityhttps://youtu.be/if_IAZpFm7wDr. Joy James on New Bones and the Captive Maternalhttps://youtu.be/lXoS3wxpTNIDr. Dylan Rodriguez on Abolition and White Colonial Rulehttps://youtu.be/d4gMUrfnItMPatrisse Cullors To Release New Book on Abolitionhttps://youtu.be/0BqATy9UxsQBet On Blackhttps://youtu.be/LfG2iy9Legk?t=598“The Most Visible Mulattoes”: Drake and Obama Match Hip-Hop and Politicshttps://imixwhatilike.org/2014/01/09/drakeobama/Hip-Hop's Still Troubled Narrative: A Requiem for C. Delores Tuckerhttps://imixwhatilike.org/2017/10/28/hip-hops-still-troubled-narrative-requiem-c-delores-tucker-jared-ball/Free Sundiata Acolihttps://www.tapinto.net/towns/new-brunswick/sections/police-and-fire/articles/convicted-in-a-new-brunswick-courtroom-48-years-ago-acoli-to-make-appealFree Leonard Peltierhttps://www.whoisleonardpeltier.info/ ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★
It's been both an eternity and no time since the disgusting attack on our nation's Capitol one year ago. We've seen some amount of justice dealt to those involved, but mostly at lower levels. Is there more to come? Will those at the top face consequences? Andrew is here reading the tea leaves on Merrick Garland's speech, and they are some interesting leaves... In the second segment, Andrew tells us about the worthless ethics report issued by Chief Justice Roberts. Links: Read Merrick Garland's Full Jan. 6 Speech, 2021 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, "On Sexual Harassment in the Judiciary" by Leah M. Litman and Deeva Shah, Supreme Court order vax case
Howdy everyone, and thanks again for tuning in to The Jeffersonian Tradition. In today's episode, we ask Patrick Henry what he had to say about the federal judiciary and the sacred nature of trial by jury. If you want me to cover a topic or elaborate further on any given episode, then reach out to me through the show's private MeWe group, or by contacting me at the show email address, which is mrjeffersonian@outlook.com. If you find value in the podcast, please consider becoming a supporting listener. One-time contributions can be sent to the show's cash app, http://cash.app/$MrJeffersonian. Recurring contributions can be made through the Anchor supporting listener link. Thanks again for tuning in to The Jeffersonian Tradition! Sign up for MeWe today: https://mewe.com. Fuel the Jeffersonian Revolution today and buy your goldbacks here: Defy the Grid. Use coupon code LibertyBlock from now through January 1 and enjoy a 1% discount! --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/mr-jeffersonian/support
Howdy everyone, and thanks again for tuning in to The Jeffersonian Tradition. In today's episode, we rediscover the critical arguments over the federal judiciary from the Virginia Ratifying Convention, starting with George Mason and James Madison. If you want me to cover a topic or elaborate further on any given episode, then reach out to me through the show's private MeWe group, or by contacting me at the show email address, which is mrjeffersonian@outlook.com. If you find value in the podcast, please consider becoming a supporting listener. One-time contributions can be sent to the show's cash app, http://cash.app/$MrJeffersonian. Recurring contributions can be made through the Anchor supporting listener link. Thanks again for tuning in to The Jeffersonian Tradition! Sign up for MeWe today: https://mewe.com. Support monetary freedom today and buy your goldbacks here: Defy the Grid. Use coupon code LibertyBlock from now through January 1 and enjoy a 1% discount! --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/mr-jeffersonian/support
Over 30,000 people work for the federal judiciary, a system that the public relies on for redressing sexual and workplace harassment. And yet, those 30,000 employees go to work each and every day without the protection of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Now, some employees are taking the federal judiciary to court for sexual harassment in the workplace. Ashley Erickson talks with Ally Coll and Deeva Shah about this litigation and the reforms needed to protect the employees who keep our courts running. ----------------- Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.org Today's Host: Ashley Erickson, ACS Director of Network Advancement Guest: Ally Coll, President and Co-Founder of The Purple Campaign Guest: Deeva Shah, Associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters Link: Brief of Amici Curiae Legal Momentum, National Women's Law Center, The Purple Campaign, and 32 Additional Organizations in Support of Plaintiff -Appellant Link: Brief of Amici Curiae for Named and Unnamed Current and Former Employees of the Federal Judiciary Who Were subject to or Witnessed Misconduct as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellant Jane Roe Link: Brief of Amici Curiae Aziz Huq and Erwin Chemerinsky in Support of Appellant, regarding the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Link: "On Sexual Harassment in the Judiciary" by Leah Litman and Deeva Shah Link: "Enough is Not Enough: Reflection on Sexual Harassment in the Federal Judiciary" by Olivia Warren Visit the Podcast Website: Broken Law Podcast Email the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.org Follow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | LinkedIn | YouTube ----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of American Constitution Society 2021.
A steadfast rule of being a judge is remaining impartial to the case before you…. So why did over 100 judges break the law and take on cases where they had financial interests? Part of the problem could lie in that many (if not all) of these judges have a professional manage their investments leaving the judges ignorant of their involvement. It would be a huge undertaking for a new judge to come in and retry all these cases which would take up years of court time, but Jack Russo and Bernie Marren both agree that the losers of these cases want their fair trial. All this data is public but is just now coming to light thanks to the AI that is catching all the bits and pieces humans miss. Has data analytics created enough havoc for the federal judiciary or is this just a small part of a larger problem that goes up to the Supreme Court?
Federal Judicial Center confess it has no power authority are jurisdiction
Episode 19- Texas Goddamn – Show Notes In this episode attorney, Mary Whiteside breaks down the tyranny emerging in Texas caused by the Republican controlled state legislature, which has enacted laws written by Dark Money funded political operatives like ALEC and SNP, groups designed to write right wing laws to benefit Dark Money donors and religious zealots .This unholy alliance has seemingly unlimited funding, which has been used to capture a large part of the Federal Judiciary including the Supreme Court. What is happening in Texas is the plan for the rest of the country. This is the all hands on deck moment for democracy and the rights of the majority of its citizens. MAIN POINTS: The Texas 6 week abotion ban was passed to please the religious zealot voting block (aka the pro-life voters). The specifics of the far right agenda is deeply unpopular with voters because it hurts everyone who is not extremely rich. Therefore, they needed to build a coalition of voters. The religious zealot voting block only focuses on overturning Roe v. Wade leaving the Koch politicians free to enact other policies without scrutiny. The Captured Supreme Court was installed to make sure Roe is overturned or gutted to the point of practical irrelevance. The Robert's Court is fulfilling their promise to the Dark Money Texas enacts the Koch operatives' long term strategy by passing the most restrictive voter suppression/restrictions, which is the key to permanently installing an autocratic Christian Nationalist minority. Part 3 looks at all the other laws Texas passed this year to advance the Koch project to make America hospitable for corporations and the ultra wealthy. CONCLUSION: We need to pressure the Democratically controlled Congress and President Biden to pass these laws. The Women's Health Protection Act - This bill would establish a statutory right for health care professionals to provide abortion care and the right for their patients to receive care, free from bans and medically unnecessary restrictions that single out abortion care. The Judicial Ads Act would require identification of donors who fund advocacy campaigns aimed at confirming their favored nominees. The Disclose Act The For the People Act, The Freedom to Vote Act We also need to make our voices loud, especially with our state, local and national representatives. We need to spend our money strategically and stop giving money to fossil fuel and businesses that are using their wealth to undermine and weaken democracy. Resources https://www.texastribune.org/2021/08/31/new-texas-laws-september-2021/ https://www.khou.com/article/news/local/texas/new-texas-laws-2021/285-d5170afe-e39c-401f-a575-bf110bba780b https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/texass-proposed-voter-suppression-law https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Captured%20Courts%20-%20Reproductive%20Rights.pdf https://www.npr.org/2021/07/09/1014579306/texas-republicans-have-a-new-voting-bill-heres-whats-in-it https://www.uclalawreview.org/the-equality-argument-for-abortion-rights/ Need More Access Follow the pod on Facebook, Twitter @courtpod to see what we think about current events and let us know your thoughts. Have compliments, criticisms, or suggestions. Email us at displeasethecourt@gmail.com Subscribe so you don't miss an episode on iTunes/Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Podbean, Spotify, Sticher, Vurb, or via RSS. Rate and Review (5 Stars!) the show to help people find us.
Parvez and Omar are joined by Hamid Khan to discuss the end of the Afghan war and the crisis that followed. Mr. Hamid Khan is an accomplished legal professional with 20 years' experience advancing the rule of law through public policy, global program development, and legal education. Mr. Khan is also an expert in Islamic constitutionalism, issues of Islamic law in armed conflict and post-conflict justice, gender issues under Islamic law, and trends in modern Islamic political thought share his insights on the current crisis in Afghanistan, evacuation and resettlement efforts, and potential ways forward. Mr. Khan has worked in justice sector and legal development issues with a wide variety of international organizations, non-governmental organizations, and U.S. Government agencies including the Director of National Intelligence, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Federal Judiciary, the United Nations, NATO, ISAF (Afghanistan), and the U.S.-Islamic World Forum at the Brookings Institution. He is a Judicial Education Attorney with the Federal Judicial Center and has served as Postdoctoral Fellow for Stanford Law School's Afghanistan Legal Education Project.
We think of our great country, we Americans do, as a Democracy. The fact of the matter is that America is really not a democracy but rather a:REPUBLIC.America is a sophisticated system of government, political authority spread about, exercised by different entities and branches of government and most importantly, the governmental system known as Federalism which consists of a federal government on the one hand and state governments, autonomous with considerable independent political authority.The Founding Fathers were very suspicious of human kind, little trust in some cases, with regards to the integrity of men and women who would run the government and the Founding Fathers in the CONSTITUTION divided power four ways creating a Senate, a House of Representatives, a President and a Federal Judiciary. For, they thought, independent and self-functioning branches of government would act as a considerable check and balance and no one entity or person would ever be able to exercise control, real control. But democracy underlay government at every level, Federal and State. Democratic principles center around essential, indispensable and inalienable freedoms such as speech, press, religion, assembly and petition were indeed the most important. The government envisioned by the founders was based on those essential freedoms and in fact had no structure or substance without them. The democratic republic they envisioned for WE THE PEOPLE was however a most fragile concept easily tarnished or done away with in whole or in part by power hungry politicians or by those who very much wanted a different form of government for our country. Democracy, this noble experiment, required a vigilant, pro-active, wary citizenship, ready to protect and defend this governmental form and the essential freedoms it espoused even with the very lives of the citizenry as occurred in revolutionary days. America was founded as a political entity by those who were in fact willing to give their lives for the freedoms they wanted so badly. We the people live today as we do because of them.President Ronald Reagan told us so very clearly that:FREEDOM IS ONLY ONE GENERATION AWAY FROM EXTINCTION!How right he was. It seems as though everywhere, Federal, State and local governments as they are, essential freedoms are eliminated, curtailed or just simply ignored. Men and women once empowered do as they please, so many without regard to the law or the Constitution and the DEMOCRACY, the democratic republic in which we live has never been more in danger of that extinction Reagan warned against. This unique, fragile democracy of ours, this democratic republic may well be on its last legs. The forces of change, radical change, determined to introduce a virulent socialism, or perhaps even a Marxism or at the extreme some form of dictatorship seem to be winning. In 1887, Alexander Tytler, a Scottish history professor at University of Edinburgh said this about Democracy: “A democracy is always temporary in nature. It simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over LOOSE FISCAL POLICY, which is always followed by some form of dictatorship.”Scary words are they not? Professor Tytler states emphatically that any democracy, such as the Athenian Republic is always temporary. It simply cannot survive long term. It cannot exist as a permanent form of government! America, therefore, as it is constituted, simply cannot survive and, says Tytler, the cause of our political death will be: MONEY! Loose Fiscal Policy. Rampant spending. Graphed, Bribes, Pork. Deceit and dishonest financial dealings. Incredible inflation. The combination of these Fiscal factors will be the end of the American Democracy we now know and love. That is happening at an unbelievable pace today, TODAY! It is here and now. It isn't coming sometime in the future. THE BEGINNING OF THE ENDING OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY – REPUBLIC HAS BEGUN!Professor Alexander Tytler of Edinburgh University goes on to state the following:“The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years.”America, THE CITY ON A HILL has been alive and well for:245 YEARSOur great country has existed 45 years longer than the average age of historical democratic governments. Tytler, guided by historical precedent, would see the soon end of our great civilization and our magnificent country. Then Professor Tytler gives us a timeline as to the course of democracy from its beginning to its ending. In those 200 years, the average age of the survival of the democratic form of government, Tytler identifies nine different stages which characterize the government. The first is:BONDAGE. Men and women live politically under the iron hand of others. There is no freedom of any kind. They live under the political yoke of others.But then comes the second stage: SPIRITUAL FAITH. Revival happens. Those enslaved are energized by spirituality. They are ready to do whatever is required to shake off the bondage.And that spiritual faith leads to the next phase:GREAT COURAGE. Men and women become bearing, willing to risk all, putting all on the alter in the hunt and fight for freedom. They will not live under bondage any longer.And this courage and the action which follows produces the next great stage of the newly arriving civilization:LIBERTY!Men and women achieve what they want most in life, LIBERTY AND FREEDOM. They become masters of themselves, forming their own governments, establishing laws and constitutions which protect and defend that liberty. Then, from that liberty comes the next great phase of civilization:ABUNDANCE.Professor Tytler sees the creation of wealth, abundant goods and services, significantly increased lifestyles, the good life virtually everywhere.Then from this state of abundance comes the next phase of the ever–evolving democracy, our democratic way of life:COMPLACENCY.We begin to assume, take for granted. We become lazy in protection. We would rather live the good life than the politically active. Morals loosen. The rule of law is weakened. The Constitution is watered down. Complacency rules. Then, from complacency comes APATHY. We become indifferent, ignoring reality, real problems, real threats and we refuse to respond to the demands of democracy for protection and defense. The conscious adopts a SO WHAT or WHO CARES attitude and democracy wanes. Then, from apathy comes DEPENDENCE. We the people become dependent upon government, upon others, ruled by BIG, whether government, corporations, churches and religious institutions, banks and financial institutions and more. There is at first a gradual loss of freedom, but then rapid. We become immune, indifferent having lost so much spiritual faith, courage and a real concern for the liberty our forefathers fought for. That can happen in one generation, freedoms lost and of course once lost, are lost forever.Finally, says Tytler, that once great democracy, that experiment in freedom, now in a state of DEPENDENCE reverts back into BONDAGE. That is of course a loss of democracy, a loss of freedom. There comes in its place socialism, or Marxism, or an oligarchy, or in a worse case scenario, a dictatorship. We the people lose our desire, courage, spiritual faith so necessary for the protection of our democratic way of life. Our generation could well be the one, as President Reagan so well said, which is responsible for the loss, the extinction of FREEDOM. We now exist, we Americans, Tytler would say in the state of complacency heading toward if not altogether in the state of APATHY. Are we, are we my fellow Americans in a state of apathy? Do we not care about our great country, our democratic way of life, our freedoms, our Constitution, all that America has been or at least stood for for the past 245 years. Are we indeed complacent, apathetic, unconcerned, unwilling to fight the fight of freedom, of democracy, are we? Are you? Are we the proud American people willing to revert back to a state of dependence, dependence upon government which will eventually put us back into the BONDAGE which we fought to throw off 245 years ago? It can easily appear that way. So few of us are willing to put our all on the alter of freedom, unwilling in so many ways to do what is required to really make certain that America remains free, truly and in fact:THE LAND OF THE BRAVE AND THE FREE.We must end, and end now any form of political complacency, any form of political apathy or indifference. We must not allow any form of dependence to occur in our great country, and to us. We must reidentify, protect and defend the freedoms of our great Constitution, the essential staples, the structure, the substance of our way of life. We do that now, we prevent the loss of those freedoms for if they are in fact once lost:THEY ARE LOST FOREVER.Stand up, my fellow Americans, stand up now and do so with all your might. Be energized by spiritual faith. Allow that to turn into great courage to do whatever is required. Reidentify and protect and defend the liberty we now begin to take for granted, with complacency and apathy. Remember the price that has been paid throughout those 245 years to protect, preserve and defend that freedom, that liberty. If we don't, back into some awful form of bondage we go, for:FREEDOM ONCE LOST IS LOST FOREVER!Your call, your life. WHAT WILL YOU DO?
In this paper, Hamilton states and explains the specific objects that are to be under the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary. The judiciary's jurisdiction includes issues that are between states including land disputes, issues with foreign powers, and admiralty/maritime law. Please like, share, and subscribe You have criticisms, recommendations, or topics for new videos: thefederalistfiles@gmail.com Youtube: https://youtube.com/channel/UCrPbNN9i70MoE83sjtJpthQ Catch this podcast on apple podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-federalist-files/id1536517953 Amazon Audible: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08K58GZBT/ref=cm_sw_r_fa_dp_xKo6FbB9R92PF?fbclid=IwAR1hCwYa9X8iYViGGpX8Ph7qDxgd8SLAbBcAIqYJQNH2aPcPJcgGANgp89g Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0hpUFhzr8AXqXLKl6daQKq iheart radio: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/269-the-federalist-files-73615284/ Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/Thefederalistfiles Support our veterans: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org Follow on parler: @MichaelDeMato Follow on Twitter: https://twitter.com/michael_demato Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thefederalistfiles/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/michael.demato.18 Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/thefederalistfiles #conservative #conservatism #politics #rumble #thefederalistfiles #federalistpapers #federalism #liberal #liberalism #republican #democrat #GOP #podcast #podcaster #2A #secondamendment #constitution #freedom #liberty #government #federalgovernment #patriot #usa #libertarian #rightwing #constitution
Senator Mitch McConnell stated that the Federal Judiciary was his top priority. During the Trump administration, Senator McConnell and the Republican Party were able to approve and Trump appoints almost 1/3 of the entire federal judiciary. Three Justices were appointed to the U.S. Supreme, but overall the Appellate and District Federal Courts were dramatically reshaped with over 223 appointees. With the average age on the lower courts Justices being 48 years old and the U.S. Supreme Court Justice's average age being 55 years old the impact of their decisions will last for decades. Join us on The ClaVille Report as we discuss the impact of Mitch McConnell's plan on the Judicial Branch and the United States. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
Historically Speaking-Uncommon History with an Unconventional Pair
“Keep Cool with Coolidge” was one of the presidential campaign slogans for the 1924 election. What was so cool about Coolidge? Here in Episode 23, we give you our reasons why Calvin Coolidge gets our vote for the most underrated president in American history. Here's a few teasers – he was the first president to appoint a woman to the Federal Judiciary, he extended American citizenship to Native Americans, he proposed the first federal anti-lynching laws, he was the last president to pay down the national debt, and so much more. A man of very few words (a.k.a. Silent Cal,) who experienced heartbreaking personal tragedy while in office, Coolidge is the only president to be sworn into office by his own father and the only one to be sworn in at 3 o'clock in the morning. Books: The Autobiography of Calvin Coolidge by Calvin CoolidgeWhy Coolidge Matters: Leadership Lessons from America's Most Underrated President by Charles C. JohnsonA Puritan in Babylon: The Story of Calvin Coolidge by William Allen WhiteCoolidge: An American Enigma by Robert SobelA History of the American People by Paul Johnson
All month, we're celebrating Pride. Tune in to hear about amazing members of the LGBTQIA+ community.Every weekday, listeners explore the trials, tragedies, and triumphs of groundbreaking women throughout history who have dramatically shaped the world around us. In each 5 minute episode, we'll dive into the story behind one woman listeners may or may not know -- but definitely should. These diverse women from across space and time are grouped into easily accessible and engaging monthly themes like Leading Ladies, Activists, STEMinists, Local Legends, and many more. Encyclopedia Womannica is hosted by WMN co-founder and award-winning journalist Jenny Kaplan. The bite-sized episodes pack painstakingly researched content into fun, entertaining, and addictive daily adventures.Encyclopedia Womannica was created by Liz Kaplan and Jenny Kaplan, executive produced by Jenny Kaplan, and produced by Liz Smith, Grace Lynch, Maddy Foley, Brittany Martinez, Edie Allard and Lindsey Kratochwill. Special thanks to Shira Atkins, Carmen Borca-Carrillo, Taylor Williamson, Ale Tejeda, and Sundus Hassan.We are offering free ad space on Wonder Media Network shows to organizations working towards social justice. For more information, please email Jenny at jenny@wondermedianetwork.com.Follow Wonder Media Network:WebsiteInstagramTwitter
Leah and Kate are joined by Sen. Sheldon “Whiteboard” Whitehouse to discuss the courts subcommittee hearing on dark money and how the topic of the hearing relates to the Court’s upcoming case in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Becerra/Thomas More Law Foundation v. Becerra.
How Big Oil captured the Federal Judiciary to crush a heroic lawyer. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/rfkjr/message
Before diving into landmark cases we must take a broad look at where the Supreme Court came from, and how the inferior courts came into being. We will do this through looking at the Article III of the United States Constitution, and the Judiciary Act of 1789. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/aaron-larson2/support
FFRF attorney Liz Cavell describes FFRF's alarming new report: "Religious Liberty Under Threat: The Christian Nationalist Capture of the Federal Judiciary." After hearing Kristin Lems' seasonal song "Solstice Time" and Dan Barker's ballad "Solstice Tribute," Michigan activist Doug Marshall tells us about the equal-time "Keep Saturn in Saturnalia" banner in Warren, Michigan, that was vandalized and stolen.
American Government and Civics review for the courts and some civil liberties/Civil Rights --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app
The Supreme Court and Federal Judiciary accidentally make the case to #ExpandtheCourt. Will #Trump use the courts to steal the election? Also, should we be celebrating the massive turnout in #Texas? #SCOTUS #TURNTEXASBLUE We're on iTunes: http://apple.co/2tCd0Dn Google Play: http://bit.ly/2tEpOJb Stitcher: http://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=139322 TuneIn: http://bit.ly/2svIk6F ... and now Spotify! https://spoti.fi/2NpeIT3 Please subscribe, share us with your friends and write a review! Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/BestWordsPod
Jennifer Braceras from Independent Women's Law Center talks with Senator Joni Ernst about her work on the Senate Judiciary Committee and the confirmation hearings on the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the United States Supreme Court.She Thinks is a podcast for women (and men) who are sick of the spin in today's news cycle and are seeking the truth. Once a week, every week, She Thinks host Beverly Hallberg is joined by guests who cut through the clutter and bring you the facts.You don't have to keep up with policy and politics to understand how issues will impact you and the people you care about most. You just have to keep up with us.We make sure you have the information you need to come to your own conclusions. Because, let's face it, you're in control of your own life and can think for yourself.You can listen to the latest She Thinks episode(s) here or wherever you get your podcasts. Then subscribe, rate, and share with your friends. If you are already caught up and want more, join our online community.Sign up for our emails here: http://iwf.org/sign-upIndependent Women's Forum (IWF) believes all issues are women's issues. IWF promotes policies that aren't just well-intended, but actually enhance people's freedoms, opportunities, and choices. IWF doesn't just talk about problems. We identify solutions and take them straight to the playmakers and policy creators. And, as a 501(c)3, IWF educates the public about the most important topics of the day.Check out the Independent Women's Forum website for more information on how policies impact you, your loved ones, and your community: www.iwf.org.Be sure to subscribe to our emails to ensure you're equipped with the facts on the issues you care about most: https://iwf.org/sign-up. Subscribe to IWF's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/IWF06.Follow IWF on social media:- https://twitter.com/iwf on Twitter- https://www.facebook.com/independentwomensforum on Facebook- https://instagram.com/independentwomensforum on Instagram#IWF #SheThinks #AllIssuesAreWomensIssues See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
Despite high praise from The American Bar Association, America's largest lawyers' group, Senate Democrats on Capitol Hill, positioned themselves to poison the process to nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court as hearings began Monday. "A substantial majority of the Standing Committee determined that Judge Barrett is 'Well Qualified." "For the past 67 years, the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has conducted comprehensive peer reviews of the professional qualifications of federal judicial nominees, including all 34 U.S Supreme Court nominees." However, now, liberal-Democrats and their hell-bent efforts to poison the Court and the American people's minds overshadow independent reviews. You see, for the left - they know best. I don't know about you, but Democratic VP Candidate and Run A Muck, Chuck Schumer, have hardly had or continue to have the best intentions for the American people - unless, of course, they personally profit. If you recall, Chuck Schumer has routinely criticized conservative Christians, and now with Amy Coney Barrett's nomination to the Supreme Court considered a Republican lock-up, ole' Chucky is up to his old games of deception and political parlor tricks. But now, with Barrett getting the nod from Trump and Senate Republicans, for Schumer, faith has no place, at least not on The Supreme Court. Even more, if confirmed, ole' Chucky is requesting that the then Justice Barrett recuse herself from any case regarding the Affordable Care Act or 2020 Election results that may require guidance or judicial review. These are the political games of liberal-Democratic lawmakers. The left is completely disallowing voters' wishes of 2016 - claiming now that only 2020 votes should matter - that is, of course, should voters stand with and behind Biden in the ballot box in November. Thankfully, Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell understands the liberal monstrous mentality. And can pull a page from his political playbook to vote on a discharge resolution that would remove the responsibility of considering the committee's Barrett nomination—allowing McConnell, R-Ky, to call the nomination for a full vote. The fact of the matter is this, it is 4th and long, and liberals are gearing up for a Hail Mary - unfortunately for them, they are out of talent, out of luck, and out of time. Ultimately, despite their political theatre and attempts to publically pervert and community castrate Amy Coney Barrett - there is nothing they can do to keep the nomination from moving forward. Checkmate - Chucky! We must not turn a blind eye to the geriatric games of Joe Biden and his communist minions in Congress. Should the Harris-Biden Administration somehow become a reality, and should Republicans relinquish control of The White House and the Senate, make no mistake, Democrats will railroad socialism down the throats of all Americans. If you follow history, you know that all totalitarian regimes, before becoming legitimized and taking control, take an iron-grip on education, the media, and finally, government. Folks, since the Vietnam War, liberalism has cancerously cannibalized our nation's educational system. The goal? To churn out as many communist sheep as possible. Ask no questions - and pay no consequences - as long as you fall into line and socialistic submission. Liberal-thought has invaded our liberties - and now, we have allowed these out-of-touch asinine clowns to control our thoughts and our process. The last effort to cement these United States of America under a banner of communism is to control the courts - and in that, liberal-Democrats could and would hold power on the interpretation of their laws. I cannot begin to beg you to understand just what is in store for our nation if Biden becomes President in November. My words are not to instill fear; no, they are to attempt to bring logic to the lunacy of the radical left in this country. The Democratic party may be screaming that they are for change, but that isn't the case. If you don't believe me, take a look at who is heading their ticket. The combined years in office of their hopeful president in Joe Biden, Speaker of the House Pelosi, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is 101. That's right, over 100 years between the 3 of them - and nothing but Democratic-led destruction has blazed their political paths. Let me be clear - lifelong liberal politicians despise President Trump; it has been that hatred since even before his election that has led to their hate-filled hack job against him. You see, Donald Trump doesn't fit into their mold - and why? Because unlike the socialistic-rats like Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi, Donald Trump doesn't need politics to survive. Democrats like Biden and his bunch have done nothing and could do nothing without the power and riches acquired while in office. They have not owned a business; they have been responsible for financial solvency and accountability. No, no, for generations, they have sucked and bled dry the American dream at the expense of those they have sworn to protect and those too gullible to know the difference. Biden, Schumer, and Pelosi prey on the weak and the disenfranchised. Why, because deep down, they and the Democratic party know that their base is made up of expendables. If you lose some, no big deal - for these people, they believe belong to a population class that no one would notice if they go missing. No one can debate on this - I have the facts to back this claim up. The facts are this, Joe Biden and those pulling his strings and propping him up to do not care about the American people. Instead, they only care about what is in it for them. Democratic leaders, like the Hollywood elites and a majority of professional athletes, couldn't cut the mustard in the private sector - and wouldn't know real, gritty hard work in the shoes of assembly line workers or farmers who have been instrumental to the foundation of our nation's economy. Democratic politicians are vultures, continuing to pick away at the skin of those in our society who try hard and succeed. In a socialist society, people are watered down to weather away in the muck of crap created by the left's communistic ideals. Mediocrity rewarded, creativity stifled, and our nation left defenseless and lacking innovation. For far too long, liberals have labeled capitalism as an evil; with every passing piece of legislation, Democrats become encouraged and emboldened in their efforts. Suppose somehow, Joe Biden and those who are pushing his political buttons steal a win in November. In that case, he and they will systemically destroy the Supreme Court of the United States, hellishly conjoining Congress and the courts for one purpose - to push their socialistic agenda and destroy the greatest democracy ever created. The time to understand has passed - the time for action is upon us. Music courtesy of Greg Shields Music. http://www.reverbnation.com/GregShields
A quick note that this episode was recorded before the heartbreaking death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In legislative sessions across the U.S. in the year of 2019, more than 300 anti-abortion bills were introduced and 58 restrictions were enacted. Some of these sexual and reproductive health-related laws will end up in front of the courts, meaning an individual's right to abortion access in some states ends up in the hands of whatever judges preside in the court. Anisha Singh, Director of Judiciary and Democracy Affairs with Planned Parenthood Action Fund (PPACT), sits down to talk with us about how our courts play a critical role in our sexual and reproductive health and rights.Support the show (https://www.reprosfightback.com/take-action#donate)
What is your exit plan and how do you avoid paying the piper on all that taxable-gain you've just incurred from the sale of your ranch? Don't have a ranch but want one? Here's how you can use the tax code to your benefit the exchange into a ranch. Be prepared to drink through a fire-hose on this episode, their is an abundance of information for those who invest in real estate and would like to move assets or portfolio allocation to farms and ranches.Max A. Hansen, a Montana native, joined Accruit after 27 years as President and CEO of American Equity Exchange, one of the first Section 1031 qualified intermediary companies in the Rocky Mountain Region. For over 40 years, Max has helped taxpayers and real estate professionals successfully complete property exchanges.As an attorney and Certified Exchange Specialist™, Max has been assisting clients in real estate transactions involving exchanges for over 42 years. Max is licensed to practice and an active member of the State Bars of Montana, Idaho, Utah and California. He is a Past President of the State Bar of Montana and was State Bar Delegate and ABA delegate to the American Bar Association House of Delegates for over 20 years He served on various ABA committees including the Nominating Committee and the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary and remains a member of the Committee on Sales, Exchanges and Basis of the ABA Section of Taxation.
Bakari is joined by former secretary of state Hillary Clinton to talk about how she would have responded to the coronavirus pandemic (7:20), what Joe Biden's current lead in the polls means for November (18:52), the future of the federal judiciary (20:20), and some advice for Biden before he makes his vice president pick (33:09). Host: Bakari Sellers Guest: Hillary Clinton Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Theyfeartruth News interview with The Federal judiciary center for the Northern District of Chicago interview about jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction Reporter president and FOUNDER of Theyfeartruth Federal government of America Rico Dukes has proved to the American people beyond a doubt that the United States government corporations has no jurisdiction over the American people. This interview is with the Federal justice prosecutors office known as FJC FEDERAL JUDICIARY CENTER. America listen to this interview that just changed American history..THEY HAVE NO JURISDICTION THEYFEARTRUTH NEWS can aslo be found on. Feedspot.com a worldwide connection date systemTHEYFEARTRUTH NEWS RESERVE ALL RIGHTS
Your Court Restarting Trials? Here’s What Works As courts are reopening, many have already held their first trials. Others are planning to start trials in the next month or two. Whether they are conducted in-courtroom, or via video conference-calls, trials are going to look different for some time into the future. What will change for those coming to the courthouse? What will a trial on a video conference-call look like? To help manage this process, The Federal Judiciary just released a report on June 4 titled, “Conducting Jury Trials and Convening Grand Juries During the Pandemic.” The panel discusses the experience of courts that have already held some trials; others courts that are starting up pilot programs in their states; the dramatic increase in the space needs for jury trials (it is currently taking three courtrooms to hold a single trial); supplemental jury questionnaires specifically addressing jurors and the Coronavirus; masks, goggles, and gloves, disinfecting routines; videos describing what courts are doing to keep jurors safe, and even the possibility of video conferencing the voir dire. This Week's Panelists Zenell Brown has garnered respect both as Executive Court Administrator for the Third Circuit Court in Detroit, Michigan, and for her ethical leadership and innovation. Zenell has a Juris Doctor from Wayne State University Law School, a Public Service Administration Graduate Certificate from Central Michigan University, and a Court Administration Certificate from Michigan State University. Richard J. "Rick" Pierce is the Judicial Programs Administrator of the Judicial District Operations and Programs Department, at the Pennsylvania Administrative Office of the Courts. Prior to his current position, he was the district court administrator for Cumberland County. He graduated from Washington and Lee University, and received his Masters in Public Administration from Shippensburg University. Angela S. "Angie" VanSchoick is the Court Administrator with the Town of Breckenridge Municipal Court. She received her MSW from the University of Michigan in 2007. She also assist the Court and with the Colorado Association for Municipal Court Administration. Elizabeth "Liz" Rambo is the Trial Court Administrator for Lane County Circuit Court in Eugene, Oregon. She graduated with high scholarship from Oregon State University with a BA in history and has an MBA from Portland State University. Mark A. Weinberg is the Court Administrator for the Seventh Judicial Circuit in Daytona Beach, Florida. Prior to his current position, he was an administrator with the court in Maricopa County, Arizona. He holds a bachelor's degree in public administration from James Madison University and a master's degree in judicial administration from the University of Denver. Leave a comment at CLAPodcast@nacmnet.org
Amongst the many studies of the makeup of the Federal Judiciary, one particularly noticeable characteristic is the overrepresentation of Ex-prosecutors in relation to other potential professional backgrounds on the federal bench. One recent study published by the Cato Institute fully delved into this controversial issue and brought further attention to this aspect of the Federal Judiciary. Is the overrepresentation necessarily a negative aspect of the Federal Judiciary? Are there sound reasons for preferring judges who have a prosecutorial background? How has this aspect of the Judiciary shaped our constitutional and statutory law in recent decades? Join us as we discuss these controversial issues with our distinguished guests: -- Clark Neily, Vice-President for Criminal Justice, The Cato Institute -- Jesse Panuccio, Partner, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP -- Moderator: Jodi Balsam, Associate Professor of Clinical Law|Director, Externship Program Brooklyn Law School
Amongst the many studies of the makeup of the Federal Judiciary, one particularly noticeable characteristic is the overrepresentation of Ex-prosecutors in relation to other potential professional backgrounds on the federal bench. One recent study published by the Cato Institute fully delved into this controversial issue and brought further attention to this aspect of the Federal Judiciary. Is the overrepresentation necessarily a negative aspect of the Federal Judiciary? Are there sound reasons for preferring judges who have a prosecutorial background? How has this aspect of the Judiciary shaped our constitutional and statutory law in recent decades? Join us as we discuss these controversial issues with our distinguished guests: -- Clark Neily, Vice-President for Criminal Justice, The Cato Institute -- Jesse Panuccio, Partner, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP -- Moderator: Jodi Balsam, Associate Professor of Clinical Law|Director, Externship Program Brooklyn Law School
“A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” – Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. MadisonConstitution geeks, rejoice. The book you've been waiting for has arrived. Repugnant Laws by Keith Whittington (William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Politics at Princeton) takes readers under the hood of our system of checks and balances – examining “Judicial Review of Acts of Congress from the Founding to the Present.”Whittington, who writes for my favorite legal blog the Volokh Conspiracy, joins me live. He has written a great deal about impeachment lately, but his real constitutional expertise is the main check that the judiciary exercises over the legislature – its ability to overturn state and federal laws which it deems unconstitutional. The power of judicial review was first discovered by the Supreme Court in the infamous case of Marbury v. Madison, in which Chief Justice John Marshall opined that “A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” (Who else but the courts could decide when a law enacted by Congress is repugnant to the Constitution?)Since then, the makeup of the courts has influenced the direction of policy in subtle but powerful ways. Whittington's book analyzes thousands of cases in which the Supreme Court either upheld or overturned federal laws. He applies the precision of a scientist (a political scientist, that is) to questions of politicization and examines whether an activist judiciary is antidemocratic.RealClear Politics reports that President Trump is “Remaking the Federal Judiciary at a Historic Rate”. According to Whittington's data, this will influence political outcomes for decades to come. But while judicial appointees may tend to side with the dominant political coalitions, he notes that they do not make their decisions along strict ideological lines.I have previously explored whether the courts should exercise restraint in allowing lawmakers to craft a wide range of legislation (see Overruling Government Overreach: Damon Root on the Libertarian Legal Movement).I have also argued in favor of a more activist judiciary, which defends individual rights from being overridden by majority rule, and believe that the courts are the last bulwark against excessive democracy. However, everyone seems to be in favor of judicial activism when it favors his or her politics. That explains why restraint and “minimalism” are in vogue among liberals when the conservatives are in power, and vice versa.Find out why Randy Barnett says Repugnant Laws is “Simply a must-read for any serious student of our Constitution and how it actually works.”
What is the principle of the law? The Constitution is law, the highest law, and the President, Congress, and the Federal Judiciary are bound by its terms. ... Rule of law, then, is not rule of the law, but a doctrine concerning what the law ought to be—a set of standards, in other words, to which the laws should conform. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/chicano/message
Harvey Weinstein is trying to find a jury of his peers, Chief Justice John Roberts gives his year-end report card on the Federal Judiciary (spoiler alert – not everyone passed), and CNN settles Nick Sandman’s defamation lawsuit. Apparently, CNN wanted out of the fake journalism business. These stories, plus we look ahead to the Comedian of Law’s First Annual Academy Awards show where we give out our awards for the best, and worst, legal movies. For more about Joel Oster and our live CLE schedule, online or webinar CLEs, visit our website.For more about Mackenzie Smith and aviation law, visit her here.
(Note: This is a DocuPod – audio reads of important public documents. No conversation; no interview. Just the document itself.) You may have noticed: Especially with the impeachment, there’s been a lot of news, coverage and discussion – tweets, speeches, rallies, angry letters, hearings, cable panels – around two branches of government: The Executive and Legislative. But assuming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi indeed sends the two Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, and assuming Majority Leader Mitch McConnell indeed convenes a trial, our third branch – the Judiciary – will be front and center. That’s because, as you may know, when the President of the United States faces an impeachment trial in the Senate, the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court presides. And that person, of course, is John G. Roberts. Now, we don’t hear much from Chief Justices. Sure, they write some of the Court’s opinions. But they don’t really do interviews. They certainly don’t tweet. So when they speak, their words carry great power, and everyone scrambles to read between their lines. Just recently, Chief Justice Roberts spoke. Actually, he published – on New Year’s Eve, his annual Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary. And, of course, with the tensions among the branches of government – with an impeachment trial likely on the horizon – this year’s report was widely anticipated. You may recall Roberts’ last comments that seemed to be directed towards President Trump in 2018, when the Chief Justice reminded the President that, “We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.” President Trump tweeted back: “Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have ‘Obama judges,’ and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country.” So what about now? Would Roberts say anything about President Trump? Would he reveal his feelings on the state of our nation – on whether we are in, or headed towards, a Constitutional Crisis? Chief Justice Roberts didn’t disappoint. As the New York Times described, Roberts “issued pointed remarks… that seemed to be addressed, at least in part, to the president himself. The two men have a history of friction, and Chief Justice Roberts used the normally mild report to denounce false information spread on social media and to warn against mob rule. Some passages could be read as a mission statement for the chief justice’s plans for the impeachment trial itself.” For show notes & my newsletter, go to chrisriback.com.
The E.O. Trump just signed is only the beginning. https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Trump-is-remaking-the-federal-judiciary-14924789.php https://www.rt.com/news/476623-syria-defense-missiles-israel/ https://strangesounds.org/2019/12/biblical-locust-plague-video-somalia.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y8mjq2eUxA&t=4024s --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/dontspeak/support
Judy Perry Martinez is a lawyer who has made public service a part of her career from the start. She continues that legacy in August as she assumes the presidency of the 400,000-member American Bar Association during its annual meeting in San Francisco. On this episode of LawNext, Martinez joins host Bob Ambrogi for a wide-ranging discussion of the challenges and opportunities facing the ABA and the profession at large. Over more than 30 years, Martinez has held various leadership positions at the ABA, including as chair of the ABA Presidential Commission on the Future of Legal Services, which three years ago released it seminal study on access to legal services, Report on the Future of Legal Services in the United States. Martinez also chaired the ABA’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which evaluates all prospective nominees to the federal bench. Other roles in which she has served include as the ABA’s lead representative to the United Nations, a member of the ABA Task Force on Building Public Trust in the American Justice System, a member of the ABA Commission on Women in the Profession, a member of the Council of the ABA Center on Diversity, and a member of the ABA Commission on Domestic Violence. She spent much of her career at the law firm Simon, Peragine, Smith & Redfearn in New Orleans, where she is of counsel. In 2003, she joined Northrop Grumman Corporation as assistant general counsel-litigation, eventually rising to become vice president and chief compliance officer before leaving in 2015 to spend a year at the Advanced Leadership Institute at Harvard University. NEW: We are now on Patreon! Subscribe to our page to be able to access show transcripts, or to submit a question for our guests. Comment on this show: Record a voice comment on your mobile phone and send it to info@lawnext.com.
WUKY's award winning history series Saving Stories with Dr. Doug Boyd from the Nunn Center for Oral History in the UK Libraries, returns with audio from the Heyburn Initiative For Excellence in the Federal Judiciary. Among the more than 40 interviews conducted by project director Anu Kasarabada, is a conversation with former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who died at the age of 99 earlier this month. Stevens is one of only a few Supreme Court Justices who started their law careers by clerking for a Supreme Court Justice. In this interview from 2017 Stevens reveals that a coin toss determined whether he would clerk for Justice Wiley Rutledge or Chief Justice Fred Vinson; both hailed from Kentucky.
Ryan Stinson currently manages the Security Engineering Team at Hubspot, where he enjoys leading cybersecurity efforts in a fast-paced, customer focused environment. He began his career as an Officer in the US Air Force, where he served in a variety of InfoSec roles within the DoD. Since that time, he's developed a federated identity management suite for the Veterans Affairs e-authentication project, built a line of business focused on security assessment, penetration testing, and security architecture at a consulting firm, and managed the application security program at the Federal Judiciary.
Last week was the 65th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. Currently, federal judicial nominees are refusing to answer the low bar question of whether Brown was decided correctly. Something is amiss in the Federal Judiciary. Mike and Amera review the decision and the impact of both the ruling and the sustained campaign to circumvent the ruling. This episode is the first in a two-part series we continue next week when we look at Roe v. Wade and the Christian obsession with it.
Judge Pamela Harris of the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and Slate Editor Dahlia Lithwick discussed sexual harassment in the judiciary. Professor Anne Coughlin moderated the discussion. Dean Risa Goluboff introduced the panel. (University of Virginia School of Law, Feb. 25, 2019)
Today's episode tackles the recent Supreme Court orders in the Trump ban on transgender service members. How did we get here and what's next? Listen and find out. We begin, however, with a brief Andrew Was Wrong segment regarding the history and modern politics of the State of the Union. After that, it's time for the main segment, which dives deeply into the history of trans service in the U.S. military, including a discussion of what it means to bring a case pursuant to the equal protection clause and what the future likely holds. Then, it's time for a rapid-fire round of questions about Trump's shutdown. Why is Congress still getting paid? Who can sue, and why haven't they? Find out the answers to these questions and more! We end, as always, with a brand new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #111 regarding the delivery of water bottles. As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE! Appearances Thomas was just the guest host on Episode 179 of God Awful Movies. Give it a listen! And if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links 1. The must read Advocate Article interviewing long-standing friend of the show Alice Ashton. 2. 2016 Open Service Directive: Directive-type Memorandum (DTM) 16-005, "Military Service of Transgender Service Members" 3. 2017 Trump Memorandum rescinding the Open Service Directive 4. 2018 Mattis Policy: Military Service by Transgender Individuals 5. Mattis “Study”: Dept of Defense Report and Recommendations on Military Service by Transgender Persons 6. We last discussed Hively v. Ivy Tech (7th Cir.) and Zarda v. Altitude Express (2nd Cir.) in Episode 152 7. Glenn v. Brumby, 663 F.3d 1312 (11th Cir. 2011) 8. FLSA lawsuit regarding the Shutdown 9. Federal Judiciary extended to February 1st 10. 13 U.S.C. § 1350 - Criminal penalty Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ Don't forget the OA Facebook Community! For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed! @oawiki And email us at openarguments@gmail.com
The Trump administration is reshaping our judicial landscape. During his time in office, Trump has sent 157 judicial nominees to the Senate, which is bad news for reproductive and sexual health and rights. To help explain the sometimes daunting task of understanding the federal judiciary system under Trump, we're excited to have Kate Ryan from NARAL Pro-Choice America sit down with us! Support the show (https://www.reprosfightback.com/take-action#donate)
Fifty years since passage of the Federal Magistrates Act, the Federal Bar Association continues to work on behalf of members of the federal judiciary and of administrative law judges. Recently it released a statement on the rule of law and confidence in the Department of Justice. Federal Bar Association President Maria Vathis spoke about the association's issues for the coming year on Federal Drive with Tom Temin.
To: Audience From: LPolice Radio Date: May 10, 2018 Subject: Episode # 34 U.S Marshals Main Subject: Host Alpha Mike talks about the oldest law enforcement agency in America. With all the types of law enforcement duties the USMS is Americas reliable police agency. Created in by the Judiciary Act of 1789during the presidency of George Washingtonas the Office of the United States Marshal. The Marshals Service is the primary agency for fugitiveoperations, the protection of officers of the Federal Judiciary, the management of criminal assets, the operation of the United States Federal Witness Protection Programand the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System, and execution of federalarrest warrants. Throughout its history, the Marshals have also provided unique security and enforcement services including protecting African Americanstudents enrolling in the South during the civil rights movement, escort security for United States Air ForceLGM-30 Minutemanmissile convoys, law enforcement for the United States Antarctic Program, and protection of the Strategic National Stockpile. o9TG Training Tip: The responsibility of the agency when creating a training class for staff and command personnel sit in the class that will not enforce what is learned. The Conversation: a little less conversation and a little more action, Alpha Mike explains. What's Next: May 17, 2018: Episode #35 Police Week(signed into law by JFK May 15, 1962) http://lpoliceradio.com http://o9tg.com #news #iTunes #NowPlaying @LpoliceR LPoliceRadio o9TG Leatherneck7 #Security
Townhall Review – May 5, 2018 Michael Oren, former Israeli Ambassador to the United States, joins Hugh Hewitt to discuss how the possible Iranian duplicity during the brokering of the Iran Nuclear Deal recently uncovered by Israeli intelligence might affect that fragile deal. Michael Medved examines the historic meeting between North Korea’s Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in. Hugh Hewitt and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell look at the Federal judiciary and the pace of judicial appointments and confirmations. Michael Medved looks at the question about the accuracy of Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu’s claims regarding the Iranian nuclear agreement. Dennis Prager talks with author and commentator Jonah Goldberg about his new book, “Suicide of the West, How the Rebirth of Nationalism, Populism and Identity Politics is Destroying Democracy.” Andy Puzder, trial lawyer, restauranteur and author discusses his new book, “Capitalist Comeback,” with Larry Elder. Mike Gallagher gives his take on Trump supporter Kanye West and his willingness to attract the scorn of peers, fellow entertainers, and even California Congresswoman Maxine Waters.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
When President Donald Trump took office last year, there were over 100 federal court vacancies, roughly twice as many as when President Barack Obama faced the same situation in 2009. Since then, President Trump has been nominating judges and having nominees confirmed at “record speed,” leading many senators from both sides of the aisle—from Senator Ted Cruz to Senator Chris Coons—to assert that the most long-lasting and significant legacy to the Trump administration “will be the men and women appointed and confirmed to the federal bench.” This topic and others were part of the Federal Bar Association’s annual mid-year meeting in Washington, D.C. John Malcolm is Vice President of the Institute for Constitutional Government and Director of the Meese Center for Legal & Judicial Studies and Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, where he oversees the Heritage Foundation’s work to increase understanding of the Constitution and the rule of law. Elizabeth Wydra is President of the Constitutional Accountability Center. From 2008-2016, she served as the CAC’s Chief Counsel, representing the Center as well as constitutional scholars and historians, state and local government organizations, and groups such as the League of Women Voters and the AARP. Jeffrey Rosen is the President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Constitution Center, the only institution in America chartered by Congress “to disseminate information about the United States Constitution on a nonpartisan basis.” He is also a professor at The George Washington University Law School, and a contributing editor for The Atlantic. Questions or comments? We would love to hear from you. Contact the We the People team at podcast@constitutioncenter.org The Constitution Center is offering CLE credits for select America’s Town Hall programs! Get more information at constitutioncenter.org/CLE.
Statutory administrative law judges (ALJ) located within each agency adjudicate administrative law cases brought by agency enforcement personnel, located in the same building as the judges. These judges do not enjoy tenure during good behavior or an irreducible salary. Their rulings are often appealable only to the administrative agency itself and only later to an Article III Court, and then only on a very deferential standard of judicial review. Civil jury trial is not currently available in administrative law judicial proceedings and the rules of evidence and the burden of proof arguably operate in a manner that favors the agency. This panel will assess the constitutionality of current law and ask whether Congress ought to change the law and, if so, how. Should ALJs have life tenure? Should they be housed separately from their agency?Prof. Steven G. Calabresi, Clayton J. and Henry R. Barber Professor of Law, Northwestern Pritzker School of LawProf. Linda D. Jellum, Ellison C. Palmer Professor of Tax Law, Mercer University School of LawProf. Jennifer L. Mascott, Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityProf. Gillian Metzger, Stanley H. Fuld Professor of Law, Columbia Law SchoolModerator: Hon. Edith Jones, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Statutory administrative law judges (ALJ) located within each agency adjudicate administrative law cases brought by agency enforcement personnel, located in the same building as the judges. These judges do not enjoy tenure during good behavior or an irreducible salary. Their rulings are often appealable only to the administrative agency itself and only later to an Article III Court, and then only on a very deferential standard of judicial review. Civil jury trial is not currently available in administrative law judicial proceedings and the rules of evidence and the burden of proof arguably operate in a manner that favors the agency. This panel will assess the constitutionality of current law and ask whether Congress ought to change the law and, if so, how. Should ALJs have life tenure? Should they be housed separately from their agency?Prof. Steven G. Calabresi, Clayton J. and Henry R. Barber Professor of Law, Northwestern Pritzker School of LawProf. Linda D. Jellum, Ellison C. Palmer Professor of Tax Law, Mercer University School of LawProf. Jennifer L. Mascott, Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityProf. Gillian Metzger, Stanley H. Fuld Professor of Law, Columbia Law SchoolModerator: Hon. Edith Jones, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
The US Supreme Court decided the Presidential election in the year 2000. The majority over-ruled the courts of Florida despite promises to uphold states rights. That was the first big story for this program. Today we look at what's happened since.
Just Joe and Christian, coming to you after a terrible week. We talk guns, ex-Judge Posner's book and humility, the right rules for disabled stoplights, the closing of a coffeehouse, and airplane seat reclining behavior. This show’s links: Oral Argument 101: Tug of War (http://oralargument.org/101) Richard Posner, Reforming the Federal Judiciary (https://www.amazon.com/Reforming-Federal-Judiciary-Televising-Arguments/dp/1976014794) Steven Lubet, Richard Posner, Unedited (Part One) (http://www.thefacultylounge.org/2017/10/richard-posner-unedited.html) Zoran Tasic, Reforming Richard Posner (https://medium.com/@ztasic/reforming-richard-posner-a25ce8fddece) Oral Argument 32: Go Figure (http://oralargument.org/32) (on Judge Posner's gay marriage opinion in Baskin) and Oral Argument 131: Because of Sex (http://oralargument.org/131) (featuring discussion with Anthony Kreis about Judge Posner's Hively opinion) WINIR (http://winir.org) How do you pronounce Utrecht? (https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-pronounce-Utrecht) The Perfect Cappuccino (http://cappuccinomovie.com) Two Story's Last Day in Five Points (http://www.redandblack.com/multimedia/photos-two-story-s-last-day-in-five-points/collection_5a4052c2-a21f-11e7-bd12-5391199be363.html) (including a photo of Christian with the shop's last cap) Christian Turner, The Cost of Foregone Biergartens (https://www.hydratext.com/blog/2013/3/8/the-cost-of-foregone-biergartens.html) Oral Argument 31: Knee Defender (http://oralargument.org/31) (and see episode 32, above, for more knee defender discussion) Christopher Buccafusco and Christopher Jon Sprigman, How to Resolve Fights over Reclining Airplane Seats: Use Behavioral Economics (http://evonomics.com/resolve-fights-reclining-airplane-seats-use-behavioral-economics/)
The US Supreme Court hangs in the balance when it comes to some of the most important areas of the law, with a couple of more vacancies possible, and there are an unprecedented number of vacancies anticipated on the Federal appeals courts. Leonard Leo - Executive Vice President of the Federalist Society - describes how this state of affairs presents a unique opportunity to transform the courts so as to engender a greater respect for limited, constitutional government. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel spills his heart out on the state of the courts, what conservatives are looking for, and why Gorsuch, although a solid nominee, still doesn’t inspire full confidence that he is the best we could have done, given GOP control of the Senate. Then again, with a Senate full of RINOs, who could have scuttled the nomination of someone in the mold of Clarence Thomas, could you really blame Trump? Moreover, the entire process demonstrate why we will never really fix the courts simply by “picking better judges.” “The capacity of a good judge to do good is nowhere near the capacity of a bad judge to harm our constitution, society, sovereignty, and security. Even if we had a Clarence Thomas for every Republican SCOTUS pick and for every lower court pick, an impossibility (they don’t exist), we could never combat the malfeasance of the left. The equivalent on the right of what the left does to advance their malevolent agenda through the courts would be to force people to own guns and to throw homosexuals and transgenders in jail. This is one of the many reasons why we will not fix the judiciary by picking “good judges” alone; we need wholesale judicial reform. Finally, Daniel praises Trump for staying the course but expresses concern about his enthusiastic embrace of Obama’s discriminatory policy of cutting off government contracts with businesses that don’t promote the transgender agenda. The entire reason why we want to win back the courts is so they don’t promote social transformation without representation. Yet, Trump is now codifying it on his own. While we will continue to defend his courage on immigration, we must demand that social conservatives and even social libertarians are not sidelined by the Marxist cultural warriors. Key Quotes: “What it evidences is the deep and perhaps irremediable corruption of our legal culture’s conception of constitutional interpretation.” ~ Justice Alito “On the evidence, we must conclude, I think, that this tendency of courts, including the Supreme Court, is the inevitable result of our written Constitution and the power of judicial review. Even in the depths of the Warren Court era some of us thought that the Court’s performance, though profoundly illegitimate, could be brought within the range of the minimally acceptable by logical persuasion or the appointment of more responsible judges, or both. We now know that was an illusion. A Court majority is impervious to arguments about its proper behavior. It seems safe to say that, as our institutional arrangements now stand, the Court can never be made a legitimate element of a basically democratic polity.” “Republican Presidents have used the nomination process in an effort to change the direction of the Court with almost zero results on the major issues. After twelve years of Presidents Reagan and Bush, each of whom made a determined effort to appoint Justices who would abide by the Constitution as originally understood, we seem farther than ever from a restrained Court.” ~Robert Bork Show links: Rep. Ron Desantis’s excellent balanced statement on Gorsuch 7 reasons Neil Gorsuch’s nomination is only the beginning of taking back the judiciary 12 reasons why Federal Judiciary is irremediably broken What conservatives want and need in a Supreme Court Justice Fake judges violate 200 Years of Case law by staying Trump’s sovereignty order Incontrovertible proof that a nation has the right to exclude or deport any foreign national Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
What impact could the new Trump administration have on the federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court? Having previously served with the Office of the Solicitor General and as Special Assistant and Associate Counsel to President Obama, respectively, Doug Hallward-Driemeier and Justin Florence from Ropes & Gray's business and securities litigation practice offer their perspectives on what might lie ahead under the new administration.
The Supreme Court is helps shape civil rights in the United States, but it is less recognized for its role in intensifying economic inequality. Professor Stephen Gottlieb details cases in the high court that have promoted these inequalities. For More on this Topic: Read two-page brief, How the Roberts Court Undermines U.S. Democracy, or his book, Unfit for Democracy: The Roberts Court and the Breakdown of American Politics. Check out his blog or commentary on WAMC Northeast Public Radio. Further Reading: The Changing Relationship of Congress and the Federal Judiciary, Bruce Peabody, Fairleigh Dickinson University County Right-to-Work Laws as the Latest Tactic to Undercut American Labor Unions, Raymond Hogler, Colorado State University
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
