Podcasts about first amendment

One of the big questions that's been coming up everywhere lately: how does the First Amendment actually work when it comes to online pornography? In this episode, I break down the recent Supreme Court case, Free Speech Coalition Inc. v. Paxton, which addresses whether states can require age verification pop-ups on adult websites and whether that crosses the line into unconstitutional territory.I'll walk you through the basics of how the courts view content-based regulation versus time, place, and manner restrictions, and why that distinction matters for everything from protests on the statehouse lawn to what you see on your favorite websites. We'll talk about why challenges to these regulations are so important, what makes something pass constitutional muster, and where things might be headed next in the ever-evolving world of free speech and online content.If you love digging into constitutional law, or if you simply want to understand how these headlines affect your rights, this episode is for you. Got a question? Head over to lawyertalkpodcast.com, send it my way, and let's keep the conversation going. 3 Key Takeaways:Content-Based vs. Time, Place, and Manner:Content-based regulations, where the government restricts speech based on its message, are almost always unconstitutional. By contrast, time, place, and manner restrictions (imposing rules about when, where, or how speech happens) are generally permissible if applied fairly and equally.Strict Scrutiny Applies:Content-based restrictions are subjected to the strictest legal scrutiny and rarely survive court challenges. Time, place, and manner restrictions, if neutral and reasonable, tend to fare better legally.Slippery Slope & Future Concerns:The age verification requirement for adult content raises important “what's next?” questions. Could similar regulations creep into academic, legal, or other sensitive content areas? How might new rules affect non-pornographic but still controversial discussions or resources online?Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2025 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law Mentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of...

On this powerful new episode of Friends Talking Nerdy, Professor Aubrey and Tim the Nerd dive into the timeless and timely world of protest music. Together, they explore a curated list of some of the most iconic protest songs in music history—songs that have given voice to social movements, challenged injustice, and inspired generations to stand up and speak out. Tracks discussed include Bob Dylan's rallying cry The Times They Are A-Changin', the haunting reflection of Ohio by Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, and Sam Cooke's soulful anthem of hope, A Change Is Gonna Come. They also dig into For What It's Worth by Buffalo Springfield, Which Side Are You On by Florence Reece, and Killing In The Name by Rage Against The Machine, among others, exploring the historical and political contexts that shaped each song and the emotional weight they still carry today. Listen to the playlist on YouTube.In the second half of the episode, Professor Aubrey shares a heartfelt and firsthand account of attending the No Kings protest in Portland, Oregon, on June 14th, 2025. She reflects on the power of peaceful demonstration, the courage of everyday people taking to the streets to demand justice, and why exercising our First Amendment rights is more important than ever. In a time of political unrest and deep uncertainty, this episode is a tribute to resistance, resilience, and the enduring impact of collective action.As always, we wish to thank Christopher Lazarek for his wonderful theme song. Head to his ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ for information on how to purchase his EP, Here's To You, which is available on all digital platforms.Head to Friends Talking Nerdy's⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠for more information on where to find us online.

A Sacramento Lawsuit and the Fight for Police Accountability In the latest episode of Everyday Injustice, host David Greenwald sits down with civil rights attorney Marissa Hatton of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area and community activist Meg White to examine a pivotal case against the Sacramento Police Department. The lawsuit, stemming from police violence during the George Floyd protests in 2020, sheds light on the city's response to racial justice demonstrations and the long road toward accountability and reform. Despite a monetary settlement, plaintiffs and advocates remain deeply frustrated by the court's refusal to impose lasting injunctive relief. Hatton recounts the harrowing details behind the legal battle, which challenged the Sacramento Police Department not only for excessive force—including the widespread use of chemical agents and rubber bullets—but also for viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment. While the court ruled that the department had violated the Fourth Amendment by using unlawful force and failing to train or discipline its officers, it stopped short of mandating policy changes to prevent future misconduct. For many, including the plaintiffs, that decision leaves them vulnerable to repeat abuse. Meg White, one of six plaintiffs, offers an unflinching firsthand account of what it felt like to be maced, beaten, and traumatized during what was supposed to be a peaceful protest. White's experience—shared by hundreds of demonstrators—illustrates a pattern of police escalation and indiscriminate retaliation. The contrast between the violent crackdown on racial justice protesters and the relative restraint shown to Stop the Steal demonstrators is a key element of the case, revealing a disturbing double standard in how law enforcement responds to dissenting voices. Though the court acknowledged a pattern and practice of unconstitutional conduct, the ruling left systemic change off the table—deepening public distrust. As the conversation turns toward ongoing protests and growing authoritarianism across the country, this episode is both a sobering postmortem of one city's failures and a warning about what happens when legal victories don't translate into institutional reform. Hatton and White make one thing painfully clear: without accountability and structural change, the injustice will repeat itself.

Today's show: Grok 4 just leapfrogged OpenAI to become the top AI model—and it's not just hype. In this episode, @Jason and @alex break down Grok's AGI-level performance, the massive drop in LLM pricing, and why some companies are raising prices anyway. They also dive into the Missouri AG's investigation into AI “bias,” the future of First Amendment protections for LLMs, and how autonomous vehicles are creating a new category: “autonomous commerce.” If you're building with AI or betting on the future of tech, don't miss this one.Timestamps:(1:55) AI models: Grok 4 and performance benchmarks(3:51) Detailed analysis of AI model performance and price trends(10:11) Lemon.io - Get 15% off your first 4 weeks of developer time at https://Lemon.io/twist(11:25) AI models' problem-solving capabilities and timeline for solving math problems(16:53) Legal and regulatory challenges for AI(19:56) Retool - Visit https://www.retool.com/twist and try it out today.(21:12) Bias in AI models and political implications(30:41) Vouched - Trust for agents that's built for builders like you. Check it out at http://vouched.id/twist(32:07) Infinite energy potential and AI impact; Bitcoin's new high(37:11) Crypto regulation and fintech under new administration(45:50) Future of storage, computing power, and GPU lifespan in data centers(53:40) Claude segment by Anthropic(55:09) Guest Ben Seidl of Autolane introduction(57:19) Autolane's impact on autonomous vehicles and commerce(59:05) Rise of autonomous commerce and logistics(1:06:37) Retailer issues with autonomous vehicle integration and orchestrationSubscribe to the TWiST500 newsletter: https://ticker.thisweekinstartups.comCheck out the TWIST500: https://www.twist500.comSubscribe to This Week in Startups on Apple: https://rb.gy/v19fcpFollow Lon:X: https://x.com/lonsFollow Alex:X: https://x.com/alexLinkedIn: ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexwilhelmFollow Jason:X: https://twitter.com/JasonLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasoncalacanisThank you to our partners:(10:11) Lemon.io - Get 15% off your first 4 weeks of developer time at https://Lemon.io/twist(19:56) Retool - Visit https://www.retool.com/twist and try it out today.(30:41) Vouched - Trust for agents that's built for builders like you. Check it out at http://vouched.id/twistGreat TWIST interviews: Will Guidara, Eoghan McCabe, Steve Huffman, Brian Chesky, Bob Moesta, Aaron Levie, Sophia Amoruso, Reid Hoffman, Frank Slootman, Billy McFarlandCheck out Jason's suite of newsletters: https://substack.com/@calacanisFollow TWiST:Twitter: https://twitter.com/TWiStartupsYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/thisweekinInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/thisweekinstartupsTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thisweekinstartupsSubstack: https://twistartups.substack.comSubscribe to the Founder University Podcast: https://www.youtube.com/@founderuniversity1916

Donald Trump is losing support on policy decisions from people like Joe Rogan and gets backlash from fringe conspiracy theorists over the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Aside from being ignored by world leaders over tariffs. SPONSOR: Head to http://www.joindeleteme.com/fiveminutenews and use promo code fiveminutenews for 20% off. Join this channel for exclusive access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. Please subscribe HERE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

To craft legal discrimination, the Third Reich studied the United States - and Jim Crow policies. Join this channel for exclusive access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. Please subscribe HERE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Angel Studios https://Angel.com/ToddBecome a Premium Angel Studios Guild member to watch The King of Kings, stream all fan-curated shows and movies, and get 2 free tickets to every Angel Studios theatrical release. Alan's Soaps https://www.AlansArtisanSoaps.comUse coupon code TODD to save an additional 10% off the bundle price.Bioptimizers https://Bioptimizers.com/toddEnter promo code TODD to get 10% off your order of Berberine Breakthrough today.Bizable https://GoBizable.comUntie your business exposure from your personal exposure with BiZABLE.  Schedule your FREE consultation at GoBizAble.com today.  Bonefrog https://BonefrogCoffee.com/toddThe new GOLDEN AGE is here!  Use code TODD at checkout to receive 10% off your first purchase and 15% on subscriptions.Bulwark Capital https://KnowYourRiskPodcast.comHear directly from Zach Abraham as he shares insights in this FREE “Halftime” Webinar, THURSDAY, July 24th at 3:30 Pacific.  Register now at Know Your Risk Podcast dot com. Renue Healthcare https://Renue.Healthcare/ToddYour journey to a better life starts at Renue Healthcare. Visit https://Renue.Healthcare/ToddLISTEN and SUBSCRIBE at:The Todd Herman Show - Podcast - Apple PodcastsThe Todd Herman Show | Podcast on SpotifyWATCH and SUBSCRIBE at: Todd Herman - The Todd Herman Show - YouTubeHarvard Vs. National Security // Seattle's Mayor Thinks He's Defying Jesus. // Can You Remain Saved while Defending Adultery and Fornication?Episode Links:Harvard sues Trump administration for right to admit foreign subversives…Federal Judge Blocks Trump Admin Deportation Flight—Even for Murderers With Orders Dating Back to 1999…Oregon police responded 17 times to home occupied by Tren de Aragua gang members charged with torture, kidnapping, attempted murder: charging documents…Wow. This lifelong Democrat and pro-migrant activist who was planning to vote for Kamala, says she switched to President Trump after her quiet town in Colorado was overrun by illegals committing violent crime.Trump just cleared violent illegals off Minnesota's streets–Tim Walz calls that ‘tyranny'…Illegal Migrant with a criminal record was driving 100 miles per hour, he was drunk, he was high, he drove right into American Trooper Christopher Gadd killing him instantly in his police car. Seattle, Washington attorney says “It is not a crime” (INSANE)Reporter: "Why do you not want the best and brightest from around the world to come to Harvard?" President Trump: "I do, but a lot of the people need remedial math. Did you see that? Where the students can't add 2 and 2, and they go to Harvard...And then you see those same people picketing and screaming at the United States … We don't want troublemakers here."Marco Rubio obliterates Rep. Pramila Jayapal over student visas: Jayapal: "Where in the Constitution does it say that the Secretary of State can override the First Amendment protections of free speech?" Rubio: "There's no constitutional right to a student visa. A student visa's a privilege."Rubio to Mayorkas: If you come from Cuba, you are presumed to be fleeing persecution. Which means you are automatically eligible got refugee cash. You're eligible for food stamps. You're eligible for Medicare and Medicaid. Others who immigrate this country have to wait five years for that—and they don't get the refugee cash.Heartbreaking. 15 year old Irish girl and champion boxer Kaiden McKenna speaks about feeling unsafe in her own community because of strange foreign men.Video from the May 27 Seattle Trantifa and far-left violent direct action shows BLM race grifter Erica Williams @AExquisitePearl hitting Christians trying to attend the worship rally outside City Hall.Massive crowd of Christians gather to praise Jesus Christ—despite threats of political violence. The group says they will not be stopped from worshipping in the city of Seattle. This is powerful

The team delves into some of the many civics lessons the public got while watching Karen Read's retrial, which ended with her acquittal on all major charges in June. Topics include the First Amendment, judicial discretion, courtroom tactics, and more. Our expert for this episode is Colin Miller, blogger, podcaster, and professor at University of South Carolina School of Law. Read Vanity Fair's extensive reporting on this case. WIN A NEW CAR OR 25K IN CASH DURING NHPR'S SUMMER RAFFLE! GET YOUR TICKETS HERE.CLICK HERE: Visit our website to see all of our episodes, donate to the podcast, sign up for our newsletter, get free educational materials, and more!To see Civics 101 in book form, check out A User's Guide to Democracy: How America Works by Hannah McCarthy and Nick Capodice, featuring illustrations by Tom Toro.Check out our other weekly NHPR podcast, Outside/In - we think you'll love it!

Federal immigration agents from ICE and other agencies have ratcheted up enforcement raids, arresting and detaining anyone they suspect of violating immigration laws, critics warn that their tactic of masking — particularly when wearing plain clothes and no visible marker of identity — spreads fear and panic across communities and imperils citizens as well as immigrants without legal status. Join this channel for exclusive access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. Please subscribe HERE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Democrats criticized Gov. Greg Abbott for seeking a redistricting, favored by President Trump's political team, just days after devastating floods in Texas when they convene in a special session later this month, in a bid to gain Republican seats and help the party keep control of the House in 2026. Join this channel for exclusive access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. Please subscribe HERE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this solo episode, host Corey Nathan shares a personal story that explores a fundamental question many of us face in political and relational discourse: “Do you want to be right, or do you want the relationship?” Prompted by a real-life interaction following his attendance at a local rally, Corey examines how we navigate our convictions, the costs of being “right,” and the cognitive, identity-based, and psychological roots that underlie our desire to win arguments—especially at the expense of connection.  What Is Discussed: The real story behind a tense political exchange among friends. The importance of prioritizing relationships over ideological victory. Key psychological and sociological reasons why people insist on being right. How identity, ego, and group affiliation shape our perceptions in political dialogue. Thoughtful strategies to promote civil discourse, even across ideological lines. Episode Highlights: [00:03:00] Corey describes the No Kings Rally in Santa Clarita and his motivation for attending. [00:05:00] A group text spirals into conflict after a friend posts a divisive meme about Democrats. [00:07:00] Corey challenges the assumptions being made and asserts his conservative identity. [00:10:00] The text conversation intensifies—Corey confronts the damaging generalizations. [00:13:00] He reflects on the absence of actual conversation and the importance of listening. [00:20:00] Corey shares research on cognitive biases like confirmation bias and bandwagon effect. [00:24:00] A powerful explanation of identity protective cognition and how it affects discourse. [00:29:00] The psychological roots of being “right”: ego, fear, insecurity, and narcissism. [00:31:00] A parable of two billy goats illustrates the cost of refusing to give ground. Featured Quotes: “Do you want to be right, or do you want the relationship?” “The endeavor that I care about is people exercising their First Amendment rights.” “If we were actually talking, you'd know this isn't even in my top 50 concerns.” “We don't need to diminish others to hold our convictions.”

Steve Gruber discusses news and headlines 

On June 27th, the Supreme Court ruled in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton that Texas’s age-verification law did not violate the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause. Justice Thomas wrote the Court’s opinion, holding that States had a right to protect children from obscenity, even if that meant incidentally burdening adults’ own access to that content. Many are celebrating the 6-3 decision as a victory for the protection of children, as it will cement similar laws in the 21 other states that have implemented them. Yet, as in Justice Kagan's dissent, others worry about Paxton’s implications for Freedom of Speech in the digital age. When does an incidental burden become a substantial violation of adults' First Amendment Rights? What kind of precedent does Paxton set for speech cases going forward?

This Day in Legal History: Richard and Mildred Loving ArrestedOn this day in legal history, July 11, 1958, Richard and Mildred Loving were arrested in Central Point, Virginia, for violating the state's Racial Integrity Act, which banned interracial marriage. The couple had legally wed in Washington, D.C., but upon returning to Virginia, they were charged with "cohabiting as man and wife, against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth." Richard, a white man, and Mildred, a Black and Indigenous woman, pled guilty and were sentenced to one year in prison, suspended on the condition that they leave the state for 25 years.The Lovings relocated to Washington, D.C., but their desire to return home ultimately led to a pivotal civil rights case. In 1963, they wrote to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, who referred them to the ACLU. Attorneys Bernard Cohen and Philip Hirschkop took up their case, arguing that Virginia's law violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. After years of legal battles, the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court.In Loving v. Virginia (1967), the Court unanimously struck down laws banning interracial marriage, declaring that "the freedom to marry… may not be infringed by the State." Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote that Virginia's law served no legitimate purpose "independent of invidious racial discrimination." The decision invalidated similar laws in 15 other states.The Lovings never sought to become civil rights icons—they simply wanted to live as a married couple in their home state. Their quiet determination reshaped American constitutional law, affirming marriage as a fundamental right and setting a legal precedent that continues to influence equal protection jurisprudence.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily paused a lower court ruling that had blocked President Donald Trump's executive order removing collective bargaining rights for large segments of the federal workforce. U.S. District Judge James Donato had issued the initial injunction in June, finding the executive order likely violated federal employees' First Amendment rights and targeted unions viewed as adversarial to Trump. The appeals court's administrative stay keeps the order in limbo while it considers the administration's appeal, with oral arguments scheduled for July 17.Trump's order affects 21 federal agencies and would make it easier to discipline or fire employees while restricting union challenges. The order notably broadened national security exceptions to collective bargaining beyond intelligence agencies like the CIA and FBI. Unions argue the move is retaliatory and affects many workers who don't handle national security matters.Earlier, a Washington, D.C. judge blocked the same order at seven agencies, including the DOJ and Treasury, but that ruling is also stayed pending appeal. The Trump administration has also filed lawsuits to void existing union contracts, though one such suit by the Treasury was dismissed for lack of standing. A related case remains pending in Texas.US court pauses block on Trump eliminating union bargaining for federal workers | ReutersThe White House is currently reviewing federal agency layoff plans following a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that permits large-scale downsizing of the government workforce. Two senior officials confirmed the review is aimed at minimizing future legal challenges by ensuring all plans comply with congressional rules and civil service regulations. Coordination is being handled through the White House Counsel's Office and the Office of Personnel Management. Although no specific timeline has been announced, officials say the layoffs are an "immediate priority," with a goal to reduce the size of government swiftly.The ruling, welcomed by the Trump administration, allows agencies to act on plans developed earlier this year under the guidance of the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk. However, the administration acknowledged that labor contracts and due process protections still apply, and lawsuits are expected even if legal thresholds are met.The State Department has already confirmed it will begin issuing termination notices imminently, having proposed nearly 2,000 job cuts in May. Overall, about 260,000 federal employees have already exited through firings, resignations, or early retirements since January. The layoffs are expected to affect more than a dozen departments, including Agriculture, Commerce, and Veterans Affairs.White House reviews mass federal layoff plans, aims for swift action | ReutersMahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University student and permanent U.S. resident, has filed a $20 million claim against the Trump administration, alleging false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. Khalil, a pro-Palestinian activist, was detained for over 100 days by immigration authorities who accused him of undermining U.S.–Israel relations. His legal team submitted the claim under federal rules requiring damages claims to be filed before a lawsuit. Homeland Security dismissed the claim as "absurd," defending its actions as lawful.Khalil argues his arrest was politically motivated, targeting him for his pro-Palestinian speech, and says he would accept an official apology and a policy change as an alternative to monetary compensation. He was released on bail in June after a federal judge ruled his detention violated his First Amendment rights. The case has drawn widespread attention from civil rights and Palestinian advocacy groups, who accuse the administration of equating criticism of Israel with antisemitism.Trump has publicly pledged to deport foreign students participating in anti-Israel protests, and Khalil was the first high-profile detainee under this initiative. His lawyers continue to challenge his deportation, and the administration has six months to respond to his compensation claim.Mahmoud Khalil seeks $20 million from Trump administration over immigration arrest | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by George Gershwin.This week's closing theme is dedicated to one of America's most iconic composers—George Gershwin, who died on July 11, 1937, at just 38 years old. Though his life was short, Gershwin's musical legacy is vast, bridging the worlds of classical music and jazz with unprecedented flair. His compositions resonate with a distinctively American voice, and no piece captures that better than Rhapsody in Blue. Premiered in 1924, the work opens with a now-famous clarinet glissando and bursts into a vibrant, restless energy that seems to embody the optimism and chaos of early 20th-century New York.Commissioned by bandleader Paul Whiteman, Rhapsody in Blue was Gershwin's first major attempt to merge classical form with jazz idioms. What emerged was a concerto-like work that thrilled audiences and critics alike and marked the beginning of serious recognition for jazz as a concert-hall art form. Gershwin performed the piano solo himself at the premiere, having written much of it in a hurry and leaving some sections to be improvised on the spot.His sudden death from a brain tumor shocked the music world. It cut short the career of a composer who had already revolutionized American music and was poised to do much more. In works like Porgy and Bess and An American in Paris, Gershwin demonstrated a rare ability to synthesize European traditions with American vernacular music. But Rhapsody in Blue remains his most enduring testament—a collision of elegance, innovation, and vitality.As we reflect on Gershwin's passing this week, we close with Rhapsody in Blue, a work that continues to pulse with life nearly a century after its premiere. Its blend of bluesy lyricism and orchestral sweep makes it a fitting tribute to a composer whose voice was silenced too soon.Without further ado, George Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue, 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

This podcast is solely for the purposes of entertainment and does not speak to anyone directly. But if the shoe fits….Brandon Rafi and his attorney Raees Mohamed just took an L in court. Their motion to gag Gil Negrete and silence his free speech? Denied.In a clear win, the judge ruled Rafi didn't meet the strict scrutiny required to infringe on Gil's First Amendment rights (see: CV2024-003021).Gil and Jezuz break it all down—what happened, what's next, and Jezuz approves of Laura Negrete's crunchy tacos at camp.We also find out Brandon has a deposition set for August 15, 2025—and Gil's gearing up to call healthcare providers to testify in the federal case involving alleged illegal payments to Rafi's intake staff.To Raees: don't pull out your beard. Enjoy your vacation. :)Thanks for the love and support. We're not done—glory is coming.

Sarah Isgur returns to her home state of Texas to join a panel of leading constitutional scholars for a deep dive into the most significant Supreme Court decisions of the term. Alongside experts Jonathan Adler, Daniel Epps, and Frederick Lawrence, she examines key cases and explores the growing influence of politicians and the media on how the court is viewed by the public. The Agenda:—Is there a play in the joints between religion clauses and the First Amendment?—Why is it called United States. v Skrmetti?—The Fifth Circuit is the new Ninth Circuit—Will the court rein in excesses of state criminal justice? This episode is brought to you by Burford Capital, the leading global finance firm focused on law. Burford helps companies and law firms unlock the value of their legal assets. With a $7.2 billion portfolio and listings on the NYSE and LSE, Burford provides capital to finance high-value commercial litigation and arbitration—without adding cost, risk, or giving up control. Clients include Fortune 500 companies and Am Law 100 firms, who turn to Burford to pursue strong claims, manage legal costs, and accelerate recoveries. Learn more at burfordcapital.com/ao. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What Is The 'Canary Mission' And Why Are US Officials Using It To Attack The First Amendment by Ron Paul Liberty Report

Mishelle describes her brother Collin as a vibrant little boy who loved to joke around and make people laugh. All of that changed, seemingly overnight. Sabrina and Mishelle walk Andrea through their memory of the timeline of Collin's symptoms, and his eventual diagnosis with NMO (Neuromyelitis Optica). This recounting of events exposes some discrepancies in the family's memory and Lisa's public story, as well as a rapid escalation in the medication given to Collin. We're introduced to Lisa's blog on CaringBridge, where she kept a detailed account of Collin's medical journey. She quickly begins referring to NMO as a fatal disease, even mentioning the possibility of hospice care. However, this portrayal is challenged by a pediatric neuroimmunologist we'll refer to as Dr. K, who specializes in NMO. Dr. K offers a clear explanation of what Neuromyelitis Optica is, the diagnostic criteria, and just how rare the condition is—particularly in children. As suspicions grow within their tight-knit community and the family's financial support runs dry, the McDaniels relocate to Alabama to seek care from NMO expert Dr. Jayne Ness. *** Andrea's August 1st event with Gregg Olsen: https://www.libertybaybooks.com/event/west-sound-crime-con-2025-local-authors-gregg-olsen-and-andrea-dunlop Order Andrea's new book The Mother Next Door: Medicine, Deception, and Munchausen by Proxy.  Click here to view our sponsors. Remember that using our codes helps advertisers know you're listening and helps us keep making the show!   Subscribe on YouTube where we have full episodes and lots of bonus content.  Follow Andrea on Instagram: @andreadunlop Buy Andrea's books here.  For more information and resources on Munchausen by Proxy, please visit MunchausenSupport.com The American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children's MBP Practice Guidelines can be downloaded here.  *** This season covers sensitive subject matter involving allegations of child abuse, medical child abuse (also known as Munchausen by proxy), and the death of a minor. All information presented is based on court records, first-person interviews, contemporaneous documentation, and publicly available sources. The podcast includes personal statements and perspectives from individuals directly involved in or affected by these events. These accounts represent their experiences and interpretations, and some statements reflect opinions that may be emotionally charged. Where appropriate, the reporting team has verified claims through official records or corroborating sources. Nothing in this podcast should be interpreted as a legal conclusion or diagnosis. All subjects are presumed innocent unless convicted in a court of law. This podcast is intended for informational and public interest purposes. This podcast contains audio excerpts from two phone conversations recorded in the states of Georgia and Alabama, respectively. Both recordings were obtained by a third-party source, who acted in accordance with the relevant one-party consent laws of those states, which allow for the lawful recording of a conversation with the consent of one participant. These recordings were subsequently shared with the producers of this podcast after the fact, and were not made by or at the direction of the podcast team or its parent organization. The podcast producers have made good-faith efforts to confirm the legal compliance of the original recordings, and are presenting these materials in the context of public interest reporting. The inclusion of this audio is intended for journalistic, educational, and documentary purposes in alignment with the principles of fair use and First Amendment protections. Listeners are advised that the views expressed in the recordings are those of the individuals speaking and do not necessarily reflect the views of the producers or affiliated entities. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this jam-packed episode, CannCon and Alpha Warrior kick off with the stunning reversal of Douglas Mackey's conviction over his 2016 meme, an unprecedented First Amendment case the DOJ pursued under the KKK Act. Mackey joins live to recount being raided, banned, and nearly imprisoned over obvious satire, and why he's planning civil action against the FBI and prosecutors. The hosts then dive into bombshell news that the DOJ has criminally referred John Brennan and James Comey over Russiagate misconduct, debating whether the moves signal real accountability or just another show. The conversation shifts to FISA court disclosures about Carter Page warrants, the systemic abuse of surveillance power, and how legislative reforms might finally emerge. They also cover updates on Dr. Kirk Moore's federal trial over saline vaccines, revealing how a prosecution witness claiming the shots were “safe and effective” accidentally opened the door to evidence about jab harms. Other highlights include California's post-fire land grab to build subsidized housing, Trump's new NASA leadership, and a fresh Japanese study linking COVID boosters to aggressive cancer. Blending humor, frustration, and sharp analysis, this episode underscores why Americans are losing trust in institutions, and why exposure is just the beginning.

Today on Truth in Politics and Culture the controversy over the Epstein files breaks in and divides the MAGA base. What the facts and is there a conspiracy? I will review the Supreme Court rulings that support religious liberty and First Amendment rights. Also, the IRS finally walks away from the enforcement of the unconstitutional "Johnson Amendment."

This Day in Legal History: Second Bank of the United States VetoedOn July 10, 1832, President Andrew Jackson vetoed legislation that would have renewed the charter of the Second Bank of the United States, setting off a fierce political and constitutional conflict known as the “Bank War.” The Bank, originally chartered in 1816, acted as a quasi-governmental financial institution and played a central role in stabilizing the U.S. economy. Jackson, however, saw the Bank as a symbol of entrenched privilege and a threat to democratic values. In his veto message, he argued that the Bank was unconstitutional—even though the Supreme Court had previously upheld its legitimacy in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)—and that it concentrated too much financial power in the hands of a wealthy elite.Jackson framed his opposition as a defense of the common man against corporate monopoly. His veto marked a dramatic assertion of presidential power, expanding the scope of the executive's role in legislative review. By directly challenging a long-standing institution supported by Congress and the courts, Jackson redefined the balance between branches of government. His veto was also politically strategic, rallying populist support ahead of the 1832 presidential election, which he would go on to win decisively.The fallout was immense: Jackson's administration began withdrawing federal funds from the Bank and redistributing them to selected state banks, derogatorily termed “pet banks.” This redistribution triggered economic instability and helped contribute to the Panic of 1837. Despite intense opposition from figures like Henry Clay and Nicholas Biddle, the Bank's president, Jackson remained steadfast, and the Bank's federal charter ultimately expired in 1836.The legal significance of this event lies in its reimagining of the veto as a political, not merely constitutional, tool. Jackson's interpretation of the Constitution, driven by populist ideals rather than judicial precedent, established a precedent for a more active and independent executive.A federal judge in New Hampshire, Joseph Laplante, is set to hear arguments on whether to block President Donald Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship, despite a recent Supreme Court decision limiting the use of nationwide injunctions. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is asking the court to grant class-action status to a lawsuit aimed at protecting U.S.-born children whose parents are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. If class status is granted, it could enable a nationwide block on the policy through the class action mechanism—something the Supreme Court ruling left open as an exception to its injunction restrictions.Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office in January, would deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. unless at least one parent is a citizen or green card holder. The Supreme Court previously narrowed three injunctions against the order, but did not rule on its constitutionality. Opponents argue the order violates the 14th Amendment and contradicts the precedent set in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), which affirmed that birthright citizenship applies regardless of a parent's immigration status.Judge Laplante had already ruled in February that the policy was likely unconstitutional and issued a limited injunction affecting only certain advocacy groups. The ACLU is now urging him to expand this to a broader class of affected families, citing the risk of statelessness or undocumented status for tens of thousands of children. The Justice Department, meanwhile, claims the plaintiffs are too diverse to form a single legal class and that the suit bypasses proper legal procedures.Judge to weigh blocking Trump on birthright citizenship despite Supreme Court ruling | ReutersThe Trump administration escalated its standoff with Harvard University by threatening its accreditation and subpoenaing records related to international students. Federal officials claimed Harvard may have violated anti-discrimination laws by failing to protect Jewish and Israeli students, citing a Title VI investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services. As a result, the Education and Health Departments formally notified Harvard's accrediting body that the university might not meet its standards. However, the accreditor clarified it operates independently and typically allows schools up to four years to come into compliance.Simultaneously, the Department of Homeland Security announced plans to issue subpoenas targeting potential "criminality and misconduct" among student visa holders at Harvard. These actions follow previous federal efforts to block Harvard from admitting international students and to freeze billions in grants, which the university is currently challenging in court. A judge had already halted Trump's proclamation barring foreign students, though the administration is appealing that ruling.Trump accused Harvard of fostering antisemitism and "woke" ideology, while the university insists the administration's actions are politically motivated retaliation infringing on its First Amendment rights. Nearly 6,800 international students—about 27% of Harvard's student body—could be affected if the administration succeeds in stripping the university of its ability to host them. A separate lawsuit seeking to unfreeze $2.5 billion in grants is set to be heard on July 21.Trump administration threatens Harvard's accreditation, seeks records on foreign students | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced it will no longer consider a farmer's race or sex when administering many of its key programs, including those related to loans, commodities, and conservation. The decision follows directives from the Trump administration aimed at rolling back diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives across federal agencies. According to the USDA, the shift reflects its belief that past discrimination has been sufficiently addressed and that programs should now focus solely on merit and fairness.The final rule, signed by the USDA's acting General Counsel, states that race- or sex-based criteria will no longer influence program eligibility or funding decisions, though some advantages remain for beginning and military veteran farmers. For decades, the agency had designated certain groups—such as women and farmers of color—as "socially disadvantaged," often creating set-asides or prioritizations for them. This latest move effectively ends that practice.Critics argue the change undermines transparency and accessibility for farmers of color who have historically faced systemic exclusion. Legal scholar Margo Schlanger, formerly involved in USDA civil rights work, said the rule shuts off a vital avenue for ensuring equitable access to federal support. The decision comes despite the fact that only about 4.5% of U.S. farmers identify as nonwhite or multiracial, according to the 2022 Census of Agriculture.US agriculture agency to end consideration of race, sex in many farm programs | ReutersThe Trump administration filed a lawsuit against California, arguing that the state's animal welfare laws concerning egg and poultry farming unlawfully raise egg prices nationwide and violate federal law. The complaint, brought in federal court in Los Angeles, claims that California's regulations conflict with the Egg Products Inspection Act of 1970, which mandates national uniformity in egg safety standards. The federal government asserts that only it has the authority to regulate egg safety and that California's restrictions burden interstate commerce.California laws passed by voter initiatives in 2008 and 2018 prohibit confining hens so tightly that they cannot move freely. These measures were designed to reduce animal cruelty and prevent foodborne illness. However, the federal government argues that while California can regulate farms within its borders, it cannot impose its requirements on out-of-state producers selling eggs in California.This is not the first legal battle over the issue. In 2014, several states sued California on similar grounds and lost at both the district and appellate levels. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld California's 2018 animal welfare measure in a separate challenge from pig farmers in 2023, further solidifying the state's right to set agricultural standards for products sold within its borders.US government sues California over egg prices | Reuters 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

Law professor and media analyst Jonathan Turley joins Dr. Phil to unpack the legal, cultural, and personal consequences of rage-fueled censorship in America. What happens when society treats words like weapons? Dr. Phil sits down with law professor and First Amendment advocate Jonathan Turley to unpack why free speech is under fire—from the courtroom to the classroom to your screen. They explore how anger has become addictive, how censorship masks itself as virtue, and what's at stake when we stop allowing disagreement. Whether you're raising a college kid, following high-profile trials, or just trying to stay sane online, this episode cuts through the noise with clarity, law, and a call to rethink the way we engage. If you care about honest conversations and what's left of civil discourse, don't miss it.  This episode is brought to you by Home Title Lock: Go to https://hometitlelock.com/drphil  and use promo code PHIL to get a FREE title history report and a FREE TRIAL of their Triple Lock Protection! For details visit https://hometitlelock.com/warranty  This episode is brought to you by  Beam: Visit https://shopbeam.com/DRPHIL and use code DRPHIL to get an exclusive discount of up to 40% off! Subscribe | Rate | Review | Share: YouTube: https://bit.ly/3H3lJ8n Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/4jVk6rX Spotify: https://bit.ly/4n6PCVZ Website: https://www.drphilpodcast.com    

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has handed 2A supporters a victory in a challenge to a California law that could muzzle gun-related speech. California Rifle & Pistol Association head Chuck Michel joins Cam with the details.

Send us a textIn this thought-provoking episode of Living the Dream with Curveball, we are joined by Julian Raven, an artist, author, and passionate advocate for free speech. Julian takes us on a journey through his eight-year battle with the Smithsonian Institution, sparked by his creation of a 7x15 portrait of Donald Trump. He shares the challenges he faced after submitting his artwork to the National Portrait Gallery, detailing the surprising rejection he received and the subsequent legal fight that ensued. As we delve into the complexities of free speech, governmental bias, and the role of art in society, Julian emphasizes the importance of standing up for one's rights and the power of perseverance. His story is not just about art but a reflection on the broader implications of free expression in America today. Tune in to hear Julian's insights, his experiences as an immigrant, and the lessons he has learned along the way.1. Introduction to Julian Raven and his background2. The creation of the Trump portrait and its significance3. The rejection from the Smithsonian and the ensuing battle4. Insights into free speech and governmental bias5. The impact of Julian's case on future artists6. Reflections on perseverance and civic responsibility7. Details on Julian's book and where to find it

The First Amendment simply does not allow government schools to require families to sacrifice their religious beliefs for their children to attend school. Constitutional expert, lawyer, author, pastor, and founder of Liberty Counsel Mat Staver discusses the important topics of the day with co-hosts and guests that impact life, liberty, and family. To stay informed and get involved, visit LC.org.

Welcome to The Clay Edwards Show, where I dive into the day's hottest topics with an unfiltered take. Today, I'm breaking down a viral incident involving a first amendment auditor clashing with a Mississippi trooper outside the governor's mansion. These self-proclaimed “auditors” record public officials to test free speech rights, but is it activism or just harassment? I argue it's the latter, comparing them to the Westboro Baptist Church for targeting innocent employees—like security guards—without cause. The trooper's reaction (putting hands on the auditor) sparks debate: was it justified self-defense or overreach? I say the auditor asked for it with his provocative “What are you gonna do?”—and got an answer he didn't like. Two wrongs don't make a right, but I'm not siding with the auditor here. Listen in for my take on free speech boundaries and personal accountability. Why Listen? A raw, no-holds-barred take on first amendment auditors and free speech. Real-time reaction to a viral trooper-auditor clash. Thought-provoking discussion on harassment vs. rights. Who's This For? If you're passionate about free speech debates or curious about the first amendment auditor trend, this is for you. Perfect for those who love unfiltered commentary and lively discussions.Key Topics: First amendment auditors vs. public officials Free speech boundaries and harassment Trooper-auditor confrontation analysis Follow Us: Catch me on social media: @savejxn (Facebook, X, YouTube, Rumble) and @clayedwardsshow (YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts). Tune In: Subscribe to this channel, hit the notification bell, and drop your thoughts in the comments! What do you think about first amendment auditors—heroes or harassers? Share this with friends who love a good debate! Note: Like and share to keep the conversation going. Suggestions for future topics welcome!

**Description:** Welcome to *Uncensored Live*, the raw, unfiltered nightly newscast where three friends—Clay Edwards of *The Clay Edwards Show* and *Save Jackson*, Shaun Yurtkuran, and Lindsey Beckham of *Crossing the Aisle*—raise hell and tackle the day's biggest stories with zero punches pulled. Launched on July 3, 2025, this is Episode #2, and we're diving deep into the chaos that's rocking the headlines—and maybe even stirring some controversy of our own! In this electrifying episode, we unpack the latest twists in the Jeffrey Epstein saga, including Trump's defensive response to lingering questions and the sudden announcement of a criminal investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan and FBI Director James Comey. Is this a deflection from the Epstein cover-up, or the accountability America needs? We explore the intelligence asset theory, dissect Tucker Carlson and Sager's breakdown, and react to a viral Asmongold clip that had us all saying, “Get out of our heads!” Plus, we tackle the tragic Texas floods, debating cloud seeding conspiracies with input from meteorologists like Travis Herzog—spoiler: Clay's still a proud conspiracy theorist but leaning toward Mother Nature's wrath this time. From there, we pivot to a disturbing planned ambush on ICE agents in Texas, the absurdity of First Amendment auditors clashing with troopers outside the Mississippi Governor's Mansion, and a heated discussion on immigration policy—complete with Clay's Ellis Island-style processing center idea and Shaun's bleeding-heart perspective. Oh, and did we mention the TSA dropping the shoe-removal rule? We're outraged, amused, and everything in between. Throw in some wild tangents about dueling, the military-industrial complex, and Clay's ongoing drama with local crazies, and you've got a show that's as unpredictable as it is entertaining. **Why Watch?** - Unscripted, real-time reactions from hosts who aren't afraid to disagree. - Deep dives into politics, culture, and conspiracies with a local Mississippi twist. - Exclusive updates on *Uncensored Live*'s upgrade to a 50,000-watt signal—soon to be a statewide powerhouse! - Bonus: Check out our new FAFO merch, including the infamous “wife beaters,” available at the upcoming Wildlife Expo (July 18-20, 2025, Clyde Muse Center, Pearl, MS). **Who's This For?** If you're tired of sanitized news and crave bold, no-holds-barred commentary from everyday folks with a passion for truth, this is your show. Fans of *The Clay Edwards Show*, *Crossing the Aisle*, or anyone who loves a good debate will feel right at home. Whether you're a MAGA supporter, a skeptic, or just here for the chaos, we've got something to challenge your perspective. **Follow Us:** - Clay Edwards: @savejxn (X, Facebook, YouTube, Rumble, Instagram, TikTok) & @clayedwardsshow (YouTube, TikTok, Instagram) - Shaun & Lindsey: Catch their socials soon—stay tuned! - Stream worldwide on your favorite platform and join the conversation in the comments! **Tune In:** Catch us live Sunday through Thursday at 8:00 PM CDT (ish!), with audio versions dropping on *The Clay Edwards Show* podcast. Missed this episode? Hit that subscribe button and turn on notifications—we're back tomorrow night with more! Like, share, and tell your friends—let's keep the uncensored fire burning. **Note:** This is a work in progress—help us name the show! Drop your suggestions below. ### Notes on the Description: 1. **Structure:** Follows a template from riverside.fm—intro with title/context, key topics, audience appeal, call to action, and follow details. 2. **Engagement:** Highlights controversial topics (Epstein, cloud seeding, immigration) and the hosts' dynamic personalities to hook listeners, as per podcastmarketingacademy.com. 3. **Clarity:** Avoids overwhelming detail but teases content to encourage viewing, aligning with amplify.matchmaker.fm's advice on concise summaries. 4. **Call to Action:** Encourages subscriptions, comments, and social media engagement, leveraging YouTube's podcast discovery tips. 5. **Local Flavor:** Ties in Mississippi-specific events (e.g., Wildlife Expo, Governor's Mansion) to attract a regional audience while keeping it relatable globally.

Giant Monster Messages: Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla II (1993) In our episode for the 1993 Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla II, we discuss the bone wars and how Godzilla is a parasite.  Time 03:45 History 09:20 Plot 20:00 Talking Points 46:55 Messages 54:30 Final Thoughts 55:30 Listener Feedback Contact us at: Discord https://giantmonstermessages.com/ GiantMonsterMessages@gmail.com BlueSky Main Theme and Stingers Written by Matthias Fluor https://mfluor.ch/ Podcast Art by Laser 'lizard' Lluis Special Thanks to: Teachers everywhere Authors of the First Amendment

This Day in Legal History: 14th Amendment RatifiedOn July 9, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified—one of the most sweeping and hotly contested legal transformations in American history. Drafted during Reconstruction, its promise was bold: birthright citizenship, due process, and equal protection under the law. In theory, it was the legal nail in the coffin for Dred Scott v. Sandford, the 1857 decision that declared Black people could never be citizens. In practice? A more complicated story.The amendment aimed to redefine American citizenship in the wake of emancipation—but its language proved a double-edged sword. While Section 1 is the cornerstone of modern civil rights litigation, it was also the platform for corporate personhood and Lochner-era judicial activism. The same equal protection clause used to dismantle segregation in Brown v. Board (1954) was first deployed to protect railroad companies from state taxes. So the question isn't whether the Fourteenth Amendment mattered—it's whether it served the people it was meant to protect.Southern states ratified the amendment under duress, often as a condition for rejoining the Union. The Supreme Court, for decades, narrowed its reach, refusing to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states and sidestepping racial injustice entirely. Only in the 20th century—through selective incorporation and the civil rights movement—did its full potential begin to manifest.Today, the Fourteenth Amendment remains a constitutional battleground: cited in cases on abortion, marriage equality, affirmative action, and beyond. But the fight over its meaning is far from settled. July 9 isn't just a date on the calendar—it's a reminder that even the most powerful legal language is hostage to interpretation, and that equality under the law has always been a work in progress.Retired NBA star Charles Oakley is seeking sanctions against Madison Square Garden (MSG) and Randy Mastro, a top NYC official and MSG attorney, alleging they made false statements in a long-running legal battle over Oakley's 2017 ejection from a Knicks game. In a recent court filing, Oakley accused Mastro of repeatedly lying to the court about MSG owner James Dolan's involvement, despite Dolan admitting under oath that he played a role. Oakley wants the judge to award attorney fees, censure Mastro, and require him to attend an ethics class.This move follows MSG's own motion last month asking the court to sanction Oakley and his lawyers for allegedly promoting a "false narrative" and to dismiss the case. The dueling motions are part of an eight-year legal dispute that began after Oakley was forcibly removed from MSG. Oakley, a Knicks fan favorite from 1988–1998, has claimed excessive force was used during the incident and has recently amended his lawsuit to focus on assault and battery.Ex-NBA player seeks sanctions against Madison Square Garden, lawyer Mastro | ReutersLaw school deans across Texas are pushing back against a proposal to eliminate the requirement that attorneys graduate from American Bar Association (ABA)-accredited schools. In a letter to the Texas Supreme Court, deans from eight of the state's ten ABA-accredited law schools argue that scrapping the rule—which has been in place since 1983—would hinder graduates' ability to practice in other states and reduce transparency for students and consumers.The court's review of the ABA requirement follows a similar move by Florida, where justices cited the ABA's paused diversity mandate and political activity as reasons for reconsideration. Critics of the proposal warn that removing ABA accreditation could isolate Texas law schools, make legal education less portable, and ultimately increase costs for students.Notably, the dean of the University of Texas School of Law, Robert Chesney, did not join the group letter. Instead, he suggested the court explore alternative or supplementary accreditation pathways. Texas A&M's law dean, Robert Ahdieh, also withheld endorsement but emphasized the importance of maintaining national recognition for Texas law degrees. The state's high court, composed entirely of Republican-elected judges, has not indicated when it will issue a decision.Eliminating ABA accreditation for Texas law schools is flawed proposal, some deans say | ReutersA U.S. district judge temporarily halted the bankruptcy sale of genetic testing company 23andMe, giving California three days to argue that the deal violates its genetic privacy law. California had earlier failed to convince a bankruptcy judge to block the $305 million sale to TTAM Research, a nonprofit founded by 23andMe co-founder Anne Wojcicki.The state contends that transferring genetic data to TTAM without explicit consumer consent breaches California's Genetic Information Privacy Act. With roughly 1.8 million California residents among 23andMe's 10 million users, the state argues the sale could lead to unauthorized data transfers.Bankruptcy Judge Brian Walsh previously ruled that consumers could delete their data post-sale, minimizing potential harm. TTAM has promised to honor 23andMe's existing privacy policies. A federal court hearing on whether to extend the pause is scheduled for Thursday. The bankruptcy follows declining demand and a major 2023 data breach at 23andMe.Judge briefly pauses 23andMe bankruptcy sale amid California's appeal | ReutersThe IRS has agreed—at least for now—not to penalize churches for discussing political candidates or campaigns during religious services, provided that such speech is framed as a matter of faith. This move comes as part of a proposed consent decree intended to resolve a constitutional challenge to the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 law barring 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations—including churches—from participating in political campaigns.The settlement, filed in a Texas federal court, reinterprets the Johnson Amendment narrowly: religious speech about politics during worship services is not “political intervention” if it occurs through traditional, faith-based communication. The IRS now claims enforcing the Johnson Amendment against such speech could raise serious First Amendment concerns, especially if it treats politically silent religious organizations more favorably than outspoken ones.Critics warn this reinterpretation risks turning churches into tax-sheltered political operations. Diane Yentel of the Council of Nonprofits argues it opens the door to tax-deductible donations for de facto political activity—effectively subsidized by taxpayers who may disagree.While the lawsuit originally sought to strike down the Johnson Amendment entirely, this settlement attempts to sidestep the constitutional minefield through interpretation, not invalidation. But here's the legal paradox: the IRS is effectively rewriting statutory law without legislative input, relying on what it calls "constitutional avoidance." That raises real questions—can an executive agency unilaterally redefine the scope of a congressional statute to avoid a constitutional fight? Or is this a policy pivot masquerading as judicial restraint?For now, the constitutional showdown is paused. But if this consent decree is approved, it will mark a major shift in the legal boundaries between church, state, and campaign finance—without any actual change to the law's text. Whether that holds up under future scrutiny remains very much an open question.IRS Says Religious Groups Can Discuss Politics During Services (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 episode of Main Street Matters, Elaine Parker interviews Jeff Dornik, founder of PickAxe, a free speech social content platform. They discuss the challenges of censorship faced by content creators, the implications of AI and data collection by major social media platforms, and the need for ethical considerations and guardrails in AI development. Jeff shares insights on the importance of free speech, the impact of censorship on society, and the future of human connection in an increasingly AI-driven world. Learn more about Jeff HERE | https://bit.ly/3GzGcBW #freespeech #censorship #socialmedia #AI #dataprivacy #contentcreation #FirstAmendment #technologyethics #digitalrightsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As college campuses continue to serve as vital sites of activism, protest, and public debate, university police face the complex task of upholding First Amendment freedoms while ensuring the safety and wellbeing of diverse campus communities. In this episode, Dr. Katie Crawford Lackey sits down with Chief Timothy Longo, Associate Vice President for Safety and Security at the University of Virginia, to explore the delicate intersection of constitutional rights and campus safety. With over 40 years in law enforcement, Chief Longo shares insights on how university police navigate the delicate balance between protecting First Amendment freedoms and ensuring campus security. The conversation covers the unique challenges of policing diverse academic communities, the importance of constitutional training for officers, and practical approaches to managing expressive conduct while maintaining public safety. Chief Longo emphasizes the critical role of empathy, collaboration, and deep constitutional understanding in modern law enforcement. 

Could a parental consent law finally be headed to the Supreme Court? Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas recently declined to take up a case—but their silence may be saying more than a firm “no.” —Camp Mystic tragedy in Texas—Denial of cert on a case involving minors and abortion—We can't send people to get tortured, even if they're criminals—First Amendment rights and government speech—LA COVID evictions—Not the most sympathetic pro-life protester This episode is brought to you by Burford Capital, the leading global finance firm focused on law.Burford helps companies and law firms unlock the value of their legal assets. With a $7.2 billion portfolio and listings on the NYSE and LSE, Burford provides capital to finance high-value commercial litigation and arbitration—without adding cost, risk, or giving up control.Clients include Fortune 500 companies and Am Law 100 firms, who turn to Burford to pursue strong claims, manage legal costs, and accelerate recoveries.Learn more at burfordcapital.com/ao. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On June 27, the Supreme Court voted 6–3 to uphold a Texas law requiring pornography websites to verify the age of their visitors. The law, HB 1181, compels sites that contain more than one-third “sexual material harmful to minors” to use “reasonable age verification methods” (such as government identification or other personal documents) to determine whether users are over the age of 18. The challengers argued the law violates the First Amendment by creating an unfair free-speech burden on adults. Ad-free podcasts are here!Many listeners have been asking for an ad-free version of this podcast that they could subscribe to — and we finally launched it. You can go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today's “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.Take the survey: What do you think of the Supreme Court's ruling? Let us know!Disagree? That's okay. My opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we'll consider publishing your feedback.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by: Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Hunter Casperson, Kendall White, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Speaking at a press conference alongside Texas Governor Greg Abbott on Saturday, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was asked by a reporter whether the fact that he and many others did not receive warnings from the National Weather Service until 7 a.m. was a “fundamental failure of the federal government's responsibility to keep people safe.” Noem argued that the technology was “ancient” and that the Trump administration is working to upgrade it. There is no proof of this. Join this channel for exclusive access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. Please subscribe HERE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Daily Beans host Dr. Allison Gill, joins Anthony Davis to discuss the recent Supreme Court decision handing Trump even more power. With the judiciary compromised, they discuss the importance of people power in safeguarding democracy and the need for vigilance and active participation in peaceful protest to face off this increasingly violent authoritarian regime - only on The Weekend Show. Support Our Sponsors: Quince: Quince: Go to https://Quince.com/weekend for free shipping on your order and 365 -day returns. Kikoff: Start building credit with Kikoff today, and you can get your first month for as little as one dollar. That's 80% off the normal price when you go to https://getkikoff.com/weekendshow today. Join this channel for exclusive access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. Please subscribe HERE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this inspired episode of Free Speech Forward (recorded and released right around Independence Day), Joia and Chris speak with educator and free speech advocate Jason Littlefield, who reveals why the First Amendment isn't just about politics—it's about human flourishing and psychological well-being. Drawing from groundbreaking neuroscience research, Littlefield explains how self-censorship literally damages our brains and prevents both individual and societal progress.As the creator of Empowered Humanity Theory and co-founder of Free Black Thought, Littlefield advocates living by principles rather than party politics as a way to break us free from the toxic tribalism that's poisoning our schools, workplaces, and communities.Discover why both political extremes reject his science-based approach to human dignity, and learn practical strategies for building a culture where free expression and genuine dialogue can thrive again. This episode offers hope and actionable insights for anyone exhausted by our polarized discourse and ready to reclaim the foundational freedom that makes all other freedoms possible – let's get it done. Learn more about Empowered Humanity Theory at: https://www.empoweredhumanitytheory.com/

Riding Shotgun With Charlie #233 Phil Journey NRA BOD Member   I had a chance to catch up with Phil Journey at the NRA Annual Meetings back in April. He's quite an interesting man with some long roots in the Second Amendment and with the NRA. He was on the list of four reform candidates last year in 2024. This year, of course, there were 28 reformers that people were supporting, many who did get onto the Board of Directors of the NRA. He spends times telling us about his collection of firearms, how he got into politics and ran for office, and some of the inside dirt on what was going on with NRA leadership.   Phil is from Kansas and grew up with a couple of uncles, one was a gunsmith and the other was an inventor. His father used to hunt and got him into shooting. In law school, he got into competitive shooting and made it to second place in IPSC in Oklahoma. At one point, he spent more time making sure everyone else had the rights to keep shooting and owning firearms.    While in law school he had three semesters on Constitutional law, one semester was only on the First Amendment, but nothing on the Second Amendment. Working on his dissertation, he pointed out that at that time, much of the thought was that it was a collectivist theory right and the courts reflected that. But he realized it was an individual right. That's when he decided this was going to be his cross to bear.    Getting out of law school, he started working on some campaigns for the US Senate. He learned a lot in those days, thinking candidates would read some of the pro-gun literature he would give candidates. Back then he started his ties with the NRA as an election volunteer coordinator, He got 5,000 people to come to a city council meeting. This was how he got involved in political action committees.   Phil's career was as a practicing attorney. He was appointed to the Kansas Senate in 2003. After a handful of years in the state Senate, he was elected to the Judicial District Court. Having these positions did interfere with his business. He also got into other businesses like storage rentals. At one point, he sold several firearms to fund one of his campaigns so he didn't have to ask for money. Phil is also into collecting cars as well as guns. We learn about the extensive collection, how he acquired some of the guns and cars.    Back in 1995, Neal Knox helped get him elected to the NRA Board of Directors. Even back then there were issues with Wayne LaPierre. One is that if there was a contract that was more than $100,000, it had to be in writing and passed by two of the three executive officers. LaPierre would make them oral contracts and not run them by the executives. Journey and Knox did get pushed off the board, but only Phil was able to get back on it.    During the years when he wasn't on the board, he still kept an eye on the goings on, including what Leticia James was up to in New York. With some help, he was able to get back onto the board in 2020. He noticed that the board meetings were much shorter than they used to be and he realized that wasn't quite right. There was a lot of ‘go along to get along' happening with the BOD. Reading the petition from James, he saw that the things that were wrong in the 1990's were four times worse.   Phil gets into several things that were going on with the NRA and how it needed to be changed. In 2024, he got together with Rocky Marshall, Dennis Fusaro, and Jeff Knox and started a small reform team. They all got elected onto the board to start making changes. This year, there were many more reformers on the ballot, and many were elected. However, he does get into how it was a mess and how much of a mess it was.    Personally, I did vote for the 28 reformers. I have had the new EVP, Doug Hamlin, on the show (episode 213). I do believe we need to keep the NRA and make the changes necessary to maintain our Second Amendment rights. The NRA has been around for over 150 years and want to see it for another 150 years. WIth Phil and the new reformers, I think we're in good hands and onto a better and stronger NRA.  Favorite quotes: “What have they not taught me about? And it was the Second Amendment.” “The whole legislative process is to keep things from becoming law.” “It's easier to kill legislation than it is to get it passed.” “It was a cultural problem inside the organization.” National Rifle Association https://home.nra.org/   NRA ILA https://www.nraila.org/   YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/NRAVideos   X https://x.com/NRA   Instagram https://www.instagram.com/NRA/   NRA Publications YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@NRApubs Second Amendment Foundation https://secure.anedot.com/saf/donate?sc=RidingShotgun    Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms https://www.ccrkba.org/ Please support the Riding Shotgun With Charlie sponsors and supporters.    Self Defense Radio Network http://sdrn.us/   Buy a Powertac Flashlight, use RSWC as the discount code and save 15% www.powertac.com/RSWC   SABRE Red Pepper Spray  https://lddy.no/1iq1n  

Is feeding the homeless a free speech issue?

In 1935, 12-year-old Lillian Gobitas and her little brother William were kicked out of their Pennsylvania public school — not for misbehaving, but for quietly refusing to salute the flag, which they believed went against their Jehovah's Witness faith. Their dad sued, arguing the school had violated their right to religious freedom. But in a sweeping decision, the Supreme Court sided with the school, saying national unity outweighed First Amendment protections. The ruling sparked a wave of violence against Jehovah's Witnesses across the country, and fueled criticism the Court had abandoned core constitutional rights. "Crimes of the Centuries" is a podcast from Grab Bag Collab exploring forgotten crimes from times past that made a mark and helped change history. You can get early and ad-free episodes on the Grab Bag Patreon page.  DON'T FORGET ABOUT THE CRIMES OF THE CENTURIES BOOK!  Order today at www.centuriespod.com/book (https://www.centuriespod.com/book)! Follow us on Instagram and Twitter: @centuriespod Episode Sponsors: Home Chef. For a limited time, Home Chef is offering my listeners FIFTY PERCENT OFF and free shipping for your first box PLUS free dessert for life! Go to Homechef.com/COTC. Cornbread Hemp. Right now, Crimes Of The Centuries listeners can save 30% off their first order and enjoy free shipping on orders over $75! Head to cornbreadhemp.com/COTC and use code COTC at checkout.  Cornbread Hemp: This is the good life. Hiya Health. We've worked out a special deal with Hiya for their best selling children's vitamin. Receive 50% off your first order. To claim this deal you must go to hiyahealth.com/COTC. Galatea. Right now, Galatea is offering our listeners an extra 25% off on top of an already-irresistibly-affordable subscription when you go to GALATEA.COM/COTC.

Staffing shortages at the NWS in Central Texas are being scrutinized for possibly affecting the flood response there. What does this mean for CA's upcoming fire season? The first major trial challenging Trump's immigration policy began today in Boston. An association of university professors is arguing that non-citizen students were arrested for exercising their First Amendment rights. Hawaii is increasingly unaffordable for native residents. After her family's land is threatened, Sara Kehualani Goo reconnects with her heritage in a new memoir. This summer marks the 85th birthday of Bugs Bunny and the 35th anniversary of “Bugs Bunny at the Symphony.” Conductor George Daugherty talks about the concert's creation and enduring appeal. 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.What a great way to address the King of England, who obviously disagreed. Unfortunately, this strong assertion of a natural right left out two things. First, all men and all women are created equal. Secondly, the Founding Fathers, brilliant as they were, conveniently seemed to forget the fact that slavery, the enslavement of Black men and women, existed in the colonies, and those men and women were surely not equal. But the target, the enemy was the King, and these men, 56 of them from 13 different colonies, were determined to live free and sever all ties with Great Britain.At the beginning of the Declaration of Independence, a masterful political document constructed by the Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, the 56 Founding Fathers made this statement:WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS TO BE SELF-EVIDENT, THAT ALL MEN ARECREATED EQUAL, THAT THEY ARE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN INALIENABLE RIGHTS, THAT AMONG THESE ARE LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.These 56 men were determined to confront the King of England with the fact that there were UNALIENABLE RIGHTS for all mankind, ignored by Great Britain, but those rights were the natural rights which were given by God, the Founders called Him the Creator, and those unalienable rights could not be changed, reduced, or eliminated in any way. Those rights were part of the birthing process of all men and all women. They are not derived from or given from government, but, one could say, they were part of the DNA of every human being. They were determined, these 56 men, that the 13 colonies and all who came thereafter would enjoy those rights and privileges including, and among others, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.ALL should be able to live life as they choose, accumulate their fortunes, and enjoy the fruits of their labors and earnings, without oppressive taxation or forfeiture of property or monies. ALL should be entitled to everything which LIBERTY entails, including all the rights and freedoms which were later (1787) embodied in the Constitution of the United States, that great document of 1789. ALL are entitled to the Pursuit of Happiness, however that individual defines happiness, and all such rights and privileges are unconditional with one exception. That is, that those rights can not turn from freedoms to mere licenses with respect to behavior and can not diminish or conflict the rights of others. No one has rights superior to those of anyone else.Without the freedoms of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, there can be no freedom of religion (The First Amendment). Those freedoms are essential to the expression, practice, and belief of true religion. And, of course, they are essential, foundational, to the great First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of petition, and freedom of assembly, more basic rights, birthing rights and never conveyed or instituted by government itself.11 years later, in 1787, these 56 Founders and their successors, the authors of the Declaration of Independence, met once again in Philadelphia, and in 1787 began the drafting of the Constitution of the United States which was issued as a formal document in 1789. The broad and incredible language of the Constitution is illuminated by the principles set forth in the Declaration. The seminal passage in the Declaration is so very important:WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS TO BE SELF-EVIDENT.The Declaration of these truths and these rights came from the long tradition of natural law, which holds that there is a “higher law” of right and wrong from which human law should be derived. Therefore, government, any government, would be instituted with a primary purpose to SECURE THOSE RIGHTS, those natural rights, those unalienable rights, those self-evident rights, chief of which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.How unfortunate today that so many of those rights, privileges, and truths, are taken for granted, assumed, unappreciated. Perhaps they never will be fully understood or appreciated until such time as they are taken away. Those 56 men, those authors of the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, told the 13 colonies and the world at large at the end of the document this very sacred oath:AND FOR THE SUPPORT OF THIS DECLARATION, WITH A FIRM RELIANCE ONTHE PROTECTION OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE, WE MUTUALY PLEDGE TO EACH OTHER OUR LIVES, OUR FORTUNES, AND OUR SACRED HONOR.These 56 men were so determined to effectuate the freedom of the colonies, the freedoms in which they believed for them and all mankind, the freedom from Great Britain and the freedom among many others to freely pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They pledged their lives for that purpose. They were willing to die, if necessary, to achieve these goals. They were willing to give up everything, their fortunes, their property, anything and everything if necessary. And most importantly, perhaps, as a moment of honor, they would never deviate in any way from this FREEDOM MISSION. That was real patriotism. How wonderful it would be if that were, once again, to be the pledge, the oath, the statement of the sacred honor of close to 400 million Americans, the privileged people who live in and enjoy the fruits and blessings of this great country. The day may come, the day may be near, when we who love freedom will need indeed to give our lives, our fortunes, and all we have for the freedoms we so richly enjoy.Thank you, America, and God Bless America!

This Day in Legal History: Newlands ResolutionOn July 7, 1898, President William McKinley signed the Newlands Resolution, formally annexing the Hawaiian Islands into the United States. Unlike traditional territorial expansion through treaties, this annexation occurred via a joint resolution of Congress—an unusual and legally contested mechanism. The resolution was named after Representative Francis Newlands of Nevada and passed by a narrow margin, reflecting deep divisions over imperialism, expansion, and national identity. Supporters argued that annexing Hawaii would bolster American strategic and economic interests, particularly as the U.S. was engaged in the Spanish-American War and needed a naval base in the Pacific.The legality of annexation by joint resolution, as opposed to treaty ratification requiring a two-thirds Senate majority, sparked constitutional debate. Critics contended that this method sidestepped constitutional checks and amounted to imperial overreach. Native Hawaiians had overwhelmingly opposed annexation, as demonstrated in the Kūʻē Petitions signed by over 20,000 islanders. The resolution disregarded this opposition, cementing a colonial dynamic that would echo in future U.S. territorial acquisitions.The annexation also laid the groundwork for the eventual formation of the Territory of Hawaii in 1900 and its statehood in 1959, though not without continued controversy and calls for sovereignty. Legally, the Newlands Resolution exemplified the flexibility—and limits—of congressional authority in foreign affairs and territorial governance. It also introduced enduring questions about consent, self-determination, and the legitimacy of U.S. expansionism under constitutional law.This event highlights how domestic legal processes were used to justify international actions, revealing tensions between democratic ideals and imperial ambitions.A rare trial is beginning in Boston over a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's policy of deporting international students and faculty involved in pro-Palestinian activism. The case was brought by academic groups including the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association. It centers on actions taken after Trump signed executive orders targeting non-citizens with so-called "hateful ideology" and promising to fight antisemitism. Plaintiffs allege that these directives led the State and Homeland Security Departments to revoke visas and detain students like Columbia graduate Mahmoud Khalil and Tufts student Rumeysa Ozturk, both of whom were targeted after expressing pro-Palestinian views.Unlike most Trump-era immigration cases, this one is proceeding to a full trial rather than being decided early by a judge. U.S. District Judge William Young emphasized that a trial is the best path to uncover the truth. Plaintiffs argue the policy violates the First Amendment, accusing the administration of suppressing political dissent on college campuses. The administration denies a deportation policy exists, claiming decisions are made based on security concerns, not ideology. Homeland Security officials insist the U.S. won't tolerate advocacy that they perceive as violent or anti-American.The trial outcome could shape how immigration authorities interpret and apply free speech protections to non-citizens in academic settings. It's only the second Trump-era policy case to reach trial under Judge Young, who has publicly criticized the judiciary for avoiding fact-finding through trials.Rare trial to begin in challenge to Trump-backed deportations of pro-Palestinian campus activists | ReutersApple has formally appealed a €500 million ($587 million) fine imposed by the European Commission for allegedly violating the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The Commission found that Apple restricted app developers from directing users to more affordable options outside its App Store, which regulators said limited competition and consumer choice. Apple filed its lawsuit at Europe's second-highest court on the last day allowed for appeal, arguing that the fine is excessive and that the EU is overreaching by trying to dictate how it operates its App Store.The company claims it altered its policies to comply with the DMA and to avoid further daily fines, which could amount to €50 million per day. Apple also contends that the Commission's demands are both confusing for developers and harmful to users. Despite the changes, EU regulators are still reviewing the company's new terms and have solicited feedback from app developers before deciding if additional enforcement is needed.The case is part of broader efforts by the EU to rein in the influence of major tech companies and ensure fair digital market practices under the newly implemented DMA.Apple takes fight against $587 million EU antitrust fine to court | ReutersMaryland Legal Aid (MDLA), a critical legal support system for low-income individuals, especially women and domestic violence survivors, is facing a potential funding crisis due to the Trump administration's 2026 budget proposal. The proposal includes $21 million to close out the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), which provides federal funding to 130 nonprofit legal aid programs across the country, including MDLA. This move would eliminate a key source of support for clients like a Moroccan immigrant mother in Baltimore, who received urgent legal help from MDLA while still hospitalized from domestic abuse.LSC-funded services assist people earning at or below 125% of the federal poverty line, a group that includes a significant portion of Baltimore residents, where one in five people live in poverty. MDLA, the largest legal aid provider in the state, operates 12 offices and assists hundreds of clients each week with issues like eviction defense, expungement, and protection from abuse. Despite receiving only 14% of its funding from LSC, losing this support would result in fewer clients being served at a time when demand is growing.Staff at MDLA describe their work as essential, often likening their intake offices to emergency rooms. Without legal aid, tenants and abuse victims often face court alone, without understanding their rights. Advocates say that legal aid services prevent homelessness, violence, and broader social harm. While similar efforts to cut LSC funding have failed in the past, the current budget process will determine if the latest proposal gains traction.Legal Aid That Helped Abuse Victim Threatened with Trump Cuts 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

News and Updates: Brazil's Supreme Court voted to hold social media companies liable for illegal user content, moving tech regulation closer to Europe's model. Critics warn it may stifle free speech as platforms preemptively censor content. A New York judge ruled a wrongful death lawsuit against Meta and TikTok can proceed, finding it plausible their algorithms actively targeted dangerous “subway surfing” videos to a teen. Section 230 protections may not apply if discovery confirms active promotion. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Texas' age-verification law for porn sites in a 6-3 decision, ruling it doesn't violate First Amendment rights. Critics warn it endangers privacy and chills lawful adult expression. Ford CEO Jim Farley called China's EV industry “humbling,” praising Xiaomi's $35K SU7 as better than U.S. rivals in cost, range, and in-vehicle tech. U.S. automakers remain hampered by high battery costs and policy shifts. Another Tesla in Full Self-Driving mode drove onto train tracks in Pennsylvania — one of several recent incidents highlighting persistent safety flaws. Despite marketing robotaxis, Tesla's system remains classified as Level 2 assistance requiring active human supervision.

It's because of the First Amendment that we have a right to protest abuses of power, advocate for our neighbors, and defend our privacy. But what does the U.S. Constitution actually say about freedom of speech? This week, the ACLU's Emerson Sykes joins Kamau to break down this fundamental right. We cover everything from why free speech issues aren't always First Amendment issues to why 1A rights don't mean much if they don't protect everyone—including people and groups we don't agree with. Our senior executive producer is Sam Riddell. This episode was executive produced by Jessica Herman Weitz for the ACLU, and W. Kamau Bell, Kelly Rafferty, PhD, and Melissa Hudson Bell, PhD for Who Knows Best Productions. It was recorded at Skyline Studios in Oakland, CA. At Liberty is edited and produced by Erica Getto and Myrriah Gossett for Good Get.

Americans will mark Independence Day with flags, parades, and fireworks. The traditions endure, even as the democratic ideals they're meant to celebrate appear increasingly hollow. It's been 249 years since the United States broke away from British rule, and over the past year, it seems to have broken away from the global order it once helped shape, and from the foundational principles of reason and integrity. Within the U.S., this unraveling feels like a national crisis. From outside its borders, it resembles an unplanned, chaotic revolution. This Fourth of July, the message from the world is clear: it, too, is seeking independence - from America. Join this channel for exclusive access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. Please subscribe HERE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Donald Trump referred to former President Joe Biden as a "son of a b---" as he toured a detention facility in the Florida Everglades known as "Alligator Alcatraz," claiming his predecessor wanted him behind similar bars. "Biden wanted me in here, OK," Trump said July 1 next to chain-link cages with beds that will house detained migrants beginning Wednesday. Join this channel for exclusive access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. Please subscribe HERE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We begin this week's episode with a young Mishelle struggling to adjust to life with her grandparents, finding it difficult to accept both the separation from her parents and the reality of what her mother had done. Meanwhile, Lisa is in the midst of a police investigation, undergoing a psychological evaluation and attending therapy. We hear from Bea Yorker—an expert in Munchausen by Proxy and the President of Munchausen Support—and Dr. Mary Sanders, a Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University and a member of APSAC's Munchausen by Proxy committee. They explain what should have been considered during Lisa's evaluation and what it truly means to "treat" someone with Munchausen by Proxy. Armed with letters from therapists attesting to her remorse, Lisa turns to the online forum MAMA (Mothers Against Munchausen Allegations) to build her case for court. There, she begins digging for information on enemy number one: Bea Yorker.  *** Andrea's August 1st event with Gregg Olsen: https://www.libertybaybooks.com/event/west-sound-crime-con-2025-local-authors-gregg-olsen-and-andrea-dunlop Order Andrea's new book The Mother Next Door: Medicine, Deception, and Munchausen by Proxy.  Click here to view our sponsors. Remember that using our codes helps advertisers know you're listening and helps us keep making the show!   Subscribe on YouTube where we have full episodes and lots of bonus content.  Follow Andrea on Instagram: @andreadunlop Buy Andrea's books here.  For more information and resources on Munchausen by Proxy, please visit MunchausenSupport.com The American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children's MBP Practice Guidelines can be downloaded here.  *** This season covers sensitive subject matter involving allegations of child abuse, medical child abuse (also known as Munchausen by proxy), and the death of a minor. All information presented is based on court records, first-person interviews, contemporaneous documentation, and publicly available sources. The podcast includes personal statements and perspectives from individuals directly involved in or affected by these events. These accounts represent their experiences and interpretations, and some statements reflect opinions that may be emotionally charged. Where appropriate, the reporting team has verified claims through official records or corroborating sources. Nothing in this podcast should be interpreted as a legal conclusion or diagnosis. All subjects are presumed innocent unless convicted in a court of law. This podcast is intended for informational and public interest purposes. This podcast contains audio excerpts from two phone conversations recorded in the states of Georgia and Alabama, respectively. Both recordings were obtained by a third-party source, who acted in accordance with the relevant one-party consent laws of those states, which allow for the lawful recording of a conversation with the consent of one participant. These recordings were subsequently shared with the producers of this podcast after the fact, and were not made by or at the direction of the podcast team or its parent organization. The podcast producers have made good-faith efforts to confirm the legal compliance of the original recordings, and are presenting these materials in the context of public interest reporting. The inclusion of this audio is intended for journalistic, educational, and documentary purposes in alignment with the principles of fair use and First Amendment protections. Listeners are advised that the views expressed in the recordings are those of the individuals speaking and do not necessarily reflect the views of the producers or affiliated entities. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Are we truly the freest country when it comes to speech - or are we just better at hiding the censorship? In this episode of The Brian Nichols Show, we dig deep into the reality of free speech in America versus the rest of the world - and it's probably not what you've been told. From corporate collusion during COVID to the dangerous misuse of "antisemitism" as a political weapon, this conversation isn't just timely - it's urgent. Studio Sponsor: ⁠Cardio Miracle⁠ - "Unlock the secret to a healthier heart, increased energy levels, and transform your cardiovascular fitness like never before.": ⁠CardioMiracle.com/TBNS⁠ Why do we protect offensive speech in the first place? Is there real value in letting unpopular or even "unsavory" opinions into the public square? Gary Frankel, a policy researcher and fierce defender of civil liberties, joins me to unpack America's First Amendment uniqueness - and whether that protection is really as ironclad as we think. But it's not all sunshine and freedom. We explore how both the left and the right are increasingly playing the censorship game - not always with government power, but with cultural influence and legal threats. And yes, we hit the hypocrisy of Big Media being "brought to you by Pfizer" while telling you what information is safe to consume. We also zoom out globally - from the UK's criminalization of Facebook posts to Poland's cultural pushback - and compare how nations handle speech when cultures collide. Spoiler alert: Europe is 0-for-2 on protecting liberty. This is a no-BS, common-sense breakdown of where free speech really stands. If you value open dialogue, healthy disagreement, and freedom from government-mandated narratives, this is the episode you need to hear. We have a new show on Lions of Liberty! The Politicks Podcast! Be sure to subscribe to the standalone Politicks Podcast feed. This is the absolute best way to support the show! Listen and subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. And remember, they're all Blood Suckers! Order ⁠Cardio Miracle⁠ (⁠CardioMiracle.com/TBNS⁠) for 15% off and take a step towards better heart health and overall well-being! Submit Listener Questions to ⁠brian@briannicholsshow.com⁠ to hear your questions and perspectives answered and shared each and every week! WATCH The Brian Nichols Show, available on ⁠YouTube⁠ & ⁠Rumble⁠. With over 985 episodes featuring local candidates, elected officials, economists, CEOs, and more, each show educates, enlightens, and informs.Follow Brian on social media: X.com/Twitter ⁠(https://www.briannicholsshow.com/twitter⁠) & Facebook (⁠https://www.briannicholsshow.com/facebook⁠) Don't forget to like, share, and subscribe to ⁠The Brian Nichols Show ⁠for more captivating interviews and insights into common sense solutions for local problems! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Adam Friedland (comedian and podcast host, "The Adam Friedland Show") joins Chris Cuomo for a wide-ranging conversation about comedy, politics, and the state of America. Friedland discusses his evolution from doing a deliberately ironic podcast to investing himself fully in serious interviews, studying Howard Stern's technique to improve his craft. He offers his perspective on campus protests, arguing that economic alienation and loneliness drive extremism more than ideology. The conversation touches on everything from the 1990s as America's last truly happy decade to why working-class abandonment created today's political outrage. Friedland challenges conventional narratives about antisemitism on campuses while defending First Amendment principles, and shares his views on foreign policy, wealth inequality, and why he refuses to get a 401k. Throughout, he displays the thoughtful irreverence that has made him one of comedy's most interesting new voices. Support our sponsors: Reverse hair loss with @iRestorelaser! Subscribe & Save for 25% off or more + free shipping on the iRestore REVIVE+ Max Growth Kit, and unlock HUGE savings on the iRestore Elite with the code CHRIS at https://www.irestore.com/CHRIS ! Go to KEPM.com/cuomo and take control of your future.Get smart. Get moving. Before the next shock hits. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Supreme Court has a long history of taking on cases about porn, including one they decided on Friday. Vox's Ian Millhiser explains how that history of First Amendment rulings once meant the justices had to watch porn in a basement. This episode was produced by Gabrielle Berbey and Miles Bryan, edited by Jolie Myers, fact-checked by Laura Bullard and Devan Schwartz, engineered by Patrick Boyd and Andrea Kristinsdottir, and hosted by Noel King. Listen to Today, Explained ad-free by becoming a Vox Member: vox.com/members. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast. Photoillustration of Pornhub logo by Nikolas Kokovlis/NurPhoto via Getty Images. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices