Podcasts about international courts

Today I am extremely grateful to Ardi Imseis and Chris Gunness for joining me for an urgent discussion of Israel's accelerated genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza and the West Bank.  These eminent international human rights scholars discuss Israel's longstanding violations of international law and the complicity of the US. We also discuss at length the responsibility of states to immediately halt their direct and indirect support for the genocide. Our conversation includes an in-depth discussion of the UN, and both the usefulness and shortcomings of international law. We end with a call to international civil society to use the information, rules, and judgments of law to do what too many states fail to do—protect the rights and lives of Palestinians and bring forth justice.Dr. Ardi Imseis is Associate Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, Queen's University. He is author of The United Nations and the Question of Palestine: Rule by Law and the Structure of International Legal Subalternity (Cambridge University Press 2023). In 2019 he was named by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to serve as a Member of the UN commission of inquiry into the civil war in Yemen. He has served as legal counsel before the International Court of Justice, including the Court's groundbreaking 2024 opinion on Legal Consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. Between 2002 and 2014, he served in senior legal and policy capacities in the Middle East with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). He has provided expert testimony in his personal capacity before various high-level bodies, including the UN Security Council, the UN Human Rights Council, and the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Professor Imseis's scholarship has appeared in a wide array of international journals, and he is former Editor-in-Chief of the Palestine Yearbook of International Law (Brill; 2008-2019) and Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar and Human Rights Fellow, Columbia Law School. Professor Imseis holds a Ph.D. (Cambridge), an LL.M. (Columbia), LL.B. (Dalhousie), and B.A. (Hons.) (Toronto). He appears today in his personal capacity.Chris Gunness covered the 1988 democracy uprising for the BBC in what was then Burma. After a 23-year career at the BBC, he joined the United Nations as Director of Strategic Communications and Advocacy in the Middle East. In 2019 he left the UN and returned to London. He founded the Myanmar Accountability Project (MAP) in 2021.

What's up with climate change and climate law?  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has announced that it is going to cancel the “endangerment finding” of 2009 that provided the legal basis for regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. In July, the Department of Energy released “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate,” which downplayed the research, the impacts and the importance of climate change.  The Trump Administration has pretty much declared that is it going to eliminate anything that suggests climate change is a threat.  And fossil fuel companies have been unleashed to produce anywhere the is even a hint of fossil carbon.  At the same time, three international courts—the International Court of Justice, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea—have issued opinions that international climate law requires countries to act now to reduce emissions.  What does the law say?  What is law's impact?Join host Ronnie Lipschutz for a conversation with Professor Alice Kaswan of the University of San Francisco School of Law. Professor Kaswan's scholarly work focuses on climate change with a particular emphasis on federalism and on environmental justice. She has written extensively about the role of state and local governments in climate change adaptation and mitigation policy.  In addition, she has addressed the environmental justice dimensions of domestic climate change policy.  Feeling warm?  Tune in!Photo Copyright: Photographs©2015 Barbara Ries. All rights reserved.

The 80th United Nations General Assembly's High-Level Week begins on September 22, bringing together heads of state to deliver speeches and set the policy agenda for the year ahead. The prospect of several major Western powers—such as the United Kingdom, France, Australia, and Canada—formally recognizing Palestinian statehood has drawn significant media attention. At the same time, it has prompted warnings of serious consequences from both U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Dr. Ardi Imseis, Professor of International Law at Queen's University in Canada and legal counsel to the State of Palestine in its case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), offers insight into the potential impact of this recognition and what developments might unfold at the UN in the coming weeks.

The annual Climate Change and Business Conference is the biggest corporate meet-up on the climate agenda, attracting delegates from industry, politics and NGOs as well as overseas high-noters. This year's event featured Lord Adair Turner, of UK Energy Transmissions Commission, Wang Xiaolong, the China ambassador to NZ and Cynthia Houniuhi, who led an historic delegation of Pacific youth to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) this year.Alec Tang of KPMG and Joanna Silver of Westpac were both at the conference and joined Vincent to discuss their reactions.

Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Ronald Lamola has called for South Africa's case against Israel at the International Court of Justice to be be given a life of its own as it may have a bearing on the application of international law across the globe

Shigeru Oda, who served as a judge for the International Court of Justice for 27 years, died of natural causes at the age of 100 at his home on Thursday.

The recent advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on states' obligations regarding climate change was celebrated globally for providing clarity on countries' legal obligation to prevent climate harm, but was also appreciated by island nations for its additional certainty on their maritime boundaries remaining intact regardless of sea level rise. This week on Mongabay's podcast, environmental lawyer Angelique Pouponneau, a Seychelles native and lead negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), explains these victories, their legal implications, and how they matter for small island nations. She says Small Island Developing States (SIDS) face a multitude of, “one of which [was] this idea of the shrinking exclusive economic zones.” Exclusive economic zones are the waters that lie within the jurisdiction of a nation, usually 200 nautical miles (370 kilometers) from its shore. With the ICJ advisory opinion, there's now legal certainty that this zone will remain within the jurisdiction of a state, even if its shoreline shrinks as a result of rising seas due to climate change. “What island nations were trying to guard against through state practice was essentially if there were ever to be loss of territory, it would not mean loss of exclusive economic zone,” Pouponneau says. Subscribe to or follow the Mongabay Newscast wherever you listen to podcasts, from Apple to Spotify, and you can also listen to all episodes here on the Mongabay website. Mike DiGirolamo is a host & associate producer for Mongabay based in Sydney. He co-hosts and edits the Mongabay Newscast. Find him on LinkedIn and Bluesky. Image Credit: Island in the South Pacific, Fiji. Image by Rhett A. Butler/Mongabay. ---- Timecodes (00:00) The importance of the SIDS alliance (10:09) 'Wins' in the ICJ advisory opinion (17:38) What about enforcement? (21:29) Maritime boundaries will remain (27:38) What are sustainable ‘blue economies?' (32:32) Concerns about development & ‘debt for nature' (42:12) Frustrations with Global Plastic Treaty negotiations (45:50) Looking to the BBNJ treaty

東北大特別栄誉教授の小田滋さん海洋法の第一人者として知られ、国際司法裁判所の判事を２７年間務めた、東北大特別栄誉教授の小田滋さんが４日、老衰のため自宅で死去した。 Shigeru Oda, who served as a judge for the International Court of Justice for 27 years, died of natural causes at the age of 100 at his home on Thursday.

Today on the show I have Elaine Johnson - a leading landowner advocate and environment and climate lawyer who's led some of the most consequential cases against fossil fuel expansion in this state. Her work in and with communities who are opposing the deleterious local impacts of more pollution and being able to frame that within a larger climate change debate is truly remarkable and vital work. In light of the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion in July regarding the new considerations governments are now supposed to take regarding fossil fuel projects whether that's Greenfield approvals or expanding existing sites, there is greater optimism and hope that the law can become an effective tool in the fight against vested polluters and captured governments. And let's not forget that Australia was one of a few nations who opposed this case along with the USA, China and Saudi Arabia, while our government has also fought domestically against the idea it has a duty of care to both young people and Torres Strait Islanders who will be most affected by a new climate reality or already are losing Country and Culture to rising seas and bigger storms.Elaine is on the show to get into many areas of legal practice and strategy regarding the work she's done and to offer insights into the trajectory of how courts will and could rule for healthier and more just futures. The rapid escalation in climate litigation cases globally and here in Australia is a phenomenon I wanted to better understand, and why Australia is one of the leading innovators in this domain. I also wanted to explore and understand the specific cases and implications of different cases Elaine has worked on, and where this may and hopefully is going.I really do mean it when I say that I think law is the most innovative part of the climate action system at the moment, and Elaine and her team are at the centre of that in this country. To learn more about Elaine's work, head to Johnson Legal and follow her on LinkedIn. Events are live and more are coming - follow on Humanitix.Follow on LinkedIn, Substack and Instagram. Today's show is delivered with Altiorem. Use code FindingNature25 to get 25% off an annual subscription.Today's show is delivered with Regenerate Talent. Reference Finding Nature for 10% off their career advisory support program. Today's show is delivered with Econome. Reference Finding Nature for 10% off their climate stream and seed programs. Send me a messageThanks for listening. Follow Finding Nature on Instagram

David Lammy is named the U.K.'s new Deputy Prime Minister in a major cabinet reshuffle, A report alleges that U.S, Navy SEALs killed North Korean civilians in a 2019 attempted mission, Anutin Charnvirakul is elected Thailand's prime minister, Mali files an International Court of Justice case against Algeria over a drone downing, A Gaza boy said to be "gunned down" is allegedly found alive, ICE raids a Georgia Hyundai plant, arresting 475 workers, President Trump will direct the Pentagon to use “Department of War” as a secondary title, DOJ opens a criminal investigation into Fed governor Lisa Cook, The EU fines Google $3.45 billion for anti-competitive ad practices, and a new study posits a link between air pollution and dementia. Sources: www.verity.news

Nearly two years into Israel's devastating war in Gaza, ceasefire negotiations remain stalled, the humanitarian toll continues to mount, and international divisions are deepening. Despite mounting global pressure, Israel has resisted calls for a permanent ceasefire, insisting on unfeasible conditions. During this week's Middle East Report, James M. Dorsey analysed the faltering ceasefire efforts. Dorsey outlined the core of the impasse: a mounting divergence between Israeli and much of the international community, and Hamas's demands on the other. In August, Hamas accepted an Israeli-endorsed US proposal for a 60-day ceasefire. Yet, Israel and US envoy Steve Witkoff shifted the narrative, insisting any truce be permanent and linked to full hostage release—effectively changing the negotiated goalposts. Dorsey warned that this tactical shift by Israel and the United States amounts to deliberate undermining of ceasefire momentum. “So, in effect, what Israel is doing is sabotaging a ceasefire,” Dorsey said. The Trump administration has enacted sweeping punitive measures against Palestinians: preventing Palestinian officials—including President Mahmoud Abbas—from attending the United Nations General Assembly in New York; barring Palestinian passport holders from US entry; and sanctioning Palestinian human rights groups supporting South Africa's genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Dorsey observed that diplomatic and economic pressure on Israel remains insufficient—yet potentially poised to escalate. “Private sector and limited government sanctions are troubling Israelis, but not enough to push Prime Minister Netanyahu to reconsider his policies,” Dorsey said. At the same time, civil society in Europe and elsewhere are campaigning for sanctions against Israel. “If and when sanctions start to kick in by the Europeans, serious sanctions that start to hit where it hurts, that's something that Israel is going to have to take account of,” Dorsey said. Dorsey also spotlighted the latest flotilla of 50 ships from 44 countries—including activists from Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Qatar—that has set sail to break the siege of Gaza. He flagged the unprecedented involvement of Gulf nationals as “remarkable,” given the suppression of pro-Palestinian expression of support in much of the Middle East. Finally, Dorsey touched on Lebanon's entanglement: the Lebanese government, under US pressure, has committed to disarming Hezbollah, though the group has refused to comply. On paper, this move is framed as a step toward consolidating state sovereignty by ensuring the monopoly of arms rests with the state. But in practice, it places Beirut in an impossible bind. Hezbollah, still reeling but not broken from its latest confrontation with Israel, has declared it will not give up its weapons as long as Israeli forces occupy Lebanese land. This creates a standoff between Hezbollah, which commands loyalty across significant sections of Lebanese society, and the fragile Lebanese state. For ordinary Lebanese, this uncertainty compounds daily struggles. The country is still reeling from years of financial crisis, the 2020 Beirut port explosion, and one of the world's worst currency devaluations. Analysts warn that pressure to confront Hezbollah militarily could trigger fresh conflict in a society exhausted by instability. At the same time, Washington insists that Lebanon must show it can rein in armed groups operating independently of the state. As Dorsey put it, this leaves Lebanon “between a rock and a hard place,” trying to navigate American demands without igniting a civil confrontation that could spiral into another round of violence.

Wereldwijd breken de investeringen in hernieuwbare energie opnieuw records. Maar kunnen we dit tempo volhouden? Deze aflevering in het kort: ☑️ Wereldwijde investeringen in hernieuwbare energie bereiken records ☑️ Kleinschalige zonneprojecten blijken de motor achter de groei ☑️ Impactpluim voor World Youth 4 Climate Justice De energietransitie draait op volle toeren. In de eerste helft van 2025 werd wereldwijd maar liefst 386 miljard dollar geïnvesteerd in hernieuwbare energie, een stijging van 10 procent vergeleken met vorig jaar. Vooral kleinschalige zonneprojecten jagen die groei aan. Ze zijn snel te realiseren en leveren relatief snel rendement op, wat ze aantrekkelijk maakt voor zowel investeerders als lokale gemeenschappen. China verdubbelde zelfs de investeringen in deze categorie. Tegelijkertijd blijft offshore wind sterk groeien, met ruim 33 miljard dollar aan nieuwe projecten. Luister ook | De zomercolumn: grondstoffen, punt! Toch zijn er ook uitdagingen. In Europa stegen de investeringen met maar liefst 63 procent, mede dankzij stimulerend beleid en een aantrekkelijk klimaat voor duurzame financiering. In de Verenigde Staten daarentegen daalde het kapitaal voor hernieuwbaar met 36 procent – een signaal dat politieke keuzes direct invloed hebben op investeringsstromen. En dan zijn er de knelpunten: netcongestie, negatieve stroomprijzen en het trage tempo van grootschalige projecten. Hoe lossen we dat op? In deze aflevering van spreken we over deze kwesties met Adriaan Kamp van Energy for One World. Luister ook | De zomercolumn: onzichtbaar gif in je lijf Ons groene geweten Nikki Trip deelt een impactpluim uit aan de jongeren van World Youth 4 Climate Justice. Zij startten drie jaar geleden met een idee op eilandstaten als Vanuatu en Fiji en groeiden uit tot een internationale coalitie, met ook een sterke Nederlandse inbreng. Dankzij hun inzet vroeg de VN om een historische uitspraak van het International Court of Justice in Den Haag. Die was unaniem: landen kunnen juridisch verantwoordelijk worden gehouden voor klimaatverandering. Een krachtig precedent en - terecht - een impact-pluim.

Wereldwijd breken de investeringen in hernieuwbare energie opnieuw records. Maar kunnen we dit tempo volhouden?Deze aflevering in het kort:☑️ Wereldwijde investeringen in hernieuwbare energie bereiken records☑️ Kleinschalige zonneprojecten blijken de motor achter de groei☑️ Impactpluim voor World Youth 4 Climate JusticeDe energietransitie draait op volle toeren. In de eerste helft van 2025 werd wereldwijd maar liefst 386 miljard dollar geïnvesteerd in hernieuwbare energie, een stijging van 10 procent vergeleken met vorig jaar. Vooral kleinschalige zonneprojecten jagen die groei aan. Ze zijn snel te realiseren en leveren relatief snel rendement op, wat ze aantrekkelijk maakt voor zowel investeerders als lokale gemeenschappen. China verdubbelde zelfs de investeringen in deze categorie. Tegelijkertijd blijft offshore wind sterk groeien, met ruim 33 miljard dollar aan nieuwe projecten.

Dinkar P. Srivastava joined the Indian Foreign Service in 1978. He has served in Karachi in the early 90s. Also served in the Middle East, Washington, Brussels and Tehran.In 1993-94, as Director (UNP), he was part of successful Indian lobbying efforts against four Pakistani attempts to have resolutions on J&K adopted in UN General Assembly and UN Commission on Human Rights. He was involved in the drafting of National Human Rights Commission statute. As Joint Secretary (UNP), he participated in Indian lobbying efforts to contain the diplomatic fallout of the Pokhran II nuclear tests and prevent the internationalization of the J&K issue during the Kargil war (1999).He dealt with Indian candidature for permanent membership of the UN Security Council, UN Peace-keeping and Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism. He was a member of the Indian delegations to the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, and the International Court of Justice in the case of Aerial Incident of 1999 (Pakistan v. India). In 2011-15, as Indian Ambassador to Iran, he negotiated the MOU for Indian participation in Chabahar Port.His book 'Forgotten Kashmir: The Other Side of the Line of Control' examines the evolution of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) over the past seven decades. His latest book 'Pakistan: Ideologies, Strategies, Interests' examines the ideology of Pakistan

On July 23rd the United Nations' International Court of Justice (ICJ) announced its highly-anticipated climate advisory opinion. The opinion represents a watershed moment because the court ruled states or countries are accountable for contributing to anthropogenic warming or for their GHG emissions. Consequently, the ICJ concluded countries are legally obligated to ensure the climate is protected from GHG emission, if not, countries - and private actors such as healthcare - can be held culpable for failing to do so. Though an advisory opinion the ICJ ruling has significant implications for US healthcare largely because US healthcare annually accounts for a massive amount of GHG emissions at over 600 MMT of CO2e and the federal government has neither enacted legislation nor promulgated regulations that require healthcare mitigate its GHG emissions. Not surprisingly, healthcare has ignored the 2023 UN resolution that requested the ICJ opinion and now the opinion. The ICJ opinion is at: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/187/advisory-opinionsThe Columbia University Sabin Center's Climate Change Law Blog ICJ symposium writings are at: https://blogs.law.columbia.edu/climatechange/category/blog-series/ This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

On the 23rd of July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued its long-awaited Advisory Opinion on the obligations of states in respect to climate change. The Advisory Opinion makes clear that states have far-reaching obligations under international law to prevent harm to the climate system and that breaching such obligations could result in having to make reparations, among other things.   So, what impact might the ICJ's ruling have on international climate diplomacy and action, including climate-related litigation? To find out, Anna and Bhargabi speak to Dr Margaretha Wiwerinke-Singh, who is an Associate Professor of Sustainability Law at the University of Amsterdam and who lead the legal team of Vanuatu and the Melanesian Spearhead Group throughout the ICJ proceedings, and Dr Maria Antonia Tigre, who is the Director of Global Climate Change Litigation at the Sabin Centre at Columbia University.   To learn more about the ICJ's Advisory Opinion, read this Chatham House expert comment and/or listen to this Climate Briefing interview with Ralph Regenvanu, who at the time of the interview served as Vanuatu's Minister of Climate Change Adaptation, Meteorology and Geo-Hazards, Energy, Environment and Disaster Risk Management.

On July 23, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion that many are regarding as a groundbreaking legal moment for the fight against climate change. But what was included in the actual opinion? What does this mean for the future of climate litigation? And most importantly, what will this mean for the future of climate action? To answer all these questions and more, we talk to Dr. Maria Antonia Tigre, the Director of Global Climate Change Litigation at the Sabin Center. She explains how this decision sets a new precedent in international law by recognizing the extensive legal obligations countries have in combating climate change. We explore how the opinion integrates customary international law, human rights, and environmental treaties, offering a robust framework for future climate cases. Dr. Maria Antonia Tigre also details the fascinating backstory of how a class project from the University of South Pacific in Vanuatu evolved into a global movement, culminating in this historic opinion. She shares insight into the legal community's reaction, the potential ripple effects on domestic and international cases, and the strengthened legal arguments that could emerge from this decision. We also explore the role science played in informing the court's decision, particularly the emphasis on the 1.5-degree threshold as a legal standard. Finally, we discuss the broader implications for fossil fuel regulation, climate reparations, and the responsibilities of both developed and developing nations. Dr. Maria Antonia Tigre is the Director of Global Climate Change Litigation at the Sabin Center. She manages the Sabin Center's Global Climate Change Litigation Database with the support of the Sabin Center's Peer Review Network of Climate Litigation. Maria Antonia is a leading expert in the field of climate change law and climate litigation, having published dozens of articles on the topic. She also co-heads the Sabin Center and GNHRE's project on Climate Litigation in the Global South.  Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to our newsletter/podcast, The Climate Weekly, to help support this show. Your contributions will make the continuation of this show possible.  Our music is "Gotta Get Up" by The Passion Hifi, check out his music at thepassionhifi.com. Rate, review and subscribe to this podcast on iTunes, Spotify, and more! Subscribe to our YouTube channel.

The Human Dimension of International Law (Brill, 2025) offers a vision of international law through the protection of human rights and the values they embody. This approach is particularly timely in light of recent international developments. For the first time, the International Court of Justice is seized of the main legal aspects of serious contemporary crises (Ukraine, Gaza Strip, Syria, Myanmar, etc.), on the basis of human rights instruments, with the participation of dozens of States. In this context, the book analyzes the multiple interactions between general international law and human rights. The former influences the latter, positively or restrictively, as illustrated by the issue of jurisdictional immunities. Conversely, human rights exert an influence on the evolution of general international law, sometimes gently, sometimes drastically. They contributed to the development of the sources of international law, several institutions related to the external relations of the State, the law of the sea, the theory of the subjects of international law, the concept of international responsibility, the system of collective security, as well as the structure and character of the discipline. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Human Dimension of International Law (Brill, 2025) offers a vision of international law through the protection of human rights and the values they embody. This approach is particularly timely in light of recent international developments. For the first time, the International Court of Justice is seized of the main legal aspects of serious contemporary crises (Ukraine, Gaza Strip, Syria, Myanmar, etc.), on the basis of human rights instruments, with the participation of dozens of States. In this context, the book analyzes the multiple interactions between general international law and human rights. The former influences the latter, positively or restrictively, as illustrated by the issue of jurisdictional immunities. Conversely, human rights exert an influence on the evolution of general international law, sometimes gently, sometimes drastically. They contributed to the development of the sources of international law, several institutions related to the external relations of the State, the law of the sea, the theory of the subjects of international law, the concept of international responsibility, the system of collective security, as well as the structure and character of the discipline. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

The Human Dimension of International Law (Brill, 2025) offers a vision of international law through the protection of human rights and the values they embody. This approach is particularly timely in light of recent international developments. For the first time, the International Court of Justice is seized of the main legal aspects of serious contemporary crises (Ukraine, Gaza Strip, Syria, Myanmar, etc.), on the basis of human rights instruments, with the participation of dozens of States. In this context, the book analyzes the multiple interactions between general international law and human rights. The former influences the latter, positively or restrictively, as illustrated by the issue of jurisdictional immunities. Conversely, human rights exert an influence on the evolution of general international law, sometimes gently, sometimes drastically. They contributed to the development of the sources of international law, several institutions related to the external relations of the State, the law of the sea, the theory of the subjects of international law, the concept of international responsibility, the system of collective security, as well as the structure and character of the discipline. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Recently, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio imposed sanctions on the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Francesca Albanese, saying, “The United States has repeatedly condemned and objected to biased and malicious activities of Albanese that have long made her unfit for service as a Special Rapporteur.”  Today we are joined by three of Albanese's predecessors—John Dugard, Richard Falk, and Michael Lynk, who talk about what these sanctions mean. They trace the United States' and Israel's longstanding attacks on not only Special Rapporteurs on Palestine, but the very claims to Palestinian rights. This latest instance is a particularly egregious attack on the UN and international law. We end with a plea to the international community to come to the aid of the Palestinian people, who are suffering famine, disease, and warfare of immense proportions.John Dugard SC, Emeritus Professor of Law, Universities of the Witwatersrand and Leiden; Member of Institut de Droit International; ; Director of Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, Cambridge (1995-1997); Judge ad hoc  International Court of Justice (2000-2018); Member of UN International Law Commission (1997 -2011); UN Special Rapporteur on Situation of Human Rights in Occupied Palestinian Territory (2001-2008); Legal Counsel, South Africa v Israel (Genocide Convention).Richard Falk is Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University (1961-2001) and Chair of Global Law, Faculty of Law, Queen Mary University London. Since 2002 has been a Research Fellow at the Orfalea Center of Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Between 2008 and 2014 he served as UN Special Rapporteur on Israeli Violations of Human Rights in Occupied Palestine.Falk has advocated and written widely about ‘nations' that are captive within existing states, including Palestine, Kashmir, Western Sahara, Catalonia, Dombas.Falk has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize several times since 2008.Michael Lynk was a member of the Faculty of Law, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada between 1999 and his retirement in 2022. He taught courses in labour, human rights, disability, constitutional and administrative law. He served as Associate Dean of the Faculty between 2008-11. He became Professor Emeritus in 2023.In March 2016, the United Nations Human Rights Council unanimously selected Professor Lynk for a six-year term as the 7th Special Rapporteur for the human rights situation in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967. He completed his term in April 2022.He has written about his UN experiences in a 2022 book co-authored with Richard Falk and John Dugard, two of his predecessors as UN special rapporteurs: Protecting Human Rights in Occupied Palestine: Working Through the United Nations (Clarity Press).Professor Lynk's academic scholarship and his United Nations reports have been cited by the Supreme Court of Canada, the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court and the United Nations General Assembly.  

In December 2023, when South Africa accused Israel of genocide before the International Court of Justice, I thought it was wrong to do so. Israel had been attacked. Its defense was legitimate. The blood was on Hamas's hands.But over the last year, I have watched a slew of organizations and scholars arrive at the view that whatever Israel's war on Gaza began as, its mass assault on Palestinian civilians fits the definition of genocidal violence. This is a view now held by Amnesty International, B'Tselem, Human Rights Watch, and the president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, among many othersOne reason I have stayed away from the word genocide is that there is an imprecision at its heart. When people use the word genocide, I think they imagine something like the Holocaust: the attempted extermination of an entire people. But the legal definition of genocide encompasses much more than that.So what is a genocide? And is this one?Philippe Sands is a lawyer who's worked on a number of genocide cases. He is the author of, among other books, “East West Street,” about how the idea of genocide was developed and written into international law. He is the best possible guide to the hardest possible topic.Mentioned:“What the Inventor of the Word ‘Genocide' Might Have Said About Putin's War” by Philippe Sands“‘Only the Strong Survive.' How Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu Is Testing the Limits of Power” by Brian Bennett“The laws of war must guide Israel's response to Hamas atrocity”The Ratline by Philippe Sands38 Londres Street by Philippe SandsBook Recommendations:Janet Flanner's World by Janet FlannerCommonwealth by Ann PatchettBy Night in Chile by Roberto BolañoThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find the transcript and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.htmlThis episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” was produced by Jack McCordick and Annie Galvin. Fact-checking by Michelle Harris, with Kate Sinclair. Our senior engineer is Jeff Geld, with additional mixing by Aman Sahota. Our executive producer is Claire Gordon. The show's production team also includes Marie Cascione, Annie Galvin, Rollin Hu, Elias Isquith, Kristin Lin, Marina King and Jan Kobal. Original music by Marian Lozano, Dan Powell, Carole Sabouraud and Pat McCusker. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The director of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

The International Court of Justice at the United Nations this week ruled that failing to take poverty-creating “appropriate action to protect the climate system” — meaning ending the use of life-giving fossil fuels — could open nations to being hauled before a global tribunal to answer for their crimes. As a trio of climate attorneys wrote in The New York Times, “continuing fossil fuel production and use, let alone expanding it, violates the law.” We'll see about that.But this development is just the latest in a long line of legal actions trying to enforce climate communism, even as more and more countries reject it.The Heartland Institute's Anthony Watts, Sterling Burnett, Linnea Lueken, Jim Lakely, and our special guest Daren Bakst — director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute — will also cover some of the breaking and Crazy Climate News of the Week from around the world.Thanks to Trump, those gasoline cans everyone hates will no longer be mandatory. We now have only three years left to save the planet, apparently. And the legacy media has finally caught up with this program and is reporting that the unscientific “Endangerment Finding” for carbon dioxide is about to be repealed.Join us LIVE at 1 p.m. ET on YouTube, Rumble, and X — and we'll answer the questions you leave for our panel in the chat.BE SURE TO VISIT OUR SPONSOR, ADVISOR METALS!https://heartland67740.ac-page.com/advisor-metals-page In The Tank broadcasts LIVE every Thursday at 12pm CT on on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Tune in to have your comments addressed live by the In The Tank Crew. Be sure to subscribe and never miss an episode. See you there!Climate Change Roundtable is LIVE every Friday at 12pm CT on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Have a topic you want addressed? Join the live show and leave a comment for our panelists and we'll cover it during the live show!

In this episode of Occupied Thoughts, FMEP Fellow Hilary Rantisi speaks with Palestinian-Canadian lawyer and analyst Diana Buttu. They discuss Palestinian citizens of Israel, who have long navigated Israeli racism and have faced accelerated repression over the last 22 months that has included arrests, threats, and efforts to impeach Palestinian Knesset Member Ayman Odeh and undermine Palestinian political participation inside of Israel. They talk about responses to the Israeli genocide in Gaza, including recent protests and hunger strikes led by Palestinian citizens of Israel as well as growing numbers of Jewish Israelis who are naming Israeli actions in Gaza as genocide. They also look at the new diplomatic wave led by many Western states promising to recognize a Palestinian state and, specifically, how that state recognition is juxtaposed against the International Court of Justice's rulings on Israeli occupation. Finally, Diana reflects on the legacy of the Oslo Accords and the reckoning on those agreements that has never occurred.  Diana Buttu is a Palestinian-Canadian lawyer, analyst, and writer. She is also the Communications Director in Palestine for the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU). Previously, she served as a legal advisor to the Palestinian Liberation Organization. Hilary Rantisi grew up in Palestine and has been involved with education and advocacy on the Middle East since her move to the US. She is a 2025 Fellow at FMEP and was most recently the Associate Director of the Religion, Conflict and Peace Initiative (RCPI) and co-instructor of Learning in Context: Narratives of Displacement and Belonging in Israel/Palestine at Harvard Divinity School. She has over two decades of experience in institution building at Harvard, having been the Director of the Middle East Initiative (MEI) at Harvard Kennedy School of Government prior to her current role. She has a BA in Political Science/International Studies from Aurora University and a master's degree in Middle Eastern Studies from the University of Chicago. Before moving to the US, Hilary worked at Birzeit University and at the Jerusalem-based Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center. There, she co-edited a photo essay book Our Story: The Palestinians with the Rev. Naim Ateek. Original music by Jalal Yaquoub.

The International Court of Justice at the United Nations this week ruled that failing to take poverty-creating “appropriate action to protect the climate system” — meaning ending the use of life-giving fossil fuels — could open nations to being hauled before a global tribunal to answer for their crimes. As a trio of climate attorneys wrote in The New York Times, “continuing fossil fuel production and use, let alone expanding it, violates the law.” We'll see about that.But this development is just the latest in a long line of legal actions trying to enforce climate communism, even as more and more countries reject it.The Heartland Institute's Anthony Watts, Sterling Burnett, Linnea Lueken, Jim Lakely, and our special guest Daren Bakst — director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute — will also cover some of the breaking and Crazy Climate News of the Week from around the world.Thanks to Trump, those gasoline cans everyone hates will no longer be mandatory. We now have only three years left to save the planet, apparently. And the legacy media has finally caught up with this program and is reporting that the unscientific “Endangerment Finding” for carbon dioxide is about to be repealed.Join us LIVE at 1 p.m. ET on YouTube, Rumble, and X — and we'll answer the questions you leave for our panel in the chat.BE SURE TO VISIT OUR SPONSOR, ADVISOR METALS!https://heartland67740.ac-page.com/advisor-metals-page In The Tank broadcasts LIVE every Thursday at 12pm CT on on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Tune in to have your comments addressed live by the In The Tank Crew. Be sure to subscribe and never miss an episode. See you there!Climate Change Roundtable is LIVE every Friday at 12pm CT on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Have a topic you want addressed? Join the live show and leave a comment for our panelists and we'll cover it during the live show!

We're all feeling the effects of the fossil-fueled climate crisis, but young people will not let this threat to their future go unchallenged. They're taking it to the courts. In the last year, youth plaintiffs have had notable legal successes in Montana and Hawaiʻi, challenging that those states were violating their constitutional rights in continuing to burn fossil fuels. In Hawaiʻi, the ruling compels the state department of transportation to quickly move to a zero-emission system.  But the biggest victory may have been outside of the U.S. The small island nation of Vanuatu led the charge to ask the International Court for Justice to grant a judgement on the legal obligation of countries to fight climate change. The judgment, released in late July, stated that countries do have a responsibility to address the climate crisis. Beyond their specific claims and remedies, these numerous cases ask: What do we owe our future generations, and how will we make good on those promises? Guests:  Vishal Prasad, Director, Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change  Julia Olson, Co-Executive Director & Chief Legal Counsel, Our Children's Trust  Rylee Brooke Kamahele, Youth Plaintiff, Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation Support Climate One by going ad-free! By subscribing to Climate One on Patreon, you'll receive exclusive access to all future episodes free of ads, opportunities to connect with fellow Climate One listeners, and access to the Climate One Discord. Sign up today. For show notes and related links, visit our website. Ad sales by Multitude. Contact them for ad inquiries at multitude.productions/ads Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We're all feeling the effects of the fossil-fueled climate crisis, but young people will not let this threat to their future go unchallenged. They're taking it to the courts. In the last year, youth plaintiffs have had notable legal successes in Montana and Hawaiʻi, challenging that those states were violating their constitutional rights in continuing to burn fossil fuels. In Hawaiʻi, the ruling compels the state department of transportation to quickly move to a zero-emission system.  But the biggest victory may have been outside of the U.S. The small island nation of Vanuatu led the charge to ask the International Court for Justice to grant a judgement on the legal obligation of countries to fight climate change. The judgment, released in late July, stated that countries do have a responsibility to address the climate crisis. Beyond their specific claims and remedies, these numerous cases ask: What do we owe our future generations, and how will we make good on those promises? Guests:  Vishal Prasad, Director, Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change Julia Olson, Co-Executive Director & Chief Legal Counsel, Our Children's Trust Rylee Brooke Kamahele, Youth Plaintiff, Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation Support Climate One by going ad-free! By subscribing to Climate One on Patreon, you'll receive exclusive access to all future episodes free of ads, opportunities to connect with fellow Climate One listeners, and access to the Climate One Discord. Sign up today. For show notes and related links, visit our website. Ad sales by Multitude. Contact them for ad inquiries at multitude.productions/ads Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Good afternoon, I'm _____ with today's episode of EZ News. Tai-Ex opening The Tai-Ex opened up 270-points this morning from yesterday's close, at 23,717 on turnover of $12.2-billion N-T. The market fell sharply on Wednesday - as semiconductor stocks tumbled after U-S President Donald Trump announced that he will announce new tariffs on chips within the next week or so. NGO says migrant workers facing fraud but reluctant to report it The TransAsia Sisters Association says migrant workers in Taiwan are facing many types of fraud - but the cases are going underreported because of language barriers and other factors. According to the association, it has identified several potential problems in the effort to fight scams against migrants through interviews over the past year with mainly migrant workers and a small proportion (部分) of foreign spouses. The association says around 30-per cent of interviewees had experienced financial fraud, but that only a third of them reported their cases to authorities. The group is attributing the reluctance to report fraud cases to police to a lack of readily available multilingual services at police stations. The Workforce Development Agency says migrant workers can use the 1955 hotline, which provides multilingual services, to help them identify potential fraud schemes .. .. and the hotline can contact third parties on behalf of workers to verify suspicious situations and report cases to local labor authorities. Trump says 100% tariff coming on some imported semiconductors US President Donald Trump says he will impose a 100% tariff on imports of semiconductors. But he said he would exempt companies making their chips in the US… or are in the process of (的過程中) building chip fabrication facilities in the country. Toni Waterman has more. UN Report on Taliban Weaponizing Law Against Women and Girls The independent U.N. investigator on human rights in Afghanistan says its Taliban rulers have “weaponized” the legal and judicial system to oppress women and girls in what amounts to “crimes against humanity." Richard Bennett said in a report to the U.N. General Assembly circulated Wednesday that after seizing power in 2021 the Taliban suspended the 2004 constitution and specific laws protecting the rights of women and girls. These include a landmark law that criminalized 22 forms of violence against women, including rape and child and forced marriage. The Taliban defend their approach to justice by claiming they are implementing Islamic sharia law, but Islamic scholars and others have said their interpretation is unparalleled (無與倫比的) in other Muslim-majority countries and does not adhere to Islamic teachings. Bennett urged all countries to support efforts to bring Afghanistan before the International Court of Justice, the U.N.'s highest tribunal. Barbary Lion Cubs Born at Czech Zoo Four Barbary lion cubs have been born in a Czech zoo. The birth marks a significant boost for the rare species, which is extinct (滅絕的) in the wild. The three females and one male were seen playing at Dvur Kralove Safari Park on Wednesday. Soon, the cubs will be sent to other zoos as part of an international program to ensure (確保) their survival. Zoo officials say that while reintroducing the Barbary lion into its natural habitat is considered, it remains a distant goal. The Barbary lion once roamed northern Africa but was wiped out due to human activities. That was the I.C.R.T. EZ News, I'm _____. -- Hosting provided by SoundOn

“12 UN Relief Works Agency staff members are accused of involvement in Hamas' attack against Israel,” reports NPR. “Details Emerge on U.N. Workers Accused of Aiding Hamas Raid,” announces The New York Times. “Hamas Military Compound Found Beneath U.N. Agency Headquarters in Gaza,” claims The Wall Street Journal. In January 2024—literally on the same day the International Court of Justice deemed Israel was committing “plausible genocide”—a number of sensationalistic headlines broke across U.S. media, namely The Wall Street Journal and New York Times, telling us in 40-point font that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the single most important supplier of food and medical aid in Palestine, was in fact a front for "Hamas." Western audiences were told that, based on “Israeli intelligence”, 12 workers at the agency may have been involved in the attacks on October 7, 2023, and, in another blockbuster claim, that “Around 10% of Palestinian aid agency's 12,000 staff in Gaza have links to militants, according to intelligence dossier.” Given this history, the logic went, who knows how else the agency might be operating at the behest of Hamas? It would have been a major revelation if there were any evidence to support it. But there wasn't and the story was later dropped, walked back or ignored by the media. But the damage was done: President Biden quickly defunded UNRWA and Israel criminalized it, helping fast track mass starvation in Gaza. So why did media outlets publish so many breathless and lurid headlines about Israel's claims without an ounce of independent confirmation? To what extent, if any, have outlets acknowledged their journalistic and moral recklessness? And how has this contributed to the mass starvation, immiseration, and wholesale murder of the population of Gaza? On this episode, Part I of our two-part season finale on “The Importance of Seriousness, or Why Palestinians Can't Be Witness to Their Own Genocide,” we examine the role of legacy news media in inciting the starvation of millions of Palestinians in Gaza, the racist double standard of what sources and experts can be trusted and the broader incitement campaign against the UN Relief and Works Agency which directly caused today's mass starvation in Gaza. Our guest is Moureen Kaki, Head of Mission at Glia.

The Director of the Global Centre for Justice and Advocacy Leadership, le Susuga Alopi Latukefu, spoke to us about the importance of the recent advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on Climate Change for Moana Pasefika nations and the world.

On 23 July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered a historic advisory opinion on climate change. While not legally binding, the opinion confirms that states have obligations under international law to prevent environmental harm, including from greenhouse gas emissions, and that these duties extend to regulating private actors. In this episode of ESG Matters, host Elena Lambros, a partner in our Risk Advisory practice, is joined by legal experts from across our global disputes and arbitration teams, including Arne Fuchs, James Clarke, and Erin Eckhoff. Together, they unpack the implications of the ICJ’s opinion and what it could mean for climate-related litigation, corporate liability, and governance standards around the world. They explore developments across key jurisdictions including, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK and examine how legal systems are beginning to engage with the idea of a climate change duty of care. They also consider how courts may treat climate inaction, what this means for companies with high-emission operations or supply chains, and why boards and legal teams need to be watching closely. Explore more of Ashurst’s analysis of the ICJ opinion. To listen and subscribe to future episodes, search for ESG Matters on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favourite podcast app. For more from Ashurst’s podcast library, visit ashurst.com/podcasts. This podcast contains general information and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek professional advice before acting on the content discussed.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The US Environmental Protection Agency plans to rescind the foundation of its authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.  Eliminating the so-called “endangerment finding” is a key part of President Trump's efforts to reverse Obama- and Biden-era climate policy. The finding was also targeted in the conservative Project 2025 strategy to reshape the federal government. But the rollback won't happen without a fight, and the endangerment finding has held up to past legal challenges. Meanwhile, international courts are moving in the opposite direction. The International Court of Justice recently ruled that countries have legal obligations to address climate change and that fossil fuel subsidies could constitute "internationally wrongful acts." So what would overturning the endangerment finding mean for US climate policy? What legal and scientific arguments is the administration using? And how do these conflicting domestic and international trends shape the future of energy and climate policy? This week, Bill speaks to Michael Gerrard about how the EPA is rescinding its own ability to regulate greenhouse gases. Michael is the founder and faculty director of Columbia's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Before joining Columbia in 2009, Michael practiced environmental law in New York for three decades. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Gregory Vilfranc.  

The Other Side of the Story with Tom Harris and Todd Royal – July 2025 brings major developments in climate policy, from a new DOE report challenging claims about extreme weather and sea level rise, to a sweeping EPA proposal and a landmark International Court of Justice ruling on carbon emissions. Explore the shifting climate landscape, regulatory battles, and what these changes could mean for both the U.S. and the world...

From June 13, 2024: On today's episode, Lawfare General Counsel and Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Gabor Rona, Professor of Practice at Cardozo Law, and Natalie Orpett, Lawfare's Executive Editor, to discuss their recent Lawfare piece examining whether a state pursuing an armed conflict in compliance with international humanitarian law could nonetheless violate the Genocide Convention. They discussed how these two areas of law intersect, their relevance to the ongoing proceedings over Israel's conduct in Gaza before the International Court of Justice, and what the questions their analysis raises might mean for the future of accountability for genocide.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 2019, a group of law students from Pacific island nations set in motion a case that made it to the world’s highest court: The International Court of Justice. The students wanted answers to two important questions: what responsibility do countries have to stop climate change? And if countries don’t stop polluting, will they have to pay for the damages? Now the ICJ has delivered its verdict, and it seems like a huge win for the climate. But is it? Laura Clarke, chief executive officer of legal non-profit ClientEarth, joins Akshat Rathi on Zero to discuss. Explore further: One Pacific Nation’s Court Case Opens New Era for Climate Lawsuits - Bloomberg UN Top Court Says Countries Are Obliged to Fight Climate Change - Bloomberg Heat Pump Sales Top Gas Boilers in Germany for the First Time - Bloomberg Zero is a production of Bloomberg Green. Our producer is Oscar Boyd. Special thanks to Eleanor Harrison Dengate, Siobhan Wagner, Sommer Saadi and Mohsis Andam. Thoughts or suggestions? Email us at zeropod@bloomberg.net. For more coverage of climate change and solutions, visit https://www.bloomberg.com/green.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

From coral reefs and mangroves to raising the land itself, how small island nations are using natural and innovative techniques to adapt to rising sea levels and extreme weather events linked to climate change. Jordan Dunbar chats to Tina Stege, climate envoy for the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Dr. Rosanne Martyr, senior scientist on coastal vulnerability and adaptation, Climate Analytics. Plus, Anna Holligan, the BBC's correspondent in The Hague, has the latest on a landmark climate case brought by Pacific Islanders at the International Court of Justice.Got a comment or a question you'd like us to answer? Send an email to: TheClimateQuestion@bbc.com or whatsapp us on +44 8000 321 721 Presenter: Jordan Dunbar Producer: Diane Richardson Production Co-Ordinator: Brenda Brown Sound Engineers: Tom Brignell, Rohan Madison and Frank McWeeny Editor: Simon Watts

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureTrump called the UN out on their fake climate agenda. The UN wants to sue, if they try they will lose. D's try to say Trump raised prices on food, boomerang, it was Biden, D's delete the X Post. Australia and many other countries will accept beef from the US. Trump exposes the Fed, if they can't manage a renovation, how are they managing the US. Trump might give a rebate to the people. The [DS] pushed the Epstein narrative, they tried to divide MAGA, they fell right into the trap that Trump set. They want their manipulated docs released but Trump wants the Grand Jury info released and Ghilliane  Maxwell was interviewed, will she spill the beans. Trump as the [DS] right where he wants them, he has the floor now and all eyes are on Obama, pain is happening now, justice is coming.   Economy Trump Issues Perfect Response After UN Pushes Policy Where US Can Be Sued Over Climate  After the International Court of Justice ruled this week that countries are required to cut emissions in the name of climate change, the White House gave a simple reply: “America first.” Any decision from the court is non-binding, but far-left advocates are hopeful it will cause a chain reaction, leading to “domestic lawsuits” and “other legal actions,” according to the Associated Press. The case was reportedly brought before the United Nations' highest court by small island countries, seeking to force international standards onto larger governments. When Axios reached out to the White House Monday regarding potential penalties the United States could face, the response was direct. “As always, President Trump and the entire Administration is committed to putting America first and prioritizing the interests of everyday Americans,” Spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said in a statement. Spot on. We cannot be sucked into global affairs — and follow edicts from other countries — as we rebuild our own domestic infrastructure. Hence, Trump's move to withdraw America from the Paris Climate Accords — something he'd already done in his first term, but had to do again after former President Joe Biden reversed it. “[The ICJ case] specifically calls out the responsibility of industrialized nations to take the lead in limiting emissions,” Axios reported. Are we supposed to believe that countries like China and Russia are going to have their feet held to the fire on pollution? The target seems to be the United States. Why? Because we have far-left lawmakers willing to throw trillions of dollars at an issue that hasn't even been fully settled. First, it was “global warming” because the polar caps were melting, setting up an ice age. Then the argument shifted to temperatures getting hotter, and the phrase was switched to climate change. Every time a doomsday event was predicted, it got pushed off. “The Day After Tomorrow” never came. That's red flag number one. Red flag number two is the potential money-laundering aspect. After laundering tactics were exposed inside the USAID by Elon Musk's DOGE team, what's to stop climate change funding from being used as a personal piggy bank? During the Obama years, the firm Solyndra had the federal government cosign a loan for over $500 million in solar technology before it went under, Forbes reported. The same Forbes piece highlighted how several similar firms were given hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds, yet they all failed. Where did the money go? Source: thegatewaypundit.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.

Subscribe now to skip the ads. Don't forget to buy our “Welcome to the Crusades” miniseries! Danny and Derek also rail against the war pigs, but lack the heavy riffs. This week: the International Court of Justice rules that wealthy nations must take action on climate change or bear responsibility (1:20); clashes escalate on the Thai-Cambodian border (4:08); a ceasefire holds in Syria's Suwayda province after clashes between Druze and Bedouin groups (9:06); in Israel-Palestine, Gaza's starvation reaches catastrophic levels (13:19) as ceasefire talks barely limp along (16:23); Iran is reengaging with the International Atomic Energy Agency (20:49); the Democratic Republic of the Congo and M23 militant group sign a declaration of intent (23:05); in Ukraine, a new round of peace talks achieves little (25:24) while Zelensky responds to protests over corruption (28:27); Venezuela, the US, and El Salvador carry out a prisoner exchange amid accusations of torture (31:38); the Japan House of Councillors holds an election while PM Ishiba looks likely to resign (33:32); and Japan, the Philippines, and Indonesia make trade deals (36:10). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Don't forget to buy our “Welcome to the Crusades” miniseries!Danny and Derek also rail against the war pigs, but lack the heavy riffs. This week: the International Court of Justice rules that wealthy nations must take action on climate change or bear responsibility (1:20); clashes escalate on the Thai-Cambodian border (4:08); a ceasefire holds in Syria's Suwayda province after clashes between Druze and Bedouin groups (9:06); in Israel-Palestine, Gaza's starvation reaches catastrophic levels (13:19) as ceasefire talks barely limp along (16:23); Iran is reengaging with the International Atomic Energy Agency (20:49); the Democratic Republic of the Congo and M23 militant group sign a declaration of intent (23:05); in Ukraine, a new round of peace talks achieves little (25:24) while Zelensky responds to protests over corruption (28:27); Venezuela, the US, and El Salvador carry out a prisoner exchange amid accusations of torture (31:38); the Japan House of Councillors holds an election while PM Ishiba looks likely to resign (33:32); and Japan, the Philippines, and Indonesia make trade deals (36:10).Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

On the Glossy Podcast, senior fashion reporter Danny Parisi and international reporter Zofia Zwieglinska break down some of the biggest fashion news of the week. This week, we discuss the announcement of September's New York Fashion Week schedule, including a long-awaited move back to a more geographically consolidated number of venues. Additionally, we talk about a ruling from the International Court of Justice that puts more pressure on wealthier countries to curb their emissions. Lastly, we talk about a bizarre case of money laundering in the Netherlands involving Louis Vuitton and discuss the luxury industry's vulnerability to financial crime. Later in the episode, our editor-in-chief, Jill Manoff, has a discussion with Patience Anoe-Lamptey Battle, a 15-year veteran store associate who specializes in selling high-end fragrance. The conversation is part of our ongoing Store Associates Strategies week, a series of stories the Glossy team has put together on how fashion and beauty brands are making use of their store associates today. Battle spoke with Jill about how she got into the job of high-end sales associate, how it's changed and what the career path looks like.

Conspiracy Theory Thursday talk, Dr. Bonner Cohen from CFACT talks the International Court ruling on climate change...will it matter?

IS LEBANON'S FUTURE BRIGHT OR BLEAK?HEADLINE 1: Saudi Arabia announced $6.4 billion worth of investments in Syria.HEADLINE 2: Another country is poised to join South Africa's genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice.HEADLINE 3: 8 Israeli soldiers were injured yesterday.--FDD Executive Director Jon Schanzer provides timely situational updates and analysis, followed by a conversation with David Daoud, FDD Senior Fellow and expert on Lebanon and Hezbollah.Learn more at: https://www.fdd.org/fddmorningbrief

Vanuatu's Climate Change Minister has said the Pacific now has more leverage in climate negotiations after the UN's top court found that countries can be held legally responsible for their greenhouse gas emissions. The president of the International Court of Justice, Yuji Iwasawa, said climate change is an urgent and existential threat. From the Hague, Jamie Tahana reports.

The International Court of Justice has delivered a historic ruling on international climate obligations, opening the door for possible reparations. After a lengthy campaign led by law students in Pacific Island nations, the world's top court has declared individual states have a legal duty to tackle climate change.

The World Health Organisation's chief, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has demanded full access for aid into Gaza as well as a ceasefire, describing the situation there as "man-made mass starvation". We speak to a doctor in Gaza City and to a spokesperson for the Israeli prime minister's office.Also in the programme: the International Court of Justice clears the way for countries to sue each other over climate change; and what's behind the rise in bars dedicated to women's sport?(Picture: Gazans react as they ask for food at a charity kitchen in Gaza City, July 14, 2025. Credit: REUTERS/Mahmoud Issa)

More than 100 aid organizations warn, "famine" is knocking on the door in Gaza. Correspondent Jeremy Diamond reports on the dire situation there. Then, as the International Court of Justice gives its first ever ruling on climate change, we hear from a Vanuatu official whose Pacific Island Nation faces an existential threat from rising oceans. And, how U.S. funding cuts set back the fight against HIV/AIDS. Christiane speaks to South African activist Zackie Achmat. Also, a decorated U.S. army veteran forced to self-deport to Korea. Michel Martin speaks with Sae Joon Park and immigration lawyer Danicole Ramos. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Comprehensive coverage of the day's news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice. Peace Palace, home of International Court of Justice World Court rules countries that don't act on climate crisis may be liable for violating human rights law; UN Security Council debates Gaza crisis amid questions over role of UN, humanitarian law; Civil disobedience at Wells Fargo offices in SF, NYC protest bank dropping DEI, climate goals; California AG asks judge to put LA juvenile detention facilities into receivership over poor conditions, abuse of power; Florida AG investigating restaurant that held LGBTQ pride event; UN says food deprivation, shattered health system leading to catastrophic birth outcomes for pregnant women and newborns The post World Court rules countries failing to act on climate may be violating human rights law; UN Security council debates Gaza war, humanitarian crisis – July 23, 2025 appeared first on KPFA.

We look ahead to the International Court of Justice official advisory opinion on climate justice which is due this month. What were the arguments made during the hearings back in December 2024, how much attention this is getting and how may it be received? With Nikki Reisch, Vishal Prashad, Brenda Reson Sapuro and Felix Golenko. Do like, subscribe and leave us a review. Want to find out more? Check out all the background information on our website including hundreds more podcasts on international justice covering all the angles: https://www.asymmetricalhaircuts.com/ Or you can sign up to our newsletter: https://www.asymmetricalhaircuts.com/newsletters/ Did you like what you heard? Tip us here: https://www.asymmetricalhaircuts.com/support-us/ Or want to support us long term? Check out our Patreon, where - for the price of a cup of coffee every month - you also become part of our War Criminals Bookclub and can make recommendations on what we should review next, here: https://www.patreon.com/c/AsymmetricalHaircuts Asymmetrical Haircuts is created, produced and presented by Janet Anderson and Stephanie van den Berg, together with a small team of producers, assistant producers, researchers and interns. Check out the team here: https://www.asymmetricalhaircuts.com/what-about-asymmetrical-haircuts/

In a world-first, the International Court of Justice is preparing to deliver an advisory opinion on climate change and human rights - all thanks to a youth-led campaign that began thousands of miles from The Hague, in the Pacific Islands.This week, we look inside that extraordinary campaign, and hear the story of Cynthia Houniuhi, who - as a young law student from the Solomon Islands - helped launch the movement that would ultimately unite over 130 countries behind a single goal. Now, six years after this idea began in a law classroom, the world's highest court is set to weigh in on the responsibility of states to protect current and future generations from climate harm.Christiana Figueres, Tom Rivett-Carnac, and Paul Dickinson reflect on the power of legal activism, the role of youth leadership, and what this landmark case could mean for the future of international climate law.Learn more ⚖️ Read more information about the ICJ climate case on the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change website

On Friday's Mark Levin Show, the framers of the Constitution did not grant courts, such as the International Court of Trade, the final authority on matters like tariffs, reserving that power for Congress. The Constitution gives Congress broad authority over taxation and spending, and through a 1977 emergency law, it delegated certain tariff powers to the president. Courts lack the constitutional basis to override such delegations. Historical records, including Madison's notes, the Federalist Papers, and state ratification debates, show the framers rejected giving courts supreme authority, like judicial review, to resolve separation-of-powers disputes. The framers of the Constitution, heavily influenced by Montesquieu, designed a government with a strict separation of powers to prevent tyranny, as Montesquieu warned that combining legislative, executive, or judicial powers in one entity leads to arbitrary rule and oppression. Congress should address this through legislation, not courts through litigation. Also, Sam Antar accused a Politico writer of "reputational laundering" for praising  New York AG Letitia James as a "Shadow Attorney General" in a Democratic shadow cabinet, while ignoring her federal criminal investigation for alleged mortgage fraud. Politico's omission of the DOJ referral shows the media bias, as James has targeted Trump, notably winning a $450M civil fraud case against him.  Later, the Wall Street Journal reports the decline of America's military-industrial capacity compared to China's rapid growth in the sector. The U.S. has allowed its defense manufacturing and supply chains to weaken due to underinvestment, outsourcing, and a focus on short-term efficiency over long-term resilience. This is frightening. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices