Podcasts about fifth circuit

The eyes of the consumer finance world are now on the Supreme Court as it decides whether to grant the CFPB's certiorari petition in Consumer Financial Services Association Ltd. v. CFPB. In the decision, a Fifth Circuit panel held the CFPB's funding mechanism violates the Appropriations Clause of the U.S. Constitution. In Part I, we focused on the legal arguments underlying the Fifth Circuit decision and potential outcomes. In Part II, we discuss the potential practical effects of a Supreme Court decision that holds the CFPB's funding is unconstitutional on existing CFPB mortgage and other regulations and on pending and future CFPB enforcement actions. In particular, we consider how the current legal uncertainty might factor into the litigation strategy of companies that are the targets of CFPB enforcement activity as well as companies' compliance strategy. We also consider the uncertainty's impact on the CFPB's ongoing operations and conclude with a discussion of how Congress might react if the Supreme Court holds that the CFPB's funding is unconstitutional. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group, moderates the discussion, joined by John Culhane, Richard Andreano, and Michael Gordon, partners in the Group.

Free Speech: Did the police violate the civil rights of the blogger La Gordiloca, when they arrested her for publishing non-public information on Facebook? - Argued: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 9:57:4 EDT

The eyes of the consumer finance world are now on the Supreme Court as it decides whether to grant the CFPB's certiorari petition in CFSA v. CFPB. In the decision, a Fifth Circuit panel held the CFPB's funding mechanism violates the Appropriations Clause of the U.S. Constitution. We first review the background of CFSA's lawsuit, the mechanism through which the CFPB is funded, and Congress's policy rationale for the mechanism. We then examine the reasoning behind the Fifth Circuit's conclusion that the funding mechanism is unconstitutional, the CFPB's strategy in response to the decision, and the issues CFSA is expected to raise in a cross-petition for certiorari. We conclude with Adam's predictions on the outcome of the cert petitions, how SCOTUS is likely to rule if it grants the CFPB's petition, potential remedies if SCOTUS rules the funding is unconstitutional, and the impact of such a ruling on pending and future litigation challenging CFPB actions. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group, moderates the discussion, joined by John Culhane, Richard Andreano, and Michael Gordon, partners in the Group.

NCLA Wins Major Fifth Circuit en Banc Decision Tossing ATF's Bump Stock Ban The full Fifth Circuit bench has ruled that a bump stock does not fall within the definition of “machinegun” as set forth in federal law. NCLA represents gun shop owner, Army veteran, and firearms instructor Michael Cargill in Michael Cargill v. Merrick B. Garland, et al. NCLA argued that: (1) the Final Rule conflicts with the statutory definition of a machinegun and thus exceeds ATF's authority; (2) ATF's construction is not entitled to Chevron deference; (3) to the extent that the courts determine that the definition of machinegun is ambiguous with respect to bump stocks, they should apply the rule of lenity to determine that bump stocks are not machineguns; and (4) if the statute were interpreted as authorizing ATF's declaration that bump stocks are prohibited machineguns, then the statute would be an unconstitutional delegation of Congress's legislative powers. The Fifth Circuit agreed with NCLA on every one of these points. Mark and Vec discuss NCLA's Fifth Circuit win.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Decades of tension over the use of noncompete agreements in the workplace has bubbled over to start the year with a Federal Trade Commission proposal to ban those agreements across the board. The early-stage move drew cheers from the labor movement and threats of swift litigation from the powerful business lobby, teeing up a fierce legal and political clash in the coming months. Law360 competition reporter Bryan Koenig joins Pro Say this week  to lay out the specifics of the FTC's bombshell proposal and the likely battles that lie ahead. Also this week, Real Housewives star Jen Shah gets 6.5 years in prison for her role in a telemarketing scam and the Fifth Circuit strikes down a ban on “bump stocks” meant to accelerate the firing of semi-automatic rifles. Finally, a mysterious interloper in the elite publishing world is rung up on fraud charges for stealing manuscripts and impersonating literary figures to mysterious ends.

We got some exquisite First and Second Amendment content for you today. David and Sarah discuss a Fifth Circuit decision to strike down the Trump administration ban on bump stocks. They then discuss whether a teacher has a right to wear a MAGA cap even if it engenders emotional reactions.Show Notes:Fifth Circuit Majority Opinion on Bump Stock bansGorsuch's dissentJudge Elrod's musical talentsSummary from 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on MAGA hat and free speechNYT: A Lecturer Showed a Painting of the Prophet Muhammad. She Lost Her Job. 

Survivors of domestic violence often lack the resources to secure legal representation in either or both civil and criminal courts. And navigating the civil and criminal justice systems can be overwhelming for survivors. What's more, offenders in criminal domestic violence cases are entitled to attorney representation while their victims are not. To address the shortcomings of systems that do not adequately address the needs of survivors, organizations like the DC Volunteer Lawyers Project have stepped up to offer no-cost legal assistance that provides a holistic approach to representation. In doing so, survivors receive more than just attorney representation, they also receive advocacy, referrals to domestic violence services and help with child custody matters. We talk with attorney Jenny Brody for an understanding of what survivors need in these cases and how they can access appropriate resources. Ms. Brody also explains the importance of domestic violence training for law enforcement, attorneys and judges and how that training can improve outcomes for survivors.Jenny Brody has practiced family law in Washington, DC for more than ten years.  As the Co-Founder and Co-Executive Director of the DC Volunteer Lawyers Project, from 2008 to 2016, Ms. Brody provided legal assistance to hundreds of domestic violence survivors in Civil Protection Order cases, as well as in divorce, custody and child support matters.  As a member of the DC Superior Court Counsel for Child Abuse and Neglect Panel, Ms. Brody represented children as a court-appointed Guardian ad litem and also represented adoptive parents in adoption petitions.  Ms. Brody has devoted substantial time to improving the court system, as a participant in the DC Superior Court Domestic Relations and Domestic Violence Implementation Committees.  She also played a role in promulgating Guardian ad litem Practice Standards, through the Council for Court Excellence and in DC Superior Court. Ms. Brody is a recognized expert in domestic violence and family law issues, presenting numerous training programs in these areas for lawyers, judges, social workers, medical professionals and domestic violence advocates. Prior to practicing family law, Ms. Brody worked in private practice, at Rogovin, Huge & Schiller and at Powers, Pyles & Sutter.  She also served as an attorney at the United States Department of Justice, Civil Appellate Staff.  She clerked for the Hon. Irving L. Goldberg, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.  

Fifth Circuit blocks ATF ban on bump stocks, New law means no charges for Maryland 12-year-old who brought gun to school,Should foster parents have to give up their Second Amendment rights?, Anti-Gunners Should be Careful What They Wish For.    Lock N Load is presented by; Aero Precision https://aeroprecisionusa.com Modern Gun School https://mgs.edu  Ace Firearms http://www.acefirearms.com DeSantis Holsters https://www.desantisholster.com Staccato http://staccato2011.com Taran Tactical Innovations https://tarantacticalinnovations.com Spikes Tactical https://www.spikestactical.com Chambers Custom https://chamberscustom.com C&H Precision https://chpws.com

1 Fifth Circuit Blocks Federal Contractor Vaccine Mandate A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld a lower court's ruling blocking the Biden administration's Covid-19 vaccine mandate for federal contractors. In a 2-1 decision, the court said the mandate could be interpreted to give President Joe Biden “nearly unlimited authority to introduce requirements into federal contracts.” NCLA represents clients in James Joseph Rodden, et al. v. Dr. Anthony Fauci, et al., a similar class-action lawsuit seeking to overturn the vaccine mandate imposed on federal workers.  Vec discusses the Fifth Circuit's prohibition of the contractor vaccine mandate in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Indiana.  2 Lawsuit Against CT's Freedom of Information Commission This week, Judge John L. Cordani denied the Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission's (FOIC) motion to strike in the lawsuit, Energy Policy Advocates v. Freedom of Information Commission, et al.  NCLA Senior Litigation Counsel Peggy Little joins the show to discuss the latest updates in the case.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

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))

It's all about optics. When an associate left Jones Day before serving a full two years, the firm billed for pro-rated bar study expenses. Once again, just because an agreement allows a firm to do something, doesn't mean it should. It's just not a good look for a firm. Speaking of optics, we also talk about Justice Brett Kavanaugh partying with Matt Gaetz and Alex Acosta -- and more importantly, parties with business before the Court this Term -- all while Supreme Court legitimacy sinks like a stone. Speaking of legitimacy, the Fifth Circuit agrees that a judge committed an ethical breach in hearing a case, but decided to just sweep it under the rug. Also, by the time this posts, Twitter will have changed its policies five more times, but we discuss the legal ramifications, if any, of Twitter's short-lived ban on mentioning "competitors."

It's all about optics. When an associate left Jones Day before serving a full two years, the firm billed for pro-rated bar study expenses. Once again, just because an agreement allows a firm to do something, doesn't mean it should. It's just not a good look for a firm. Speaking of optics, we also talk about Justice Brett Kavanaugh partying with Matt Gaetz and Alex Acosta -- and more importantly, parties with business before the Court this Term -- all while Supreme Court legitimacy sinks like a stone. Speaking of legitimacy, the Fifth Circuit agrees that a judge committed an ethical breach in hearing a case, but decided to just sweep it under the rug. Also, by the time this posts, Twitter will have changed its policies five more times, but we discuss the legal ramifications, if any, of Twitter's short-lived ban on mentioning "competitors."

The Fifth Circuit recently ruled that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) funding structure is unconstitutional, casting doubt on all of the agency's actions. But the CFPB is as active as ever. Please join Mayer Brown lawyers Ori Lev, Chris Leach, and Christa Bieker as they discuss the Fifth Circuit's ruling and its implications as well as the agency's recent policy, enforcement, and supervisory activities.  

On November 7, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Michelle Cochran v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. In April 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) brought an enforcement action against Michelle Cochran, a certified public accountant, alleging that she had failed to comply with federal auditing standards. A SEC administrative law judge (ALJ) determined Cochran had violated federal law, fined her $22,500, and banned her from practicing before the SEC for five years. The SEC adopted the ALJ's decision, and Cochran objected.Before the SEC could rule on Cochran's objection, the Supreme Court decided Lucia v. SEC, in which it held that SEC ALJs are officers of the United States under the Appointments Clause, who must be appointed by the President, a court of law, or a department head. In response to the Lucia ruling, the SEC remanded all pending administrative cases for new proceedings before constitutionally appointed ALJs, including Cochran's. Cochran filed a federal lawsuit arguing that while Lucia may have addressed one constitutional issue with ALJs, it left uncorrected another problem: because SEC ALJs enjoy multiple layers of "for-cause" removal protection, they are unconstitutionally insulated from the President's Article II removal power. The district court dismissed her case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction based on five circuit courts of appeal ruling that the Exchange Act implicitly stripped district courts of the jurisdiction to hear challenges to ongoing SEC enforcement proceedings. Arguing that in 2010, the Supreme Court had unanimously ruled in Free Enterprise Fund that nothing in the Exchange Act stripped federal court jurisdiction either explicitly, or implicitly, Cochran appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. A three judge panel affirmed the dismissal 2-1, but later, the Fifth Circuit sitting en banc, reversed 9-7, holding that Cochran had district court jurisdiction to bring her challenge to the SEC ALJ's removal protections. Tune in to hear a breakdown of the oral argument.

Supreme Court actions during the 2021-2022 term - opinions, grants and denials of petitions for certiorari, and motions docket orders - captured the attention of the legal community. Emblematic of the trend in judicial analysis was West Virginia v. EPA in which, notwithstanding that every brief cited Chevron for or against deference to the agency’s action, the Court’s opinion never mentioned it. Instead, the Court invoked the major questions doctrine to conclude that the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulations had exceeded the authority Congress had granted it in the Clean Air Act. In other decisions as well, the Court applied new degrees of weight to a variety of methodologies, doctrines, and canonical tools in its interpretations of statutes and the authority they grant the agencies assigned to implement them.This panel will explore what this new trend in judicial analysis means for future challenges to agency actions. Is the SEC’s focus on ESG, for example, within the confines of its statutory mandate? Can ERISA fiduciaries favor ESG concerns over earnings and value considerations? Is DOJ acting within its authority when it requires the target seeking to settle an enforcement action to pay, not a statutorily prescribed fine to the Federal Treasury, but non-parties, unrelated to the enforcement action? Is the Department of Education authorized to forgive student loans? Can the Department of Defense discharge military personnel for refusing a COVID vaccine? These and other questions are likely to be the subject of lively discussion by this panel of experts.Featuring:Mr. Ian Gershengorn, Partner, Jenner & Block; Former Acting U.S. Solicitor General Prof. Jennifer Mascott, Assistant Professor of Law & Co-Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University; Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, U.S. Department of JusticeProf. Tom Merrill, Charles Evans Hughes Professor of Law, Columbia Law School; Former Deputy Solicitor General Mr. Yaakov (Jacob) M. Roth, Partner, Jones Day Moderator: Hon. Edith H. Jones, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

ABA Model Rule of Professional Responsibility 1.2(b) states: “A lawyer's representation of a client, including representation by appointment, does not constitute an endorsement of the client's political, economic, social or moral views or activities.” The comment on the rule further explains: “Legal representation should not be denied to people who are unable to afford legal services, or whose cause is controversial or the subject of popular disapproval. By the same token, representing a client does not constitute approval of the client's views or activities.” These principles date back at least to John Adams’ defense of the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre and have long been viewed as essential to the adversarial system.Increasingly, however, in the minds of some, these principles are better honored in the breach – at least in the case of the powerful. There are all kinds of representation that lawyers simply should refuse to undertake – ranging from the House of Representatives seeking to intervene to defend a previously enacted law, to GITMO detainees, to the Defense of Marriage Act, to tobacco companies, to oil companies, to gun manufacturers, to former President Trump – regardless of the legal merits of the matters at issue. Lawyers who undertake such representations, it is argued, should incur severe reputational and professional consequences, and other clients should punish firms that take on these matters by taking their business elsewhere, even if there is no direct conflict. To these minds such representation sends the wrong message about the role of law in society. At the same time, in the view of many of the proponents of these exceptions, it remains essential that lawyers continue to represent certain kinds of unpopular clients, such as defendants accused of violent crimes, without fear of adverse professional repercussions. To them that is fundamental to the proper role for lawyers in society.Can these two visions coexist? What is the proper role of the lawyer?Featuring:Ms. Lisa Blatt, Partner, Williams & Connolly; Former Assistant to the U.S. Solicitor GeneralHon. Paul D. Clement, Partner, Clement & Murphy, PLLC; Former U.S. Solicitor General Mr. Kannon Shanmugam, Partner, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP; Former Assistant to the U.S. Solicitor GeneralHon. Seth Waxman, Partner, Wilmer Hale; U.S. Former Solicitor General Moderator: Hon. S. Kyle Duncan, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

COVID: Can Tyson Foods be held liable for the spread of COVID amongst its employees? - Argued: Mon, 05 Dec 2022 15:14:6 EDT

The Roberts Court is recasting the administrative state according to its view of the separation of powers. It is giving the President more authority to fire his subordinates and creating a hierarchical executive where the President and his principal officers have more authority over appointments and decision making. It is forcing the legislature to speak clearly when it wants to vest agencies with major powers and expressing interest in reinvigorating limits on some delegations of legislative power. It is strengthening the judiciary’s interpretative role, declining to give as much deference to regulatory interpretations by agencies. Is its view coherent and sound? Should the Court square its vision with a modern government that was formed on different principles? If so, how?Featuring:Prof. Aditya Bamzai, Martha Lubin Karsh and Bruce A. Karsh Bicentennial Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of LawHon. Thomas B. Griffith, Special Counsel, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP; Former Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia CircuitHon. Sally Katzen, Professor of Practice and Distinguished Scholar in Residence; Co-Director of the Legislative and Regulatory Process Clinic, New York University School of LawProf. Nicholas R. Parrillo, William K. Townsend Professor of Law and Professor of History, Yale Law SchoolModerator: Hon. James C. Ho, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Executive branch agencies such as the SEC, CFTC, FTC and others have recently used their regulatory powers to advance ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance criteria) policies that some consider beyond their core missions and outside of their legal authority. For example, the SEC has proposed climate change disclosure rules that are prescriptive as to the actions expected of public companies. Likewise, the FTC has asked “non-traditional” questions (e.g., environmental, governance, unionization status) during merger probes, and its draft strategic plans propose using antitrust and consumer protection to advance “racial equity, and all forms of equity.”Institutional investors are also pushing ESG and corporate America is responding. Many companies have embraced “stakeholder capitalism” and as a result are taking public stands on voting rights, gun control, and other social issues.Some are concerned about the economic and societal impact of these activities, and pushback is occurring in the form of judicial challenges to regulatory rulemaking, new state laws against divestiture and defunding of energy production and gun sales, and state antitrust investigations of institutional investor groups seeking environmental and social change at public companies.Panelists will discuss the current state of play of “woke capitalism”, and efforts to address agency actions and those of private sector entities.Featuring:Mr. Jonathan Berry, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates; Former Acting Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of LaborMs. Dalia O. Blass, Head of External Affairs, Blackrock; Former Director, Division of Investment Management, U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionMr. Douglas Geho, Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law, U.S. House Judiciary CommitteeHon. Christine S. Wilson, Commissioner, Federal Trade CommissionModerator: Hon. Andrew Oldham, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Anchored by MT founder and civil rights lawyer, Ben Meiselas and national trial lawyer and strategist, Michael Popok, the top-rated news analysis podcast LegalAF x MeidasTouch is back for another hard-hitting look at the wheels of justice in “real time analyze and discuss this week's most consequential developments at the intersection of law and politics. On this week's episode: Trump's lawyers are grilled by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals concerning the the stolen documents at Mar-a-Lago, and Special Counsel Jack Smith is on the job; a new suit is filed by columnist E. Jean Carroll against Trump in New York federal court for civil rape and a new defamation claim; the New York Attorney General's civil fraud case against the Trump Organization is set for a 2023 trial date; the Supreme Court rules against Trump (again) and permits his tax returns to be turned over to the House Ways & Means Committee; the Department of Justice seeks testimony from Mike Pence about Jan6 and Trump's actions; and the Fifth Circuit (!) rules in favor of the Biden Administration in a case brought by 2 states related to the spread of social media disinformation. DEALS FROM OUR SPONSORS: AG1 by Athletic Greens: https://athleticgreens.com/legalaf Aura Frames: https://auraframes.com/legalaf Shop Meidas and Legal AF Merch at: https://store.meidastouch.com Join us on Patreon: https://patreon.com/meidastouch Remember to subscribe to ALL the Meidas Media Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://pod.link/1510240831 Legal AF: https://pod.link/1580828595 The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://pod.link/1595408601 The Influence Continuum: https://pod.link/1603773245 Kremlin File: https://pod.link/1575837599 Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://pod.link/1530639447 The Weekend Show: https://pod.link/1612691018 The Tony Michaels Podcast: https://pod.link/1561049560 American Psyop: https://pod.link/1652143101 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

ARCI President Ed Martin joins this week's TDN Writers' Room to discuss the recent news that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that HISA is unconstitutional.

On November 7, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Michelle Cochran v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. In April 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) brought an enforcement action against Michelle Cochran, a certified public accountant, alleging that she had failed to comply with federal auditing standards. A SEC administrative law judge (ALJ) determined Cochran had violated federal law, fined her $22,500, and banned her from practicing before the SEC for five years. The SEC adopted the ALJ's decision, and Cochran objected. Before the SEC could rule on Cochran's objection, the Supreme Court decided Lucia v. SEC, in which it held that SEC ALJs are officers of the United States under the Appointments Clause, who must be appointed by the President, a court of law, or a department head. In response to the Lucia ruling, the SEC remanded all pending administrative cases for new proceedings before constitutionally appointed ALJs, including Cochran's. Cochran filed a federal lawsuit arguing that while Lucia may have addressed one constitutional issue with ALJs, it left uncorrected another problem: because SEC ALJs enjoy multiple layers of "for-cause" removal protection, they are unconstitutionally insulated from the President's Article II removal power. The district court dismissed her case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction based on five circuit courts of appeal ruling that the Exchange Act implicitly stripped district courts of the jurisdiction to hear challenges to ongoing SEC enforcement proceedings. Arguing that in 2010, the Supreme Court had unanimously ruled in Free Enterprise Fund that nothing in the Exchange Act stripped federal court jurisdiction either explicitly, or implicitly, Cochran appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. A three judge panel affirmed the dismissal 2-1, but later, the Fifth Circuit sitting en banc, reversed 9-7, holding that Cochran had district court jurisdiction to bring her challenge to the SEC ALJ's removal protections. The case is set to be argued on Nov 7, 2022. We will break down the oral argument for this case on the next day, November 8, 2022. Featuring:--Margaret A. Little, Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance

My guest is Tom Hall (https://www.bishopmills.com/attorneys/tomhall/) of the Bishop & Mills (https://www.bishopmills.com/) law firm in Tallahassee. Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir.1981) (en banc) was the opinion adopting as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to October 1, 1981 in the new Elevent Circuit. History and creation (https://www.5dca.org/About-the-Court/Court-History) of the Fifth DCA. Opinion (https://www.floridasupremecourt.org/content/download/811045/opinion/sc21-1543.pdf) creating the new Sixth DCA. Sixth DCA (https://www.flcourts.org/6DCA) official website. Your host is Duane Daiker (https://www.shumaker.com/professionals/A-D/duane-a-daiker), a board certified appellate lawyer in the Tampa office of Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP (https://www.shumaker.com). You can reach him at: ddaiker@shumaker.com (ddaiker@shumaker.com). Please support our sponsor: Court Surety Bond Agency (http://courtsurety.com/). CSBA is the nation's leading surety agency specializing in supersedeas bonds. (877-810-5525). If you love the show, feel free to Buy Me a Coffee (https://www.buymeacoffee.com/Daiker)! Please follow the show on Twitter (https://twitter.com/IssuesonAppeal), and consider subscribing and rating the show on iTunes. Special Guest: Tom Hall.

Some employers were surprised by the en banc Fifth Circuit's December 2021 decision in Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt that a supervisor for an offshore oil company who received approximately $1,000 per day for a total of over $200,000 annually was eligible for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Act exempts from overtime pay workers “employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity,” and the oil company argued that a highly compensated supervisor like Mr. Hewitt qualifies for this “EAP” exemption. The en banc Fifth Circuit applied a Department of Labor regulation requiring EAP-exempt employees to have a fixed weekly salary to conclude that, notwithstanding high pay and supervisory duties, Mr. Hewitt was non-exempt because he was paid on a daily rather than weekly basis.However, that argument has not been accepted across the bench. Judge Jones dissented that the weekly salary rule is inapplicable for workers who satisfy a separate regulatory requirement for exempt “highly compensated employees” who make over $100,000 per year (now $107,432). Judge Wiener's dissent added that application of the weekly salary rule—which dates from 1940s—is illogical and unreasonable under the circumstances. DOL took no view on this case. Additionally, Helix Energy created an apparent split with the First and Second Circuits, and the Supreme Court granted on certiorari May 2, 2022. Oral argument took place October 12. If the Court upholds the decision, employers that relied on the First and Second Circuits may face significant retroactive liability. In this podcast, experts provide a litigation update on Helix Energy, what it is, what the possible outcomes may be, and the potential consequences of the same. Featuring:Dave Dorey, Senior Litigation Counsel, The Fairness CenterTimothy Taylor, Partner, Holland & Knight LLP[Moderator] Sheng Li, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties AllianceVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

This episode considers modern-day financial regulation - specifically, the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau - and what Alexander Hamilton might have thought about it. Then I consider, using a recent Fifth Circuit opinion as a test case, whether those thoughts offer any guidance about the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I doing so, I focus on the trial-court rules that guard against speculative testimony from a witness, as well as expert testimony that is not well-grounded in a recognized methodology. Based on that review, I suggest that analysis of Hamilton's intent - that would likely not be admissible in a trial court - may not be probative in a Constitutional analysis about a feature of modern government that did not exist in Hamilton's lifetime. 

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is facing an existential crisis after the Fifth Circuit said the agency is unconstitutionally funded. On this week's episode, Law360 senior baking reporter Jon Hill tells us about the fallout of that ruling, including a flurry of filings from companies looking to get CFPB cases thrown out. Also this week, we discuss a criminal tax fraud case getting underway against the Trump Organization; an appellate ruling that says call center workers should be paid for the time it takes to boot up their computers; and we offer a plethora of legally-themed Halloween costume ideas.

The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: When it becomes generally controversial to protect children from sexualization and to have limits on things such as pornography for youth and children, a society has devolved into the nihilist cesspool desired by the anti-God Left. Are we there? What side of the fight will you find yourself in protecting children?Our Lone Star story of the day is sponsored by Allied Compliance Services providing the best service in DOT, business and personal drug and alcohol testing since 1995.LULAC loses at the Fifth Circuit in its risible case against a Texas voter integrity law involving registering to vote with a post office box.Biden Spikes Migrant Population by 3 Million to 48 Million. “Biden's rush of illegal migrants is one-and-half-times the inflow of legal immigrants, the report notes.”And, other news of Texas.Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com

In a decision with enormous potential implications, a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has ruled that the manner in which the CFPB is funded violates the Appropriations Clause of the U.S. Constitution. After reviewing the decision, we discuss: the CFPB's strategic options for next litigation steps; the decision's potential impact on existing regulations and ongoing rulemakings, ongoing and future enforcement litigation and investigations, and consent orders; and possible legislative fixes and the likelihood of bipartisan support. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Service Group, leads the discussion, joined by John Culhane, Richard Andreano, and Michael Gordon, partners in the Group.

Few judges in the Texas court system can claim to have served at every level—trial court, appellate court, and Texas Supreme Court. But this week's guest, Justice Jane Bland, has done all three! Her career of service to the people of Texas gives her a unique perspective on how the judicial system should work. Justice Bland joins Jody Sanders and Todd Smith to talk about her career path, from her journey as a Fifth Circuit clerk who later went into private practice with her mentor, and through the Texas judicial system. She also discusses efforts by her and other stakeholders to make the justice system more accessible to people with mental disabilities and her role as liaison to the Texas Supreme Court Historical Society.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 a decision with potentially far-reaching implications for the CFPB, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit yesterday ruled that the Bureau's funding structure is unconstitutional. The case involved a longstanding challenge to the Bureau's 2017 Payday Lending Rule and marks another significant obstacle for the Bureau two years after the Supreme Court's decision in Seila Law that its leadership structure violated separation of powers principles. https://www.adlawaccess.com/2022/10/articles/an-arrow-has-found-its-target-federal-appeals-court-deems-cfpb-funding-method-unconstitutional-invalidating-payday-lending-rule/ Donnelly L. McDowell Partner dmcdowell@kelleydrye.com (202) 342-8645 Bio - www.kelleydrye.com/Our-People/Donnelly-L-McDowell Caroline T. Schmitz cschmitz@kelleydrye.com (202) 342-8459 Bio - https://www.kelleydrye.com/Our-People/Caroline-T-Schmitz Download the Ad Law Access App www.kelleydrye.com/News-Events/New…ind-Advertising See our Linktree for more information linktr.ee/KelleyDryeAdLaw Hosted by Simone Roach Produced by Jeff Scurry

Today on "Catholic Drive Time" Catholic Drive Time - 877-757-9424 Date – TUESDAY October 25, 2022 – The Feast Day of THE FORTY MARTYRS OF ENGLAND AND WALES This feast, the feast of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales, honors the hundreds of British men and women who died for their faith in wake of the dispute between the Pope and King Henry VIII during the 16th century. Many loyal Catholics were tortured and killed by the British state from 1535 to 1679. In 1970, the Vatican selected 40 martyrs, men and women, lay and religious, to represent the full group of about 300. Each martyr has their own day of memorial, but they are all remembered as a group on October 25. INTRO – Today on CDT, we're going to make an analysis on the effects of no cash bail “reform” on the country. Attorney Ken Good joins us. And – Is a digital ID coming to the US? Will we be on the heels of China? Join Email list! GRNonline.com/CDT GRN to 42828 Bio- Ken W. Good graduated from Hardin Simmons University in 1982 with a Bachelor of Arts Degree. He received a Master of Education Degree in 1986 from Tarleton State University, a part of the Texas A&M System. In 1989, he received his law degree from Texas Tech School of Law, where he was a member of the Texas Tech Law Review. Mr. Good has argued cases before the Supreme Court of Texas and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, along with numerous courts of appeals, including the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Mr. Good is married and has two daughters. Joe Social Media IG: @TheCatholicHack Twitter: @Catholic_Hack Facebook: Joe McClane YouTube: Joe McClane Rudy Social Media IG: @ydursolrac Youtube: Glad Trad Podcast Adrian Social Media IG: @ffonze Twitter: @AdrianFonze Facebook: Adrian Fonseca YouTube: Adrian Fonseca YouTube: Catholic Conversations Visit our website to learn more about us, find a local GRN radio station, a schedule of our programming and so much more. http://grnonline.com/

1Fifth Circuit Strikes Down CFPB Funding MethodIn the case of Community Financial Services Association of America v. CFPB, three judges onthe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit have ruled that the CFPB's funding methodviolates the Constitution's structural separation of powers. The judges also invalidated part of theCFPB's 2017 payday lending rule.Vec reviews the Fifth Circuit ruling. 2New NCLA Video on Nasdaq's Board Diversity RulesThe U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission approved Nasdaq's listing rules requiring mostcompanies in the stock exchange to meet quotas for race, gender, and sexual preference incorporate board membership. A new video released by NCLA explains why these BoardDiversity Rules fall outside of the agency's regulatory authority.Mark and Vec discuss NCLA's recent video concerning Nasdaq's Board Diversity Rules.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Exploring Tom Emmer's candidacy for whip. Steny Hoyer chips in for majority. CFPB's funding stream is threatened by the Fifth Circuit. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Recording live at George Mason University, David and Sarah open with a critical WAP correction to last week's show, followed by updates on The Onion amicus brief and the never-ending Yale drama. Plus: Amy Coney Barrett takes on Common Good Constitutionalism and the Fifth Circuit decides a “zero-pence case” on religious coercion.-Fifth Circuit decision on Freedom From Religion v. Wayne Mack

A federal appeals court rules that Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, was unlawful when President Obama created it in 2012. What happens to the Dreamers already protected by the policy? Is this heading to the Supreme Court? And is there any hope in Congress for an immigration deal that both protects the Dreamers and fixes the border crisis? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Does the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protect a private social media company's right to moderate content on its platform?A new ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit says it does not, and that a Texas law preventing viewpoint discrimination on social media platforms is constitutional.The issue is likely bound for the Supreme Court, setting up what is arguably the most consequential First Amendment legal case in a half-century. Institute for Free Speech Chairman and Founder Brad Smith and George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin join us to debate the ruling and the future of free speech on the internet. Show notes: Texas social media law, HB 20 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in NetChoice v. Paxton 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in NetChoice v. Attorney General, State of Florida Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 Pruneyard Shopping Center et al v. Robins et al. (1980) Masterpiece Cakeshop, LTD. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018) “Governor Newsom Signs Nation-Leading Social Media Transparency Measure” Packingham v. North Carolina (2017) www.sotospeakpodcast.com YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/SotoSpeakTheFreeSpeechPodcast Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freespeechtalk/ Email us: sotospeak@thefire.org

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 3: While speaking at Salve Regina University in Rhode Island, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan alluded to the court's recent decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization—stating: “The very worst moments have been times when judges have essentially reflected one party's or one ideology's set of views in their legal decisions.” During another recent speech, she suggested that in order to maintain legitimacy, the court should more closely mirror public sentiment. In response to Vice President Kamala Harris' statement that the Biden Administration should distribute Hurricane Ian disaster relief based on “equity”, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' office rebuked Harris and emphasized that relief will be distributed based upon need—not race or gender. While speaking at the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health prior to Hurricane Ian making landfall, President Joe Biden warned the oil industry against using a natural disaster to boost prices. Nate Hochman—Staff Writer at National Review—joins the show to discuss his article, “Federal Judge Vows to Stop Hiring Law Clerks from Yale Law School.” Judge James C. Ho of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has pledged that he will no longer hire clerks from Yale Law School due to the school's intolerance towards political debate and active censorship of speakers on campus. Judge Ho stated: “I would contend that cancel culture is one of the leading reasons why citizens no longer trust a wide variety of once-leading institutions.” 83-year-old Democratic State Senator, a grandmother, Toby Ann Stavisky's Twitter account was used to “like” several pornographic images—the Senator and her chief of staff both denied being the ones who “liked” the X-rated material.

Nate Hochman—Staff Writer at National Review—joins the show to discuss his article, “Federal Judge Vows to Stop Hiring Law Clerks from Yale Law School.” Judge James C. Ho of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has pledged that he will no longer hire clerks from Yale Law School due to the school's intolerance towards political debate and active censorship of speakers on campus. Judge Ho stated: “I would contend that cancel culture is one of the leading reasons why citizens no longer trust a wide variety of once-leading institutions.”

The Rich Zeoli Show- Full Show (10/03/2022): Kamala Harris Advocates for Equity-Based Hurricane Relief 3:00pm- While speaking at the Democratic National Committee's Women's Leadership Forum in Washington D.C., Vice President Kamala Harris stated that the Biden Administration should distribute Hurricane Ian disaster relief based on “equity”—prioritizing “our lowest income communities and our communities of color.” Are Democrats attempting to use Hurricane Ian to push their equity agenda and extreme green policies? 3:25pm- Stupid Clip of the Day: While visiting the Korean Peninsula's Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), Vice President Kamala Harris mistakenly touted the United States' “important relationship” and “alliance” with North Korea…what? 3:40pm- Dr. Marty Makary—Professor at Johns Hopkins University & author of the book “The Price We Pay: What Broke American Health Care—and How to Fix It”—joins the show to talk about a new study published by The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) indicating that trace amounts of the COVID-19 vaccine are present in the breast milk of new mothers. Dr. Makary also weighs-in on a startling new California law that is designed to restrict doctors from spreading anything lawmakers determine is “misinformation.” Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is On Birth Control…And She Wants Everyone to Know About It 4:05pm- Dr. Wilfred Reilly—Professor of Political Science at Kentucky State University & author of “Taboo: 10 Facts You Can't Talk About”—joins the show to talk about his most recent research article, “A Requiem for Black Lives Matter.” In the piece, Dr. Reilly analyzes data and arrives at the conclusion that the BLM movement did not result in substantial, positive change. Alarmingly, serious crime in America's biggest cities has skyrocketed since the movement began. 4:25pm- Stupid Clip of the Day: President Joe Biden proclaims that Kamala Harris won't be the last female Vice President…he also challenged Republicans to a fight… 4:35pm- Non-Stop Talk for an Hour…Well, Almost an Hour: During a House Oversight Committee hearing on abortion, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY) made several outlandish claims. First, she stated that “forcing people to give birth” was a form of employment conscription—she went on to describe, in detail, the type of birth control she is currently using. But who is having children against their will? And, perhaps more importantly, why do we have to hear about AOC's birth control?! 4:50pm- In a new USA Today editorial, opinion contributor Mary Vought documents how “parents were demonized for demanding schools reopen”—however, it turns out, according to National Center for Education Statistics, parents were right to be worried about remote learning's impact on education. Supreme Feud? Elena Kagan Criticizes Dobbs Decision, Alito Defends the Court 5:00pm- While speaking at Salve Regina University in Rhode Island, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan alluded to the court's recent decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization—stating: “The very worst moments have been times when judges have essentially reflected one party's or one ideology's set of views in their legal decisions.” During another recent speech, she suggested that in order to maintain legitimacy, the court should more closely mirror public sentiment. 5:10pm- In response to Vice President Kamala Harris' statement that the Biden Administration should distribute Hurricane Ian disaster relief based on “equity”, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' office rebuked Harris and emphasized that relief will be distributed based upon need—not race or gender. 5:15pm- While speaking at the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health prior to Hurricane Ian making landfall, President Joe Biden warned the oil industry against using a natural disaster to boost prices. 5:40pm- Nate Hochman—Staff Writer at National Review—joins the show to discuss his article, “Federal Judge Vows to Stop Hiring Law Clerks from Yale Law School.” Judge James C. Ho of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has pledged that he will no longer hire clerks from Yale Law School due to the school's intolerance towards political debate and active censorship of speakers on campus. Judge Ho stated: “I would contend that cancel culture is one of the leading reasons why citizens no longer trust a wide variety of once-leading institutions.” 5:55pm- 83-year-old Democratic State Senator, a grandmother, Toby Ann Stavisky's Twitter account was used to “like” several pornographic images—the Senator and her chief of staff both denied being the ones who “liked” the X-rated material. New Zealand Prime Minster Implores the UN to Restrict Speech on Social Media 6:10pm- While appearing on MSNBC, Democrat candidate for U.S. Senate John Fetterman offered an awkward retort to Chris Hayes' greeting. 6:35pm- Colonel Barney Barnum (USMC Medal of Honor Recipient) and Jerry Conner (MC-LEF Philadelphia Committee Member) join the show to talk about the 2022 Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation Philadelphia Gala on Saturday, October 22nd at Rivers Casino. Information about the event can be found here: https://www.mclefphila.org/events-overview 6:50pm- While speaking at the United Nations General Assembly, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Arden compared unrestricted freedom speech on social media platforms to “weapons of war” and implored members of the U.N. to take the threat seriously—ultimately advocating for a governmentally established restriction on speech. 6:55pm- Who Won Social Media? + Zeoli's Final Thought

A Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals judge says he will no longer hire clerks from Yale Law School, because the Ivy League participates in - and promotes - cancel culture and the stifling of free speech. From National Review: Judge James C. Ho of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit announced Thursday that he would no longer be hiring law clerks from Yale Law School and urged other judges to follow suit. In a keynote address to the Kentucky Chapters Conference of the Federalist Society, titled “Agreeing to Disagree — Restoring America by Resisting Cancel Culture,” Ho cited a number of high-profile examples of speakers being shouted down or otherwise censored at law schools across the country but singled out Yale Law as “one particular law school where cancellations and disruptions seem to occur with special frequency.” “Yale not only tolerates the cancellation of views — it actively practices it,” Ho said, according to prepared remarks exclusively obtained by National Review. “Starting today, I will no longer hire law clerks from Yale Law School. And I hope that other judges will join me as well.” But constitutional law scholar, Jonathan Turley, doesn't think the effort will work. He says the faculty has already shown a desire to harm their students' education by engaging in the cancel culture tactics. Institutional interest has not motivated faculties to reverse this trend.  Even if judges expressly or privately (which is more likely) follow Ho's boycott, it would not likely deter these professors who garner personal benefits from limiting dissent or allowing others to cancel opposing speakers. The only solution is the alumni. Graduates must be willing to withhold contributions from these schools. Yale is at the virtual bottom of free speech rankings with other schools like Georgetown, Penn, and Columbia. That disgraceful distinction has not produced even a scintilla of concern at the school because faculty are insulated from any backlash. Indeed, they benefit on some levels from the viewpoint intolerance or limitations. It is only money that might motivate administrators to reconsider this trend as alumni refuse to subsidize orthodoxy. Plus, one of the top comms officials from the United Nations appeared at a World Economic Forum panel discussion on mis- and dis-information, where she proclaimed that the UN "owns the science" on climate change.    Get exclusive content here!: https://thepetekalinershow.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tech sector asks Fifth Circuit to stop Texas's social media law from taking effect   The State of Texas's social media law which stops tech companies from taking down hate speech and misleading information has reached the Fifth Circuit in a motion that this organization – WashingTech – has participated in amicus filings for. We agree with NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) that this law impinges on platforms' First Amendment rights and the discretion Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act affords them to moderate content posted by third parties.    It would allow traditional media platforms, like Fox News, to ban progressive voices but require competing online platforms to host politically-motivated harmful content, including election misinformation.   Abortion advocates pushback against “people search” websites   Cyberscoop notes that abortion rights adovocates' privacy rights are put in jeopardy by people search websites, like BeenVerified, which share their personal contact information. Maleeha Aziz, deputy director of the Texas Equal Access Fund, told Cyberscoop that she   installed security cameras around her home because she lives in constant fear, because of her abortion advocacy, that anti-abortion extremists or solicitors will come knocking on her front door at any moment. Reuters exclusive: child pornography solicitations on Twitter have been showing up next to PBSKids ads   Several brands, as many as 30, to be exact, have had to limit their advertising on Twitter after Reuters found their ads showing up next to solicitations by pedophiles for content depicting child abuse. Disney, Coca Cola, NBCUniversal, PBS – are just some of the companies that were affected.   Privacy advocates want the FTC to tamp down on daycare apps   Privacy advocates are pushing back about daycare apps that let parents and caregivers stream videos of their babies in daycare. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) argues that these platforms host images of kids in unsecure, cloud-based storage apps, and, in one case, an app called Tadpoles for Parents, shared these images on Facebook without notifying parents of their privacy policy.

THE THESIS: The Party clearly intends to censor anyone who opposes them. We will gather in the way God intended, in ways that are far more difficult to cancel. If we abide in Christ. gathering in real life in the name of God is uncancellable by The Party.  THE SCRIPTURE & SCRIPTURAL RESOURCES:  The religious technocrats of the days of the early church thought they had permanently “cancelled” Jesus the Christ. Yet, after the Lord Jesus was resurrected, spent time with people and then had returned to Heaven, 3,000 people (probably many more), gathered, heard from the Apostles and were publicly baptized right in front of the forces who crucifided Jesus. They formed, on that day, a tight bond that has been tested, but never been broken or “cancelled.” PayPal and Venmo can cancel people fighting to defend children from perversion and mutilation, but they cannot cancel our backyards, neighborhoods, churches and family meetings. Be tightly connected as believers and you, too, will be uncancellable.  Acts 2: 42-47 The Fellowship of the Believers 42 They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved. THE NEWS & COMMENT: Meta's Nick Clegg says the company risks being “the greatest industrial-scale censor ever in human history”, Yet the platform continues to censor opinions. But, censoring what opinions, exactly? Big Tech thinks this is hate speech:  [AUDIO] - Gays Against Groomers @againstgrmrs founder Jaimee Michell @thegaywhostrayd appears on Tucker to discuss her org being banned by PayPal and Venmo: "We're not scared, we're not intimidated and we're not going to stop." Big Tech thinks this is “one love . . . “ [AUDIO] - So-called “scholars” are doing exactly what I said they would do ten years ago: they are attempting to make pedophillia into just another “sexual orientation.”  Just like Big Tech thinks questioning their fellow technocrats is a thought-crime PayPal shuts account of group who fought to keep schools open during pandemic; Another casualty of the recent PayPal purge. Abd, it's not just Big Tech. Journalism can be legally punished if journalism makes a point against The Party. Democratic firms prevail in suit against Project Veritas; A jury returned a $120,000 verdict against purveyors of hidden-camera stings against liberals. Unless we change our culture by abiding in Christ, it won't just be PayPal and Venmo. And, it will not just be Facebook, Google, Twitter, PayPal and YouTube doing the spying:  Senator Wyden: US military bought mass monitoring tool that includes email and browsing data The tool reportedly covers 93% of the world's internet traffic. There is some reason to be hopeful Federal Appeals Court Upholds Texas Law Banning Viewpoint Discrimination On Largest Internet Platforms; In a split decision, the Fifth Circuit reverses district court decision in NetChoice v Paxton. But, there is a better reason to be Biblical: they will never cancel God:  Acts 2 The Holy Spirit Comes at Pentecost 2 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them. 5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren't all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? 9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia,[b] 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” 12 Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?” 13 Some, however, made fun of them and said, “They have had too much wine.” Peter Addresses the Crowd 14 Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. 15 These people are not drunk, as you suppose. It's only nine in the morning! 16 No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 17 “‘In the last days, God says,     I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy,     your young men will see visions,     your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women,     I will pour out my Spirit in those days,     and they will prophesy. 19 I will show wonders in the heavens above     and signs on the earth below,     blood and fire and billows of smoke. 20 The sun will be turned to darkness     and the moon to blood     before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord. 21 And everyone who calls     on the name of the Lord will be saved.'[c] 22 “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23 This man was handed over to you by God's deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men,[d] put him to death by nailing him to the cross. 24 But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. 25 David said about him: “‘I saw the Lord always before me.     Because he is at my right hand,     I will not be shaken. 26 Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices;     my body also will rest in hope, 27 because you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead,     you will not let your holy one see decay. 28 You have made known to me the paths of life;     you will fill me with joy in your presence.'[e] 29 “Fellow Israelites, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. 30 But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31 Seeing what was to come, he spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, that he was not abandoned to the realm of the dead, nor did his body see decay. 32 God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it. 33 Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. 34 For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said, “‘The Lord said to my Lord:     “Sit at my right hand 35 until I make your enemies     a footstool for your feet.”'[f] 36 “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.” 37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” 38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.” 40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day. The Fellowship of the Believers 42 They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan, Quinta, and Scott went guestless to discuss the week's big national security news, including:“Ne Me Quitte Pas.” The nearby island nation of Haiti is hitting new levels of instability, as paired economic and political crises have given way to open gang warfare in broad swathes of the country. While the events have some calling for external intervention, others have expressed major reservations with such a step, given its past failings in the country. Where might this crisis lead?“I'm Rubber, You're Su(ing).” Last week, the Fifth Circuit released a real barn-burner of an opinion in the matter of NetChoice v. Paxton, wherein it adopted a narrow reading of the First Amendment in order to resurrect a Texas law severely limiting how social media platforms can moderate content. What will this case mean for platforms moving forward?“Flying Worst Class.” Florida Governor Ron Desantis became the latest Republican governor this week to fly undocumented migrants to northern cities in purported protest of the Biden administration's immigration policies. But his move has sparked unexpected furor among Florida's Cuban and Venezuelan immigrant communities—as well as at least one criminal investigation. What was he thinking and where will this controversy go next?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Our Arbiters of Truth series on the online information ecosystem has been taking a bit of a hiatus—but we're back! On today's episode, we're discussing the recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in NetChoice v. Paxton, upholding a Texas law that binds large social media platforms to certain transparency requirements and significantly limits their ability to moderate content. The decision is truly a wild ride—so unhinged that it's difficult to figure out where First Amendment law in this area might go next.To discuss, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with fellow Lawfare senior editor Alan Rozenshtein and Alex Abdo, the litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University—who's come on the podcast before to discuss the case. They tried to make sense of the Fifth Circuit's ruling and chart out alternative possibilities for what good-faith jurisprudence on social media regulation might look like.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott went guestless to discuss the week's big national security news, including:“Ne Me Quitte Pas.” The nearby island nation of Haiti is hitting new levels of instability, as paired economic and political crises have given way to open gang warfare in broad swathes of the country. While the events have some calling for external intervention, others have expressed major reservations with such a step, given its past failings in the country. Where might this crisis lead?“I'm Rubber, You're Su(ing).” Last week, the Fifth Circuit released a real barn-burner of an opinion in the matter of NetChoice v. Paxton, wherein it adopted a narrow reading of the First Amendment in order to resurrect a Texas law severely limiting how social media platforms can moderate content. What will this case mean for platforms moving forward?“Flying Worst Class.” Florida Governor Ron Desantis became the latest Republican governor this week to fly undocumented migrants to northern cities in purported protest of the Biden administration's immigration policies. But his move has sparked unexpected furor among Florida's Cuban and Venezuelan immigrant communities—as well as at least one criminal investigation. What was he thinking and where will this controversy go next?For object lessons, Alan endorsed his and his wife's new favorite seasonal sweet treat: salted maple ice cream. Quinta highlighted a recent judicial opinion that appeared to mix up two of the judge's favorite philosophers: Plato and Donald Rumsfeld. And Scott celebrated his most recent homemade hot sauce success: turning tabasco chilis into "peppa sauce." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ethereum merge, GPU demand shifts, Adobe's Figma deal, GTA 6 hack Ethereum activates The Merge as it shifts to proof of stake. No One Is Profitable': GPU Mining Faces Dark Days After Ethereum Merge. GeForce GPUs are 80% of EVGA's revenue—but it's cutting ties with Nvidia anyway.  Farthest Frontier on Steam. Nvidia is about to make a big announcement during a difficult time. Some iPhone 14 Pro customers are getting their preorders delayed by Apple. The iPhone 14 Index: How much of a yearly salary you need to spend to afford an iPhone 14 around the world. Adobe (ADBE) Agrees to Buy Figma in $20 Billion Software Deal. The career rise, fall, and return of Adam Neumann, the controversial WeWork cofounder who is back with another real-estate startup. iPhone 14 is eSIM-only in the US. We Spoke With the Last Person Standing in the Floppy Disk Business. Floppy Disks Are Still Used for 1,900 Government Procedures In Japan. They Must Go, Its Digital Minister Says. Apple adds souped-up period and ovulation tracking to Apple Watch Series 8. Google cancels half the projects at its internal R&D group Area 120. Massive GTA 6 gameplay video leak depicts male and female playable characters. Google loses appeal over illegal Android app bundling, EU reduces fine to €4.1 billion. Fifth Circuit rules in favor of Texas law on social media regulation. Why Do All These 20-Somethings Have Closed Captions Turned On? Host: Leo Laporte Guests: Carolina Milanesi, Alex Wilhelm, and Mike Elgan Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-tech Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: noom.com/twit mintmobile.com/twit Blueland.com/TWIT itpro.tv/twit promo code TWIT30

Religious liberty is a human right. So why are American courts so confused?   In recent months, American courts have continued to grapple with the size, scope, and even the definition of religious freedom. For Christians who believe that religious liberty for all is a public good, there's good news and bad news.  The good news includes the decision from the Fifth Circuit two weeks ago in the case of Franciscan Alliance, a group of Catholic hospitals and doctors that sued the federal government in 2016. Rules issued from the Biden Administration would have forced doctors within Franciscan Alliance to perform so-called “transition surgeries” on patients with gender dysphoria, as well as provide abortions for patients who requested them. Lawyers for the hospital system argued that these procedures are violations of the oath doctors take to “do no harm” to their patients, and therefore a violation of the doctors' religious freedom. Thankfully, the Fifth Circuit respected Supreme Court precedent and ruled in favor of Franciscan Alliance.   The bad news includes a case out of New York, in which a trial court ruled that Yeshiva University, a Jewish school in New York City, must allow an LGBTQ club to establish on campus. The university argued the club's mission openly violated the school's religious beliefs about sexuality. In a particularly bizarre ruling, a judge sided with the LGBTQ club by reasoning that Yeshiva University is not a religious institution. “Yeshiva” is the Hebrew word for “a school that studies the Talmud,” or ancient rabbinic writings on Scripture. Still, the judge cited Yeshiva University's charter, which refers to the school as an “educational institution,” as evidence that the school therefore cannot be religious.   The question at the heart of each of these cases is the same: What does it mean to be religious?  Though it is good news for everyone, doctors and patients, that Franciscan Alliance will not be forced to mutilate bodies in the name of “transgender medicine,” the judge in this case ruled explicitly that the government could not violate these doctors' religious beliefs. It is not good news that the reality that men and women are different is being denied, or that bodies are being mutilated and called “healthcare,” or that opposing being involved is reduced to a “religious belief.” In the same way, the idea that we should not take the life of a child in or out of a mother's womb should be obvious, not reduced to merely “religious.”  In one sense, every law is religious in the sense that they are predicated on some view of the universe, human nature, and morality. They assume that certain things ought to be done and others ought not to be done. Everything we do, including where we work, what we value, and how we raise our kids, is built upon moral beliefs about the world, whether Christian or not. Even if we don't always act consistently with those beliefs, religious liberty ensures the right to call upon these views inside and outside of Church, synagogue, mosque, or Twitter.   In our culture, however, certain views are designated “religious” and others are not. Therefore, the “religious” views are considered biased exceptions to be tolerated. In fact, progressive judges and administrations often deem policy positions they don't like as “religious” as a way of suggesting they should not be taken seriously in the public square. In other words, taking innocent human life and mutilating healthy bodies are presented as the “obviously right” views, and opposing these horrors is dismissed as “religious.”   All of which says a lot about the moral status of our culture. Further, it misunderstands the meaning of “religious” and leads to obvious violations of religious liberty. Christian doctors within the Franciscan Alliance cannot leave their worldviews at the operating room door. Yeshiva University doesn't stop being religious when it educates. In fact, it educates because it is religious.   The Supreme Court, at least currently, recognizes this reality, but some lower courts do not. Thus, the absurd ruling that claims Yeshiva University is not religious because it educates, or the one in Colorado which held that a Christian school chaplain wasn't in a “religious position,” or the lower court ruling from a few years ago that attempted to force a group of Catholic nuns to pay for abortion and contraception.   In such a conflicted time, Christians must, more and more, live like Christians. We must compellingly demonstrate that the resurrected Christ we worship in one building one morning a week shapes how we live and act in any other building every other day of the week. And we continue to defend religious liberty as a public good for all people.  About this, the U.S. Constitution is clear. Hopefully, our nation's courts will gain clarity too.