Podcasts about Federal public defender

Marilyn Mosby, Baltimore's former top prosecutor, made headlines for her bold actions during her tenure. She fearlessly took on the Baltimore police, charging those involved in Freddie Gray's death, and advocated controversial positions, including refusing to prosecute low-level drug offenders. However, her own legal journey took an unexpected turn. Accused of federal fraud violations, she faced trial and ultimately received a non-custodial sentence. Was this an outlier? Did she receive special treatment? Join Doug Passon and Mark Allenbaugh as we delve into these questions and more on this week's episode of Set for Sentencing!   IN THIS EPISODE:   The backstory of the Marilyn Mosby Prosecution; Digging into the sentencing data and the facts to determine whether her non-custodial sentence was warranted; Critique of the sentencing memoranda (spoiler alert, the defense memo was F'ing fantastic); In praise of the Federal Public Defender; Gender disparity at sentencing; Walking the tightrope of using your kids as mitigation; Why lawyers should be less scared about going to trial; Remember that the guidelines actually suggest NON-CUSTODIAL sentences for ALL first time offenders!; Arguing collateral consequences at sentencing; Navigating the pitfalls of not accepting responsibility after trial.   LINKS:   "The 3Rs of Sentencing Narrative":  In this I make a few references to something I call “relativity” and “redemption” stories, which are 2 of the “3Rs” of sentencing. If you'd like to dig into the full 3Rs, visit the shownotes on the website and you'll find a link to an article I wrote on the subject for the Champion. www.setforsentencing.com/mosby  

This podcast delves into the alarming trend of medicating children for behavioral issues and mental health concerns. Host Gris Alves shares her extensive experience working with children and adults over the past 30 years, including her time with the Federal Public Defender's Office. Gris examines the deeper roots of behavioral issues, such as unprocessed emotions, intergenerational trauma, and attachment problems. She argues that medications often serve as a temporary fix, masking deeper issues that require a more holistic approach. Through personal anecdotes and professional insights, Gris advocates for alternative methods like therapy, family support, and somatic practices. She emphasizes the importance of understanding and addressing the underlying causes of distress rather than relying solely on medication. Gris also discusses the societal and cultural factors contributing to the rise in child medication, urging parents and caregivers to look inward and seek more meaningful solutions. She concludes by offering resources and support for those looking to explore alternative approaches to healing and well-being. Join Gris Alves in this eye-opening episode of "Tales of Recovery" as she challenges conventional wisdom and encourages a more compassionate, informed approach to child mental health.

It shocked the nation when David DePape, driven by insane QAnon conspiracy theories, violently attacked Paul Pelosi, husband of former Speaker Nancy Pelosi.   A federal judge recently sentenced DePape to 30 years in prison.  With that de facto life sentence looming, we uncover a legal twist: the judge's oversight during sentencing denied him the chance to speak in his own defense.  Now, a follow-up hearing is in the offing, leaving us wondering—will DePape break his silence, and will the sentence change? More importantly, at sentencing his lawyer reveals that DePape has documented mental health disorders, including Autism Spectrum Disorder.  Yes, we're going there -- again. In this episode, we explore the intersection of radicalization and vulnerability, particularly online, among individuals with ASD.  Could this condition render them more susceptible to extremist ideologies?   #DePapeCase #SetForSentencing #Radicalization #MentalHealth #Autism   LINKS:   Original DePape Podcast:  https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/david-depape-pelosi-attacker-guidelines-mitigation-breakdown/   Alan Ellis - Articles about What Judges Look For At Sentencing: https://alanellis.com/law360-series-sentencing-representation/   For a copy of Judge Bennett's Article, go to shownotes at the Set for Sentencing website: https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/depape-pelosi-at…cing-post-mortem/

County prosecuting attorneys aren't just responsible for prosecuting criminals--they lead an office of attorneys and professionals who decide what crimes get charged, indicted, and prosecuted. Their vision and leadership is a critical piece in how justice is defined for the communities they serve.rnrnTwo candidates are running in the March 19th Democratic primary. Because of the political demographics of Cuyahoga County, the winner of the Democratic primary has a very good chance of winning the general election. Matthew Ahn is a professor at Cleveland State University College of Law. He has worked in the Federal Public Defender's office and clerked for judges at the federal level, as well.rnrnIncumbent Michael O'Malley is in his second term as County Prosecutor.rnrnThe debate is moderated by Nick Castele, Government Reporter, Signal Cleveland.

lovethylawyer.comA transcript of this podcast is available at lovethylawyer.com.Bilingual forensic linguist & Expert Witness spanish interpreting, translation and transcription Superior Court of California, County of Alameda 2001- present Certified Court Interpreter, Spanish Language, Criminal, Civil, Family & Juvenile  Freelance Transcription, Translation & Interpreting 1998 – present Clients include: United States District Court, Federal Public Defender, Alameda County Public Defender, Alameda County Criminal Court Appointed Attorneys Panel, Yolo County District Attorney, University of California, San Francisco  Accent on Languages 1998 - 2001 Wire intercept monitoring and tape & video transcription & translation. Clients included DEA, FBI, US Customs and California Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement  expert witness testimony·       Yolo County District Attorney – 2022  Selected essay & Fiction publications·       Blood in the Grove, The Plentitudes, Winter 2022 ·       Priest Killer, Wilderness House Literary Review, Summer 2022 ·       Savior, The Writing Disorder, Fall 2020  translation publications   Please subscribe and listen. Then tell us who you want to hear and what areas of interest you'd like us to cover.  Louis Goodman www.louisgoodman.comhttps://www.lovethylawyer.com/510.582.9090Music: Joel Katz, Seaside Recording, MauiTech: Bryan Matheson, Skyline Studios, OaklandAudiograms: Paul Roberts louis@lovethylawyer.com

Rebecca Hudsmith , a Louisiana Federal Public Defender, shares a trying moment of having a client on death row, as well as a monumental moment of arguing a case in the Supreme Court, all in pursuit of upholding a system of justice that works for us all.

Stare Decisis, a Latin term meaning “let it stand,” is a key element of how American law is interpreted, applied, and adjudicated. When applied, it leads courts to stand by decided cases, to uphold precedents, and/or to maintain former adjudications. How exactly that principle should be applied, however, is a topic of some debate. In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court held that a proper application of stare decisis required an assessment of the strength of the grounds on which the prior precedent was based. That articulation has led some to question: what are the implications of applying that conception of stare decisis to the Court’s constitutional criminal jurisprudence under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments? What might be its effect on those rights and remedies?Featuring:Hon. John F. Bash, III, Partner, Quinn EmanuelMr. Michael Caruso, Federal Public Defender, Southern District of FloridaProf. Meghan J. Ryan, Co-Director, Tsai Center for Law, Science and Innovation, Altshuler Distinguished Teaching Professor, and Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of LawProf. John Stinneford, Edward Rood Eminent Scholar Chair, Professor of Law, & Senior Fellow, Hamilton Center for Classical and Civic Education, Levin College of Law, University of FloridaModerator: Hon. Amul Thapar, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth CircuitOverflow: Chinese Room

The Zero Point Offender and Status Point modifications to the Sentencing Guidelines go into effect on November 1.  They are RETROACTIVE.  But not everyone knows whether they may benefit from the changes or how to go about getting that benefit.  Therefore, helping us get Set for Sentencing, Mark Allenbaugh, and Keith Hilzendeger to tell us everything you everything you need to know.  This episode is for those who have resources to engage private counsel to fight this fight, or for those who may need help from the Federal Public Defender.  Either way, change is coming, and we must be ready.   IN THIS EPISODE: PART ONE:  MARK ALLENBAUGH Overview of the “ZIPPO”, or ZERO POINT OFFENDER guideline amendment; Overview of the “status points” adjustment changes; Retroactivity and the February 1, 2024 target date; DO NOT WAIT until 11/1 to ask for these 2 levels off or, consider asking for a continuance until the amendment goes into effect! Using compassionate release motions to effectuate the change on the grounds that if you are immediately eligible for release, you shouldn't have to wait until February 1, 2024; Covid is still a thing, and why it matters to Zippo motions; What to do if your sentencing is set before the changes take effect (11/1/23).   PART TWO:  KEITH HILZENDEGER, ASST. FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER Advice for clients who cannot afford to hire counsel to deal with Zippo/Status Point changes.   LINKS:    For an overview of the Zero Point Offender (ZIPPO) amendment, check out episode, ___ where we go into all the basics. https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/zippo/      

Dean Risa Goluboff and Juval Scott, federal public defender for the Western District of Virginia, discuss the value of public service and share their experiences at the 1L Public Service Kickoff. Noa Jett '25, membership co-chair for the Public Interest Law Association, introduced Scott. (University of Virginia School of Law, Aug. 29, 2023)

Since former President Donald Trump was indicted for retaining sensitive government documents at Mar-a-Lago, the Espionage Act has become a household term. But only a small number of lawyers have seen an Espionage Act trial from the inside. Just Security has assembled an all-star roundtable of experienced federal prosecutors and defense attorneys who have handled high-profile Espionage Act cases. Joining the show to share their insights, experience, and views on Trump's Espionage Act charges are David Aaron, Andrew Weissmann, and Jim Wyda. David and Jim have previously faced off from opposite sides of an Espionage Act prosecution, but they've come together for this special discussion. Before he joined private practice, David was a prosecutor at the Justice Department's National Security Division. Andrew has served in many senior Justice Department roles, including on the leadership team for Special Counsel Robert Mueller and as the General Counsel of the FBI. Jim is the Federal Public Defender for the District of Maryland. This episode is hosted by Paras Shah, with co-production and editing by Tiffany Chang, Michelle Eigenheer, and Allison Mollenkamp. Show Notes:  David Aaron (@davidcaaron)Andrew Weissmann (@AWeissmann_) James WydaParas Shah (@pshah518) Just Security's Espionage Act coverageJust Security's classified information coverageJust Security's coverage of Special Counsel Jack Smith Just Security's Trump Classified Docs ClearinghouseBrian D. Greer (@secretsandlaws) and Wendy Leben's Just Security Podcast episode on the presidential classification and declassification process Music: “The Parade” by “Hey Pluto!” from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/hey-pluto/the-parade (License code: 36B6ODD7Y6ODZ3BX)Music: “Covert Affair” by Kevin MacLeod from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/kevin-macleod/covert-affair (License code: Z20AS7IAZ04VZZBR)

Dan Wannamaker was born in Alabama and attended the University of Texas and South Texas College of Law. He started his career clerking for the Criminal Court of Appeals and has spent nearly four decades representing the accused as both a Federal Public Defender in Texas and Alabama and as a private attorney. He has two rare distinctions: (1) being board certified in criminal law and crinimal appellate law and (2) obtaining a pardon from President Obama on behalf of one of his clients. Dan and his wife live in Austin, Texas.

In this episode, we discussed a recent case U.S. v. Seekins, in which the federal public defender attempted to push the Fifth Circuit to revisit the scope of interstate commerce in the criminal justice context. By a close vote (7-9), the Fifth Circuit refused to open this door. However, Justice Ho, in his dissenting opinion, laid out a blueprint for the defendant to get the the Supreme Court's attention. Will this case be the case for the conservative Supreme Court to cut back on the scope of interstate commerce? Joel Page, the federal defender who prepared and argued this case, offered his thoughts in this episode. Host: Leo Yu (SMU Law)Guest: Joel Page (Appellate Chief of the Federal Public Defender's Office (NDTX))

Public policy influences all aspects of our lives, yet few people give much thought to how policy is made, let alone experience the policymaking process firsthand. A new one-year program — and the first of its kind in the nation — the Policy Advocacy Clinic at the School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA) educates students on the policymaking process and incorporates a clinical program where students work with lawmakers or advocates to advance a public policy issue. During this inaugural year, students will engage in policy advocacy before the United Nations, Congress, and the New Jersey State Legislature.On this episode of the Dean's Dialogue, Udi Ofer, founder of the Policy Advocacy Clinic, and Princeton senior Ella Gantman ‘23, who is the senior commissioner for the clinic, join Dean Amaney Jamal to discuss the different projects at the international, federal, and state level that students can expect to work on at the Policy Advocacy Clinic during the yearlong program. Ofer is the James L. Weinberg Visiting Professor and Lecturer at SPIA and most recently served as both deputy national political director of the ACLU, as well as founding director of ACLU's Justice Division. While at the ACLU, he oversaw the passage of hundreds of criminal justice reform laws and executive actions, including by the White House. He is perhaps best known for launching the ACLU's first-ever effort to engage in candidate races through a nonpartisan lens. Ofer has testified before many legislatures, including the United States Senate, and is frequently cited as an expert on civil rights and criminal justice matters.Gantman is majoring in the School of Public and International Affairs and pursuing a certificate in Spanish. In the past, she has interned at the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the District of Columbia, where she worked directly with indigent clients and trial attorneys to prepare their legal defenses. This past summer, she worked in the Department of Justice, Office of Civil Rights, Voting Rights Section. On campus, Gantman is a goalkeeper on the varsity women's soccer team, a student supervisor at Tiger Call at Princeton's Annual Giving office, and a fellow at the Princeton Writing Program.

From abortion to police brutality and the death penalty, Black Americans suffer disproportionate amounts of state-sanctioned lethal violence. This roundtable discussion from our 2022 Rehumanize Conference brings together Black activists who hold a Consistent Life Ethic to discuss the critical importance of challenging racial injustice as we advocate for human rights for all human beings.   Watch the video version of this session on our Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j91o_IL63Kw   Transcript: Herb Geraghty: So this session is titled Black Lives Matter from Conception to Natural Death. I am so grateful to be joined by these three individuals. I'm going to just briefly introduce each of our participants and then hand the conversation over to them. First, Jack Champagne is a graduate of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. He currently works as an educator in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He formerly worked for the Capital Habeas Unit of the Federal Public Defender's Office, the Innocence Project, the Project, and the Southern Poverty Law Center. He is also a staff writer for Rehumanize International. Cherilyn Holloway is the founder of Pro Black Pro-Life. She specializes in initiating tough conversations surrounding racial equity, including in the womb. She travels the country, educating her community about the negative messaging they receive regarding motherhood and the sanctity of life. Finally, Gloria Purvis is an author, commentator, and the host and executive producer of the Gloria Pur podcast. Through her media presence, she has been a strong Catholic voice for life issues, religious liberty, and racial justice. She has appeared in numerous media outlets, including The New York Times, the Washington Post, PBS News Hour, npr, Newsweek Live and she hosted Morning Glory, an international radio show. She recently debuted a video series entitled Racism, Human Dignity, and the Catholic Church through the Word on Fire. I. Again, I am so, so grateful for each of our participants. With that said, I am going to get out of here and give them the opportunity to discuss their work and tell us what Black Lives matter from conception to natural death means to you. Thank you all. Thank you.  Jack Champagne: Thank you, Herb.  Gloria Purvis: Jack, why don't you start us off.  Jack Champagne: Oh man, . I was, I'm, I'm a,  Cherilyn Holloway: I was gonna vote for Jack.  Yes. .  Jack Champagne: Ah, alright then. So yeah, I was, I was, I, I've spent most of my life kind of with the sort of mainstream understanding of, uh, of life issues, of kind of being, you know, kind of, not super, uh, decided on the issue. It was actually working at the capital habeas unit that I actually, developed a, I mean, you try working with condemned prisoners and not develop a healthy respect for human life. It's, you know, dealing with, you know, prisoners who do not have living victims and who are themselves usually scheduled to die at the hands of the state. Having to advocate for these people and, you know, if you don't have an opinion on the death penalty going in, you will definitely have one coming out. And, I mean, it, it's a, it's a powerful experience, you know, just looking at the conditions they live in, the legal issues, that, uh, that surround capital punishment, and, uh, you know, just working under, Marshall Diane, who I think is still working there, who was a, who was a very, you know, loud voice against the death penalty. Just kind of, just kind of, you know, uh, formed my thinking on that. And of course it's, you know, Uh, very short distance from there to, you know, you know, concern about the lives of the disabled and the unborn. And you know, that, that, that of course interacts with my, my perception of race, both as, uh, both as a black man and as somebody who was clientele was almost always black men as well. So, you know, that's, that's. Uh, you know, that's, that's, I I have a very tangible, you know, grasp on what that looks like for me. I don't know about the, I don't know about you, uh, you all, but that's kind of where I come from with it.  Gloria Purvis: Uh, you know, I, I think, I'm a child of south. I mean, I grew up in Charleston, South Carolina. Which is where the Civil War started. Long history of bad race relations, . Still, we have people having a love affair with the lost cause mythology that the South had race relations, uh, correct by subjugating black people and that we were happier with the way that it was and that they had it right in terms of human relations between men and women. Uh, right in terms of the race question, but it wasn't. And, this — growing up in that environment, but at the same time, growing up in a very strong black community, in that environment, in a strong black community of people who, despite all the obstacles were achievers, were people who created things within the black community. And so while I grew up down there, I also had an environment where black excellence was normal, was normative. And, encountering people there that thought that, you know, I shouldn't think so highly and be so sure of myself. And that was their problem, not mine, but at the same time also seeing the uneven application of law enforcement, the uneven application of good healthcare. You know what I mean? Things like that, that you just as a black person moving through the world is paying attention. You see these things. And then, as a person of faith, also as a person that, believed in the science, you know, and I studied biology, uh, I understood that the human person. It, you know, is a human person, is a human life, a member of the human family from that moment of conception. And it just made sense to me, that we'd wanna protect and defend that life from the moment of conception all the way through natural death. And it was inconsistent to me to, in, on the one hand, say, we wanna defend lives in this instance, and yet in another instance, get rid of that life it in as a means of empowering others. So it just seemed illogical to me, some positions that I've seen in different justice movements. So it made me question, well, what is justice really? And as a, a person of faith and studying with the Catholic church understands justice, being justice means every human person — life being, uh, gets what they, you know, they merit something their life merits, protection, nurturing, flourishing. And that's what each of us is entitled to. Whether we're, whether we're the condemned on death row, whether we're in the womb, whether we're on our deathbed as a sick person, our lives of worthy of protection. And, and, and now even I think people are struggling with the notion that the death penalty should be no more. You know, we, we have this idea that really is really vengeance if you ask me. It's not justice. This idea that, you know, people need to get what's coming to 'em in a negative way without ever looking, also, at the way racism influences how the death penalty, who gets the death penalty. How, someone's wealth or lack thereof, influences who gets the death penalty, influences who even gets arrested and prosecuted. So, uh, there's so much uneven in our legal system. I've learned to call it the legal system instead of the justice system. There's so much uneven in our legal system that, it, it, it really, in terms of fairness, makes no sense to have the death penalty. Not to mention that each and every person, no matter what they've done, has made the image and likeness of God and is worthy of dignity and respect. And we as believers, I'm speaking as myself, are called to respond differently to persons who have harmed the community. We want restorative justice, not, not vengeance. And I think that's a difficult thing for people, but we can get into that and, and all, uh, later, but just as a high level, that has influenced, you know, my views and understanding of the human person and, and the dignity and why their lives need to be respected and protected. Cherilyn Holloway: Yeah, that's, both of those are like, spot on. So I, got into this. I was a community outreach director for a pregnancy center. I had made two previous abortion choices and I came outta those really feeling duped. Like I wasn't given all my options. And had I been given all my options, I would've made different choices. And I didn't want another woman to have to go through that. I had no idea that there was like a pro-life, pro choice. I had no clue. I was completely ignorant. And even when I joined the first pregnancy center, it wasn't something that they talked about. Nobody ever talked about Roe versus Wade. Nobody ever talked about the March for Life. It was just kind of like hand to the plow. We're just helping women. And it wasn't until I moved back to Ohio. I'm originally from Oberlin, Ohio, where the college is, and I grew up just with this, bubble. And in the bubble we were all like working towards justice. And so , you know, racial justice, food equity, everything you could think of, you know, Oberlin College was a first college to openly accept gay and lesbian couples. It was before like, I don't know, there's a session earlier where someone was saying that like being trans really was, wasn't a big deal in the 2000s and now it's a big deal. Like that is, that was my world and. So I grew up in a very different community that was surrounded by all white rural communities that were extremely racist. And so it wasn't that we were going out somewhere far to do work. We were, had work to do right where we were in our county. And so I moved back to Oberlin. and, uh, became the executive director of my local pregnancy center. And that's where I learned about this pro-life, pro-choice, uh, overturning Roe versus Wade. But the biggest thing I learned about was the disparities of abortion in the black community. And I couldn't wrap — I'm very li I'm not very sensational. Like I'm not, nobody would describe me as sensitive. Nobody would describe me as overly emotional. I'm very logical, data driven, straight to the point. And to me it just, I couldn't figure out why the, why everyone didn't know this. Like why isn't this obvious to everyone else? Like, I know I'm not like crazy, but this is obvious. And so when I began to go to conferences and look around and see, you know, five to 10 people that look like me and wonder, and everyone's stopping me saying, Why isn't the black community enraged about the abortion numbers? And I'm like, Have you, I don't know. Like I'm trying to figure it out myself and like, Well, what can we do? And so then I started pushing back and asking, Well, what do you do for their other circumstances? Like what do you do to help them with the children that they already have? Like, what are you doing to help them find, you know, equitable jobs? Like how are you helping them in other ways? Like, what else are you doing aside from, you know, telling them that we're having too many abortions? and I've — I kept being met with the same response, which was, Oh, well we wanna keep to the main thing. The main thing. It doesn't really matter if the baby doesn't make it out the womb, but it does matter because unless you are pregnant, you're not really thinking about abortion. So it absolutely does matter. If we're not actually doing something in the community to help the lives that are earth side, then it does matter. And so there just became, Pretty obvious tension between me and, uh, some of my, uh, pro-life comrades , because I wasn't going to be the person who, who just stood and talked about, you know, racism and the abortion issue without tying everything else together. And that's how I began to reach my community, inadvertently just without knowing, just randomly talking to people at the barbershop in the grocery store and , uh, wherever I could, because I talked to people everywhere. Um right. And that led me to start Pro-Black Pro-life just to be able to have a place. Where people who thought like me, because I just like, I can't be the only one gonna keep me to have this place. And then I built it. People came . That was kind of my, uh, way into really thinking about how Black lives matter from womb to tomb and how to be able to communicate that to the greater black community.  Gloria Purvis: You, you know, Cherilyn. That question that you know, well, why aren't black people more outraged about abortion? I would hear a, a flavor of that just about everywhere I went. But it was asked in a way, like in some cases like, is your community stupid? You know? Right. It's so condescending. And so when I felt like it, 'cause a lot of times I was like, remain in your ignorance because I don't have the wherewithal right now emotionally to deal with this. But in, in cases where I felt that it was worth having the conversation, I help people understand that there's a difference between abortion and the kinds of racialized, other racialized violence that we experience. I said, So for example, abortion. An abortion is something somebody has to go out and get. I said, me walking through the street and getting cold jacked by the police, I have to do nothing except be me and move through the space. So in terms of, uh, actual threats, nobody's jumping out and putting an abortion on you per se, you know what I mean? Right. So in terms of actual threats, what I'm thinking about as I'm leaving out of the safety of my home are those things that I cannot control. So I cannot control being followed in the department store and having security called on me. I cannot control when the doctor is ignoring me. When I say I'm, I'm hurting, you know, I need help with this pain. I cannot control when, I come in for a job interview and although I'm qualified and my name hints my ethnicity, that I'm not given the job. But I can control whether or not, at least in some sense, of going to choose abortion. So the threats are perceived differently. You know, the existential threats are perceived differently. Even though our community is heavily targeted, uh, for abortion and heavily marketed to, for abortion and all that kind of stuff, it's just perceived as a different kind of threat. So while it's not that we're not outraged, it's just that we got a lot of other things we got like going on. We got a lot already going on. So it's not that we don't care, it's not that it's, it's frankly that the people asking question are so far removed and so uninvested in the black experience that they can't fathom that we move through the world differently than they do. Jack Champagne: Mm-hmm. . Yeah, I think, I think, I think Cherilyn gets at something. When she talks about how isolating it is to sort of be in the black community, but also be pro-life because you're kind of, you know, the, there's sort of some kind of, there's kind of a regulatory capture in black communities in which the most politically active of us also feel the need to go in, all in on being pro-abortion, because that's where the political allies are. And then on the flip side, you have, you know, pro-life movement, which is not, uh, not always responsive to black voices. And black voices are not always present, you know, and I had occasion to think about this, you know, when, uh, Kamala Harris, you know, had brought, brought those leaders together to talk about, you know, reproductive justice and how effectively they were able to, to, do the messaging on that as sort of a civil rights. Uh, sort of or group, you know, you had buy in from Al Sharpton, from Mark Morial of the Urban League, from the NAACP, from all of these groups, these big names, and it was, it was, and you know, it's stunning how easy it was and how effectively they had kind of, you know, seized on this black organizing tradition and had kind of made it into — you know, this is the natural continuity of, you know, this black organizing tradition and kind of how uncritically, you know, is kind of accepted in these communities. So, you know, that isolation, it does have real political results and, you know, we're seeing it become, you know, increasingly stark and, you know, sort of a post Dobbs reality where, you know, these sharp political lines are being drawn. Cherilyn Holloway: Yeah. And I think that, I mean, I, I feel like. We'd be remiss if we didn't address the fact that the idea of a black woman, woman, having the right to have an abortion really becomes a rights issue. It's a control issue of a right that she did not used to have. Mm-hmm. . And so we can't ignore that. Right? We can't ignore that. There was a time when black women were not in control of their bodies and were not in control of what, you know, when they had babies and how many they had, and their children were sold, you know, into, in being enslaved. We cannot ignore that. And so this, this idea, you know, overturning Roe and the Dobbs decision takes us back to to, you know, black women not being able to control their bodies is, is a very real fear for some black women. But, but on the flip side of that, on the flip side of that, there's a huge difference between women's rights and reproductive justice, right? And so what ends up happening is that the Women's Rights Movement does what the Women's Rights Movement does, right? It isolates black women. Because what women's rights are fighting for are very different than what black women are fighting for with reproductive justice, right? Black women are fighting for this idea, not just to have an abortion. The abortions like the caveat, like it's stuck on the end and doesn't actually make sense because all the other rights have to do with, maternal mortality, infant mortality, being able to take care of their children. Having healthy relationships, having healthy schools, healthy childcare, like all of those things are in the reproductive justice, like being able to have a good birth experience — and then abortion is like tacked on that, and it almost doesn't make any sense. Where, in the women's rights movement, it's solely about abortion. That's it. and what black women are saying, like our issues are more complex. And I feel like even on the pro-life side, that's what we're saying, right? We're saying, yes, we get it. We're pro-life, but our issues are more complex. If we cannot figure out why women are jumping in and go upstream and stop that, we're just gonna be steady pulling 'em off the river. And there is no, there is no relief when we're consistently pulling them out the river. We're not actually solving the problem. And for 50 years we have not actively solved this problem . And so now everyone's like, Oh, well, you know, what does post, you know, Dobbs look like? Well, it looks like what it should have looked like in 1973. Like, we should have been working to solve some of these systemic issues that Gloria just named in order to help women. If 70% of women, black women, are having abortions for financial reasons, and we're talking that they only need $20,000 more to, to make a choice, to say, to keep their baby. And I say only because I know that there are people who are donating $20,000 to pregnancy centers. Which they need to do. Don't stop doing that. But it's — there is no lack of funds in the pro-life movement.  Gloria Purvis: Okay. So couple things. I do think it's a temptation — and I think it's not, I think it's on purpose that, around abortion, it's always marketed to black women as if you're losing something. Oh, these rich white women can do it, and if you can't do it, therefore it's not equal. And I think that's the biggest bunch of hokey. Because frankly, the thing that we want that, that that white women take for granted, isn't abortion. We want safe and affordable housing, clean water, jobs for our spouses, a good education for our children. And I think it is an absolute insult that the thing that they're like, well, you can have this thing though. You can have abortion, and you should really be rallying for abortion because that makes you equal to these wealthy white women. I'm like, no it doesn't. All it does is remove our children from these substandard conditions, while we still remain in those substandard conditions. Let's remove the substandard conditions from our community. That is what we need to be focusing on. If you want equality for black women, for black men, for black families, for black children. And so it has just been. Just, I, I, it has just been shocking to me how much, how much energy and effort is put into abortion. I mean, I just saw a member of the Divine Nine say something positive about abortion. Kamala Harrison, I are both members of Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority. I'm hoping the sorority doesn't say anything along those lines, but they probably will, if they haven't already. So it is absolutely, like you say, Jack, going to all these large black organizations and getting their buy-in and getting them to send a message out to their membership. And I think we need to start speaking, you know, among our friends, among our families. So whoever wants to listen in our churches, our parishes, our sororities, fraternities, our fraternal groups, whatever, to challenge, you know, this notion that abortion is a good thing for the black community. I think we also need to understand the idea of rights. Rights cannot go contrary to the nature of a thing. And so for people to, at at least in my opinion, call abortion a right. I'm like, but that goes exactly against the nature of what it is to be female, to be able to conceive and bring life forward. So to me, to say that it's a right to terminate that pregnancy — as if our biology is some inherent injustice against being female. To me, it's very anti-woman. And it never allows us to have these broader conversations about what the economy, what our culture, what society needs to look like, to be more inclusive of women as we are. I mean, if, if the answer for every difficulty that we experience is, you know, get that abortion, that's gonna liberate you, that's gonna free you, you can go and achieve, you can make more money. Then we never really talk about the structures or the systems that hold us back from achieving and making money. And then one last thing I wanna say: when they do studies on who wants an abortion, it's typically those women or families making a combined income of more than a hundred thousand dollars a year. Those making less — like, let's say 40,000 or less — by and large want to keep their children. So abortion is even being marketed to the very communities, poor black women, as liberating with those poor black women do not want abortion. And then one lesson, I will say this: bell hooks, who died recently, talked about in the feminist movement, how black women's aims were very different from white women. They weren't pushing for abortion. But because white women carried the day, abortion became central to being feminist, to being liberated, but that is not at all what black women wanted. So yeah, I think we need to recapture what it means to, as black women, what, what, uh, equality and liberty really means. And I don't think, having the ability to end the lives of our children in the womb is the answer. Jack Champagne: We popped over to the Q and A real quick. There are two kind of related questions. I wanted to see what y'all thought about — uh, first one's anonymous. Uh, it says, As advocates for racial justice and people who have interacted with the pro-life movement, which is often tied to conservative circles, what are some strategies you might suggest for how we can push back against the racism that has grown so loud in the G O P and Trump movements. And then second one, uh, this is, uh, Miles Bedlan, I think. How can we make the pro-life movement appeal more to black Americans? I've noticed that the pro-life movement is overwhelmingly white.  Cherilyn Holloway: I'll do, I'll do the second question. Yeah.  Gloria Purvis: You know, sometimes I'm, sometimes I'm like, I really think some that's gonna be something that, white pro-lifers need to take up. I really am not interested in, to tell you the truth, I'm really not interested with the limited energy I have and having to fight the obvious racism. Right? And quite frankly, the people who are prone to those kinds of behaviors or coded, coded language, probably can't hear me when I talk to them about why something is racist or inappropriate. But they probably could hear, uh, their fellow white pro-lifers explaining or calling out why something is racist or dehumanizing to black people. And so I'm gonna really invite all my white pro-lifers to, to take up that, to take on that calling something out directly and helping people recognize that something's racist. Because I'm finding that unless the slur, a racial slur is used, people cannot recognize that something is racist. And I'm like, you know, there's a lot of coded language. There's a lot of — people know not to just come out with racial slurs, but they still can be very racist in their language and the way in which they address certain things. So, white pro-lifers, call 'em out, and also make room for black pro-lifers to come and just speak and be a part of the movement. Invite us to come and talk at your conventions, your meetings and things like that. If you want us to be more included and at the same time, call out, you know, these racist talking points that you see sometimes in the movement. Cherilyn Holloway: Oh, well I'm gonna tell you right now, like, don't invite me unless you're ready to burn it down. Like, if you're not ready, don't invite me, because I'm, I'm just, I'm gonna say what I wanna say and it may upset some people, and that's just the way it is. So, if you're not ready to restart, uh, or if you haven't recently restarted, you know, and I 100% agree with, like, I don't have the bandwidth. Like I, I don't, like, I spent a couple years very early on answering these questions and my final answer was — a very sweet southern white woman stopped me at a conference and said, how do we reach the black community? And I said, Let us do it. Like each state, like state, like if you're not there, like, that doesn't mean like there shouldn't be services or things like that, but we don't trust you. Yeah, like we do not trust, you know, the G O P, the Trumpist movements, we don't trust, you know — we don't trust it. And so, you know, I picked the name Pro Black, Pro-Life for a reason. Because I was done, but I felt like I wanted to still own the pro-life where like — you're not, I'm pro-life. You're not going to convince me to call myself something else. Like it is what it is, but I'm womb to tomb. I'm gonna tell you what it means to me and like it'll love it. Like it doesn't matter. It's not gonna change the way I feel. And so the pro-life movement itself is not going, we're not going to be able to make a mass appeal. What we, what we're gonna need to do is be more present, and seen, so that people who are sitting in the closet with their pro-life views, that they feel like they're, they're consistent, but everything around them is inconsistent, right? So like here, we all have a consistent life ethic. This — we know this exists, but people don't know this exists. And so when I talk to people, you know about being pro-life or about the womb, or about. They all say the same thing. I just went to a doctor and she goes, and she goes, Well, what do you do? And I told her what I did and she goes — It's just her and I there. And she's like, I'm pro-life too. I'm like, Why are we whispering? Because, right. It's just me and you. Right. But the idea was, she was like, But I don't wanna tell somebody else what not to do. And I told her, it's not about telling somebody else what to do, but people need to know. So when people know better, they do better. And most of the people in the black community, not the people that we see, you know, at these large national conventions, not, these are the people that I'm talking to. Most people in my church and in my community don't know the truth about abortion. They don't. They think that it's legal, so it must be okay. And so we just need to continue to speak the truth. You know, if you're gonna platform someone, you know, a black, you know, a black speaker, don't ask 'em what they're gonna say. Like, listen to a couple of their stuff. Ask 'em to come and let them have at it. Like, don't always tell people like, If you're gonna raise some money, don't ask me. Because I can't promise you people are gonna give. Gloria Purvis: Cherilyn let me ask you something because I think the name Pro-Black is in the name Pro-Black Pro-Life — putting Pro-Black right there. I think it sends a message because there are. Prominent black voices in the conservative pro-life movement who are def — definitely anti-black. I mean, I'm thinking of one woman in particular who I will not name because I feel like I'd conjur the devil if I ever mentioned the name. But, so anti-black in the things that she says and I'm like, how do people, in the pro-life movement, listen to this person and not hear the odious anti-gospel message in what she says. And I've come to recognize because they have not unlearned the racist conditioning that they've been exposed to just by mere fact of being born and going through the educational system or even entertainment, uh, system in the United States that has definite, uh, programming around blackness that seems to reinforce a criminality. A promiscuousness, an ignorance, a laziness, an untrustworthiness, just everything negative that you could think of, is out there. And so there hasn't been this unlearning and with people like this particular person and, and there are many of them, smaller level, you know, I, I can think of a number of people trying to, go for her crown, but they cater to that, those kind of, talking points about this inherent brokenness in black culture and which, you know, tries to imply there is something inherently criminal and broken in us, which is just nonsense. And so I will say, yeah, have the black person come speak, but please do check to make sure they're not reiterating a bunch of anti-black talking points, because we don't need more of that. No, you know, it, it doesn't, it, it does nothing to help the movement and it certainly says to other black people, other healthy, normal black people out there that they are not welcome.  Cherilyn Holloway: Yeah. And, and, and people, like the person you speak of, they're not talking to the black community. That is something that I often have to talk about in trainings and what I'm speaking is that they're, they're, they, they're saying that that's who they're talking to, but we're not listening to them. Right. So they're not. They're talking to you, like, they're talking to a white, conservative audience saying what the white, conservative audience wishes they could say to black people. But at the end of the day, ain't nobody saying that to black people. Cause black people ain't listening. Right. So Jack, do you have anything to say? I was gonna go to more questions cause I think we have 10 minutes.  Jack Champagne: So, so I'm very much in the Cherilyn Holloway school of Prepare To Get Your Feelings Hurt. , I'm gonna, I'm gonna answer it like this because it also tangentially answers Ben Conroy's question, which is that, you know, I was born Jackson, Mississippi, Heart of the Beast. Did a lot of work in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, you know. Things that black people care about, voting rights, uh, rights for convicted felons, rights for housing. I see never one pro-life person involved with any of that. There are more black people in Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana than there are anywhere else in the country. And I didn't see one black person involved with any, you know, any pro-life, anything. And I didn't see any outreach from pro-life people to any of these groups. All of my volunteers were, you know, working for democrat, governors, governor candidates, pro — pro-choice people, you know, those are the people who were asking me to speak at events. Those are the people who are asking me, how can I help? Those who are people — you know, fundamentally it's a problem that conservative, uh, a lot of pro-life people, they fundamentally don't respect black voices and they don't care about black issues. And that is, that is probably the most fundamental problem. There's no, you know, magic tool. There's no, there's no way to speak about these issues. Sometimes it's just caring. Sometimes it's just caring about, uh, helping people that can't help you. You know, we shouldn't, we shouldn't really be having a conversation about how we convince, can convince pro-life people to care more about racial justice — that should just be an inherent part of their calculus. But it's not because they're not pro-life. They're anti-abortion. And some of them are self-conscious about that. Some of them were like, I don't wanna be pro-life, I just want to be anti-abortion. And you know, because it requires them to do it, requires them to do things that don't directly benefit themselves and instead benefit a community that they don't care about and can't get anything from. And, you know, you can't tell me. You cannot tell me you are working in some of the only counties in the country that have a majority black population and you can't find any black people that agree with you? Give me a break. Like that is not, That is, That is a, Wow. That is, That is, That requires such an instrumental view of black people. That, you know, it, it kind of makes you tell on yourself like, Oh yeah, they might agree with me on abortion, but they might be too militant. They might be, they might care too much about racism. You know, they might not talk about it in a way that, you might, you. You, you might, you might offend my audience and things like that, right? So, you know, you need to, you need to, you need to step, basically what you need is you need to step outside of this, this paradigm in which, "I will only care about black people if they can help me. I go, I can only care about black people if they're not too extreme." You know that, this is why, you know, we get anti-black, black people that are so highly valued in the movement because that's all the only voices that the movement values. And will tolerate.  Gloria Purvis: Exactly. And will tolerate. So. Well, you know, Jack, you made me actually think of a time that I went to Community Action Arkansas and there was a bunch of black people that I was down there with, and we were talking about the upcoming election. And this was before Trump. And the issue of abortion came up, and every single one of those persons that I spoke to was pro-life, but they also told me their experience of going down to — I don't know how they did the primaries or something, you had to vote by party or whatnot — so they had to go down where all the Republicans were, and the open hostility that they experienced from these white Republicans when they went over there to vote pro-life made them say, "They don't want us here." And so, they have no interest in our thriving as a community. And so their actual experience of the so-called pro-life movement in their state when it came time to exercise their right to vote, was that it was very much anti-black. And they didn't see, so, they don't vote Republican because of their particular experience of that party in their local experience, and what their party locally has done or not done, you know, for or against the black community. And so while they are pro-life, they cannot vote locally with the Republicans who are so called the party of life because of their overt racism. Mm-hmm. , so you know. I, I, So at the same time, and I get it, I was like, Hey, I'm not telling you to go vote with people who'd, you know, just as soon slit your throat or hang you up from a tree. You know, in reality, while they may say they're pro-life, they're not really talking about your lives in the womb. When they're saying that they're pro-life, That's not their vision of being pro-life. So maybe that's the reality for quite a number of folks. So.  Jack Champagne: Yeah, I mean, we, we, what we, what we want is, It's relatively simple. It's if you can be a pro-life candidate and have a stance against racism that is not limited or qualified, you're golden. You — there's no one — there's no one else like you in the country. Yeah. And it's so easy and people stumble on it so much, and I simply don't understand it.  Gloria Purvis: Can we, I see one question. Cheryl, did you wanna say something else?  Cherilyn Holloway: Yeah, I was gonna read a question. Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead. So Lisa Stiller said, How do you answer people that say reversal of Roe negatively impacts BIPOC communities the most? So my first response is always, Why? Why does it negatively impact — and they're gonna always say the thing. Same thing, right? Poverty. So we don't have an abortion issue. We have a poverty issue. Mm-hmm. . And so if you want to not negatively impact the black community, help them get outta poverty. Mm-hmm.  Gloria Purvis: and Lisa, please remind them. Killing the poor does not solve poverty. Never. Okay. And that's what what they're saying, you know, is the solution to poverty for these BIPOC communities is to eliminate their children. Again, eliminating children from a substandard condition instead of eliminating the sub standard conditions from the community. Cherilyn Holloway: ,  yeah, this is another good one. That I may have an answer to. I don't know. What are some things you've seen well-intentioned activists do in an attempt to be pro-black that have been unhelpful? Oh, so a big one for me. This is a huge pet peeve for me and I hate to say that like I was inadvertently a part of it. Like I didn't know I was beginning my years, you guys. So this is like a pass. This is my pass. I don't like it when people take sayings and, change them to fit what they want. I forget what the word is. There's like a word for this,  Gloria Purvis: Appropriation? Is that it?  Cherilyn Holloway: Like Black Lives Matter, right? Right. So when black activists take that and they put like pre-born in front of it or all, or like when someone does that, and I feel like that is well intentioned. I get it. I get the intention, but the saying Black Lives Matter is true. There's nothing wrong with that saying, right? And I feel like if you're saying Black Lives Matter as someone who's pro-life, you should mean from womb to tomb. So it, it, it, uh, irritates me or agitates me or aggravates me. Like it won't send me like off the rock or when people do that, like when there are activists that take things like that and that's just an example, but I've taken other things with other, like it picking up other issues and tried to like formulate them into. Gloria Purvis: Oh, conflating them? Cherilyn Holloway: Yes, Conflate. Thank you . Gloria Purvis: You're welcome. Yeah. I don't know if I've ever seen anybody be attempt to really be pro black. I mean, I just remember there was a big brouhaha about a, pro-life organization on their — was it their Instagram? Around the time of the George Floyd murder, for some reason they put up this unhelpful thing that more black children die in the womb than they do in police custody. Cherilyn Holloway: They're more safe. They're more safe in police custody.  Gloria Purvis: Oh, they're safer. I mean, what, how — Just yeah, as if they were trying to, redirect the conversation — again, we can walk and chew gum. And also why, why the need to have to downplay our real suffering? And the real threats to our lives by, uh, from, unjust policing, you know, and to try to say, Oh, no, no, no. You don't have time to be, You're safe actually. You're safer in police hands than you are as a black child of woman. Please shut up. That it was not only unhelpful, it was, it was, it, it was so insensitive. Was very insensitive. It was so insensitive. And I think there was another, one last instance that I'm sure you all aware of is there was a well known pro-life activist on Twitter that. Jumped into Bishop Talbot Swan's Twitter feed to tell him that he was a problem with the black community and, and that he was, you know, all this stuff on abortion, which clearly the person had no idea that Bishop Talbot Swan is a member of Church of God in Christ, which is like one of the largest black Christian denominations that is pro-life. Yep. And, and, and that Bishop Swan had actually written an open letter to Hillary Clinton, challenging her on her abortion support and its negative impact on the black community. But this very well known pro-life white activist just, I guess, felt that she needed to help him understand that the real racism. Because that's the words she used, that the real racism was an abortion or something like that. I can't remember what it was, but the, the idea that she was gonna tell this man, this civil rights activist, this pro-life, uh, bishop from the Church of God in Christ, that she knew better what the real racism was than he did as a black man moving through this earth. For the number of years that he did. It was clearly, I guess supposed to be pro-black because she's gonna educate about real racism. But it was just very, ignorant and, tone deaf and condescending.  Jack Champagne: Yeah, I mean, I can virtually guarantee you that just living as a black person in America makes you more of an expert on racism than just about anybody on the planet. You know, it, it's one of those things where if you feel the need to redirect discussion about issues that directly affect black communities to abortion. What you're saying is that you don't actually care about black lives. You care about this issue and you want to use that in order to draw attention to the issue you do care about. And you have to be very, you know, you need to be cognizant of the fact that that's what you're doing — intentionally or not, that's what you're doing. And you know, that is very off putting that, that's something,  Gloria Purvis: Well, it, it shows a sense of entitlement that you feel entitled to — that we don't have the agency to decide what we wanna discuss, uh, at a particular time and place. I had a girlfriend that was at, talking about racism and, uh, someone jumped up in the q and a and said, Well, why aren't you talking about abortion? Da da, da, da, as if we were not entitled to discuss racism at that time. You know, somehow we should not be concerned about racism, as it demonstrates itself through, uh, abuses in the legal system, through abuses and policing and whatnot — that over and above all else, we had to only always and everywhere discuss abortion. And it is so, uh, to me, indicative of that person's, like you said, Jack, lack of respect for us and also doesn't — don't respect that we have our own minds and we can decide what it is that we wanna talk about at any time. Uh, and we can decide what we wanna focus our conversation on a particular moment. It doesn't mean, uh, we will never address abortion. It means right now this is what we wanna talk about. And if you can't handle that, or you can't participate or listen quietly, please go. Leave. We, we don't need you to be a part of it. We certainly don't need you trying to deflect, you know, from it. Mm-hmm. .  Jack Champagne: Yeah. Oh, we just got the five minute warning.  Cherilyn Holloway: Okay. It's two minutes. It was two minutes. Two minute. Okay. There aren't, I think Aimee asked about books. One is Killing the Black Body. It used to be up there. It's up here and I can't remember who it's by. Killing the Black Body is a good one about reproductive justice and the history of black women and their bodies.  Gloria Purvis: Was that Harriet Washington? Oh, I'm thinking Medical Apartheid. Go ahead. Apartheid — oh, Dorothy Roberts. Killing the Black Body by Dorothy Roberts. Yeah.  Cherilyn Holloway: And the other one I would highly recommend is, So You Wanna Talk About Race, which is by, uh, Ijeoma Oluo. And that one is just really, really good. It's an easy read, like easy by, not a lot of tension, but a lot of like, true fact. I ha— I have eight kids. Like it just.  Gloria Purvis: That's gonna happen.  Cherilyn Holloway: Wouldn't be a live from me without a child showing up.  Gloria Purvis: When I mention Medical Apartheid, I will tell you how Washington is very much pro-choice for abortion. But just in terms of, getting some history of the abuses of the black body in the United States, Medical Apartheid by Harriet Washington was a, was a good read. But with warning, she is very much pro-abortion, pro-choice. And that kind of comes across. Maybe right before we go, if I, I wanna ask each of you maybe, what is the one thing I think that still gives you hope, in discussing racial justice?  Cherilyn Holloway: Go ahead, Jack. Jack Champagne: Well, when I, when I, was, uh, when I was, uh, when I was watching, John Lewis's, uh, funeral, uh, a couple years ago, I was, uh, I was with my grandfather. And He, he, he leaned over and told me and, uh, asked me: do you know anything he did while he was in Congress? And that was very funny to me. But I always thought that, you know, I always, you know, I always think to myself, it's kind of nice that my grandfather who was born in like 1927 is able to take something like that for granted. and, you know, it is, it is, which is to say that, you know, there's a lot of work to do, but we still have accomplished a lot in a relatively short amount of time. In about less than the eighth of the time that we've been here in this country. We've accomplished a lot and, uh, you know, being able to, uh, share that moment with my grandfather. Is a, is a, is a very nice experience. So, uh, I look forward to being able to, you know, uh, look at an all black Supreme Court with my grandsons. So.  Gloria Purvis: Hey. Hmm.  Cherilyn Holloway: Uh, I think the thing that gives me hope is, is people. I, you know, like I said, what I, what I know most is that people who live their everyday lives who don't think about the abortion issue, or even like the racism issue all the time like I do, are always open to these conversations and always seem like they just learned something. Like, there's always like a light bulb moment, like, Oh, I never thought about that. And so it's, you know, my hope is in the, that I'm like planting ideas in people's heads and concepts and things for them to continuously think about as they see the news stream, you know, going across. Is, is why I feel like I, I'm always hopeful it, you know, not what I see on the news, not where I see the media focusing attention, not where I see any of these, but the everyday people I talk to, that literally, have these light bulb moments. That's what continues to give me hope.  Gloria Purvis: I would say what gives me hope is the prevalence of these kinds of conversations that are happening now. The fact that I've, you know, I'm able to have this conversation with both of you, to me, is — it gives me hope because it signals two things or three things, maybe. A, we exist. B, we can be in community. And three, we can use the microphone that's not controlled by major media to still get our messaging out. To be able to use the current technology now to give another narrative about pro-life and pro black from the womb to the tomb. And so I hope that the, the three of us together can at some point do this again on a larger stage for more people. So that gives me hope.  Cherilyn Holloway: Thank you everybody.  Gloria Purvis: Thank you.  Herb Geraghty: Thank you. Thank you three. So, so, so, so, so much for this, uh, for this round table discussion. We are so grateful. I know that the chat has been very active and very grateful for your perspective. This was wonderful. Thank you so much. We are now going into our break. We will reconvene in the sessions at 7:15 Eastern. Thank you all.

J.P. Davis is a federal public defender for the Western Judicial District of North Carolina.  The federal public defender's office represents indigent clients in federal criminal court.  At times, those attorneys need experts, especially in white-collar crimes.https://ncw.fd.org/In this episode, we discuss:The purpose of the federal public defender's officeWhy the public defender's office needs expertsHow forensic accountants can market themselvesThe role of technology in reviewing large volumes of data.Support the show

Noah Nix is a third year law student at the University of Georgia School of Law in Athens, Georgia. Currently, Noah is serving as a legal intern in the Appellate & Trial Groups at the office of the Federal Public Defender for the Districts of Colorado and Wyoming. He is based in the Denver, Colorado office. Noah will graduate from law school in spring 2023.During his time at the University of Georgia School of Law, Noah has argued in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals as part of the Appellate Litigation Clinic at UGA Law. After law school, Noah will serve as a law clerk on the Colorado Supreme Court and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Noah is a graduate of Fordham University where he earned his Bachelor of Science degree and where he was a Division 1 athlete. Connect with Noah on LinkedIn.Follow Noah on Twitter.Noah mentioned a few books during our discussion - Check them out below:Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption by Bryan StevensonThe New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander Half American by Matthew F. DelmontFind us online at https://www.personaljxpod.comFind us on Twitter @PersonalJxPodPersonal Jurisdiction is powered and distributed with Simplecast. Our logos were designed by Lizzie L. O'Connor.Personal Jurisdiction is edited by Scott Donnell at Run and Drum Media https://www.runanddrummedia.comOur Theme Song is Pleasant Porridge by Kevin MacLeod.Link: https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/song/7614-pleasant-porridgeLicense: https://filmmusic.io/standard-license

Join Host Lyons Filmer in conversation with law professor, advocate, author, and mother Lara Bazelon about embracing imbalance when it comes to work, life, and motherhood. Lara's recent book, Ambitious Like a Mother: Why Prioritizing Your Career Is Good For Your Kids, was published in spring 2022. This is the second conversation in our Empowering Women in Today's World series, co-presented with the Mesa Refuge. Both English and Spanish-language audio podcasts are posted, and the video has Spanish-language captions enabled. You can find all of the recordings on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, Spotify, Amazon Podcast, and YouTube. You can follow us at any of these platforms to get automated notices of new recordings. Lara Bazelon Lara is a professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law where she directs the criminal and racial justice clinics. From 2012-2015, she was a visiting associate clinical professor at Loyola Law School and the director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent. She was a trial attorney in the Office of the Federal Public Defender in Los Angeles for seven years. As a 2017 Jacob and Valeria Langeloth Foundation Criminal Justice Fellow at the Mesa Refuge, Lara used her residency to complete her well-received book Rectify: The Power of Restorative Justice After Wrongful Conviction (Beacon Press 2018). Host Lyons Filmer Lyons is the former program director at community radio KWMR in Point Reyes Station, California, where she served for 18 years. Her interest in radio began in college, where she was a music DJ and news reader. In the 1990s, she was a volunteer programmer at KPFA in Berkeley, where she produced and hosted programs on women's issues, drama and literature. She joined KWMR in 1999 and became its program director soon after. Among other programs, Lyons hosts “Mesa Refuge Interviews,” talking with the current residents of Mesa Refuge Writers Retreat. Find out more about The New School at Commonweal on our website: tns.commonweal.org. And like/follow our Soundcloud channel for more great podcasts.

In today's episode I speak with Paresh Patel who is currently the Chief of Appeals at the Office of the Federal Defender for the District of Maryland where he has worked for the past 18 years. In this role he represents clients on post conviction matters including direct appeal and federal habeas. He also assists trial attorneys on complex legal issues that arise in their cases. In our conversation we discuss his path to becoming a public defender, the unique role of an appellate lawyer in the federal criminal system, the ways criminal law and criminal prosecutors have changed over the past two decades and how those changes have affected his role, how he drafts briefs and prepares for oral argument, the process for becoming a public defender, the impact of storytelling in his writing, the strategy of balancing the arguments of individual clients and other similarly situated criminal defendants, and the power of on the job learning as a young lawyer. This episode is sponsored, edited, and engineered by LawPods, a professional podcast production company for busy attorneys. *** Want to Support the Podcast in 2 minutes or less? Leave a Review (this helps the algorithm connect me to new listeners) Subscribe on iTunes or Spotify Purchase How I Lawyer Merchandise Share on LinkedIn or Twitter.

On this episode of the NJ Criminal Podcast, we are joined by Orlando Nieves.

Helping us get Set for Sentencing this week, an amazing human who happens to be not only a former client, but also the subject of the first full-on sentencing mitigation video ever produced in Federal Court, almost twenty years ago!  I am so grateful that Dustin Arnold agreed to share his incredible journey from gifted student to deep addiction, from arrest to sentencing, and from rehabilitation to true redemption.   His story continues to inspire and amaze.  Dustin tells us what it feels like to put his fate and future in the hands of a lawyer.  He also talks about what it was like to tell his story in front of a camera for a "sentencing mitigation video".   What's a sentencing mitigation video, you ask?  Well, take a listen! We didn't know it at the time, but we were setting the wheels in motion for a completely new and powerful way to advocate.  Flash forward twenty years and the process is gaining momentum in courts all over the country.  Sentencing videos were even the subject of the Simpsons (S. 30, ep. 15, “101 Mitigations”).  So buckle up, and let's get Set For Sentencing! IN THIS EPISODE: What it feels like to be a client in the hands of a lawyer who isn't doing their job (and one who is); How the system can actually do more good then harm when the right resources and the right decision-makers are in place; Explanation of sentencing mitigation videos and how they can make all the difference in a case; A case study in why having discretionary sentencing (and a thoughtful judge) is vital; Mitigation videos are not simply for “wealthy” clients who are trying to "buy a lower sentence." This technique was born and raised in the office of the Federal Public Defender; Sentencing videos on The Simpsons?!; The seed that grew into the mighty oak – the evolution of mitigation filmmaking; Dustin's best advice, heart to heart, from a client to a lawyer; Who doesn't love a happy ending???? LINKS: The Simpsons, "101 Mitigations" Snippit of Dustin Arnold Sentencing Video FREE RESOURCE:  Doug Passon's Article from The Champion on Sentencing Mitgation Videos:  Using Moving Pictures to Build the Bridge of Empathy at Sentencing.   Click here to Download

Can a police officer search a criminal suspect's cell phone in full, when the only charge in the warrant was drug possession, and the affidavit provided barebone justification? This is the question the Fifth Circuit was presented in U.S. v. Morton. The Morton case presents an issue that is not fully resolved by the Supreme Court - what kind of protection a cell phone deserves under the Fourth Amendment? Treat it like a person's home? Or, more than a home?We have the privilege to have two guest attorneys who are directly involved in this case to share some insights: Brandon Beck from the Federal Public Defender's Office, who argued this case at the Fifth Circuit, and Aisha Dennis from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. 

FASD Hope is a podcast series about Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD), through the lens of parent advocates with over nineteen years of lived experience. FASD Hope is honored to welcome Kathryn "Kay" Kelly in Episode 129, titled "A Legacy in FASD and Law". Kathryn Kelly, called Kay by most who know her, came to the University of Washington after an extensive career in criminal justice. She worked for nine years as a probation officer for the state of California, and for twenty years as a federal probation officer. She was retrained as a mitigation specialist and served for three years as part of a team assembled by the Capital Habeas Unit of the Federal Public Defender in Los Angeles to represent inmates on Death Row seeking redress of their death penalty sentences. In 2001, Kay joined the Fetal Alcohol and Drug Unit (FADU) at the University of Washington, working with Dr. Ann Streissguth. With a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, she and Dr. Streissguth established the FASD Legal Issues Resource Center. In that role, Ms. Kelly has planned and/or participated in numerous trainings for judges, defense attorneys, prosecutors and other court professional throughout the United States, and in numerous foreign countries. Since 2013, she has organized a series of conferences about FASD and the law held in conjunction with the biennial UBC - Vancouver International Conference on FASD. Ms. Kelly was instrumental in the organization of the first forensic FASD diagnostic team, FASDExperts, and in the passage of an American Bar Association Resolution on FASD in 2012. Ms. Kelly is also a Research Coordinator for a National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)-funded five year project: Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders in Adults: Health and Neurobehavior.  Ms. Kelly is a Board member of the FASD United Affiliate - Washington. In this ENLIGHTENING episode, Kay discusses the following: her work and contributions in the FASD community, her amazing work with Dr. Ann Streissguth / FASD Legal Resource Center, her current projects and initiatives....and words of experience, encouragement and hope for parents and caregivers. EPISODE RESOURCES - Kathyrn "Kay" Kelly - faslaw@uw.edu Tel- 206-616-5408 https://adai.uw.edu/staff_members/kay-kelly/ University of Washington - FADU https://www.washington.edu/research/research-centers/fetal-alcohol-and-drug-unit/ FASD Resolution - ABA https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_interest/child_law/resources/attorneys/fasd-resolution/   FASD Hope - https://www.fasdhope.com/ natalie@fasdhope.com Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/fasdhope/ Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/fasdhope1 Twitter - https://twitter.com/fasdhope LinkedIn- https://www.linkedin.com/in/natalie-vecchione-17212160/ Racket - @fasdhope Clubhouse - @natalievecc Check out our  book “Blazing New Homeschool Trails: Educating and Launching Teens with Developmental Disabilities” by Natalie Vecchione & Cindy LaJoy  BUY IT NOW!  

As the title states this is part two of our conversation.  A huge thanks to BGen Baker, who was recently sworn in as the Federal Public Defender for the Western District of North Carolina and Butch Bracknell, who retired from the Marine Corps in 2014.  

The right to criminal defense counsel is a cornerstone of our justice system. This is particularly true in federal courts, where the stakes in criminal trials are very high. One of the ways we meet this constitutional guarantee is through the federal public defender system, which provides trial, appellate, and post-conviction services to criminal defendants in federal courts. In this episode, Todd Smith and Jody Sanders talk with Matthew Wright, an Assistant Federal Public Defender for the Northern District of Texas. Matthew shares his experiences and insights as counsel in criminal appeals and discusses how his office provides services to defendants at all stages of the federal criminal justice system.Love the show? Subscribe, rate, review, and share!Here's How »A special thanks to our sponsors:Court Surety Bond AgencyThomson ReutersProudly presented by Butler Snow LLPJoin the Texas Appellate Law Podcast Community today:texapplawpod.comTwitterYouTube

In this episode, we talked about Justice Breyer's retirement and Justice Gregg Costa's unexpected resignation from the Fifth Circuit. Justice Breyer's retirement announcement proposes an opportunity to the Biden administration and the replacement strategy is rather clear - Biden has determined to deliver his campaign promise to nominate an African American woman to fill the seat. But what about Costa's unorthodox resignation? At the age of 49, Costa, a young Obama appointee, announced his resignation and will leave the Court in August. What does this resignation mean to the hot bench at the Fifth Circuit? Host: Leo Yu, Clinical Professor at SMU LawGuests: Brian Owsley, Associate Professor at UNT Law; Joel Page, Appellate Chief of the Federal Public Defender's Office (NDTX)

In this episode, we pass the mic to Adeel Bashir, Esq.! Adeel Bashir is a Federal Public Defender of the Middle District of Florida and President of the American Muslim Bar Association. Bashir graduated from George Mason University School of Law in 2009, where he was a participant of the Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition and held leadership roles in George Mason's Moot Court Board and Federal Circuit Bar Journal. As a Federal Public Defender, Bashir drafts and files petitions for writ of certiorari to, and appellate briefs in the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on behalf of indigent criminal defendants, with a special emphasis on issues involving the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, statutory interpretation, United States Sentencing Guidelines and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Bashir must also present oral argument before the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, arguing over dozens of cases. Notably, Bashir has had victories in Supreme Court cases Yates v. United States, No. 13-7451, and Rehaif v. United States, No. 17-9560. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/journey-to-esquire/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/journey-to-esquire/support

Fellow Baylor Law student Allison Barber joins hosts Chris Spendlove and Ethan Scroggins to discuss her work with the Federal Public Defender for the Northern District of Texas. She shares how she qualified for and obtained her prestigious internship and details the kind of work law students can expect to do at a Federal Public Defender's office (spoilers: a LOT of research). Above all, she emphasizes the importance of finding your "why" and sticking to it.

On this week's episode Adam is subbed out and the Lawyers are joined by the incredible and legendary Baltimore Criminal Defense Attorney Warren A Brown.   FROM HIS BIO: Attorney Warren A. Brown was born into an America that had yet to fully open its reserve of social, economic, educational, and political rights to its African-American citizens; a time when a Black president, Black Miss America, Black heads of corporations, and Black people in any position of power was unimaginable. He was fortunate, however, to be surrounded by a community of honorable, hardworking, and determined people, and thus he never shied from entertaining lofty goals. One such goal was to become a lawyer, not for the money, rather, to fight for the weak and to claim membership in the “most noble profession”. Upon graduating from Carnegie Mellon University in 1974 and Boston University School of Law in 1977, Warren Brown began to apply his trade with the Memphis Area Legal Services, Inc. (MALS) under, now mayor of Memphis, A. C. Wharton. Returning to his home of Baltimore in 1980, he first worked at the Legal Aid Bureau, then with the Office of the State's Attorney for Baltimore City before settling in at the Federal Public Defender's Office. In 1988, he opened the doors to his own Criminal Defense firm. Since that time, Warren Brown has tried both state and federal cases in Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, and Delaware. An accomplished trial attorney, Warren Brown approaches trial work as an art; never leaving anything to chance. Though a successful and accomplished attorney by any standard, Warren Brown remains loyal to the legal reality that, “The truth, poorly represented, will lose”. Lawyers on the Rocks features Jeremy Eldridge, Kurt Nachtman and Adam Crandell. This triumvirate of lawyers will give you their unsolicited opinion on everything legal and illegal, while enjoying a handcrafted cocktail. Lawyers on the Rocks is sponsored by the Law Office of Eldridge, Nachtman & Crandell, LLC and produced by Gideon at Up Next Creative, LLC.  

Featuring: Raul Ayala, Deputy Federal Public Defender at Office of the Federal Public Defender in the Central District of California and the collaborative court supervising attorney.Ellen Yaroshefsky, The Howard Lichtenstein Distinguished Professor in Legal Ethics and Professor of Law.Raul and Ellen join us to share what a day in the life is like for them as a public defender and an academic, respectively. Each shares their daily activities in addition to reflections on pivotal career moments that got them to where they are. Finally, they reflect on what they wish they would have known before working in their respective roles.Enroll in a CJS CommitteeWant to get involved with the Criminal Justice Section? Join us! https://www.americanbar.org/membership/join-now

Courtney Francik is a graduate of Harvard College (2011) and the George Washington University Law School (2015). She is currently an Assistant Federal Public Defender in Baltimore, Maryland. On the state side, Courtney was an Assistant Public Defender first in the Law Office of the Shelby County Public Defender in Memphis, Tennessee from 2015-2018, and later in the Maryland Office of the Public Defender from 2018-2019. As a student at GW Law, Courtney worked in the Neighborhood Policy and Law Clinic. Learn more about GW Law's clinics here: https://www.law.gwu.edu/clinics Courtney discussed the cash bail system. Learn more about this important topic below:Adureh Onyekwere, Brennan Center for Justic, How Cash Bail Works, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-cash-bail-works (last accessed 10/29/2021).Lea Hunter, Center for American Progress, "What You Need to Know About Ending Cash Bail" available here: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/criminal-justice/reports/2020/03/16/481543/ending-cash-bail/ (last accessed 10/29/2021).We're sure that you can tell that Courtney was a very prepared podcast guest. Preparation is key to everything! Below are a few articles about the importance of preparation:Farnam Street, "How to Do Great Things" - "When someone repeatedly does great things it is because they prepared in advance to advance to recognize, work on, and fill in the blanks when necessary. This is the essence of intelligent preparation." - https://fs.blog/great-things/ Herbet Lui, Fast Company, "Your Brain is on Overload. This is How to Augment Your Intellectual Capacity." https://www.fastcompany.com/90661984/your-brain-is-on-overload-this-is-how-to-augment-your-intellectual-capacity?utm_source=pocket_mylistWe're still a fan of paper To Do lists but we also love the app ToDoist. It's simple and functional. Check it out here: Https://www.todoist.com Our Theme Song is: Pleasant Porridge by Kevin MacLeodLink: https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/song/7614-pleasant-porridgeLicense: https://filmmusic.io/standard-licenseOur Logos were designed by Lizzie L. O'Connor.

This episode, 20 Years of the Global War on Terror: Minnesota's Leadership Defending the Rule of Law, discusses the impact of 9/11 and the “global war on terror” that was waged in response. The featured panelists for this event are: Amy Bergquist -- who coordinates advocacy at the UN and with regional human rights bodies. Focus areas include LGBTI rights, discrimination based on sexual orientation/gender identity, rights of minorities and non-citizens, and the death penalty. Hon. Jeffrey Keyes -- is a retired United States Magistrate Judge in the District of Minnesota.Since retiring from the bench in April 2016, Mr. Keyes has been actively engaged as a mediator and arbitrator in a wide variety of cases including intellectual property disputes. Nicole Moen -- is a shareholder and the co-chair of the Business Litigation Department of Fredrikson & Byron, P.A. Moen has also devoted considerable time to pro bono matters, and was part of a team of Fredrikson lawyers who represented a Guantanamo detainee for several years. Major Todd Pierce - retired from the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General Corps on November 30, 2012, where he had served as Military Commissions Defense Counsel representing Guantanamo prisoners beginning in 2008. Peter Thompson - practiced criminal law in Minnesota for 33 years. As an Assistant United States Attorney and Federal Public Defender, he prosecuted and defended federal criminal cases for seven years.Thompson has also been active with Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights regarding war crimes and human rights investigations in Bosnia, Sri Lanka, Haiti, India, Cambodia, and represented immigrants applying for political asylum in the United States. The keynote speaker is Fionnuala Ní Aoláin. Ni Aolain holds the Robina Chair in Law, Public Policy, and Society and is the faculty director of the Human Rights Center at Minnesota Law. In 2017, Professor Ní Aoláin was appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council as United Nations Special Rapporteur. In this capacity she works closely with states and United Nations entities to advance human rights protections in some of the most difficult contexts globally. The event was moderated by Amanda Lyons, the Executive Director of the Human Rights Center at Minnesota Law. Providing opening remarks is Garry W. Jenkins, Dean and William S. Pattee Professor of Law at Minnesota Law. This Human Rights Center event was recorded on September 15, 2021. Subscribe to the Minnesota Law podcast feed on SoundCloud, or via your preferred podcast network, for more LawTalk episodes, as well as other podcast content produced by Minnesota Law. Learn more about the University of Minnesota Law School by visiting law.umn.edu and following Minnesota Law on Twitter twitter.com/UofMNLawSchool.

Premal Dharia is the Executive Director of the Institute to End Mass Incarceration at Harvard Law School. She has spent the last twenty years dedicated to challenging injustice in the criminal system.Ms. Dharia spent nearly 15 years as a public defender in three different places: the Public Defender Service in Washington, D.C., the Office of the Federal Public Defender in Baltimore, Maryland, and the military commission at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. She has tried dozens of cases and supervised lawyers at various levels of practice.In 2014, Ms. Dharia was selected for a three-month fellowship to help build out and train three new public defender offices in Palestine. After years in the field of public defense, she brought her years of direct service and substantial expertise to systemic work at Civil Rights Corps, where she was the Director of Litigation.In 2019, Ms. Dharia, started building a new organization to incorporate public defender advocacy into the broader push for systemic change to the criminal legal system. She was a Criminal Justice Fellow at the Reflective Democracy Campaign, a project of the Women Donors Network, which supported the launch of that organization, the Defender Impact Initiative (DII), and Dharia's investigation into the intersection of reflective democracy and the criminal system.Through DII, Ms. Dharia worked to reimagine the role of public defenders as systemic change agents, engaging community organizers, advocates and attorneys in the process.https://endmassincarceration.org/https://inquest.org/ 

'Subject To Interpretation' is a weekly podcast that deep dives into the topics that matter to interpreters.

Edward Martell was once a high school dropout facing a 20-year drug conviction. Instead of giving him the maximum sentence, judge Bruce Morrow gave Martell probation and a challenge. Marrow told Martell the next time he walked into the courtroom, he wanted him to have made something great of himself. “He said, ‘I challenge you to be a CEO of a Fortune 500 company instead of being out here selling drugs,'” Martell told Deadline Detroit. “And I love a challenge.” Fast forward 16 years, a now 27-year-old Martell is standing in front of Judge Marrow, but for a very different reason this time. This time, he is being sworn in as an attorney after passing the state bar in Michigan. The path for Martell has been far from easy. While competing his GED, his guidance counselors tried to persuade him not to pursue a legal career. His prior criminal record might ruin his future career plans, but he never gave up. After completing his associate's degree, Martell received scholarships for both his undergraduate studies and law school.  He went to gain a lot of experience by clerking at the District of Columbia's Federal Public Defender's office. He also worked as a writer and researcher at the Perkins Law Group. Martell had plenty of supports by the time it came to take the bar exam. One being Judge Morrow, with whom he never lost touch with after all those years. Martell completed a 1,200-plus page submission describing the process he took to turn his life around. “The main thing they look for is candor. I let them know I am remorseful—that I'm downright embarrassed,” Martell reported to WAPO. “I am the same person, but I don't think like that anymore. I've evolved.” After only 15 minutes, Martell was approved to be a lawyer. He still works for the Perkins Group, but now will be practicing as an attorney instead of a researcher. His dream that he worked so hard for finally came true and it is all thanks to judge Morrow. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the latest episode of Trial Ready, hosts Meena and Michelle talk with attorney Michael Battle, a partner in Barnes & Thornburg's Washington, D.C., and New York offices. Michael's career has included being a judge, a federal public defender, and the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of New York. He shares some stories about his upbringing in the Bronx, N.Y., and how he decided to become a trial lawyer, plus offers some advice for young attorneys about building strong networks.

In this episode, we are going to review five recent Fifth Circuit Cases regarding the federal sentencing guideline. These cases address issues that frequently occur at the sentencing phase and at appeals, such as relevant conduct, plain error review, etc. Speakers: Joel Page, Chief of Appeals of the Federal Public Defender's Office - NDTXTim Crooks, Former Chief of Appeals of the Federal Public Defender's Office - SDTX Leo Yu (moderator), Sr. Assistant City Attorney of Dallas Cases:USA v. Reyna-Aragon (20-10071)USA v. Mims (19-50921)USA v. Burney (20-10525)USA v. Horton (18-11577)USA v. Deckert (19-40292)

Phil Gallagher is the Supervisory Assistant Federal Public Defender for the Southern District of Texas, who has been practicing in the Houston area for nearly two decades. He is also the trial chief for the Houston Office. On this episode of HYLIGHTS, Patrick and Femi get a glimpse of Phil's day-to-day activities protecting federal defendants, the rigors of the job, and also get attuned to why he and his fellow colleagues continue to fight for our rights. The Hylights Podcast is brought to you by the Houston Young Lawyers Association! If you have any comments or questions, or if you would like to be a guest on a future episode, please email us at hylightspodcast@gmail.com. Join HYLA: https://www.hyla.org/why-should-you-join-hyla

In this episode, we are going to cover six recently issued public opinions. Three of them are from the court's civil docket, and they are regarding the Court's new jurisprudence on employment and labor law and the federal civil procedure. The three cases from the criminal docket involve the death penalty and the Fourth Amendment.Speakers:Joel Page, Federal Public Defender's Office (NDTX)Raffi Melkonian, Wright Close and Barger, LLP. Leo Yu, Dallas City Attorney's Office - Creator/Moderator

****Audio from the Black in Blue Live Broadcast on February 28, 2021**** Co-Hosts Dale and Elyzabeth welcome The Honorable Everett Mitchell from the Dane County, WI Circuit Court, Simone Hylton from the Fulton County, GA District Attorney's Office, and Malikeya Khantrece from the Office of the Federal Public Defender to the program to discuss the good, the bad, and the ugly of the U.S. Criminal Justice System.

Today's guest, Goli Kalkhoran, is a former Federal Public Defender with a focus on death row defense. Feeling drained and demoralized, Goli left law to become an entrepreneur. With time her decision led to a successful business and the birth of a podcast and platform called “Lessons from a Quitter.” It's a place where she teaches and coaches others on how to intelligently leave unfulfilling careers in order to chase meaning and value.The Think Stupid Simple Podcast is a place for authentic conversation to uncover the stupid simple truths that help us succeed and find happiness.

Rita Bosworth stops by to talk about the Sister District Project. Sister District is dedicated to changing the composition of state legislatures and making them more representative of their constituents. More specifically, Sister District seeks to turn states blue by helping Democrats win state legislative elections. Their approach is to pair up - or “sister” - volunteers from deep blue districts with carefully targeted races in swing districts. Ultimately, they seek to advance progressive policy and eliminate partisan gerrymandering. Their volunteers canvass, phonebank, write postcards, text-bank, and fundraise for candidates. Since launching in the wake of the 2016 elections, the Sister District Project has grown to over 45,000 volunteers across the country. They have raised over $3 million in small-dollar donations directly to candidates. Rita Bosworth is the Founder and Executive Director of the Sister District Project. She started Sister District a week after the 2016 presidential election. Prior to Sister District, she was a Federal Public Defender for 12 years. She received her undergraduate degree from U.C. Davis, and she received her law degree from Stanford. After law school Rita clerked for the Honorable Henry Kennedy in Washington, D.C.

Monica Foster is Executive Director of The Indiana Federal Community Defender for the Southern District of Indiana.  She and her colleagues defend more than 90 % of cases in the district. Does that sound boring?  No Way.  Just learn about the Santa Claus fraud of John F. Kennedy (alias), the most humane form of execution according to Saudis, the need for "racial reckoning," and even how a culinary workshop affected her life.

Lara Bazelon is a professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law. She directed an innocence project at Loyola Law School and was a trial attorney in the Office of the Federal Public Defender.  Her work has appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, Slate, and The Atlantic Magazine. She is the author of Rectify: The Power of Restorative Justice After Wrongful Conviction.  

Lara Bazelon is a professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law. She directed an innocence project at Loyola Law School and was a trial attorney in the Office of the Federal Public Defender.  Her work has appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, Slate, and The Atlantic Magazine. She is the author of Rectify: The Power of Restorative Justice After Wrongful Conviction.  

Does feminism conflict with progressive critiques of the criminal justice system?   Aaron Freiwald, Managing Partner of Freiwald Law and host of the weekly podcast, Good Law | Bad Law, is joined by author and law professor, Aya Gruber, to discuss her new book, The Feminist War on Crime: The Unexpected Role of Women’s Liberation in Mass Incarceration, as well as the broader issues and trendlines of today.   In today’s episode, Aaron and Aya talk about the issues of gendered crimes and gender justice, law reform and policing, feminist progress, harm and social problems, issues of race, oppression and inequality, crime control, prison abolishment and more. Discussing justice in society, Aya and Aaron question where and how society should apply its resources, the institutions of prisons, punishment in this country, and how these relate to the origins of the criminal justice system.   The Feminist War on Crime documents the failure of the state to combat sexual and domestic violence through law and punishment. Throughout her book and today’s conversation, Aya contends the importance of abandoning conventional feminist wisdom, of fighting violence against women without reinforcing the American prison state, and of using criminalization as a technique of last – not first – resort. Aya asserts that many feminists grapple with the problem of hyper-incarceration in the United States, and yet that commentators on gender crime continue to assert that criminal law is not tough enough. This punitive impulse, Aya explains, is dangerous and counterproductive. Professor Gruber argues that in the quest to secure women’s protection from domestic violence and rape, American feminists have become soldiers in the war on crime by emphasizing white female victimhood, expanding the power of police and prosecutors, touting the problem-solving power of incarceration, and diverting resources toward law enforcement and away from marginalized communities. Throughout today’s discussion, Aya elaborates on these concepts and others.   Professor Gruber received her B.A. in philosophy from U.C. Berkeley and her J.D. from Harvard Law. At Harvard, Aya was an editor on the Harvard Women’s Law Journal as well as the Harvard International Law journal and founded the Interracial Law Students’ Association. After law school, Professor Gruber clerked for U.S. District Court judge James L. King in Miami and then served as a felony trial attorney with the Public Defender Service in Washington, D.C. and the Federal Public Defender in Miami. Aya joined the University of Colorado faculty in 2010. She currently teaches and writes in the areas of criminal law and procedure, critical theory, feminism, and comparative/international law; her scholarship focuses primarily on feminist efforts to strengthen criminal law responses to crimes against women.   To learn more about Aya, please visit her bio page here. To learn more about Aya’s new book, The Feminist War on Crime: The Unexpected Role of Women’s Liberation in Mass Incarceration, please click here.   Host: Aaron Freiwald Guest: Aya Gruber     Follow Good Law | Bad Law: YouTube: Good Law | Bad Law Facebook: @GOODLAWBADLAW Instagram: @GoodLawBadLaw Website: https://www.law-podcast.com

Erika Gilliam-Booker, President of the National Black Prosecutor's Association and Executive Board Member of the Black Public Defender Association, Byron Conway join us to discuss the prosecution of the police in the murder of George Floyd. We further discuss systemic racial injustice issues and how to address them.Conway is currently serving as a Federal Public Defender in Atlanta.Gilliam-Booker is both a Cook County Assistant State's Attorney and newly appointed Special Assistant United State's Attorney. Want to get involved with the Criminal Justice Section? Join us! https://www.americanbar.org/membership/join-now 

Earning Freedom: Conquering a 45-Year Prison Term by Michael Santos Chapter eight, part two. Months 103-127     While planning for law school I continue to build a strong network of support. To overcome the resistance and bias I expect to encounter, I put together a package that I call my portfolio. It describes my crime, expresses remorse, and articulates the steps I’ve taken over the past decade to atone. The portfolio includes copies of my university degrees and endorsement letters from the distinguished academics who support me. I’m certain that a wide support network will open more options upon my release and I send the portfolios to people who might sponsor my efforts. My strategy is simple. I’ll continue what I began before I was sentenced, when I wrote to Stuart Eskenazi, the journalist who covered my trial for readers of the Tacoma News Tribune. In my letter to him, I expressed my intentions to live usefully in prison and redeem myself by preparing for a law-abiding life upon release. The new portfolio I’m creating not only records my accomplishments but also shows my progress toward the clearly defined goals I set. In it, I ask readers to consider me as the man I’m becoming rather than the one who made bad decisions in his early 20s. Taking a lesson from business stories I read in The Wall Street Journal, I supplement the portfolio by writing quarterly reports every 90 days and I distribute the reports to those in my growing support network. My quarterly reports describe my projects, the ways that they contribute to my preparations for release, and my challenges. They are my accountability tools. By living transparently I invite people to hold me accountable, to judge me by what I do, not by what I say. Any prisoner can say he wants to succeed upon release, but my daily commitment and the actions I take allows others to evaluate whether they should continue giving me their trust, sponsorship, and support. With pride in my progress, and the ways I’ve responded to the challenges of imprisonment, my parents share the portfolio with others. My father gives a copy to his friend, Norm Zachary, and Norm passes it along to his sister, Carol Zachary. I’m thrilled when my father tells me over the phone that Carol wants to help and that I should call her. She is a married mother of two who lives in Washington, D.C., where her husband, Jon Axelrod, practices law. “This is Michael Santos, calling from the federal prison in Fort Dix.” I introduce myself. “My father suggested I should call to speak with Ms. Zachary.” “Oh, Michael! I’m so glad you called. Please call me Carol. My husband and I have read through your portfolio and we want to help. You may not remember, but Norm brought me to a party at your parents’ house when you were a child. We spoke about the Hubble telescope.” “I remember. I was about seven or eight then.” She corrects me, reminding me that I was older when we met, already a teenager.  Then she says that she would like to build a friendship and asks that I send her the forms necessary to visit.  “I want to bring Zach and Tris, my sons. We need to talk about what we can do to get you out, and if you’ll let me, I’d like to lead the effort.” This is precisely the type of support I hoped to find as a result of preparing that portfolio. As Ralph Waldo Emerson was known for having observed, shallow men believe in luck, but strong men believe in cause and effect. Ever since Bruce came into my life I’ve known and appreciated the value of mentors. He guided me from the beginning through our weekly correspondence and his regular visits. Because of his support, I’ve matured and grown in confidence, as a scholar, in mental discipline, and I’m well prepared to contribute positively to society.  By taking deliberate action steps to expand my support network, I really scored, attracting Carol’s attention. When I walk into the visiting room to meet her and her sons, Zach and Tristan, they greet me with an embrace, as if I’m already family. While sitting across from each other in the hard, plastic chairs of Fort Dix’s brightly lit visiting room, I learn about the Axelrod family. Carol, a former English teacher, is a Boy Scout leader who takes an active interest in her community. She volunteers for the Red Cross, substitutes in the local schools, and, along with her husband Jon, is deeply involved in her sons’ sports and school. She’s determined to groom them as responsible citizens. Zach is 12 and he tells me about his baseball and hockey teams. When I ask what he wants to do when he grows up, he answers without hesitation: “I want to be the CEO of a publicly traded company,” and I don’t doubt for a second that he’ll succeed. His intelligence impresses me, especially when he grills me about what I’m planning to do with my life once I’m released. “I’m looking into law school right now,” I answer. “Do you think people will want to hire a lawyer who’s been in prison?” Zach asks the question with a genuine eagerness to learn more about me. “Zachary,” scolds Carol. “What, Mom? I’m just curious.” “Of course people will hire him,” she tries to soften his bluntness. “That’s a good question, Zach.” I’m impressed with his confidence and directness. “See, Mom.” “But I’m not going to law school to practice law. I’m convinced that more education will open career opportunities once I’m home, and studying law will help me through whatever time I’ve got left to serve. Wherever I serve my sentence, prisoners will need legal assistance and if I study law, I’ll be in a position to help.” “That makes sense,” Tristan, Zach’s younger brother, considers my response. “What we need to do is get you out of here,” Carol says, bringing us back to the central issue. “Jon and I have spoken with some acquaintances who work for the Justice Department. They can’t get involved because of rules about conflicts of interest, but they did insist that we need a top-notch Washington lawyer to represent you.” “I’d love to have a lawyer. But the truth is, I don’t have any financial resources.” “Well we’re going to raise some.” “How?” “You’ve built this wonderful support network. I’m sure the people who believe in you will help.” “But I can’t ask them for money.” “Why not? They want to help you.” “I just wouldn’t feel right asking anyone for money. I’ve already lost one effort at clemency, and I’m coming to terms with the likelihood that I’m going to serve my entire sentence. I’m trying to build my network so I’ll have people who will help me overcome the challenges that I’m going to face.” “But we’re not going to let you serve 16 more years, at least not without trying to get you out. You may not want to ask others for financial assistance, but as long as you don’t object, I’m going to ask on your behalf.” I’m speechless, suppressing emotions that I’m not accustomed to feeling. Of course I crave my freedom. I’m 33, well educated now, and after 10 years inside, I’m as ready for release as I’ll ever be. If I could return to society now, I would still have a reasonable chance to build a career and begin a family. Carol’s offer to advocate for my freedom validates me, bringing a sense of liberty, of worthiness that I cherish and appreciate. *  *  *  *  *  *  * Carol coordinates a team to help me. She persuades Tony Bisceglie, a highly regarded Washington, DC lawyer, to represent me pro bono. She travels to meet with my mentors, Bruce, Phil McPherson (Bruce’s brother), and George Cole. With assistance from Julie, my friends Nick and Nancy Karis, and other friends from Seattle and elsewhere, Carol launches a fundraiser to begin the Michael Santos Legal Defense Fund, and she solicits thousands of dollars to cover legal expenses. The money comes from anonymous donors, people who now have a vested interest in my freedom. I can’t participate from prison, and I don’t know what success they’ll have, but their combined energy fills me with hope. Tony orders transcripts that document my case. After reading them he determines that I have grounds to file for relief from the court. I’m ambivalent about the plan of a judicial action because I wanted to earn my freedom rather than pursue liberty through a legal technicality. More than a decade has passed since my conviction became final and we know the request for judicial relief is a long shot. Further, the judge who presided over my trial is known for meting out long sentences and never reducing them. Through his research Tony discovers that the prosecutors in my case once tried to settle. If I had pleaded guilty instead of going to trial, the prosecutors would’ve agreed that a 20-year sentence was appropriate. Since Raymond, my trial attorney, never told me of the government’s offer, Tony insists that rather than pursuing a commutation of sentence, I need to file a petition with the court for relief. To prepare the legal motion, Tony enlists the help and support of Tom Hillier, the Federal Public Defender for the Western District of Washington, to accept my case. Tom then recruits Jonathan Solovy, a top-notch Seattle attorney who agrees to prepare the documents and argue for my release. Coordinating all these efforts requires hundreds of hours, and I’m moved that professionals who’ve never met me give of themselves so generously for the singular purpose of freeing me. The legal team employs investigators to gather evidence that will bolster my petition. Jonathan works diligently to persuade both the government and the judge to reconsider my sentence. But in the end, we lose. Judge Tanner is unmoved and he lets the sentence stand. Everyone on the team is concerned about how I’ll react to the decision. Strangely, I’m at peace, grateful to have received love and support from so many strangers who’ve now become friends. *  *  *  *  *  *  * Bruce visits me at the beginning of 1998, beyond my 10-year mark. He wants to discuss my plans for law school. Through letters we’ve discussed possibilities for moving through the remainder of my sentence productively. He’s not convinced that studying law by correspondence is my best option. “I really liked your idea of spending the final years of your sentence becoming an artist, a painter, or a musician, or even studying a foreign language. Those pursuits would round out your education and maybe free some creativity within you,” Bruce says, sitting across from me in the visiting room. “Bruce, I’m going to serve 16 more years. I’m not even halfway through my term. I don’t want to devote myself to another project that prison administrators can take away. Although I’ve thought about learning to paint or play the piano, if I were transferred I’d have to go through all this frustration again because of red tape, and that’s only if I could continue. Some prisons don’t even offer music or art programs.” Bruce nods his head as I describe my reasons, then he leans back in his chair.  “But that’s the essence of a liberal education. You could study painting and piano here, and if you’re transferred you could study foreign languages or poetry there. The more you learn, the more you’ll be able to appreciate when you come home.” “It’s going home that I’m thinking about. What will I face when I walk out of here?” “You’ll have friends who will help you.” “Yes, but I want to stand on my own feet, not come out weak, with my hat in hand looking for handouts.” “Don’t express yourself with clichés,” he admonishes. “You know what I mean. By then I will have served 26 years, and I need to anticipate the obstacles I’ll face. I’ll be nearly 50, but I won’t have any savings, I won’t have a home, I won’t even have any clothes to wear. With my prison record, employers will resist hiring me. If I don’t prepare for those obstacles, I’m going to run into tremendous resistance. How will I start my life?” Bruce rubs his head. “The law school you’re considering, though, isn’t of the same caliber as your other schools. Hofstra and Mercer have impeccable credentials. Wherever you go, people will respect those degrees. If you want to study law, I think you should wait until you’re home, where you could earn a degree from a nationally accredited school, not a correspondence school that the bar association doesn’t recognize. What’s the real value of that degree? It won’t even permit you to sit for a bar exam.” I lean forward, eagerly trying to explain my decision. “That’s what I couldn’t be so clear about in the letters I wrote to you; I have to be careful of what the guards read. I’m not studying law because I want to practice as a lawyer. I’m studying law because I want to use what I learn to help other prisoners who want to litigate their cases. Look around this room. Nearly every prisoner here wants another shot at getting back into court. If I study law, I’ll be able to help them.” “But if you’re not a lawyer, how can you represent them?” “I’m not intending to represent them. What I’ll do is help them research the law and write the briefs. They’ll submit their own legal documents, pro se. Sometimes I may help people persuade lawyers to take their cases, like Tony and Jonathan took mine. A law school education, together with my experience, will enable me to offer more and better assistance. Prisoners will pay for my services.” “That’s what troubles me.”  Bruce says, shaking his head. “You’ve worked all this time to build a record as a model prisoner, to educate yourself and keep a clean disciplinary record. Now you’re talking about breaking the rules by becoming some kind of jailhouse lawyer, exposing yourself to disciplinary infractions and possible problems with the system. It doesn’t make sense to me.” “Yes, I’ve worked hard to live as a model prisoner. What has it gotten me? Instead of support, I meet resistance. Administrators transfer me to frustrate my efforts and to block me from completing my studies. I don’t have any interest in being a model prisoner. My interest, my only interest, is succeeding upon release. And I think the best way I can do that is by preparing myself financially.” “So how are the prisoners going to pay you?” Bruce smirks at my plan. “Are they going to fill your locker with candy bars and sodas? How will that help when you get out?” “They won’t pay me directly. If a guy asks for my help, we’ll agree on a price. Then he’ll have his family send the funds to my family.” “But is that legal?” “Although we have too many laws in this country, as far as I know, it’s still legal for one citizen to send money to another citizen. My sister will pay taxes on any money she receives and she’ll hold it for me until I come home. Prison administrators may not like it, but it’s not against the law for Julie to receive money from another prisoner’s family. My helping another prisoner with legal motions isn’t against the law either.” “It just seems kind of sneaky, totally different from the open-book, transparent approach that you’ve followed.” Bruce remains skeptical. “I don’t see it that way. The plan is totally consistent with the open-book approach, and I intend to do it openly.” “How so? You won’t even receive payment directly.” I shrug my shoulders. “That’s only because I’m living within the rules imposed on me. But I’ll be honest about what I’m doing, and truthfully, I’ll take pride in beating a system that perpetuates failure.” Bruce shakes his head again. “You might be living within the letter of the rules by not receiving money directly, but you won’t be living within the spirit of the rules.” “Prison rules don’t concern me. Living as a model inmate isn’t going to help me when I walk out of here. No one is going to care that I didn’t receive any disciplinary infractions. People may not even look beyond the fact that I served 26 years in prison. I need enough money in the bank to meet all of my expenses during my first year of freedom, whether I receive a paycheck or not. I’ll have to buy a car, pay rent, buy clothes, and pay for everything else I’ll need to start my life. Meeting those responsibilities has much more value to me than observing the ‘spirit’ of prison rules.” “You’ve really thought this through,” Bruce begins to relent. “Have you considered the possible consequences? What if they transfer you back to high security?” “I don’t care where they send me. From now on, my sole focus is to prepare for a successful, contributing life. That’s not going to happen by accident.” “What prompted this new resolve? The court decision that denied you an early release?” Bruce’s support for me is evident in his caring tone and genuine interest, and I appreciate his willingness to listen as I share my thoughts. “I know that you limit your reading to classical literature, but it was a book I read by Stephen Covey, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. Have you ever heard of him?” “No,” Bruce says ruefully, laughing. “I enjoy an occasional good detective story, but I don’t read much from the self-help or inspiration genres.” “Well I find it helpful and I think you might identify with Covey.” “What makes you think so?” “He’s a former professor who taught at Brigham Young University, and his focus of study was leadership. Covey’s book validates my choices, the way I’ve lived for the past 10 years, and it’s helped me set the strategy I’ll use going forward.” “How so?” Bruce asks, curious. I’m eager to explain. “In his study of leadership, Dr. Covey found that successful people share seven habits in common.” I hold up my hand and use my fingers to tick them off. “One, they’re proactive. Two, they begin with the end in mind. Three, they put first things first. Four, they seek first to understand, then to be understood. Five, they think win-win. Six, they synergize. And seven, they constantly work to sharpen their approach.” “What? Are you telling me that’s a revelation for you? You still haven’t answered my question.” “What question?” “Why the shift in your strategy?” Bruce asks again, clarifying. “I’m pragmatic. Truthfully, it’s more of an evolution than a shift. I’ve been following Covey’s seven habits of leadership ever since I was in the county jail, when I read of Socrates. By continuing to educate myself, I’m taking proactive steps to overcome my adversity. By knowing the challenges that await my release, I’m beginning with the end in mind. By enrolling in law school, I’m putting first things first. I understand my environment, my limitations, and the ways I can make myself most useful. By pursuing this goal I’ll be able to generate the resources necessary to stand on my own when I leave prison. That’s win-win. It’s a way to use my education and to lead a more meaningful life in here.” “Have you figured out your rates yet, Counselor?” Bruce teases. “Whatever the market will bear. Isn’t that the American way?” I grin, 100 percent committed to the strategy driving my plans. “I’m serious. What do you expect to gain from all of this?” “The law school program is self-paced, independent study. I expect to finish in 2001. If I charge $500 for research or writing legal motions, I think I can earn an average of $1,000 a month over the 12 years I’ll still have to serve. After taxes, that would leave me close to $100,000 in the bank when I walk out of prison.” Bruce nods, smiling. “I only have one more question. If the warden won’t let you receive books from U. Conn., what makes you think he’s going to let you receive books from the law school in California?” “That’s the nice thing about law school. I won’t need to access an outside library. Every federal prison has its own law library. I’ll just purchase the other books I need. As long as the bookstore sends the books directly, I won’t need special permission from the prison.” “So you’re all set then?” “I’m ready.” *  *  *  *  *  *  *  

Today’s episode is hosted by Alisha Griffin leading an International Child Support Round Table with representatives from Brazil (Arnaldo José Alves Silveira, General Coordinator, General Coordination for International Legal Cooperation, Department of Assets Recovery and International Legal Cooperation, National Secretariat of Justice, Ministry of Justice and Public Security & Leonardo Magalhães, Federal Public Defender at the Public Defender’s Office), Norway (Floor de Jongh Bekkali, Head of Department, NAV Family Benefits and Pensions Child Support), the Hague Permanent Bureau (Philippe Lortie, First Secretary, HCCH), The State of California (Kristen Donadee, Chief Attorney, California DCSS), and The United States (Anne Miller, Senior Policy Specialist, United States Office of Child Support Enforcement). They discuss the Hague Convention, how the implementation has gone over the past few years and other things they are doing to improve child support services and cooperation across the globe.

Malina Simard-Halm was conceived through assisted reproductive technologies. Malina is part of a family of five with two dads and two brothers also conceived through assisted reproductive technologies. Malina currently studies Political Science and Economics at Yale University with a concentration in Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies. Malina spends time outside of school working at the Federal Public Defender’s office and advocating for LGBTQ families whenever she can. Malina has spoken on Huffington Post, CNN, NPR, spoken in court, and submitted testimony for the amicus brief, “Voices of the Children,” used and cited in recent Supreme Court cases. She is additionally a fellow at Young People for the American Way – an organization which specializes in conducting research, legal work, education, and advocacy for a wide variety of causes- where she has worked on projects relating to reproductive, racial and LGBTQ justice. Listen to Malina as she discusses with Ellen and Jenn: • When she first realized that her family dynamic was different than other families. • Her first experiences with homophobia and discrimination. • How her fathers started the conversation of her birth and family. • Her thoughts on the idea that individuals need both a father and a mother. • Having her first period and having two dads. • How she dealt with homophobia or discrimination against her family. • How she handled Mother’s Day in school and growing up. • How she found a community of similar families and experiences. • How it has been for her brothers growing up. • The impact of knowing who is the “biological father” and identity of her egg donor. • Her relationship with her surrogate and egg donor. • Her fathers, a doctor and an ART Attorney! • Her future goals professionally and personally. • Her message to intended parents. Want to share your story or ask a question? Call and leave us a message on our hotline: 303-997-1903. Learn more about our podcast: https://iwanttoputababyinyou.com/ Learn more about our surrogacy agencies: https://www.brightfuturesfamilies.com/ Learn more about Ellen’s law firm: http://trachmanlawcenter.com/ Learn more about Colage: https://www.colage.org Learn more about Growing Generations: https://www.growinggenerations.com/

In this episode, Walter I. Gonçalves, Jr., a Federal Public Defender in the District of Arizona, discusses his article "Narrative, Culture, and Individuation: A Criminal Defense Lawyer’s Race-Conscious Approach to Reduce Implicit Bias for Latinxs," which is published in the Seattle Journal for Social Justice. Gonçalves begins by explaining what implicit bias is and how it can affect criminal prosecution and sentencing. He describes a range of different ways in which lawyers and judges can avoid implicit bias and help jurors avoid implicit bias. And he directs special attention to how implicit bias affect latinx criminal defendants. Gonçalves is on Twitter at @wgafpd.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Associate Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In Episode 022 of The Former Lawyer Podcast, Sarah talks with Sivani Babu. Sivani worked as a federal public defender before switching careers. She is now an award-winning nature photographer and travel journalist, and the co-founder and Creative Director of the cross-genre travel magazine Hidden Compass. In this conversation, Sivani shares about: Really enjoying being a federal public defender and getting up in court every day; Getting a “real” camera during law school and starting to take photos and display and sell her work simply as a hobby; The trip to Antarctica that changed the course of her career and her life; How the people who knew her best reacted to her decision to leave the law; Learning to navigate a new industry that was in the middle of massive transition; Being told that she needed to choose between a career in writing or a career in photography since that was how the industry worked in the past, and deciding to chart her own course; How she and the co-founder of Hidden Compass couldn’t find the kind of magazine that they wanted to read and write for—so they created it; How learning how to do new things helps you move forward with even more confidence; Why you should embrace your fear if you’re thinking about leaving the law; Why the skills that she brought from lawyering to her new career were so valuable; What you should consider when thinking about turning your hobby into a new career; Why you need to get comfortable with being uncomfortable; and much more! Show Notes: Sign up for the free 5-Day Career Clarity Bootcamp—> formerlawyer.com/bootcamp Get Sarah’s free guide, First Steps to Leaving the Law—> formerlawyer.com/guide Connect with Sivani on her website, Instagram, or Twitter, or check out the Hidden Compass website, Facebook, or Instagram

This is Pt.2 of the sit down with Federal Public Defender in the Central District of Illinois, Elisabeth Pollock who represented Brendt Christensen whom is responsible for the death of University of Illinois student Yingying Zhang.

On this episode the guys sit down with Federal Public Defender in the Central District of Illinois, Elisabeth Pollock who represented Brendt Christensen whom is responsible for the death of University of Illinois student Yingying Zhang.

Our guest on Monday is none other than Jules Johnson! @jiujiteirojd Jules is a graduate of Thurgood Marshall School of Law, former Brazoria County Assistant District Attorney (ADA), former Harris County Public Defender, former Federal Public Defender, & current Harris County ADA. He is also a BJJ Brown Belt who trains out of @pablosilvabjjhq He has won a number of IBJJF Open Tournaments across the country. He has also won Master Worlds, one of the most prestigious titles in the sport of BJJ. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/savages/message

Radhika sits down with Nora Phillips to talk about about her work as the co-founder of the non-profit organization Al Otro Lado, which provides legal and mental health services to immigrants, refugees, and deportees, in Los Angeles and Tijuana. Nora and two other humanitarians were placed on a secret government watch list to gather information and disrupt their work. Beginning in October 2018, the government tracked their movements and actions, as well as harassed them at the border. Phillips was refused entry to Mexico, separated from her family, detained, and forcibly returned to the United States. Nora serves as Legal Director of Al Otro Lado. Nora has a deep commitment to immigrant justice and, prior to starting her firm, worked at non-profit legal services organizations such as the Central American Resource Center (CARECEN) in Los Angeles (2009-2014) and the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago where she was an Equal Justice Works Fellow (2007-2009). Nora is a nationally-recognized expert on the U visa and frequently presents on this and other topics to attorneys, law enforcement, and other professionals. Nora frequently works as a consultant expert with the Office of the Federal Public Defender on complex U visa cases. Nora is a member of the Executive Committee for the Immigration Law Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association. She has been licensed to practice law in Illinois and she exclusively practices federal immigration law. Nora lives in Los Angeles.

On top of legal know-how, investigative social work skills are a big part of Tracy Ulstad’s job as a Federal Public Defender for death row inmates. She meets thoroughly with the people in her client’s life, often building a picture for the jury of how a history of family violence and abuse led to the crime—an alternative to sterile facts which suggest an evil person.Now progressive, Tracy credits her conservative upbringing for launching her career—via the humanitarian values she learned in Catholic school. She describes the stark challenges her clients face during decades on death row, how she talks about work with her 7-year-old son, and the groundbreaking state Supreme Court case that might eliminate the death penalty in Pennsylvania.Podcast website: https://nwphillypodcast.netMore about Tracy Ulstad and the Capital Habeus Unit:Habeas Corpus Unit, Federal Community Defender Office (Eastern PA district)Could a Philly killer’s appeal lead PA Supreme Court to abolish the death penalty?Capital punishment in the United States

This lecture entitled, Bail: Risk Release & Reform, was be presented by Chief Magistrate Judge Susan E. Schwab, United States Magistrate Judge for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The following individuals served as experts on the lecture panel: Hon. Richard A. Lewis  President Judge  Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas  Heidi Freese  Federal Public Defender  Middle District of Pennsylvania  David J. Freed  United States Attorney  The United States Attorney's Office  Middle District of Pennsylvania  Nyssa Taylor, Esquire  Criminal Justice Policy Counsel  ACLU of Pennsylvania Judge Susan E. Schwab was appointed Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania in 2012.  She assumed the role of Chief Magistrate Judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania in 2017. She spent 11 years in public service with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as Deputy Chief Counsel for the Auditor General, Deputy Chief Counsel and Deputy State Treasurer for Administration for Treasury, and Deputy Chief of Staff for Administration and Deputy Chief Counsel for the Democratic Caucus of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. Prior to that, Judge Schwab was in private law practice with Rhoads & Sinon, LLP in Harrisburg and Semanoff, Orsmby, Greenberg and Torchia, LLC in Huntingdon Valley. Judge Schwab is from Wilkes-Barre, Pa. and graduated summa cum laude from Wilkes College. She was a member of the inaugural class of the Harrisburg campus of Widener University School of Law, where she served as an Internal Editor of the Widener Journal of Public Law. She graduated magna cum laude and was the law school’s first valedictorian.  Judge Schwab has been a member of the Board of Overseers of Widener University School of Law and the Chair of the Widener University School of Law Harrisburg Campus Diversity Advisory Board.  For more information about Widener Law Commonwealth's podcast, visit commonwealthlaw.widener.edu/podcast.   Music Credit: LeChuckz

Last month, the Pennsylvania Joint State Government Commission released its long-awaited report on capital punishment in the commonwealth, a report seven years in the making. In this episode, Marshall Dayan of the Federal Public Defender of the Western District of Pennsylvania joins to talk about the findings of the task force and its advisory committee. The report is available at this link: http://jsg.legis.state.pa.us/publications.cfm?JSPU_PUBLN_ID=472 Also in this episode, we went to Washington! In June, the ACLU hosted its first nationwide membership conference in a decade. We talked with people from Pennsylvania who were there, asking them why they took three days out of their lives to hang out with several thousand ACLU members.

Lawyers are often seen as lone wolves but when it comes to overcoming stress, mental illness, or addiction, not even lawyers have to go it alone. In this report from On The Road at the 2018 ABA Midyear Meeting, host Jim Calloway talks to Bree Buchanan, Amanda Richards, Derek LaCroix, and Raul Ayala about the resources currently in place for lawyers who are struggling to maintain their personal and professional wellbeing. They also hit on other topics relating to lawyer wellness, including increasing resources for law students, rallying stakeholders behind mental health, and the fight to destigmatize the issue within the industry. Bree Buchanan is director of the Texas Lawyers Assistance Program of the State Bar of Texas and serves as co-chair of the National Task Force on Lawyer Wellbeing. Amanda Richards is a 1L at the University of British Columbia. Derek LaCroix, QC, joined LAP as the executive director in 1996. Raul Ayala is an attorney at Office of the Federal Public Defender in Los Angeles, California.

Josh Patashnik (Munger, Tolles & Olson) explains the 9th Circuit's significant determination that Winters rights apply to groundwater; Jeffrey Aaron (Office of the Federal Public Defender) describes a narrow evidence rule exception SCOTUS has created allowing impeachment of verdicts influenced by jurors' racial animus.

Our extern, Brittany, interviews AFPD David Bungard to get a feel for what it's like to practice federal criminal defense for the indigent charged with federal crimes.  David discusses the differences between private and public practice, his experience as a Criminal Justice Act panel attorney, what drew him to defense work, and what day-to-day life is like working in the office of the Federal Public Defender for the Southern District of West Virginia.

Host Dr. Richard Louis Miller interviews Ayelet Waldman on her recent book: A Really Good Day: How Microdosing Made a Mega Difference in My Mood, My Marriage, and My Life. Ayelet Waldman, former Federal Public Defender, is a bestselling author, married to bestselling author, Michael Chabon, and mother of 4.

We talk being a CEO, a founder, his companies, public speaking & a lot more. Christopher is the founader of Pass It Down, a social storytelling platform launching in 2016, that makes it easy to capture and preserve family stories in video, audio, text and photos. Chris is also Chief Executive Officer of SwiftWing Ventures, a venture capital firm located out of Chattanooga, Tennessee. Prior to joining SwiftWing Ventures, Christopher helped co-found Woople™, a learning management system that has delivered over 20 million minutes of educational content to fortune 500 companies around the world. He is also an attorney who practices federal criminal law on both the trial and appellate levels and is a CJA Panelist for the Federal Public Defender’s office. Christopher has spent the last 15 years actively involved in competing and teaching public speaking, debate, and appellate advocacy. In law school, he was the top speaker and winner of the Chancellor’s Cup Moot Court competition and the winner of the Robert Lee Tullis Moot Court Competition at the Paul M. Hebert LSU Law Center. During his undergraduate studies, he was a six-time collegiate state champion in public speaking and debate and a national champion speaker. Christopher now helps coach collegiate debate, public speaking and appellate advocacy. Christopher received his JD from the Paul M. Hebert LSU Law Center and has clerked for numerous judges, including, the honorable Chief Justice Johnson of the Louisiana Supreme Court. He received a double BA in Political Science and International Relations from Louisiana State University. https://twitter.com/ChrisCummings__ http://www.passitdown.com/ https://twitter.com/Passitdown http://www.woople.com/

Jesse Gessin: Federal Public Defender   Jesse Gessin is a master of navigating federal prosecutions. He spoke with the Earning Freedom audience today about his experience. Jesse began his career as a federal public defender in the Virgin Islands. After a high level of success, he transitioned to the federal public defender's office in Orange County, California. Those who listen to Earning Freedom know that I'm a huge fan of federal public defenders. They devote their careers to helping people who lack resources navigate their way through federal prosecutions. Jesse spoke with us today about trial, about the sentencing process, about post conviction proceedings, and about preparing for early termination from Supervised Release.

Federal Public Defender Miriam Conrad talks with Lawfare's Alan Rozenshtein about the case of Rezwan Ferdaus, a 26-year old U.S.-born citizen of Bangladeshi origin who recently pled guilty to terrorism charges arising out of an FBI sting operation.