Current United States federal appellate court
POPULARITY
17 episodes with fifth circuit court
9 episodes with fifth circuit court
14 episodes with fifth circuit court
10 episodes with fifth circuit court
3 episodes with fifth circuit court
3 episodes with fifth circuit court
3 episodes with fifth circuit court
4 episodes with fifth circuit court
6 episodes with fifth circuit court
Stories we're following this morning at Progress Texas:Dueling polls late in the 2026 primary season fail to clearly identify a leader in the race for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate: https://www.fox7austin.com/news/texas-primary-conflicting-polls-show-how-several-key-races-too-close-call...The new poll from the UT Politics Project: https://texaspolitics.utexas.edu/blog/competition-remains-fierce-in-both-u-s-senate-primaries-in-texas-according-to-latest-ut-texas-politics-project-poll-2...Besides, runoff elections are very likely in a bunch of races: https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/new-polling-suggests-runoff-likely-in-texas-gop-senate-primary...The historically massive Democratic turnout we've seen this time also undermines the reliability of any poll: https://www.texastribune.org/2026/02/25/texas-early-voting-turnout-democrats-midterm-election/...The latest turnout numbers: https://votehub.com/early-vote-tracker-tx-primary-26Just a week since a federal border agent's involvement in the shooting death of Ruben Ray Martinez last March, a Cameron County grand jury has already declined to indict that agent: https://www.texastribune.org/2026/02/25/texas-ice-shooting-death-grand-jury-no-bill/A California doctor becomes the first target of HB 7, the new anti-abortion law allowing private citizens to sue providers of abortion medication mailed into the state: https://msmagazine.com/2026/02/25/texas-abortion-pills-ban-bounty-hunter-california-doctor-remy-coeytaux/The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has denied a rehearing petition in a case challenging SB 12, the Drag Ban bill - it will now go into effect on March 18: https://www.aclutx.org/press-releases/fifth-circuit-denies-motion-to-rehear-texas-drag-ban-argument/Early voting in the March primary is underway! Research your ballot here: https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2026/texas-march-2026-primary-ballot/?_bhlid=7d8eca3d2a16adc7c9b44185414443fa32be6d84All about voting in Texas can be found at GoVoteTexas.org. Progress Texas is expanding into both broadcast radio - including a new partnership with KPFT-FM in Houston - and into Spanish language media! Make a tax-deductible contribution to our radio initiative HERE, and to our Spanish expansion HERE.Find our web store and other ways to support our important work at https://progresstexas.org.
U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee's comments on Israel and the Middle East...Fifth Circuit Court ruling on posting the Ten Commandments in Louisiana public school classrooms...and Souh Dakota court allows state lawsuit against New York company over its abortion pill ads.
This is Renaldo McKenzie with The Neoliberal Round. I want to provide an important update regarding the case of John Anthony Castro. An emergency motion was previously filed with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court denied that motion quickly—before the government was required to respond. According to information obtained from the clerk's office, the denial occurred because the filing was labeled as an emergency motion, which typically requests action within 24 to 72 hours. The court acted within that timeframe. Following that denial, the motion was refiled in the district court through the normal procedural channel. What happened next is significant. The government did not file a response. Thirty-three days passed without opposition. A motion to expedite was then filed, arguing that the absence of a response effectively renders the motion unopposed at the district court level. The matter is now back before the Fifth Circuit on appeal. A formal brief is being submitted, and once docketed, the government will have fourteen days to respond. The legal question now centers on procedural posture: whether the government's failure to oppose the motion at the district court level constitutes waiver or forfeiture of its arguments. If the government responds, it must address why it did not object earlier. If it does not respond, the appellate court will be reviewing a motion for release that stands unopposed. This next fourteen-day window will be critical. We will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as they unfold. This is The Neoliberal Round. Subscribe to the Podcast on any stream. Find your stream by visiting https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal. Visit us at https://theneoliberal.com or https://renaldocmckenzie.com. Check out Neoliberalism by Renaldo McKenzie at https://store.theneoliberal.comEmail us at info.theneoliberal.comDonate to us https://donate.stripe.com/7sYcN48uybAA2OEb9V93y06Or via Cash App at $renaldomckenzie so we may grow this podcast and channel.
Mark Krikorian is a nationally recognized expert on immigration issues serving as the Executive Director of Center for Immigration Studies. When it comes to our nation's borders, the last 12 months have been quite remarkable. The last administration repeatedly told us that Congress would have to act to reform our immigration policies and laws before the borders could be secured. That turned out to be a falsehood because under Trump 2.0, the U.S. borders are more secure than ever, and with that aspect of immigration taken care of, his administration has moved on to purge what they term, "The worst of the worst." In the meantime, as we've seen in Minnesota, there are those who don't like what's taking place. They're responding by causing extreme chaos, disruption, violence, vandalism, as well as assaults. So don't miss this program as Jim interviewed Mark to have him comment on the following points related to our nation's immigration and border security: In a major legal win, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Trump administration does, in fact, have the authority and requirement to detain all illegal entrants to the U.S., even if they're caught inside the country. Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court gave a win to the Trump administration regarding temporary protected status to nations like Nepal, Honduras and Nicaragua. According to the Department of Homeland Security, January numbers (of border encounters) ranked 93% below the historic average, the lowest number of encounters ever for the month of January. 9 straight months of zero releases. Record drug seizures.
Mark Krikorian is a nationally recognized expert on immigration issues serving as the Executive Director of Center for Immigration Studies. When it comes to our nation's borders, the last 12 months have been quite remarkable. The last administration repeatedly told us that Congress would have to act to reform our immigration policies and laws before the borders could be secured. That turned out to be a falsehood because under Trump 2.0, the U.S. borders are more secure than ever, and with that aspect of immigration taken care of, his administration has moved on to purge what they term, "The worst of the worst." In the meantime, as we've seen in Minnesota, there are those who don't like what's taking place. They're responding by causing extreme chaos, disruption, violence, vandalism, as well as assaults. So don't miss this program as Jim interviewed Mark to have him comment on the following points related to our nation's immigration and border security: In a major legal win, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Trump administration does, in fact, have the authority and requirement to detain all illegal entrants to the U.S., even if they're caught inside the country. Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court gave a win to the Trump administration regarding temporary protected status to nations like Nepal, Honduras and Nicaragua. According to the Department of Homeland Security, January numbers (of border encounters) ranked 93% below the historic average, the lowest number of encounters ever for the month of January. 9 straight months of zero releases. Record drug seizures.
Something New! For HR teams who discuss this podcast in their team meetings, we've created a discussion starter PDF to help guide your conversation. Download it here https://goodmorninghr.com/EP237 In episode 237, Coffey and DeDe Church discuss recent news items about how shifting economic conditions, technology, and leadership gaps are reshaping the employment landscape. They discuss the realities of a “low-hire, low-fire” labor market; dehumanizing hiring processes and AI-driven recruiting tools; challenges facing early-career workers and liberal arts graduates; emerging roles created by artificial intelligence; the growing importance of soft skills like problem solving and communication; workforce restructuring, layoffs, and job hugging; employee disengagement and the great detachment; why strong frontline workers often struggle as supervisors; the risks of promoting without leadership training; transparency, feedback, and promotion decisions; and how kindness, accountability, and continuous feedback drive engagement. Good Morning, HR is brought to you by Imperative—Bulletproof Background Checks. For more information about our commitment to quality and excellent customer service, visit us at https://imperativeinfo.com. If you are an HRCI or SHRM-certified professional, this episode of Good Morning, HR has been pre-approved for three quarters of a recertification credit. To obtain the recertification information for this episode, visit https://goodmorninghr.com. Media mentioned in this podcast: From AI bubble fears to the job market's ‘Great Freeze': Economists answer your biggest questions about 2026 Private-Sector Hiring Turned Positive in December After November Losses Private Hiring Sank in November, ADP Says US Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook: Fastest Growing Occupations The 2026 Job Market Outlook: Where the Jobs Are Economists Are Studying the Slowing Job Market—and Feeling It Themselves When Good Frontline Workers Make Bad Supervisors Is Your Leadership Style Too Nice? The Friendship Recession: The Lost Art of Connecting Use Situation-Behavior-Impact (SBI)™ to Understand Intent About our Guest: DeDe Church is an attorney, employee relations counselor, workplace and University investigator, and nationally recognized trainer with more than 30 years of experience. She has trained thousands of employees and managers on how to create a productive, respectful culture for clients ranging from Fortune 50 companies to her favorite local pizza shop. Known for her humor and practicality, DeDe is often invited and then re-invited to deliver her high-energy workshops at distinguished conferences and to create videos for employee onboarding and annual training. As an expert investigator, DeDe relies upon a depth of knowledge to find the facts without causing unnecessary disturbances. Witnesses often say they feel at ease when talking with her because of her approachable nature. In addition, DeDe is often retained to review investigation procedures and to train in-house HR and University professionals on investigation best practices. In recognition of her skills, DeDe has been retained to testify as an expert witness in employment cases more than 20 times by organizations including Uber, BP, and MD Anderson Cancer Center. DeDe is a former Senior Assistant Attorney General for the State of Texas in the Civil Rights/General Litigation Division. During almost seven years there, she advised dozens of state agencies on the proper response to employee complaints, represented the State in over 30 trials involving discrimination in the workplace, and successfully argued before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court. DeDe received the prestigious Presidential Citation from the President of the Texas State Bar in recognition of outstanding service to the citizens of Texas. Her Bachelor of Arts degree is from Louisiana State University, magna cum laude, and she received a Doctorate of Jurisprudence with Honors from the University of North Carolina School of Law in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. DeDe Church can be reached at www.dedechurch.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/dede-wilburn-church-a71b748/ About Mike Coffey: Mike Coffey is an entrepreneur, licensed private investigator, business strategist, HR consultant, and registered yoga teacher. In 1999, he founded Imperative, a background investigations and due diligence firm helping risk-averse clients make well-informed decisions about the people they involve in their business. Imperative delivers in-depth employment background investigations, know-your-customer and anti-money laundering compliance, and due diligence investigations to more than 300 risk-averse corporate clients across the US, and, through its PFC Caregiver & Household Screening brand, many more private estates, family offices, and personal service agencies. Imperative has been named a Best Places to Work, the Texas Association of Business' small business of the year, and is accredited by the Professional Background Screening Association. Mike shares his insight from 25+ years of HR-entrepreneurship on the Good Morning, HR podcast, where each week he talks to business leaders about bringing people together to create value for customers, shareholders, and community. Mike has been rec...
It's Thursday, and that means it's time to catch up on politics with The Times-Picayune/New Orleans Advocate's editorial director and columnist, Stephanie Grace. Today, we hear about President Trump's recent endorsement of Rep. Julie Letlow (R-LA), who is running for Sen. Bill Cassidy's seat. Last week, the Supreme Court began to hear oral arguments in Chevron U.S.A. v. Plaquemines Parish. The case could determine the outcome of dozens of lawsuits seeking billions in damages from oil companies that allegedly polluted Louisiana's coastline. The parish argued that the pollution has contributed to Louisiana's land loss crisis. The Times-Picayune/The Advocate's Alex Lubben has been covering this story. He joins us for more.A recent ruling by a 3-judge panel of the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals could have a far-reaching effect on songwriters, their intellectual property, and music companies. Louisiana songwriter Cyril Vetter reclaimed his total ownership of his 1963 hit “Double Shot of My Baby's Love” when he terminated his contract with Resnik Music Group back in 2022. Copyright laws made it so that he only retained the U.S. rights to the song. But the appeals court ruling struck down that long-time practice. The attorney who represented Vetter, Tim Kappel, joins us to explain what this ruling means for songwriters. —Today's episode of Louisiana Considered was hosted by Bob Pavlovich. Our managing producer is Alana Schreiber. We get production support from Garrett Pittman and our assistant producer, Aubry Procell.You can listen to Louisiana Considered Monday through Friday at noon and 7 p.m. It's available on Spotify, the NPR App and wherever you get your podcasts. Louisiana Considered wants to hear from you! Please fill out our pitch line to let us know what kinds of story ideas you have for our show. And while you're at it, fill out our listener survey! We want to keep bringing you the kinds of conversations you'd like to listen to.Louisiana Considered is made possible with support from our listeners. Thank you!
The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: After thinking they had won, the homosexual Left at West Texas A&M lose at trial in federal court over having drag queen performances in a WT campus facility.Meanwhile, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is sitting en banc this week and hearing an unprecedented seven cases. The WT case is one and the Ten Commandments in public schools is another (heard today.)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.Texas House District 88's Rep. Ken King taking casino gambling money this campaign cycle — one of 17 Republican candidates and nine Democrat candidates.In TX19, Gov. Abbott endorses young Trump campaigner Abraham Enriquez for Congress. In Texas HD71, within the same area as TX19, Abbott endorses one of the least conservative candidates, retiring RINO Stan Lambert's, staffer Jay Hardaway.Tesla Owner Elon Musk Touts ‘Most Advanced Lithium Refinery in the World' in South Texas.Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates. www.PrattonTexas.com
A new Austin city audit is calling for more installations of speed bumps and traffic enforcement to reduce speeding through neighborhoods, an Austin couple was thrown out of an Airbnb after telling the owner they were in possession of a firearm and Texas' new Ten Commandments law will go before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals today.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
The Taproot Therapy Podcast - https://www.GetTherapyBirmingham.com
Can Therapists Start a Union? The Antitrust Trap, the Shadow Committee, and the Economic Strangulation of American Psychotherapy Analyzing America's Healthcare Regulations and Their Effect on Us: Why the Law Prevents Therapists from Organizing While Allowing a Private Committee to Fix Prices for the Entire Medical System https://gettherapybirmingham.com/can-therapists-start-a-union-spoiler-alert-they-cant/ The Monthly Rage Thread If you hang around therapist forums long enough, you will see it happen. It operates with the regularity of the tides. Someone posts a thread, usually after receiving a contract from an insurance company offering 1998 rates for 2025 work, and asks the obvious question: “We are the ones providing the care. The system collapses without us. Why don't we just all go on strike? Why don't we form a union and demand fair pay?” It is a logical question. In almost every other sector of the economy, workers who feel exploited band together to negotiate better terms. Screenwriters shut down Hollywood to get paid for streaming residuals. Auto workers walk off the line. Teachers fill the state capitol. Nurses at major hospital systems have successfully unionized and won significant concessions. So why, in the midst of a national mental health crisis, does the mental health workforce remain so politically impotent? The answer is not that we lack will. It is not that we lack organization. The answer is that for private practice therapists, forming a union is a federal crime. This is not a political manifesto. It is an analysis of the bizarre regulatory environment that governs American healthcare, a system of antitrust laws, shadow committees, and bureaucratic classifications that effectively strips clinicians of their bargaining power while empowering the corporations that pay them. If you want to understand why corporate tech monopolies are ruining therapy, or why the corporatization of healthcare feels so suffocating, you have to understand the legal straitjacket we are all wearing. And you have to understand the one group that is allowed to set prices, the one group exempt from the rules that bind the rest of us. Part I: You Are Not a Worker, You Are a Standard Oil Tycoon The primary reason therapists cannot unionize dates back to the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons. The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was designed to prevent massive corporations like Standard Oil from colluding to fix prices and destroy the free market. It prohibits “every contract, combination… or conspiracy, in restraint of trade.” The law was a response to genuine abuses: companies buying up competitors, dividing territories, and coordinating prices to gouge consumers who had no alternatives. Here is the catch: In the eyes of the federal government, a private practice therapist is not a “worker.” You are a business entity. Even if you are a solo practitioner struggling to pay rent in a subleased office, seeing clients between crying in your car and eating lunch at your desk, the law views you as the CEO of a micro-corporation. You are classified as a 1099 independent contractor, not a W-2 employee, and that distinction makes all the difference in the world. If two workers at Starbucks talk about their wages and agree to ask for a raise, that is “collective bargaining,” which is protected by the National Labor Relations Act. But if two private practice therapists talk about their reimbursement rates and agree to ask Blue Cross for a raise, that is “price-fixing.” It is legally indistinguishable, in the eyes of the Federal Trade Commission, from gas stations conspiring to raise the price of unleaded. It sounds absurd, but the FTC takes it deadly seriously. When independent contractors organize to demand higher rates, when they share information about what they are being paid and coordinate their responses, they are engaging in horizontal price-fixing, one of the most serious violations of antitrust law. The Sherman Act provides for criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment. The law that was meant to break up monopolies is now used to prevent social workers from asking for a cost-of-living adjustment. The irony is crushing. The same regulatory framework that prevents two therapists from discussing their rates allows massive insurance conglomerates to merge repeatedly, concentrating buyer power in fewer and fewer hands. UnitedHealth Group, for example, has acquired dozens of companies over the past two decades, becoming the largest healthcare company in the United States. When they offer a “take it or leave it” contract to providers, they do so with the full knowledge that fragmented, legally prohibited from organizing therapists have no counter-leverage. The antitrust laws, designed to prevent monopoly power, have created a system where sellers are atomized and buyers are consolidated. Economists call this “monopsony,” and it is precisely the market distortion the Sherman Act was supposed to prevent. Part II: The Day the “Learned Profession” Died For a long time, doctors and lawyers thought they were exempt from these laws. They argued that they were “learned professions,” not mere tradespeople, and therefore above the grubby laws of commerce. They believed that their ethical obligations to patients and clients set them apart from the rules that governed steel mills and meatpacking plants. Medicine was a calling, not a business, and surely the government would not regulate the sacred doctor-patient relationship as if it were a commercial transaction. That illusion was shattered in 1975 by the Supreme Court case Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar. The case involved lawyers, not doctors, but its implications cascaded through every licensed profession in America. The Goldfarbs were purchasing a home and needed a title examination. The Virginia State Bar had established a minimum fee schedule for such services, and every lawyer they contacted quoted the exact same price. They sued, arguing that this fee schedule was illegal price-fixing. The Supreme Court agreed. In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that professional services, including legal and medical advice, are “trade or commerce” subject to antitrust laws. The “learned profession” exemption, which had been assumed but never explicitly established in law, was declared a myth. “The nature of an occupation, standing alone,” the Court wrote, “does not provide sanctuary from the Sherman Act.” This ruling was intended to lower prices for consumers by preventing lawyers from setting minimum fees, and in that narrow sense it was a good thing. But in healthcare, it had a catastrophic side effect: it made it illegal for doctors and therapists to band together to resist the pricing power of insurance companies. The “learned profession” exemption is dead. We are now just businesses, and businesses are not allowed to hold hands. This creates the illusion of progress: we have “free market” competition among providers, but monopsony power among payers. It is a market where the sellers are forbidden from organizing, but the buyers are allowed to merge until they are too big to fail. The result is not a free market at all. It is a market designed to transfer wealth from one class (providers) to another (insurers and administrators), with the law itself serving as the enforcement mechanism. Part III: The Cartel in the Basement If therapists cannot collude to set prices, surely nobody else can, right? Wrong. There is one group in American healthcare that is allowed to meet in a room, decide what every doctor's time is worth, and set prices for the entire industry. It is called the RUC, the AMA/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee. And understanding the RUC is the key to understanding why talk therapy is dying in the medical model, why psychiatrists abandoned the couch for the prescription pad, and why your insurance company offers you a ghost network of providers who never answer the phone. The Birth of a Shadow Government To comprehend the current crisis in mental health economics, one must excavate the foundations of the physician payment system. Prior to 1992, Medicare reimbursed physicians based on a system known as “Customary, Prevailing, and Reasonable” charges. Under this system, physicians were paid based on their historical billing charges. It was inherently inflationary; it rewarded those who raised their fees most aggressively and created wide geographic disparities for identical services. In response to spiraling costs, Congress passed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, mandating a transition to a fee schedule based on the resources required to provide a service. This birthed the Resource-Based Relative Value Scale. The intellectual architecture for this system was developed by a team of economists at Harvard University, led by William Hsiao. Hsiao's team sought to create a “unified theory” of medical value, attempting to quantify the “work” involved in disparate medical acts, comparing the cognitive intensity of a psychiatric evaluation with the technical skill of a hernia repair. The Harvard study was revolutionary. It promised to level the playing field, suggesting that cognitive services, the thinking and talking that comprises primary care and mental health, were vastly undervalued relative to surgical procedures. Had Hsiao's original recommendations been implemented purely, the income gap between generalists and specialists might have narrowed significantly. But the administrative complexity of assigning values to over 7,000 Current Procedural Terminology codes overwhelmed the Health Care Financing Administration. Into this administrative vacuum stepped the American Medical Association. The AMA, fearing that the government would unilaterally set prices, proposed a “partnership.” They would convene a committee of experts to maintain and update the relative values, providing this labor-intensive service to the government at no cost. The government accepted. Thus, in 1991, the RUC was born, not as a government agency, but as a private advisory body with unparalleled influence over public funds. The Architecture of Control The RUC's claim to legitimacy rests on its status as an “expert panel.” But a structural analysis of its composition reveals a profound bias that mimics the governance of a cartel designed to protect incumbent interests. The committee consists of 32 members, but power is concentrated in the 29 voting seats. Of these, 21 seats are appointed by major national medical specialty societies. The distribution is not proportional to the volume of services provided to Medicare beneficiaries, nor is it proportional to the physician workforce. Instead, it is frozen in a historical moment that favored high-technology specialties. Primary care physicians, who perform roughly 45 to 50 percent of Medicare work, hold approximately 4 to 5 seats, giving them about 17 percent of the vote. Procedural and surgical specialties, including surgery, radiology, and anesthesiology, hold 15 to 18 seats, giving them roughly 60 percent of the vote despite performing only 35 to 40 percent of Medicare work. The American Psychiatric Association holds a single seat. One seat. This lone representative must negotiate with a supermajority of specialists, neurosurgeons, cardiothoracic surgeons, radiologists, and ophthalmologists, whose financial interests are often diametrically opposed to the valuation of cognitive work. The cartel dynamic is enforced by a statutory requirement of budget neutrality. The Medicare Physician Fee Schedule is a zero-sum game. If the total relative value units projected for a given year exceed the budget, a “scaler” is applied to reduce the conversion factor, effectively cutting everyone's pay. Therefore, any proposal to increase the value of psychotherapy, which would increase the total RVU spend, effectively asks every surgeon in the room to take a pay cut to fund the raise for psychiatrists. Given that a two-thirds majority is required to pass a recommendation, the procedural bloc holds absolute veto power over any redistribution of wealth. The Secret Chamber A hallmark of cartel behavior is the restriction of information. For nearly two decades, the RUC operated in near-total secrecy. While recent years have seen minor concessions to transparency, such as the publication of vote totals, the core deliberative process remains opaque. RUC meetings are private. The public, the press, and even non-RUC physicians are largely barred from attending the deliberations where billions of tax dollars are allocated. Participants, including the specialty advisors who present data, must sign strict non-disclosure agreements. These agreements prevent them from discussing the specific tradeoffs, deals, or arguments made within the chamber. A former RUC participant described these agreements as “draconian,” designed to insulate the committee from public accountability. The Government Accountability Office and the Center for American Progress have noted the inherent conflict of interest. The individuals setting the prices are the same individuals who receive the payments. Unlike a regulatory agency, where officials are salaried and divested of industry assets, RUC members are practicing physicians whose personal incomes are directly tied to the decisions they make. This secrecy serves a functional purpose: it allows for “logrolling.” A representative from Orthopedics might support an inflated value for a Cardiology code in exchange for Cardiology's support on a Knee Replacement code. This “I'll scratch your back” dynamic creates an upward pressure on procedural values that excludes those outside the dominant coalition, specifically primary care and mental health. The Antitrust Shield Why has the Department of Justice not broken up this cartel? The legal shield is the Noerr-Pennington Doctrine. This Supreme Court doctrine establishes that private entities are immune from antitrust liability when they are petitioning the government. Because the RUC technically only “recommends” values to CMS (that is petitioning), and CMS “decides” (that is government action), the RUC is protected by the First Amendment right to petition. This legal loophole allows the RUC to operate with monopolistic characteristics without fear of prosecution, provided CMS continues to go through the motions of “reviewing” the recommendations. And CMS accepts those recommendations over 90 percent of the time. Because private insurance companies generally base their rates on Medicare, this private committee effectively sets the price of healthcare for the entire country. If independent therapists did this, if they gathered in a room and agreed on what their services should cost, they would face criminal prosecution. But because the RUC operates under the fiction of “advising” the government, it is protected. The same regulatory framework that criminalizes therapist solidarity provides cover for industry-wide price coordination by the most powerful medical specialties. Part IV: The Mechanics of Suppression To control a market, one must control its currency. In American medicine, that currency is the Relative Value Unit. Every medical service, from a 15-minute therapy session to a heart transplant, is assigned a total RVU value. This value is the sum of three components: the Work RVU, which accounts for physician time, technical skill, mental effort, and judgment; the Practice Expense RVU, which covers overhead costs like rent, staff, and equipment; and the Malpractice RVU, which reflects professional liability insurance costs. The Work RVU, which comprises roughly 50 to 55 percent of the total value, is determined by RUC surveys. When a code is flagged for review, the relevant specialty society distributes a survey to a sample of its members. These respondents are asked to estimate the time and intensity of the service compared to a “reference service.” This methodology violates several principles of statistical validity. The surveys are voluntary and distributed by the specialty societies themselves. The respondents are typically those most active in the society and most invested in maximizing reimbursement, advocates rather than neutral observers. The sample sizes are often shockingly small; RUC surveys frequently rely on fewer than 50 or 70 respondents to set the price for services performed millions of times annually. A sample of 30 orthopedic surgeons might determine the value of a procedure costing Medicare billions. The Time Arbitrage The most critical variable in the RUC equation is time. The Work RVU is conceptually derived from the formula: Work equals Time multiplied by Intensity. Therefore, inflating the time estimate is the most direct route to inflating the price. Independent studies by RAND and the Urban Institute, often using objective data like Operating Room logs, have consistently shown that the RUC overestimates the time required for surgical procedures. A procedure valued by the RUC as taking 60 minutes may, in reality, take 30 minutes. This creates an arbitrage opportunity. If a gastroenterologist can perform a “60-minute” colonoscopy in 20 minutes, they can effectively perform three procedures in the time allotted for one. They bill for three hours of work in one hour of real time. This “efficiency gain” is captured entirely by the physician as profit. Psychotherapy cannot utilize this arbitrage. CPT codes for psychotherapy are explicitly time-based in their definition. Code 90832 requires 16 to 37 minutes. Code 90834 requires 38 to 52 minutes. Code 90837 requires 53 minutes or more. A psychiatrist cannot perform a 60-minute therapy session in 20 minutes; doing so constitutes fraud. Therefore, the revenue of a psychotherapist is capped by the linear passage of time. They can sell, at maximum, roughly 8 to 10 units of labor per day. A proceduralist, aided by RUC-inflated time assumptions, can sell 20 or 30 units of “RUC time” in the same day. This structural discrepancy creates a widening income gap that no amount of “hard work” by the therapist can close. It is not a market failure. It is market design. The “Thinking” Penalty The RUC's bias is not merely structural; it is philosophical. The committee, dominated by surgeons and proceduralists, consistently values “doing things to people,” cutting, scanning, injecting, far more highly than “talking to people,” diagnosing, counseling, managing complex chronic conditions. This creates a regulatory environment that functions as a de facto wealth transfer from cognitive care to procedural care. In 2013, a major revision of psychiatry codes exposed this bias in stark relief. Previously, psychiatrists used codes that bundled the medical evaluation with the psychotherapy. The new system required psychiatrists to bill an E/M code for the medical management plus an “add-on” code for psychotherapy. While intended to improve transparency, this change exposed psychotherapy to the raw mechanics of the RUC's valuation bias. By isolating the “therapy” component, the committee could subject it to rigorous cross-specialty comparison. And the committee, dominated by surgeons, views “talking to a patient” as low-intensity work compared to “operating on a patient.” The economic signal was clear. This created the 15-minute med check culture not because psychiatrists stopped caring, but because the regulatory environment made relational care financial suicide. It effectively “illegalized” the practice of deep, slow psychiatry for anyone who wanted to take insurance. Part V: The “Messenger Model” and Other Legal Fictions When therapists ask about collective bargaining, lawyers will often point them to the only legal loophole available: the “Messenger Model.” In this model, a third party (the messenger) acts as an intermediary between a group of providers and an insurance company. The messenger takes the insurance company's offer and conveys it to each therapist individually. Each therapist must then make a unilateral, independent decision to accept or reject it. The messenger is strictly forbidden from negotiating. They cannot say, “The group rejects this.” They cannot say, “We want 10% more.” They cannot advise the therapists on what to do. They can only carry messages. This is why “Independent Practice Associations” are often toothless. In the 2008 case North Texas Specialty Physicians v. FTC, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals made clear that if an IPA actually tries to leverage its numbers to demand better rates, it violates antitrust laws. If it follows the messenger model, it has no leverage. It is a “heads I win, tails you lose” regulatory structure designed to protect payers, not providers. The only exception is “clinical integration,” where providers genuinely merge their practices, share infrastructure, and accept joint financial risk. But this requires substantial capital investment and essentially means ceasing to be an independent practitioner. It is a legal pathway available mainly to large physician groups and hospital systems, not to solo therapists working out of rented offices. Part VI: Market Distortions and the Flight to Cash When a cartel sets a price below the market equilibrium, suppliers exit the formal market. This is precisely what has happened in psychotherapy. Mental health providers generally have lower overhead than surgeons. They do not need MRI machines or sterile surgical suites. And they face high consumer demand; the national mental health crisis ensures a steady stream of people seeking services. This gives them an “exit option” that proceduralists do not have. They can refuse to accept insurance and operate as cash-only businesses. The statistics are stark. Nearly 50 percent of psychiatrists do not accept commercial insurance, compared to less than 10 percent of other specialists. A 2023 survey indicated that 64 percent of private practice therapists planned to increase their cash-pay rates. Research published in Health Affairs Scholar found that patients are 10.6 times more likely to go out-of-network for mental health care than for medical/surgical care. This mass exodus is a rational economic response to RUC-suppressed rates. If the RUC says an hour of therapy is worth $100 via the RVU-to-dollar conversion, but the market demand is willing to pay $250, the provider will leave the RUC-controlled sector. They are not abandoning their profession; they are abandoning a pricing regime that values their work at less than half its market rate. Ghost Networks The RUC's pricing failure creates “Ghost Networks,” directories filled with providers who are ostensibly “in-network” but are functionally inaccessible. They are either full, not accepting new patients, retired, have moved, or simply do not respond to inquiries from insurance-based patients because the administrative burden of prior authorizations and clawbacks outweighs the suppressed fee. This is not a “shortage” of providers in the absolute sense. There is no shortage of therapists in private practice. There is a shortage of therapists willing to work at the RUC-determined price point. The insurance directories are graveyards of phantom availability, creating the illusion of access where none exists. The Cost Paradox The central thesis of the RUC's defenders is that they “control costs.” By strictly managing RVUs, they claim to save taxpayer money. In psychotherapy, this logic backfires catastrophically. By suppressing reimbursement rates to a level that drives providers out of the network, the RUC forces patients into the cash market. The theoretical in-network cost might be a $20 copay with the insurer paying $100. The actual out-of-network cost is $250 cash out-of-pocket, paid in full by the patient. Thus, the “cost of therapy” for the consumer skyrockets. Therapy becomes a luxury good, accessible only to those with disposable income. For the poor and middle class, the “cost” is effectively infinite, because the service becomes inaccessible. The RUC's cost-control measure for the system becomes a cost-multiplier for the patient. It shifts the financial burden from the risk pool, where it belongs, to the individual, where it causes maximum harm. The Signal to Students The RUC sends powerful economic signals to medical students making career decisions. When a student observes that a dermatologist or radiologist can earn $500,000 working regular hours, while a psychiatrist earns $240,000 handling emotional trauma and on-call emergencies, while a primary care doctor earns even less, the choice is clear for those motivated by financial security. The undervaluation of cognitive codes discourages the best and brightest from entering mental health and primary care. The cartel's pricing structure creates a perpetual labor shortage in the fields most needed for public health, while creating a surplus in high-margin procedural specialties. We then wonder why there are not enough psychiatrists, why primary care is in crisis, why mental health access is collapsing. The answer is in the price signal, and the price signal is set by a committee of proceduralists meeting behind closed doors. The Hands Are Tied The question “Why can't therapists start a union?” is not just a labor question. It is a window into the broken soul of American healthcare. We have built a system where a secret committee of proceduralists can legally fix prices to favor surgery over therapy, but a group of social workers cannot band together to ask for a living wage. We have utilized laws meant to break up Standard Oil to break up the solidarity of caregivers. The same regulatory framework that criminalizes therapist coordination provides legal cover for industry-wide price coordination by the most powerful medical specialties. The result is a regulatory environment that drives doctors crazy, burns out therapists, and leaves patients navigating a fragmented, assembly-line system that was never designed to heal them. It was designed to process them. Until we confront the legal architecture of this system, the RUC, the Sherman Act, the 1099 trap, we will remain powerless to change it. And the reality of therapy is that quick fixes, whether in treatment or in policy, usually end up costing us more in the end. Some states are beginning to push back. New York and California have implemented strict network adequacy standards requiring mental health appointments within 10 business days. These regulations force insurers to expand their networks, which means they must attract providers, which means they must raise reimbursement rates above the RUC/Medicare floor. It is effectively a state-level override of the RUC cartel, forcing capital back into the mental health labor market. The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission has long advocated for stripping the RUC of its power, proposing the use of empirical data, tax returns, payroll records, practice invoices, to set values automatically. But these are patchwork solutions to a systemic problem. The fundamental issue remains: we have created a healthcare system that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. We have engineered a system where the only way to survive is to stop acting like a healer and start acting like a factory. And we have wrapped this system in a legal framework that criminalizes resistance while protecting the status quo. The hands are tied. But at least now we can see the ropes. Bibliography For those interested in the primary sources and legal texts that underpin this analysis, the following external resources provide high-trust verification of the claims made above: Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar, 421 U.S. 773 (1975): The Supreme Court decision that ended the “learned profession” exemption from antitrust laws. Read the Oyez Summary. The Sherman Antitrust Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 1–7): The foundational text of US antitrust law prohibiting restraint of trade. Read the Document at the National Archives. North Texas Specialty Physicians v. Federal Trade Commission (5th Cir. 2008): A key ruling establishing that independent physicians cannot collectively bargain on fees without financial integration. Read the Court Opinion. FTC/DOJ Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy in Health Care (1996): The federal guidelines explaining the “Messenger Model” and the narrow exceptions for clinical integration. Read the Guidelines (PDF). The RUC (AMA/Specialty Society RVS Update Committee): The AMA's own description of the committee structure and its role in valuing physician work. Visit the AMA RUC Page. “Special Deal” by Haley Sweetland Edwards (Washington Monthly, 2013): An investigative deep-dive into how the RUC operates and its impact on primary care vs. specialty pay. Read the Investigation. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA): The law governing the right to unionize, which specifically excludes independent contractors. Read the NLRA. Laugesen, Miriam J. Fixing Medical Prices: How Physicians Are Paid. Harvard University Press, 2016. The definitive scholarly analysis of the RUC's history, structure, and influence on American healthcare pricing. Government Accountability Office. “Medicare Physician Payment Rates: Better Data and Greater Transparency Could Improve Accuracy.” 2015. GAO's critical analysis of RUC methodology and conflicts of interest. Center for American Progress. “Rethinking the RUC.” 2015. Policy analysis of the RUC's structural bias against primary care and cognitive services. Health Affairs Scholar. “Insurance Acceptance and Cash Pay Rates for Psychotherapy in the US.” 2023. Empirical research on out-of-network utilization in mental health care. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC). “Report to the Congress: Medicare and the Health Care Delivery System.” 2024. Annual policy recommendations including proposals for reforming physician fee schedule methodology. Joel Blackstock, LICSW-S, is the Clinical Director of Taproot Therapy Collective in Hoover, Alabama. He specializes in complex trauma treatment and writes at GetTherapyBirmingham.com.
Join us on Texas Values Report with special guest Gene Mills, President of Louisiana Family Forum, and host Jonathan Saenz, President & Attorney for Texas Values, as they discuss the Texas Ten Commandments case at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans happening next week. Learn more about the Texas Ten Commandments Law https://tencommandmentstexas.com/ Amicus Brief filed in Hecox v. Little, Save Women's Sports case out of Idaho https://www.supremecourt.gov/.../20240814155054142... Spoiler alert: men cannot get pregnant (Sen. Josh Hawley) https://x.com/hawleymo/status/2011480384467349892?s=46 Help us build our channel so we can maintain a culture of Faith, Family, & Freedom in Texas by interacting with us; like, comment, share, subscribe! For more about Texas Values see: Txvalues.org To support our work, go to donate.txvalues.org/GivetoTexasValues
Today's episode exposes an issue far deeper than most parents realize: what's actually inside our public and school libraries. The journey began when I opened a copy of Gender Queer in a small-town bookstore and saw a graphic sexual illustration—sitting in plain view for any child to pick up. That moment sent me down a trail that led from local libraries all the way up to the American Library Association.To help us understand the full picture, I interview Bonnie Wallace from Llano County, Texas. Bonnie discovered explicit books containing graphic scenes, sexual content, and online grooming pathways—in the children's section of her library. When she raised concerns, she and her county were sued for simply moving the books to the adult side.Her legal battle went from the local level, to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court—resulting in a landmark decision affirming the right of libraries to protect kids from inappropriate material.In this conversation, we break down:-How radical ideology has infiltrated the American Library Association and state library associations-Why explicit materials are being pushed toward minors-Why some books are too explicit for prisoners, yet accessible to children-How pornography and graphic content shape a child's mind-What Christian librarians and Christian parents must do-Practical steps for protecting your kids at home, school, and in your county-Why Christians must run for school boards, library boards, and local office-And why “book banning” is a false narrative—this is about book boundaries, not censorshipParents: your vigilance matters. Shepherd your kids' hearts. Guard what they see. Engage in your local community.If one woman can take on the library industry and win, imagine what thousands of Christians standing up for righteousness could do.Join us weekly as we strive help people embrace God's standard for sexuality! Other ways to listen:https://linktr.ee/calibrateconversations#Sexuality #Libraries #Scandal
Judge Scott Schlegel of the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal joins The Geek in Review for a candid, funny, and unflinchingly practical conversation about AI inside the judicial system. Schlegel wears multiple hats, appellate judge, former prosecutor, reform-minded builder, plus a podcaster and Substack writer who speaks plainly about what works and what fails when technology hits real people on real timelines. The throughline stays consistent, courts do not need more hype, courts need competence, guardrails, and a process mindset.Judge Schlegel tackles the messy reality of AI disclosures, certifications, and uneven court rules across jurisdictions. His core message lands fast, judicial authority lives with the judge, not an AI system. From there, he outlines why chambers guidance matters, along with a structured, step-by-step approach for responsible drafting support, including prompt discipline and workflow thinking. The goal stays simple, faster decisions without surrendering judgment to “bot overlords.”The discussion then shifts to constraints judges live with every day, budgets, procurement rules, security anxiety, and the gap between shiny vendor demos and courthouse reality. Schlegel argues for a scrappy, process-first approach using small pilots, one chambers, one workflow, one measurable result. He compares the moment to early “cloud” adoption lessons, pay for the right security, avoid free tools where the user becomes the product, and treat sensitive records with strict care. Courts will see broader adoption as enterprise-grade options become attainable and baked into trusted platforms.Then comes the part that lingers in your head after the episode ends, deepfakes and voice cloning as a near-term threat to due process, especially in domestic violence and protective order contexts. Schlegel explains why judges tend to err on the side of safety, and why “damage done” shows up long before expert testimony arrives. His practical recommendation focuses on pretrial practice, require disclosure, surface manipulation concerns early, and reduce surprises at trial. He even shares a simple family safety habit, a private “secret word” to confirm identity during urgent calls, since voice cloning tools lower the barrier for fraud.Finally, Schlegel offers a sharp warning about confirmation bias, large language models often aim to please the user, which benefits advocates and harms neutral decision-making. His answer: an “AI alignment test” mindset, deliberate prompting, and refusal to outsource the white-page moment to a model. For the future, he points toward structural change courts rarely receive funding for, true legal technologists who redesign case management and public-facing guidance at scale. If courts stop printing emails and living in wire baskets, progress follows, and yes, somewhere in a parallel universe, Schlegel still wants a hologram machine.Judge Schlegel, his court, and his workJudge Schlegel bio page. Judge Scott SchlegelLouisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal profile page for Judge Schlegel. Fifth Circuit Court of AppealJudge Schlegel's Tech & Gavel landing page. Judge Scott SchlegelTech & Gavel on Apple Podcasts. Apple PodcastsAI-in-courts guidance, plus his newsletter“AI in Chambers: A Framework for Judicial AI Use” (includes the download link). Judge Scott SchlegelSchlegel Tech Substack newsletter. [sch]Legal Tech SubstackDeepfakes, provenance, and content credentialsC2PA, Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity, “About” page. C2PAListen on mobile platforms: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube[Special Thanks to Legal Technology Hub for their sponsoring this episode.] Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.comMusic: Jerry David DeCicca
A public library in Caleb and Stephen's area has been providing pornographic content to children. What is happening, why, and what should be done about it?Caleb and Stephen's Letter to the Sioux Center Public Library:To the Sioux Center Public Library, together with its director, board, staff, and all else who pertains:May the Lord convict you to read this letter in its entirety. Do not shrink from its words. Be discomforted, but receive the admonishment in humility. Remove Icebreaker, Identical, and every other wicked, ungodly, and perverse “literature” which you make available for public distribution. To be clear: not only should children be protected from depraved content, but also adults.Repent and do what is right — not from fear of man, not out of a duty to the community, but in the sight of God — that you may be forgiven. “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us” (1 Jn. 18-10). As will be explained further below, this is no matter of simply saying something to the effect of, “We don't personally like the book, but it's hard to decide what should or shouldn't be stocked,” or to “let the parents decide.”First, a brief note on the First Amendment and libraries. We would like to draw your attention to this week's conclusion of Little v. Llano County, in which the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal against the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold the county's removal of 17 books from their public libraries. Specifically, they had ruled that there is no inherent right protected under the First Amendment for someone to receive information via taxpayer-funded books from a public library. This decision now applies to the states of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. If this is the case elsewhere, can—even, ought it not be applied here? Your board has been quoted as stating its “commitment” to “protect access to information.” Should the reception of any and all information or content be protected? There is no true necessity in providing erotica to anyone. Indeed, as your director has said, “Our mission is to inspire lifelong learning, advance knowledge and strengthen our community.” How does pornographic, erotic literature inspire learning and advance knowledge? And — given the backlash you have thus far received — how does this strengthen the community?Second, your opinions on the first amendment, the Iowa constitution, and ALA policies aside: We call upon you to realize you are accountable to a Higher Authority (Acts 5:29; Westminster Larger Catechism QA 99, 128-130; Heidelberg Catechism, QA 104; Belgic Confession 36). You are under a law greater than your own policies. This law, God's law, applies to all peoples, unbelievers and believers alike. All mankind will be judged under the same law. If there are any on the board who do not profess Christ, you must hear the gospel and turn from your sins so that you may be saved. If you would hear this message of salvation while there is yet time, please contact us at pastor.rvurc@gmail.com.However, being aware of the demographics of our county, it is far more likely that this board and the library staff are full of churchgoers. If so, what grief you bring upon Christ's name! “Who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth?” (Gal. 3:1)What does the Word of God say of your actions?By providing in your catalog any material with perverse content, you promote peoples' minds to dwell upon that which is prohibited by the holy law. You train peoples' hearts to store up that which defiles the temple of our body (1 Cor. 6:18-20).“Fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints, neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not fitting…For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God (Eph. 5:3-5).” Sexual immorality is not limited to only an outward action, but also when the mind itself is lured to entertain temptation. As Jesus says in Matthew 5:27-28, “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”We are instead positively commanded to give our minds to holy, good things: “whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things” (Phil. 4:8).Perhaps you object. Perhaps you think, “I'm not responsible for what others do. If they want to read these things, that's for them to decide.” You may as well like Cain (Gen. 4:9) ask the Lord, “Am I my brother's keeper?” Yes, you are. “Do not be deceived,” says Paul, for “Evil company corrupts good morals” (1 Cor. 15:33), and “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” (Gal. 5:9).Concerning sexual immorality and the 7th commandment, Q. 109 of the Heidelberg Catechism asks, Does God, in this commandment, forbid only such scandalous sins as adultery? Note its answer well: “We are temples of the Holy Spirit, body and soul, and Godwants both to be kept clean and holy. That is why God forbids all unchaste actions, looks, talk, thoughts, or desires, and whatever may incite someone to them” (see also WLC QA 139). It is clear: you shall certainly be held responsible for your part in distributing that which may lead someone to sin, whether they be adult or child; regardless of the government's position on its permissibility. However, know that your guilt is magnified for involving a child. Indeed, by permitting a child to check out such filth, you pose a stumbling block before them that they trip into sin. To you Jesus says, “It is inevitable that stumbling blocks come, but woe to one through whom they come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin” (Luke 17:1-2; WLC QA 151).We pray you will heed these warnings with all sobriety, especially if you profess Christ, for “You should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (Eph. 4:17). “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God” (James 4:4).Consider this rebuke as a mercy from the Lord, shining light to expose devilish works. And now being exposed, understand that “to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin” (James 4:17), “for if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment” (Heb. 10:26-27). Can the stakes be any more clear than that? What ought you do?Well, if you would truly be called public servants:* Serve the parents by informing them if a child is seeking adult content (Prov. 17:25; 29:15)* Serve the child by declining to check out any material that would be destructive to their soul, even if it would cost you your job. (Lev. 19:7; Prov. 27:5; James 5:19-20)* Serve the community by refusing to stock wicked books in the first place (Ps. 101:3); by not squandering tax dollars on smut (Prov. 21:20; Lk. 16:10-13). * Discard from your shelves all depraved materials, pornographic writings, even any work which might “shake the hand against God, in defiance against the Almighty” (Job 15:25; Ezek. 20:7; Acts 19:19). * Refuse to contribute to the deformation and denigration of godliness in this area and in this land (Deut. 28:47-48; Dan. 12:10; Matt. 24:12; 1 Tim. 4:1-2; Jude 18-19).And finally, “Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up” (James 4:7-10).May God have mercy.Rev. Caleb CastroMr. Stephen EvertseRock Valley United Reformed ChurchDecember 03, 2025Iowa Standard interview with Teri Hubbard, the lone dissenting member of the SCPL boardAmerican Library Association “Freedom to Read” statementSioux Center Public Library Circulation Policy This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.onceforalldelivered.com/subscribe
The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: Texas Democrat Congressman Henry Cuellar of Laredo pardoned by President Trump. Cuellar and his wife were under indictment for what seemed to be political retribution from the Biden Administration but now, with no trial we'll never fully know. A strong candidate for the GOP just announced his campaign for TX28 yesterday so will this hurt or help? One thing to remember is that Cuellar, who almost lost last time to an underfunded Republican, has a Democratic Party Primary opponent this time who said of the pardon: “Innocent people do not take pardons.”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.TX19: Conservative leader and Lubbock County Commissioner Jason Corley officially announced a run for Congress yesterday. Corley is not a banquets and balls self-promoting politician. He's an in-the-trenches worker for conservative government – sort of a working man's rep.In oral argument, it appears the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will likely back Texas' election integrity law clamping down on electioneering related to mail-in ballots.Texas DPS and border patrol continue to interdict illegal aliens making it across the border with several big busts in recent days.Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com
The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: A new ruling in the case of the City of Kemaj abusing citizens from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will have far reaching consequences for Texas and local governments that abuse the rights of citizens. One key takeaway: The court “…asserted that a “taking” of property occurs at the time a government takes an action that makes the property unusable.”Read the full story by the great Holly Hansen here: Federal Appeals Court Ruling in Kemah Lawsuit Dismantles Hurdles for Citizens to Sue Local Governments.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.Dallas Fed: Texas manufacturing activity accelerates. Texas service sector activity retreats slightly and retail sales fall.More bad polling for Senator John Cornyn.TX23: Brandon Herrera raises $1 million in primary challenge to Tony Gonzales. Are there “Go Brandon!” signs in this primary race?Webb County judge denies violating federal election law.Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com
The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: Respected judge on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Jerry Smith, says of the ruling blocking Texas Congressional redistricting: “If this were a law school exam, the opinion would deserve an F.” Smith called the action of district court judges Brown and Guaderrama “outrageous conduct.” Smith said of the three judge panel that it was the worst he has ever seen in a case in which he was involved and accused Brown of “pernicious judicial misbehavior.”It wasn't just the terrible legal opinion, Brown and Guaderrama appear to have short circuited the judicial process with an attempt to derail Judge Smith's dissenting opinion. Judge's scathing dissent casts redistricting ruling as ‘judicial activism' Dissenting Judge Slams Colleagues for Blocking Texas Congressional Map ‘Nobel Prize for Fiction': Federal Judge Issues Fiery Dissent to Texas Congressional Redistricting Ruling Judge in Texas redistricting case slams move to strike down new map In addition, this is a must read: SCOTUS must save Texas from meddling liberal judges, by Mike Davis.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.Lt. Gov. Patrick spitting nails over a lawsuit filed over the creation of his favored new bureaucracy, the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of Texas.Attorney General Ken Paxton gets a win for law and order over Harris County's Soros-style soft on bail policies.TX19: Republican Abraham Enriquez announces campaign for Congress in Texas' 19th District.Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com
The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: Texas, sanity prevails at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals as it stops a block to Texas' law that treats sexually suggestive drag queen shows the same as other sexually suggestive performances. ACLU, homosexuals, drag queens and others sued claiming that not letting the performances be given before children somehow violates the crossdressers' constitutional rights. 5th Circuit Vacates Block on Texas' Ban on Drag Shows with Minors in Attendance Attorney General Ken Paxton Successfully Defends Law Protecting Children from Being Exposed to Sexually Illicit Content at Erotic Drag Shows Texas Can Enforce Ban on Erotic Drag Shows for Kids, Federal Court Rules 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.Oil and gas rig count falls by one in Texas.Some of the campaign related stories covered: Texas Rep. John Smithee to retire after nearly 40 years of service Nearly one in five (19%) Texas Latinos regret voting for Trump, poll finds – there are important lessons in this poll I discuss Border and illegal immigration: Trump's Border Policy Delivers: Zero Migrant Releases for 6th Month, Record-Low Apprehensions in October ICE Disputes Houston Church's Story About Detained Priest Deported pedophile ‘brutally beat' ICE agent during arrest in Houston ICE captures South American theft ring members in Texas break-ins after probe Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com
The Texas law, which I helped craft, preventing drag queens from performing in front of children has been upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Good riddance to Nancy Pelosi as she announces her retirement from Congress. Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) joins the show to discuss filing articles of impeachment against anti-Trump activist Judge James Boasberg for his alleged role in Arctic Frost, which allowed the Biden DOJ to spy on Republican senators. The Islamification of America is under way. Matthew Marsden and Jaco Booyens join the show to talk about the dangers. ► Subscribe to “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered”! https://www.youtube.com/@SaraGonzalesUnfiltered?sub_confirmation=1 Today's Sponsors: ► Relief Factor Visit https://www.relieffactor.com or call 1-800-4-Relief to try the three-week QuickStart today. ► PreBorn Donate securely at https://www.preborn.com/sara or dial #250, keyword BABY. ► Kindred Harvest Teas Go to https://www.kindredharvest.co and use code SARA for 20% off. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Firearms Policy Coalition head Brandon Combs joins Cam to discuss the bizarre judgment in a case Reese v. ATF, where the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals found the ban on handgun sales to adults under 21 violates the Second Amendment, but a district court judge has limited the judicial relief to almost no one.
This episode begins with Mary and Andrew digesting the 2-1 decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals halting the Trump administration's ability to use the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan nationals accused of being members of Tren de Aragua. Andrew calls the administration's recent arguments “outlandish” before moving to the questionable legality of the U.S. military's deadly boat strike last week – an unprecedented action which left eleven dead. Next, they move to Monday's Supreme Court decision undoing limits set by a lower court on how ICE conducts immigration raids. Plus, a federal judge issues a win for Harvard University on the topic of frozen and terminated funds. Further reading: The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling on Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport VenezuelansAnd a reminder: tickets are on sale now for MSNBC Live – our second live community event featuring more than a dozen MSNBC hosts. The day-long event will be held on October 11th at Hammerstein Ballroom in Manhattan. To buy tickets visit msnbc.com/live25.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.
This episode is presented by Create A Video – A 3-judge panel on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Trump Administration cannot deport members of the violent cartel, Tren de Aragua, under the Alien Enemies Act. The 2-1 ruling is expected to be appealed to the US Supreme Court. Also, the US Navy blew up an alleged TdA drug smuggling boat from Venezuela. Help Pete’s Walk to End Alzheimer’s! Subscribe to the podcast at: https://ThePetePod.com/ All the links to Pete's Prep are free: https://patreon.com/petekalinershow Media Bias Check: GroundNews promo code! Advertising and Booking inquiries: Pete@ThePeteKalinerShow.com Get exclusive content here!: https://thepetekalinershow.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Bryan is in his last week of shows at Edinburgh, Erin is (not) retired, and Aunt Gladys talk turns into learning about La Llorona and the Cucuy. Erin talks about the downturn of goodwill towards Costco after their decision to not sell Mifepristone due to conservative pushback. Bryan gives us some positive news with the Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans issuing an injunction against West Texas A&M for banning drag shows on the basis of the First Amendment. For hours of bonus content visit www.patreon.com/attitudes For tickets to Bryan's Edinburgh shows visit www.bryansafi.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Stories we're following this morning at Progress Texas:Fort Worth Rep. Nicole Collier spent the night last night on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives, refusing a Texas DPS tail that Republicans have required for all of the Democratic quorum breakers to leave the Capitol: https://abc7ny.com/post/democratic-texas-state-rep-nicole-collier-slept-house-floor-protest-refusing-demand-law-enforcement-escort/17584775/...A nonviolent protest and solidarity gathering on behalf of Rep. Collier is happening tonight (Tuesday 8/19) at the Capitol: https://www.mobilize.us/handsoffcentraltexas/event/830948/...At least four of Collier's supporters were arrested last night after refusing to leave their vigil: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DNhc65Ju5LX/?igsh=Y3czYnhocGV2ZTI0...A new analysis of the Trump map shows that it will extend what is already a disproportionate level of Republican representation in Texas relative to the popular vote: https://www.texastribune.org/2025/08/18/texas-redistricting-maps-charts-analysis/?_bhlid=8e069a6f680e3d5c42668d3fccf9cea202d76672...A coalition of legal defense groups are preparing their challenge to the new Texas map: https://thehill.com/homenews/5458835-democratic-aligned-nonprofit-civil-rights-groups-ready-to-sue-over-texas-congressional-map/Those new Ten Commandments posters plastered all over your kid's school are causing tension: https://www.click2houston.com/news/local/2025/08/19/tensions-rise-in-texas-as-students-return-to-school-under-new-ten-commandments-law/The notoriously conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down West Texas A&M's ban on drag shows: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2025/08/19/court-blocks-West-Texas-AM-drag-ban/9401755573254/Dallas/Fort Worth friends: Join Progress Texas Institute and the Legal Defense Fund in Dallas for a live podcast taping, featuring Tarrant County Commissioner Alisa Simmons, at the DEC Network Center—honoring the years since the signing of the Voting Rights Act and a review of where voting rights stand today, amid redistricting threats. Admission is free! https://act.progresstexas.org/a/vra_event_2025Austin friends: tickets are on sale now for our live podcast taping with legendary Austin FC goalkeeper Brad Stuver on September 15 at Hopsquad Brewing in Austin! Tickets are limited and are available here: https://act.progresstexas.org/a/allstaractivism_2025Progress Texas' financial reserves have dropped to about 3 months worth of funding. Help us avoid going on a permanent vacation this summer by becoming a sustaining member: https://progresstexas.org/join-pt-summer-vacation-membership-driveThanks for listening! Find our web store and other ways to support our important work at https://progresstexas.org.
Friday, August 15th, 2025Today, Governor Gavin Newsom announces a special election in California to fight back against Republican gerrymandering in Texas; a DC man who threw a sandwich at law enforcement was a Department of Justice employee; an inspector general report finds severe shortages at VA hospitals; Kari Lake defends her Voice of America cuts as lawmakers warn her she overstepped; the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sides with Black Louisianians by striking down their racists state legislative map; Trump announces his Kennedy Center Honorees and says he might include himself among them; and Allison and Dana read your Good News.Thank You, IQBARText DAILYBEANS to 64000 to get 20% off all IQBAR products, plus FREE shipping. Message and data rates may apply. Guest: John FugelsangTell Me Everything - John Fugelsang, The John Fugelsang PodcastJohn Fugelsang - Substack@johnfugelsang.bsky.social - Bluesky, @JohnFugelsang -TwitterSeparation of Church and Hate by John Fugelsang - Pre-order StoriesCalifornia will move forward with redistricting vote to counter Texas, Newsom says | ABC NewsTrump leaves his mark on the Kennedy Center Honors | POLITICO‘Severe' staff shortages at US veterans' hospitals, watchdog finds | Trump administration | The GuardianKari Lake defends VOA cuts in court after warnings from Capitol Hill | The Washington PostFifth Circuit Sides with Black Louisianians, Strikes Down Racially Discriminatory State Legislative Map | American Civil Liberties UnionFired DOJ employee could face prison for throwing sandwich at officers | The Washington PostGood Trouble “I just received an email from the Center for Reproductive Rights saying that Trump's GSA cut off the connection that let visitors to their website send comments to regulations.gov. The CCR has been asking people to use that link to voice their opposition to the Trump administration's attempt to ban abortion care for veterans and their families, even in cases of rape, incest or medical emergencies. Wouldn't it be great if Beans listeners made up for the lost comments by sending thousands today?” Go to regulations.gov and search for Reproductive Health Services or use this link: regulations.gov/commenton/VA-2025-VHA-0073-0002 From The Good Newsregulations.gov/commenton/VA-2025-VHA-0073-0002Lessons from Cats for Surviving Fascism by Stewart Reynolds | Hachette Book GroupErika EvansReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - feel free to email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comCheck out more from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackShare your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good TroubleHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?The Daily Beans | SupercastThe Daily Beans & Mueller, She Wrote | PatreonThe Daily Beans | Apple Podcasts
This Day in Legal History: Starve or SellOn August 15, 1876, the United States Congress passed a coercive measure aimed at forcing the Sioux Nation to relinquish their sacred lands in the Black Hills of present-day South Dakota. Known informally as the "starve or sell" bill, the legislation declared that no further federal appropriations would be made for the Sioux's food or supplies unless they ceded the Black Hills to the U.S. government. This came just two months after the Lakota and Northern Cheyenne had defeated General George Custer at the Battle of the Little Bighorn, a major blow to U.S. military prestige.The Black Hills had been guaranteed to the Sioux in the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie, which recognized their sovereignty over the area. But when gold was discovered there in 1874 during Custer's expedition, settlers and miners flooded the region, violating the treaty. Rather than remove the intruders, the federal government shifted blame and sought to pressure the Sioux into surrendering the land.The 1876 bill effectively weaponized hunger by conditioning life-sustaining aid on land cession. This tactic ignored treaty obligations and relied on exploiting the Sioux's vulnerability after a harsh winter and military setbacks. Despite resistance from many tribal leaders, the U.S. government eventually secured signatures under extreme duress. In 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians ruled that the Black Hills were taken illegally and ordered compensation—money the Sioux have famously refused, insisting instead on the return of the land.Russian state-sponsored hackers infiltrated the U.S. federal court system and secretly accessed sealed records for years by exploiting stolen user credentials and a vulnerability in an outdated server. The breach, which remained undisclosed until recently, involved the deliberate targeting of sealed documents tied to sensitive matters like espionage, fraud, money laundering, and foreign agents. These records, normally protected by court order, often include details about confidential informants and active investigations. Investigators believe the hackers were backed by the Russian government, though they haven't been officially named in public disclosures.The Department of Justice has confirmed that “special measures” are now being taken to protect individuals potentially exposed in the breach. Acting Assistant Attorney General Matt Galeotti said that while technical and procedural safeguards are being implemented broadly, the DOJ is focusing particular attention on cases where sensitive information may have been compromised. He did not provide specifics but acknowledged that the situation demands urgent and tailored responses. Judges across the country were reportedly alerted in mid-July that at least eight federal court districts had been affected.This breach follows an earlier major compromise in 2020, also attributed to Russian actors, involving malicious code distributed through SolarWinds software. In response to both incidents, the judiciary has ramped up its cybersecurity efforts, including implementing multifactor authentication and revising policies on how sealed documents are handled. Some courts now require such documents to be filed only in hard copy. However, officials and experts alike have criticized Congress for underfunding judicial cybersecurity infrastructure, leaving it vulnerable to increasingly sophisticated attacks.The situation raises ongoing concerns about the security of national security cases and the exposure of individuals whose cooperation with law enforcement was meant to remain confidential. Lawmakers have requested classified briefings, and President Trump, who is set to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, acknowledged the breach but downplayed its significance.Russian Hackers Lurked in US Courts for Years, Took Sealed FilesUS taking 'special measures' to protect people possibly exposed in court records hack | ReutersA federal trial in California is testing the legal boundaries of the U.S. military's role in domestic affairs, focusing on President Donald Trump's deployment of troops to Los Angeles during protests in June. California Governor Gavin Newsom sued Trump, arguing the deployment of 700 Marines and 4,000 National Guard troops violated the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law that prohibits the military from engaging in civilian law enforcement. Testimony revealed that troops, including armed units and combat vehicles, were involved in activities like detaining individuals and supporting immigration raids—actions critics argue cross into law enforcement.The Justice Department defended Trump's actions, asserting that the Constitution permits the president to deploy troops to protect federal property and personnel. They also claimed California lacks the standing to challenge the deployment in civil court, since Posse Comitatus is a criminal statute that can only be enforced through prosecution. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer expressed concern about the lack of clear limits on presidential authority in such matters and questioned whether the logic behind the Justice Department's arguments would allow indefinite military involvement in domestic policing.Military officials testified that decisions in the field—such as setting up perimeters or detaining people—were made under broad interpretations of what constitutes protecting federal interests. The case took on added urgency when, on the trial's final day, Trump ordered 800 more National Guard troops to patrol Washington, D.C., citing high crime rates, despite statistical declines. The Justice Department has also invoked the president's immunity for official acts under a 2024 Supreme Court ruling, further complicating California's legal path.Trial shows fragility of limits on US military's domestic role | ReutersThe U.S. legal sector added jobs for the fifth consecutive month in July, nearing its all-time high of 1.2 million positions set in December 2023, according to preliminary Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data. While this signals positive momentum, long-term growth remains modest; employment is only 1.7% higher than its May 2007 peak, showing how the 2008 financial crisis and the pandemic stalled progress. Big law firms, however, have seen major gains: between 1999 and 2021, the top 200 firms nearly doubled their lawyer headcount and saw revenues grow by 172%.Still, the wider legal job market—including paralegals and administrative staff—hasn't kept pace. Technological efficiencies and AI have reduced reliance on support staff, and the lawyer-to-staff ratio has declined steadily. Some general counsels are now using AI tools instead of outside firms for tasks like summarizing cases and compiling data, suggesting further disruption is on the horizon. Meanwhile, superstar lawyers at elite firms now earn upward of $10 million a year, driven by rising billing rates and high-demand corporate work.Broader U.S. job growth lagged in July, with the BLS issuing significant downward revisions for previous months. President Trump responded by firing BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, accusing her without evidence of data manipulation. On the law firm side, Boies Schiller is handling high-profile litigation over Florida's immigration policies, with rates topping $875 an hour for partners. Separately, Eversheds Sutherland reported a 10% jump in global revenue, citing strong performance in its U.S. offices and a new Silicon Valley branch.US legal jobs are rising again, but gains are mixed | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court has declined to temporarily block a Mississippi law requiring social media platforms to verify users' ages and obtain parental consent for minors, while a legal challenge from tech industry group NetChoice moves through the courts. NetChoice, whose members include Meta, YouTube, and Snapchat, argues the law violates the First Amendment's free speech protections. Although Justice Brett Kavanaugh acknowledged the law is likely unconstitutional, he stated that NetChoice hadn't met the high standard necessary to halt enforcement at this early stage.The Mississippi law, passed unanimously by the state legislature, requires platforms to make “commercially reasonable” efforts to verify age and secure “express consent” from a parent or guardian before allowing minors to create accounts. The state can impose both civil and criminal penalties for violations. NetChoice initially won limited relief in lower court rulings, with a federal judge pausing enforcement against some of its members, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that pause without explanation.Mississippi officials welcomed the Supreme Court's decision to allow the law to remain in effect for now, calling it a chance for “thoughtful consideration” of the legal issues. Meanwhile, NetChoice sees the order as a procedural setback but remains confident about the eventual outcome, citing Kavanaugh's statement. The case marks the first time the Supreme Court has been asked to weigh in on a state social media age-check law. Similar laws in seven other states have already been blocked by courts. Tech companies, facing increasing scrutiny over their platforms' impact on minors, insist they already provide parental controls and moderation tools.US Supreme Court declines for now to block Mississippi social media age-check law | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Samuel Coleridge-Taylor.On this day in 1875, Samuel Coleridge-Taylor was born in London to an English mother and a Sierra Leonean father. A composer of striking originality and lyricism, Coleridge-Taylor rose to prominence in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, earning acclaim on both sides of the Atlantic. Often dubbed the “African Mahler” by American press during his tours of the U.S., he became a symbol of Black excellence in classical music at a time when such recognition was rare. He studied at the Royal College of Music under Charles Villiers Stanford, and by his early twenties, had already composed his most famous work, Hiawatha's Wedding Feast, which became a staple of British choral repertoire.Coleridge-Taylor's music blended Romanticism with rhythmic vitality, often inflected with the spirituals and folk influences he encountered during his visits to the United States. He was deeply inspired by African-American musical traditions and maintained a lifelong interest in promoting racial equality through the arts. His catalogue includes choral works, chamber music, orchestral pieces, and songs—each marked by melodic richness and emotional depth.This week, we close with the fifth and final movement of his 5 Fantasiestücke, Op. 5—titled "Dance." Composed when he was just 18, the piece captures the youthful exuberance and technical elegance that would characterize his career. Lively, rhythmically playful, and tinged with charm, “Dance” is a fitting celebration of Coleridge-Taylor's enduring legacy and a reminder of the brilliance he achieved in his all-too-brief life.Without further ado, Samuel Coleridge Taylor's 5 Fantasiestücke, Op. 5 – enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I break down Senate Republicans' new proposal to remove everything but machineguns and destructive devices from regulation under the National Firearms Act as part of President Trump's "big beautiful bill." We discuss the upsides and pitfalls of this approach for gun-rights advocates and explain what needs to happen next for it to become law. We also cover a new ruling out of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on the federal Gun Free School Zones Act, a new DOJ brief arguing that AR-15s are protected by the Second Amendment, and emerging new details surrounding a tragic shooting at a recent protest in Salt Lake City.
This Day in Legal History: Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo Ratified On May 19, 1848, Mexico formally ratified the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, officially bringing an end to the Mexican-American War. Signed earlier that year on February 2, the treaty had already been ratified by the United States, but it required approval from both nations to take effect. With Mexico's ratification, the war that had begun in 1846 concluded, marking a major shift in North American territorial boundaries. Under the treaty, Mexico ceded approximately 525,000 square miles—about half its national territory—to the United States. This land included present-day California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and parts of several other states.In exchange, the U.S. paid Mexico $15 million and assumed certain debts owed to American citizens. The treaty also included provisions promising to protect the property and civil rights of Mexican nationals living in the newly acquired territories, though these promises were inconsistently honored. The ratification reshaped the map of North America and solidified U.S. continental expansion under the banner of Manifest Destiny.Legally, the treaty became a foundational document for interpreting property rights, citizenship claims, and cross-border disputes in the American Southwest. It also remains a focal point for understanding the U.S.-Mexico relationship and the historical roots of immigration and land disputes in the region. The ratification marked not just the end of a war but the beginning of complex legal and cultural transformations that still reverberate today.The U.S. Supreme Court extended a block on the Trump administration's attempt to deport roughly 176 Venezuelan detainees under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act (AEA), citing due process concerns. The justices, in a largely unsigned decision, criticized the government for providing less than 24 hours' notice of removal without informing the men how to challenge it. The Court noted the administration's failure to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who had been wrongly deported to El Salvador despite a previous Supreme Court directive.Justices Alito and Thomas dissented, saying the Court acted prematurely, bypassing lower courts. However, the majority justified the intervention by pointing to a district judge's delayed response to an emergency request, which they said risked irreparable harm to the detainees.Though Trump claimed the AEA is needed to address a national security “invasion” by alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang, the Court did not rule on whether his invocation of the AEA was lawful. The decision leaves that question to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, while preserving the temporary injunction during ongoing litigation.Justice Kavanaugh wrote separately to support judicial review before any deportation under the AEA, and the Court emphasized that immigration enforcement must align with constitutional protections. The ACLU called the ruling a rebuke of efforts to deport people without adequate process, particularly to harsh conditions like those in El Salvador's prisons.Supreme Court Extends Halt of Trump Venezuelan Deportations - BloombergThe U.S. Supreme Court is poised to issue rulings in three significant cases that could further expand religious rights and diminish the separation between church and state. Each case centers on the First Amendment's religion clauses—specifically the tension between the “establishment clause,” which prevents government endorsement of religion, and the “free exercise clause,” which protects individual religious practice.One case involves an attempt to launch the nation's first taxpayer-funded religious charter school in Oklahoma. The state's Supreme Court blocked the school, but conservative justices appeared open to the argument that rejecting it solely due to its religious nature violates the free exercise clause.A second case concerns Christian and Muslim parents in Maryland seeking the right to opt their children out of public school lessons featuring LGBT-themed storybooks. Lower courts denied the request, but the Supreme Court seemed sympathetic to the parents' religious freedom claims.The third case addresses whether Catholic Charities in Wisconsin should be exempt from unemployment insurance taxes. The state denied the exemption, arguing the organization was mainly charitable rather than religious. Conservative justices again signaled support for the religious exemption.Legal scholars suggest the Court may continue its trend of elevating the free exercise clause at the expense of the establishment clause. Recent rulings have shifted from restricting government support for religious institutions to affirming their right to receive public funds. This trend suggests the Court may increasingly allow religious organizations access to public programs traditionally limited to secular institutions.US Supreme Court may broaden religious rights in looming rulings | ReutersA federal appeals court has lifted an injunction that had blocked President Trump's executive order limiting collective bargaining rights for hundreds of thousands of federal workers. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in a 2–1 decision, allowed the order to move forward, affecting employees in more than a dozen federal agencies, including Justice, Defense, and Health and Human Services.The executive order expands a national security exemption that exempts workers involved in intelligence or national security from union rights. Trump's administration argued this exemption was necessary to protect national security autonomy. The court's majority, composed of Republican-appointed judges, agreed, saying the union failed to demonstrate immediate harm that would justify blocking the policy.The National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU), representing about 160,000 federal employees, claimed the order violates federal labor laws and the Constitution. Judge J. Michelle Childs dissented, arguing the administration's national security justification was too vague to override union protections.Trump's directive could impact roughly 75% of union-represented federal workers and specifically targets around 100,000 NTEU members. In addition to the executive order, the Trump administration is also pursuing lawsuits to dismantle existing union contracts for thousands of federal employees.Court gives go-ahead to Trump's plan to halt union bargaining for many federal workers | ReutersBilly Long, President Trump's pick to lead the IRS, is set to face intense questioning from Senate Democrats over his ties to dubious tax credits and campaign donations from their promoters. At the center of the controversy are “sovereign tribal tax credits,” which the Treasury Department says do not exist. Long previously promoted these credits through companies that also contributed large sums to help him retire campaign debt from a failed Senate run.Though Long lacks traditional tax or management experience, his most prominent qualification—beyond his political loyalty to Trump—is his distinction as the “Best Auctioneer in the Ozarks” for seven consecutive years. Critics point to his absence of tax policy credentials, lack of formal education or experience in tax, and question his independence, particularly given Trump's recent push to strip institutions like Harvard of tax-exempt status.Long, a former House member from Missouri, is known for supporting efforts to defund the IRS while in Congress and did not serve on tax-focused committees. Democrats are also scrutinizing his role in promoting the fraud-plagued Employee Retention Credit during the pandemic. As he seeks to take over an agency facing a wave of retirements and leadership departures, Long will likely be pressed on how he would steer enforcement priorities and IRS modernization efforts. Questions are expected to focus on whether he would maintain the agency's recent push to target high-income tax avoidance or pivot in a different direction.Senate Panel to Grill IRS Pick on Dubious Tax Credits, Donors This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
This Day in Legal History: Mutiny on the BountyOn April 28, 1789, one of the most famous acts of rebellion at sea occurred aboard the HMS Bounty. Captain William Bligh and 18 loyal crew members were forcibly set adrift in the Pacific Ocean by mutineers led by Fletcher Christian. The incident exposed deep tensions over leadership, working conditions, and authority in the Royal Navy. British law at the time treated mutiny as a capital offense, reflecting the critical importance of discipline aboard ships. After the mutiny, an intense search for the culprits began, with some mutineers eventually captured and returned to England to stand trial.The ensuing court-martial proceedings offered early insight into naval justice and the balancing act between maintaining strict command and recognizing crew grievances. Defendants argued that Bligh's harsh leadership provoked the uprising, but the Admiralty was unwavering in its stance against insubordination. Of those captured, three were found guilty and hanged, while others were acquitted or pardoned. The legal handling of the mutiny reinforced the severe consequences for undermining maritime authority. It also prompted discussions about humane treatment of sailors, subtly influencing later reforms in naval discipline.The Mutiny on the Bounty became a lasting symbol in both legal and cultural history, illustrating how law functions as both a tool of control and a response to the realities of human endurance and dissent at sea.Seven Democratic senators on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee have requested information from the Justice Department regarding recent changes within its civil rights division under President Donald Trump's administration. In a letter sent Friday, they expressed concern over the reassignment of several career officials, suggesting these moves could be an attempt to pressure staff into leaving and shift the division's enforcement priorities. Since Trump's return to office and the appointment of Pam Bondi as Attorney General, the department has paused investigations into police misconduct, launched a gun rights investigation in Los Angeles, and altered its approach to transgender rights cases. It has also opened investigations into antisemitism related to pro-Palestinian protests at colleges. The senators emphasized the importance of nonpartisan career staff in maintaining the integrity of civil rights enforcement. About a dozen senior attorneys specializing in voting, police, and disability rights were among those reassigned. The Justice Department has not yet commented on the senators' letter.Democratic senators question US Justice Department on civil rights changes | ReutersThe U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration announced that federal law enforcement agencies raided a nightclub in Colorado Springs, arresting over 100 individuals who were in the U.S. illegally. The operation resulted in 114 arrests out of more than 200 people present at the venue, making it one of the largest immigration-related raids since President Donald Trump's second term began. Attorney General Pam Bondi stated that the raid also led to the seizure of cocaine, methamphetamine, and "pink cocaine," and two individuals were arrested on outstanding warrants. Bondi mentioned links to gangs like Tren de Aragua and MS-13, although she did not directly confirm whether those arrested were affiliated with them. The DEA noted that occupants were given multiple warnings before the raid was executed. This action is part of an intensifying crackdown on illegal immigration under Trump's renewed immigration policies. Separately, ICE recently reported nearly 800 immigration-related arrests in Florida during a multi-agency operation.Over 100 migrants in the US illegally arrested in Colorado nightclub | ReutersThe Supreme Court has requested additional briefing in a case challenging the Affordable Care Act's mandate that insurers cover preventive services, like cancer screenings, at no cost. The justices specifically want the parties to address whether the Secretary of Health and Human Services has the legal authority to appoint members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which advises on covered treatments. During arguments on April 21, Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned whether the power to remove officials necessarily implies the power to appoint them, an issue the lower court had not considered. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled that the task force's structure violated the Constitution's appointments clause, arguing its members must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The Trump administration contends the task force members are merely "inferior officers" under the HHS Secretary's control. The case also involves objections by Texas businesses and residents to mandatory coverage of HIV prevention drugs, claiming unconstitutional imposition by unelected officials. Supplemental briefs are due by May 5, and while rare, this is not the first time the Court has asked for more information after oral arguments, as seen in past cases like Zubik v. Burwell and Citizens United v. FEC.Supreme Court Orders New Briefs After Obamacare Case Argued (1) This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
In this case, the court considered this issue: Was the Food and Drug Administration's orders denying respondents' applications for authorization to market new e-cigarette products arbitrary and capricious, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act?The case was decided on April 2, 2025The Court unanimously held that the FDA's decisions were neither arbitrary nor capricious. Specifically, the Court agreed with the FDA's assessment that the manufacturers failed to demonstrate that the benefits of their flavored products to adult smokers outweighed the risks to youth. This ruling reversed a prior decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which had found the FDA's denials unwarranted. The Supreme Court's decision underscores the FDA's authority to regulate tobacco products, particularly those appealing to younger audiences, in line with public health objectives. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Send us a textFirst, an Australian couple in Texas, manufacturing suppressors under Texas State law, are assaulted by the ATF, their business and home searched, and M-4's pointed at them and their 7-year-old son. After two years, they still haven't charged them with a crime but continue to hold them in legal limbo.Second, in a move that's certain to create some interesting ripples throughout the legal community, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans has ruled that suppressors are not firearms, that they're not even considered weapons, and thus are not covered by the Second Amendment....which casts suppressors and all cases being brought against citizens for "illegally" making/owning them into a legal quandary. This ruling is going to create some interesting legal "Catch-22's", without a doubt!Sicarios Gun ShopFirearms, Accessories, Ammo, Safes, and more!The Gun Site9-Lane 25 yard indoor Shooting Range, Gun Store, Training classesFreedom GunsFirearms, Ammunition, Accessories, Training classes Glover Orndorf and Flanagan Wealth Mgmt.Wealth management servicesSHOOTINGCLASSES.COMOnline business operations platform for firearms instructors, trainees, and Shooting RangesWJS GunsGun and Outdoor Shop, ammo, accessories, fishing tackle, moreThe American Police Hall of FameMuseum and Shooting Center (open to public), Law Enforcement and Civilian TrainingCounter Strike TacticalBest Little Gun Store in Melbourne, Florida! Veteran Owned and Operated 321-499-4949Go2 WeaponsManufacturers of AR platform rifles for military and civilian. Veteran Owned and OperatedEar Care of MelbourneNeed hearing aids? Go to the audiologists that gave Royce his hearing back!Quantified PerformanceQuantified Performance, LLC is focused on building safe, high performing keepers and bearers.Control Jiu-Jitsu/MMAJiu-Jitsu/MMA Training in Melbourne, FLDisclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the showGiveSendGo | Unconstitutional 2A Prosecution of Tate Adamiak Askari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)
While Elon Musk has been taking over the government, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals quietly overturned a 60-year-old law that prevented federally-licensed firearms dealers from selling guns to anyone aged 18 to 20. Seems bad!This week, Jess and Imani get into the weeds of Reese v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, a Second Amendment case out of the Fifth Circuit that, surprisingly, did not involve our BFF Matthew Kacsmaryk.Rewire News Group is a nonprofit media organization, which means that episodes like this one are only made possible with the support of listeners like you! If you can, please join our team by donating here.And sign up for The Fallout, a weekly newsletter written by Jess that's exclusively dedicated to covering every aspect of this unprecedented moment.
While Elon Musk has been taking over the government, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals quietly overturned a 60-year-old law that prevented federally-licensed firearms dealers from selling guns to anyone aged 18 to 20. Seems bad!This week, Jess and Imani get into the weeds of Reese v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, a Second Amendment case out of the Fifth Circuit that, surprisingly, did not involve our BFF Matthew Kacsmaryk.Rewire News Group is a nonprofit media organization, which means that episodes like this one are only made possible with the support of listeners like you! If you can, please join our team by donating here.And sign up for The Fallout, a weekly newsletter written by Jess that's exclusively dedicated to covering every aspect of this unprecedented moment.
On this installment of the Gutowski Files we sit down with investigative reporter Stephen Gutowski of thereload.com and discuss the election of prominent anti-gunner David Hogg as the vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee and what that signals as far as their future direction on gun control. Then we discuss a case out of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding age limits on gun purchases before moving on to Stephens recent travel and Sports Talk. Active Self Protection exists to help good, sane, sober, moral, prudent people in all walks of life to more effectively protect themselves and their loved ones from criminal violence. On the ASP Podcast you will hear the true stories of life or death self defense encounters from the men and women that lived them. If you are interested in the Second Amendment, self defense and defensive firearms use, martial arts or the use of less lethal tools used in the real world to defend life and family, you will find this show riveting. Join host and career federal agent Mike Willever as he talks to real life survivors and hear their stories in depth. You'll hear about these incidents and the self defenders from well before the encounter occurred on through the legal and emotional aftermath. Music: bensound.com
The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an important Second Amendment ruling yesterday that properly, further entrenches the historical framing required on questions of the Bill of Rights. 18 to 20 year olds are adults and the right to possess firearms applies to them as it does to all other adults. Jonathan Turley covers is well here.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.Oil and gas rig count is a wash for Texas.A court date has been set for July for the challenge to Texas law on certain state immigration enforcement efforts – SB4 from 2023.Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com
Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss new claims from the gun industry about the ATF continuing to enforce its controversial "zero tolerance" policy despite Trump's promises to reverse it. We talk about Trump's lack of gun policy action so far and why some gun-rights groups are starting to speak out. We also cover a significant new ruling out of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals where a three judge panel just struck down the federal handgun sales ban for young adults. Get a 30-day free trial for a subscription to The Dispatch here: https://thedispatch.com/join-offer-reload/?utmsource=thereload&utmmedium=partnerships-podcast&utm_campaign=0125
The Supreme Court is set to hear argument this term in a case raising both the nondelegation and private nondelegation doctrines. On July 24, 2024, the en banc Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal Universal Service Fund (“USF”), which funds broadband service for rural areas and hospitals, schools, libraries, and low-income individuals, […]
The Supreme Court is set to hear argument this term in a case raising both the nondelegation and private nondelegation doctrines.On July 24, 2024, the en banc Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal Universal Service Fund (“USF”), which funds broadband service for rural areas and hospitals, schools, libraries, and low-income individuals, is an unconstitutional delegation of Congress’s legislative authority. In the Communications Act, Congress directed the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) to collect contributions, or payments, from certain providers of telecommunications. The FCC employs the private Universal Service Administrative Company (“USAC”) to administer certain aspects of USF, including calculating the contribution factor based on the needs of each program established by the FCC pursuant to the Communications Act.The Sixth and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeals, as well as a panel of the Fifth Circuit, had previously upheld the constitutionality of the delegation of authority. And the FCC defended the Act against delegation challenges. It argued that the Communication Act provides an intelligible principle by which USF is to be administered and that USAC plays only a ministerial role.But the July en banc ruling by the Fifth Circuit held this regulatory revenue-raising program unconstitutional. It acknowledged “grave” concerns that the Act may have unconstitutionally delegated the taxing power to the FCC to impose a contribution amount, or tax, on America’s telecommunications carriers, and ultimately paid by consumers. Then it similarly concluded there were serious constitutional concerns about the FCC’s subdelegation to private parties, most notably USAC’s role in determining the contribution amount that will be charged to telecommunications carriers. The Court’s ultimate holding, however, was that the combination of these delegations violated the nondelegation doctrine.A petition for certiorari was granted on November 22, 2024. This roundtable will discuss this case and the broader legal issues it raises, including (1) is there a nondelegation doctrine?, (2) if there is, what should it look like?, and (3) how should the Supreme Court decide this case in light of the above discussion on the nondelegation doctrine.Featuring:Sean Lev, Partner, HWG LLPTrent McCotter, Partner, Boyden Grey PLLCProf. Nicholas Parrillo, William K. Townsend Professor of Law and Professor of History, Yale Law SchoolProf. Alexander Volokh, Associate Professor of Law, Emory LawProf. Ilan Wurman, Julius E. Davis Professor of Law, University of Minnesota Law SchoolModerator: Adam Griffin, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation--To register, click the link above.
The Supreme Court will determine whether a Texas law requiring age verification for adult websites violates the First Amendment. Nadine Strossen of New York Law School and Adam Candeub of Michigan State University join Jeffrey Rosen to preview oral arguments in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, examine the text, history, and tradition of the First Amendment, and debate whether the Texas law is constitutional. Resources: Nadine Strossen, Defending Pornography: Free Speech, Sex, and the Fight for Women's Rights (1995, republished 2024) Nadine Strossen, Brief of Amici Curiae First Amendment Scholars in Support of Petitioners, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton Adam Candeub, Amicus Curiae Brief of Scholars in Support of Respondent, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton Adam Candeub, “How the Supreme Court Can Protect Digital Childhood,” Law & Liberty (Jan. 9, 2025) Free Speech Coalition, Brief for Petitioners, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton Attorney General Ken Paxton, Brief for Respondent, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton Judge Jerry Smith, Opinion of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton Ginsberg v. New York (1968) Sable v. FCC (1989) Reno v. ACLU (1997) Ashcroft v. ACLU (2004) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
Our liberty, safety, and prosperity are based on the rule of law, not the rule of man or machine. However, given that the criminal justice system suffers from many efficiencies and errors, could artificial intelligence aid the efforts of police, prosecutors, and other actors tasked with protecting public safety with limited resources? Given the power of A.I. technologies to find proverbial needles in haystacks and identify patterns that would otherwise be overlooked, it is not surprising that some criminal justice agencies are already deploying these tools. How can we harness the potential benefits while also ensuring that our liberty and privacy are not compromised? This discussion will feature experts in both the law and technology to help us sort though these questions and identify policies and practices that promote innovation while ensuring constitutional rights are protected. Featuring: Michael R. Holley, First Assistant District Attorney, Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office, Conroe Texas Patrick Robinson, Owner, VSV Leadership Jesse Rothman, Senior Fellow, Council on Criminal Justice Hon. Scott U. Schlegel, Judge, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal, State of Louisiana (Moderator) Marc Levin, Chief Policy Counsel, Council on Criminal Justice; Senior Advisor, Right on Crime -- Related Readings --
We hear the latest Bred heifer and Stock Cow Prices. We look towards bull sale season 2025, have lots of news that you need to hear, market recaps and lots more on this all new episode of the Ranch It Up Radio Show. Be sure to subscribe on your favorite podcasting app or on the Ranch It Up Radio Show YouTube Channel. Season 5, EPISODE 218 Bred Heifer & Stock Cow Prices Plus Cattle Industry News Bred Heifers & Cows Sell Well Marty Ropp from Allied Genetic Resources joins us to discuss the upcoming bull and heifer sale season along with John Fisher from Stockmen's Livestock to recap the bred heifer and stock cow markets as well as let us know what we could expect for prices in the future. Cattle & Agriculture Industry News Former USDA Counsel Named Deputy Ag Secretary A veteran of the first Trump administration's agriculture team has been named to be deputy secretary of the USDA. President-elect Donald Trump announced his nomination of Stephen Vaden to be deputy under Brooke Rollins, a former think tank executive already tapped to head the USDA. A Yale law graduate, Vaden served as USDA general counsel from 2018-2020, when he was confirmed to a judicial appointment on the U.S. Court of International Trade. He has served as a board member of the Commodity Credit Corp. CDC Confirms Nations First Severe H5N1 Infection Of Human A patient in Louisiana was hospitalized with a severe case of avian influenza (H5N1), marking the first instance in the United States of severe illness linked to the virus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced today in a news release and press call. CDC said the Louisiana patient, one of 61 human cases to occur in the United States since April, was infected with a D1.1 virus recently detected in wild birds and poultry in the U.S. and in recent human cases in British Columbia, Canada, and in the state of Washington. Officials noted the D1.1 strain of H5N1 is different from the B3.13 genotype detected in dairy cows, sporadic human cases in multiple states, and some poultry outbreaks in the U.S. No person-to-person spread of H5 bird flu has been detected. California State Of Emergency, New Human Infections, Canadian Struggles all due to H5N1 Gov. Gavin Newsom issued a state of emergency in an effort to streamline the Golden State's response to highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). Several California agencies have developed coordinated responses to address and minimize farm worker exposures, lower raw dairy product contamination and mitigate the spread of the virus, the governor said in a statement: He said “This proclamation is a targeted action to ensure government agencies have the resources and flexibility they need to respond quickly to this outbreak.” About 680 dairy farms are under quarantine from HPAI outbreaks, while 6.2 million birds have been hit and 36 people infected across California. A commercial poultry worker in northwest Iowa is now the first confirmed human case of HPAI in the Hawkeye State, according to the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (Iowa HHS). An estimated 6.7 million birds have been affected in more than a dozen counties across Iowa, according to USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) announced that more than 13.9 million birds have been impacted by HPAI in the most recent tally of the spread of H5N1 infections across nine provinces. British Columbia is reporting the highest number of HPAI cases among 8.3 million birds. New Brunswick has the lowest number of birds affected by avian influenza with fewer than 100 birds at two locations being confirmed with the virus. Beef Processor Fined For Odor Violations The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) fined STX Beef Company $200,000 for violations linked to foul odors coming from its Corpus Christi facility, according to a local report. The penalty follows years of complaints about smells traced to cattle processing and wastewater management issues. TCEQ also cited equipment failures, inadequate scrubber systems and poor recordkeeping. Of the fine, $2,000 is already paid, with $40,000 due soon. Over $80,000 will support Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi's AutoCheck program, addressing regional vehicle emissions. The company has 30 days to submit an odor control plan, including equipment repairs and new systems, and must comply with air quality rules for five years. Corporate Transparency Act Reporting Requirement Will Return Due to Court Ruling Producers pay attention now. The Corporate Transparency Act filing requirements are back in effect following a court decision that reverses the injunction that previously halted this mandate. NCBA Executive Director of Government Affairs Kent Bacus said that The Corporate Transparency Act requires millions of family farmers and ranchers to file complex paperwork and disclose beneficial ownership information with the federal government under penalty of severe fines and jail time. Earlier last week, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a nationwide preliminary injunction on the enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act, holding that the government is likely to prevail in a constitutional challenge. This decision places many small businesses in jeopardy that have not yet filed Beneficial Ownership Information with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a division of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. In light of the Fifth Circuit's decision, FinCEN announced it will delay enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act until January 13, 2025. It is highly recommended to visit with your accountant, tax professionals, and or attorneys on exactly what needs to be filled and where. Sale Barn Updates From Pratt Livestock & Torrington Livestock We have the latest sale barn updates from Pratt Livestock, their latest reports are HERE and Torrington Livestock with their latest reports HERE. RanchChannel.Com Now Has The Futures Markets & New Listings Futures Markets RanchChannel.com now has futures markets at your fingertips! Feeder Cattle, Live Cattle, Corn, Wheat, Soybeans, Soybean Oil, Milk Class IV, and Ethanol. Information is provided by DTN and market information may be delayed by as much as 10 minutes. Click Here for more information! UPCOMING SALES & EVENTS Ressler Land & Cattle: January 11, 2025 Spruce Hill Ranch: February 6, 2025 Prairie Hills Gelbvieh: February 8, 2025 Wasem Red Angus: February 20, 2025 Vollmer Angus Ranch: April 1, 2025 Jorgensen Land & Cattle: April 21, 2025 World Famous Miles City Bucking Horse Sale: May 15 18, 2025 BULL SALE REPORT & RESULTS Churchill Cattle Company Van Newkirk Herefords Gardiner Angus Ranch Cow Camp Ranch Jungels Shorthorn Farms Ellingson Angus Edgar Brothers Angus Schaff Angus Valley Prairie Hills Gelbvieh Clear Springs Cattle Company CK Cattle Mrnak Hereford Ranch Frey Angus Ranch Hoffmann Angus Farms Topp Herefords River Creek Farms Upstream Ranch Gustin's Diamond D Gelbvieh Schiefelbein Farms Wasem Red Angus Raven Angus Krebs Ranch Yon Family Farms Chestnut Angus Eichacker Simmentals & JK Angus Windy Creek Cattle Company Pedersen Broken Heart Ranch Mar Mac Farms Warner Beef Genetics Arda Farms & Freeway Angus Leland Red Angus & Koester Red Angus Fast Dohrmann Strommen RBM Livestock Weber Land & Cattle Sundsbak Farms Hidden Angus Wheatland Cattle Company Miller Angus Farms L 83 Ranch U2 Ranch Vollmer Angus Ranch A & B Cattle Carter Angus Farms Roller Ranch Montgomery Ranch Jorgensen Farms DLCC Ranch Four Hill Farm North Country Angus Alliance Spruce Hill Ranch Wilson Angus Jorgensen Land & Cattle Motherlode Sale ISA Beefmasters JYJ Red Angus Jorgensen Land & Cattle, Legends Of The Fall Bull Sale Clear Springs Cattle Company FEATURING Marty Ropp Allied Genetic Resources https://alliedgeneticresources.com/ @alliedgeneticresources John Fisher Stockmens Livestock http://www.gostockmens.com/ @gostockmens Kirk Donsbach: Stone X Financial https://www.stonex.com/ @StoneXGroupInc Mark Vanzee Livestock Market, Equine Market, Auction Time https://www.auctiontime.com/ https://www.livestockmarket.com/ https://www.equinemarket.com/ @LivestockMkt @EquineMkt @AuctionTime Shaye Koester Casual Cattle Conversation https://www.casualcattleconversations.com/ @cattleconvos Questions & Concerns From The Field? Call or Text your questions, or comments to 707-RANCH20 or 707-726-2420 Or email RanchItUpShow@gmail.com FOLLOW Facebook/Instagram: @RanchItUpShow SUBSCRIBE to the Ranch It Up YouTube Channel: @ranchitup Website: RanchItUpShow.com https://ranchitupshow.com/ The Ranch It Up Podcast is available on ALL podcasting apps. https://ranchitup.podbean.com/ Rural America is center-stage on this outfit. AND how is that? Tigger & BEC Live This Western American Lifestyle. Tigger & BEC represent the Working Ranch world and cattle industry by providing the cowboys, cowgirls, beef cattle producers & successful farmers the knowledge and education needed to bring high-quality beef & meat to your table for dinner. Learn more about Jeff 'Tigger' Erhardt & Rebecca Wanner aka BEC here: TiggerandBEC.com https://tiggerandbec.com/ #RanchItUp #StayRanchy #TiggerApproved #tiggerandbec #rodeo #ranching #farming References https://www.stonex.com/ https://www.livestockmarket.com/ https://www.equinemarket.com/ https://www.auctiontime.com/ https://gelbvieh.org/ https://www.imogeneingredients.com/ https://alliedgeneticresources.com/ https://westwayfeed.com/ https://medoraboot.com/ http://www.gostockmens.com/ https://www.imiglobal.com/beef https://www.tsln.com/ https://transova.com/ https://axiota.com/ https://axiota.com/multimin-90-product-label/ https://jorgensenfarms.com/ https://www.bredforbalance.com/ https://ranchchannel.com/ https://www.wrangler.com/ https://www.ruralradio147.com/ https://www.rfdtv.com/ https://www.meatingplace.com/Industry/News/Details/117324 https://www.meatingplace.com/Industry/News/Details/117247 https://www.meatingplace.com/Industry/News/Details/117283 https://www.meatingplace.com/Industry/News/Details/117306
If you work for a bank or other consumer financial services provider, you will want to listen closely to how consumer advocates are reacting to Trump's election insofar as the CFPB and FTC are concerned. In today's podcast episode, we're joined by Erin Witte and Adam Rust (the “CFA Reps”) from CFA. We focus first on CFPB and FTC regulations that might be finalized during the lame duck session of Congress. The CFA Reps express hope that the FTC would finalize its so-called “junk fee reg” which, as proposed, called for “all-in” pricing (I.e., disclosure of a dollar amount for goods and services that includes all fees that will be charged in connection with the transaction.) They also express hope that the CFPB will finalize its checking account overdraft fees reg, the larger participant rule pertaining to non-bank payment providers and the medical debt rule which, if finalized, would result in unpaid medical debt no longer appearing on credit bureau reports. Of course, there is a risk, with respect to each of these rules as well as any other CFPB and FTC rules finalized roughly after August 1 of this year, which they may be overruled by Congress under the Congressional Review Act. We then discuss final regs promulgated by the FTC and CFPB which have been challenged in the Circuit Courts of Appeal. For the FTC, this includes the so-called CARS Rule (which imposes restrictions on car dealers' sales and financing of motor vehicles) and the recent “Click-to-Cancel” Rule which, among other things, requires sellers of goods and services on a subscription basis to be able to cancel subscriptions as easily as signing up for subscriptions. The latter rule has been challenged in four circuit courts of appeal. We also discuss the status of many CFPB final regs and what a new CFPB's strategy may be with respect to them. They include: the $8 credit card late fee rule which is currently enjoined by a Federal District Court in Texas; the data collection reg pertaining to small business loans promulgated under Section 1071 of Dodd-Frank, which is currently on appeal before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals after a Federal District Court denied a motion by the bank trade associations to grant a preliminary injunction pertaining to the reg; the open-banking reg under Section 1033 of Dodd-Frank (which pertains to consumers having the ability to share information in certain bank accounts with third parties which has been challenged in court; the Buy-Now, Pay-Later interpretive rule which has been challenged in court; and the Earned Wage Access interpretive rule. There is great uncertainty as to whether the new CFPB's Director will seek to repeal or amend any of these regs or whether he or she will elect to change the CFPB's position in the litigation to side with the plaintiffs. In order to repeal or change any of the regs (other than the two interpretive rules), the CFPB will need to jump through all the hoops required by the Administrative Procedure Act before effecting a repeal or change and the repeal or change might be challenged in court as being arbitrary or capricious. It would seem that it might be much easier to repeal or change the interpretive rules which would not require publishing them in the Federal Register for notice and comment. The CFS Reps also express hope that the CFPB issues its final report with respect to the voluminous information it received from auto finance companies in response to market monitoring orders it issued to them. An initial report recently issued by the CFPB and dealt with the incidence of financing negative equity in cars being traded in. While the final report is unlikely to result in new proposed CFPB regulations during the next four years, the report might instigate enforcement actions by state AGs. As was the case during the first Trump presidency, the CFA Reps believe that whatever consumer protection void is created at the CFPB will largely be filled by state AGs, state departments of banking and consumer protection agencies. They also expect there to be an increase in private civil litigation, including class actions. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel and former chair for 25 years of the Consumer Financial Services Group, hosts the discussion.
Trump's gains among working-class voters of all races—according to exit polls, he won the majority of Latino men at 55 percent—represent the ongoing realignment of the Republican Party. What was once Reagan's party of free trade, low taxes, and limited government seems to be shifting toward a multiracial working-class party that celebrates economic protectionism and credibly courts unions. But what will this shift mean for the future of the party. . . and American politics? Trump's cabinet appointments so far don't paint a clear picture. His nominee for secretary of state, Florida senator Marco Rubio, has some clear neoconservative instincts. But Trump also tapped as director of national intelligence former Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who has thundered against the “neocon” influence on her new party. So what is this new Republican Party? Is it still the party of Reagan? Is it still even a party of conservatism? Here to discuss it all today are Sarah Isgur, Matthew Continetti, and Josh Hammer. Sarah Isgur is a columnist for The Dispatch. She clerked for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and served as Justice Department spokeswoman during the first Trump administration. Matthew Continetti is a columnist at Commentary, founding editor of The Free Beacon, and author of a new book: The Right: The Hundred-Year War for American Conservatism. And Josh Hammer is senior editor at large at Newsweek and host of The Josh Hammer Show. Today, they join Michael Moynihan to discuss Trump's appointments, the significance of J.D. Vance, the roots of MAGA and where the movement fits into the history of the Republican Party, and the uncertain future of the American right. And if you liked what you heard from Honestly, the best way to support us is to go to TheFP.com and become a Free Press subscriber today. Header 6: The Free Press earns a commission from any purchases made through all book links in this article. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
As control of the US Senate hangs in the balance, the Pennsylvania race between Democratic incumbent Senator Bob Casey and his Republican challenger Dave McCormick is heating up. We explain the climate and environment dimensions of Pennsylvania's Senate race. Also, in the lower Mississippi River region commonly known as Cancer Alley, communities of color live among industrial pollution while white neighborhoods have been mostly spared from heavy industry. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is now considering whether to allow a landmark environmental racism lawsuit brought against the local government to go to trial. And Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica holds enough ice that its melting could raise sea levels worldwide by 2 feet, but it's so remote that until recently no one had ever approached where it meets the sea. Elizabeth Rush was a writer-in-residence on board the first research icebreaker to visit Thwaites and she chronicles the journey and witnessing the glacier's unraveling in her book The Quickening: Creation and Community at the Ends of the Earth. -- What issues are you most interested in having Living on Earth cover in the 2024 election season? Let us know by sending us a written or audio message at comments@loe.org. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code OPENING for 4 months EXTRA at https://surfshark.com/OPENING We are excited to welcome Georgetown law professor Steve Vladeck back to Opening Arguments for a look back at how the Supreme Court responded to the infamously unruly--and increasingly more extreme--Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in its last term. How did the 5th “win by losing,” and why is there still cause for future concern even after SCOTUS reversed all but three of the eleven cases it took up from them? What kind of messages are the high court justices trying to send back to the 5th, and why aren't they receiving them? Also discussed: Neil Gorsuch's most recent not-quite-true statement, why the Supreme Court continues to tolerate the dumbest standing arguments on Earth, the 5th's use (and abuse) of administrative stays, and what may or may not be wrong with Matt's brain. Subscribe to Prof. Vladeck's free weekly One First newsletter “The Fifth Circuit Won by Losing,” Steve Vladeck, The Atlantic (July 9, 2024) “30 Hours of SB4 Whiplash,” Steve Vladeck, LexisNexis.com (March 20, 2024) If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
On May 30, former president Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with hush money payments to adult actress Stormy Daniels. His sentencing has been scheduled for July 11, four days before the Republican National Convention. He faces a possible sentence of four years for each count. If you were on Twitter or Instagram or your social media platform of choice that historic Thursday afternoon, then you will have noticed two diametrically opposed reactions. On one side, people celebrated like it was the very best day of their entire lives, as justice, at last, was served. On the other side of the space-time Twitter-uum, it was a very, very somber day for the country. So. . . which is it? Did Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg at long last rightly and justly prosecute Trump for felony crimes? Or was this an obviously political witch trial and an abuse of the U.S. justice system? In other words: Have we crossed the Rubicon in American politics? After all, District Attorney Bragg campaigned on a promise to bring charges against Trump. And either way, the reality is that the presidential front-runner is now a convicted felon. What does that mean? For voters? (Spoiler: it made them want to give him. . . more money.) For future elections? And for this country? To debate these questions on Honestly today are Sarah Isgur and Mark Zauderer. Sarah is a columnist for The Dispatch and an ABC News contributor. She clerked for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and served as the Justice Department spokeswoman during the Trump administration. Mark is a veteran New York litigator who sits on a committee that screens applicants for the same court that will hear Trump's appeal. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The constitutional right to protest is right there in the First Amendment. So when the Fifth Circuit Court threatened this right across three states, why didn't the Supreme Court take up the case? Guest: Ian Milhiser, senior correspondent for Vox. Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Mary Ziegler is a law professor and expert on the law and politics of reproductive freedom. She joins Preet to discuss a recent ruling by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that a federal program providing confidential family planning services cannot treat minors in Texas without parental consent. They break down the state and federal laws at issue, how this case might foreshadow future challenges to the right to contraception, and what to expect from the Supreme Court when it rules on nationwide access to mifepristone, the medication used in almost two-thirds of U.S. abortions. Stay Tuned in Brief is presented by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Please write to us with your thoughts and questions at letters@cafe.com, or leave a voicemail at 669-247-7338. For analysis of recent legal news, join the CAFE Insider community. Head to cafe.com/insider to join for just $1 for the first month. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Barack Obama returns to try to sprinkle fairy dust on Joe Biden's flailing campaign; the Biden campaign panders to idiot young progressive radicals; and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals says the Texas border must remain open. Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEj Ep.1935 - - - DailyWire+: Unlock your Bentkey 14-day free trial here: https://bit.ly/3GSz8go Leftist Tears Tumbler is BACK! Subscribe to get your FREE one today: https://bit.ly/4capKTB Get your Ben Shapiro merch: https://bit.ly/3TAu2cw - - - Today's Sponsors: Birch Gold - Open an IRA in GOLD and get a FREE infokit. Text "BEN" to 989898. http://www.birchgold.com/Ben Policygenius - Get your free life insurance quote & see how much you could save: http://policygenius.com/SHAPIRO Food For The Poor - Donate Today! Text ‘BenShapiro' to 51555 or visit https://www.foodforthepoor.org/benshapiro PureTalk - Get 50% off your first month! http://www.PureTalk.com/Shapiro Tax Network USA - Seize control of your financial future! Call 1-800-245-6000 or visit http://www.TNUSA.com/Shapiro My Patriot Supply - Get $200 off your 3-month supply today! http://www.preparewithBen.com/ - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3cXUn53 Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3QtuibJ Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3TTirqd Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RPyBiB
Texas' draconian immigration law SB4 is back on hold after a ruling late Tuesday night by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. SB4 would allow state law enforcement officials to arrest and detain anyone they suspect of crossing the border illegally. It also would allow judges to issue orders to deport people to Mexico. The Fifth Circuit's decision followed an earlier decision by the Supreme Court's conservative majority to let the law go into effect. Texas Tribune immigration reporter Uriel García explained the legal whiplash and what it means for migrants in the state.The Biden administration on Wednesday finalized the country's strictest-ever limits on emissions for passenger cars and light trucks in an effort to rev up the nation's transition towards electric vehicles. It's definitely a big deal, but it is a bit more modest than what was proposed last year. Nevertheless, the health of the planet will improve with these changes as will our own.And in headlines: The Federal Reserve kept interest rates flat on Wednesday amid continued concerns over inflation, former President Donald Trump said he'd be open to endorsing a national ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, and a fourth Mississippi police officer was sentenced to 40 years in prison in a case involving the horrific torture of two Black men.Show Notes:Texas Tribune: “Disagreement and confusion on display in hearing over Texas' new immigration law” – https://tinyurl.com/24h7x3jmABC News: “Electric vehicle sales are slowing. No need for panic yet, insiders say.” – https://tinyurl.com/2xb8okygUSC: “Study links adoption of electric vehicles with less air pollution and improved health” – https://tinyurl.com/25t24c7dWhat A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday
© 2020-2026 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
