Podcast appearances and mentions of judge ellis

On today's show, I will interview the Honorable David Ellis. Judge Ellis is the Edgar-winning bestseller of ten novels of suspense, as well as eight bestsellers co-authored with James Patterson. His latest thriller, LOOK CLOSER, was released in July 2022. In December 2014, Dave was sworn in as the youngest-serving Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court for the First District. Before taking the bench, Dave was in private practice specializing in constitutional law, where his work included serving as the House Prosecutor who tried and convicted Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich in the impeachment trial before the Illinois Senate.​In today's episode, we discuss:·      Why David became a lawyer, and ultimately a Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court for the First District.·      How does a person become a judge?·      His favorite part of being a judge.·      When his author life blends with his life on the bench.·      Why he writes.·      His extraordinary workday juggling all of his responsibilities.·      David's writing process and navigating complex plots.·      Writing with James Patterson.·      The Bobby Knight quote, “Most people have the will to win, few have the will to prepare to win.” All of this and more on today's episode of the Cops and Writers podcast Visit David's website with links to his books and social media.Enjoy the Cops and Writer's book series.Please visit the Cops and Writers website.If you have a question for the sarge, hit him up at his email.Join the fun at the Cops and Writers Facebook groupFor you writers out there, Mark Dawson has opened up the wildly popular Ads for Authors class.Consider buying me a coffee :-)Support the show

Photo credit: AP Images for Britannica.com EPISODE SUMMARY In this episode, we're going to focus on one of the most talked about cases in Supreme Court history. On May 17 1954, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held in Brown versus Board of Education, that in the field of public education, the doctrine of separate but equal had no place, and that separate educational facilities were inherently unequal. A FEW KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM THIS EPISODE  In terms of what it meant to the health of the nation, Brown versus Board of Education was the most significant case in the history of the Supreme Court. Part of what's in the DNA of this country is aspirational. And what Brown did was having a goal of providing equality. It's certainly true that we have fallen short in some of the things that we profess as a nation. The difference between where we want to be and where we are, is the engine that drives change. Judge Ellis read excerpts from the Appendix to the Congressional Globe, described here from https://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwcg.html  “The Globe, as it is usually called, contains the congressional debates of the 23rd through 42nd Congresses (1833-73). There are forty-six volumes in the series based on the table found in the Third Edition of Checklist of United States Public Documents 1789-1909, Volume 1B (pp. 1466-69). The Globe is the third of the four series of publications containing the debates of Congress. It was preceded by the Annals of Congress and the Register of Debates and succeeded by the Congressional Record. The first five volumes of the Globe (23rd Congress, 1st Session through 25th Congress, 1st Session, 1833-37) overlap with the Register of Debates. Initially the Globe contained a "condensed report" or abstract rather than a verbatim report of the debates and proceedings. With the 32nd Congress (1851), however, the Globe began to provide something approaching verbatim transcription. The contents of the appendix of each volume vary from Congress to Congress, but appendixes typically contain presidential messages, reports of the heads of departments and cabinet officers, texts of laws, and appropriations. Speeches not indexed or referenced on the pages reprinting the debates appear in the appendix as well.” More specifically, I read from the 33rd Congress, Second Session.[1855] The first page of the Appendix is  https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30790/m1/1/?q=thirty-third From the entry page you can jump to specific pages, and I read from page 234, Tennessee Senator https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30790/m1/248/?q=thirty-third And page 236, Indiana Senator https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30790/m1/250/?q=thirty-third To download the transcript, CLICK HERE LINKS IN THIS EPISODE CLICK HERE TO LEAVE FEEDBACK Follow Ellis Conversations on Twitter Follow Judge Ronald Ellis on Twitter Follow Jamil Ellis on Twitter Follow Jamil Ellis on LinkedIn Information from Legal Defense Fund Information from History.com Information from Britannica Encyclopedia Information from PBS.org Information from US Courts Information from The New Yorker, May 3, 2004 Did Brown Matter? Appendix to the Congressional Globe, described here from https://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwcg.html The first page of the Appendix is  https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30790/m1/1/?q=thirty-third Tennessee Senator https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30790/m1/248/?q=thirty-third Indiana Senator https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30790/m1/250/?q=thirty-third OTHER EPISODES OF INTEREST Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson Gifted and Talented Programs, So Many Children Left Behind    

In this episode, the hosts discuss the country's legacy of racial terror as embodied in lynchings of Blacks by white supremacist groups such as the KKK; how these efforts were designed to maintain racial apartheid by force and intimidation; and how they are related to the use of the criminal justice system and capital punishment statutes in efforts to legally lynch the Scottsboro Boys and the Groveland Boys. Equal Justice Initiative - Lynching in America - https://eji.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/lynching-in-america-3d-ed-080219.pdf Groveland Boys (PBS - Free) - https://www.pbs.org/video/the-groveland-four-uid8r2/ Scottsboro Boys ($) - https://www.amazon.com/Trials-Scottsboro-Boys/dp/B07F26V4XC/ref=sr_1_3?crid=39WLGM6EXMUQE&dchild=1&keywords=scottsboro+boys+an+american+tragedy&qid=1586636092&sprefix=scottsobo%2Caps%2C152&sr=8-3  Lafourche Country (where Judge Ellis grew up) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lafourche_Parish,_Louisiana    

Radhika and Matt sit down with the Honorable Sarah L. Ellis, of the Northern District of Illinois, to discuss professionalism and reputation. Judge Ellis talks about her path to the federal bench, what professionalism means to her, some surprising things she has experienced in the court room, and important Dos and Don’ts in the court room. Judge Ellis is an alumna of Loyola University Chicago School of Law (’94) and was nominated to the federal bench by President Obama in 2013.

Today's extra-long episode contains your guide to all of the developments involving Paul Manafort over the past week.  What does it all mean and what can we expect next?  Listen and find out! We begin, however, with a brief update on Episode 247 now that the Department of Defense has issued a Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM 19-004) implementing the ban on transgender service in the military.  With the help of some friends of the show, we break down the most pressing issues on the near horizon. Then, it's time for All Things Manafort (TM), which sneakily includes a deep dive into exactly how the U.S. Federal Sentencing Guidelines came into effect, when they were mandatory, how they became advisory, and what the hell happened in the Eastern District of Virginia. But that's not all!  After that, we have a discussion on when sentences should run consecutively versus concurrently, and how that interacts with Judge Amy Berman Jackson's sentencing decision in Manafort's DC case. AND we also have breaking news regarding new state charges brought against Manafort as soon as both federal sentences were handed down. And if that's not enough for you, well, we end, as always, with a brand new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #118 that's a dreaded real property question.  As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE! AppearancesNone!  If you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links First discussed trans ban back in Episode OA: 247 We were assisted by Alice Ashton – trans Arabic linguist who contributed to the Advocate article located here and by Deirdre Anne Hendrick. Here is a link to Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 19-004. This is the Feb. 22, 2018 Mattis directive. Here are the DSM-5 guidelines on gender dysphoria We first discussed the Sentencing Guidelines in Episode OA: 162. The accompanying statute is 18 U.S.C. §3553. For a primer on “variances” versus downward departures, check out the Sentencing Commission guidelines. Judge Ellis transcript can be found here. Concurrent/consecutive is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3554. Manafort’s NY State indictment involves Residential Mortgage Fraud 1st degree (4 counts) under Penal Law § 187.25 and Falsifying Business Records 1st Degree (8 counts) under §175.10. We discussed Gamble v. U.S. in Episode Episode OA: 215. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ Don't forget the OA Facebook Community! For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed!  @oawiki And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

The full broadcast of Boston Public Radio from Wednesday, March 13th, 2019. As a candidate, Donald Trump vowed to protect Medicare and Medicaid. As president, his latest budget proposal would slash both those policies. We talked to Medical Ethicist Art Caplan about this, the "anti-vaxxer" movement's effect on recent measles outbreaks, and how a Georgia state representative is mocking the heartbeat abortion bill with a "testicular bill of rights," which would criminalize vasectomies and require men to get permission from their partners before getting that Viagra prescription filled. Caplan is the Drs. William F and Virginia Connolly Mitty Chair, and director of the Division of Medical Ethics at NYU Langone Medical Center. He’s also the co-host of the Everyday Ethics podcast. Carolyn Beeler, the environment reporter for PRI’s The World, joins us for another Antarctica dispatch, where she’s studying the effects of climate change. News broke Tuesday of an alleged college admissions scam, in which wealthy parents schemed to get their children into elite colleges. We opened the lines and asked our listeners: Is this symptomatic of how crazed society has become when it comes to going to the right school? Paul Manafort's four-year sentence has provoked outrage from those who say it is too lenient. But today, Manafort faces up to 10 more years of prison in another case for conspiracy against the U.S. Will sentencing Judge Amy Jackson see a different man than Judge Ellis did? We talk to Juliette Kayyem about this, the Robert Mueller case and more. Kayyem is on the faculty of Harvard’s Kennedy school, a CNN analyst and CEO of ZEMCAR. A new podcast takes an unfiltered look at Alzheimer’s through the experiences of an unfiltered man: Greg O’Brien, who was diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer’s in 2009. The podcast, produced by WGBH editor Sean Corcoran, is called “The Forgetting: Inside the Mind of Alzheimer’s.” It’s co-hosted by O’Brien, the author of “On Pluto: Inside the Mind of Alzheimer’s” and David Shenk, the author of “The Forgetting: Alzheimer’s, Portrait of an Epidemic.” Sy Montgomery joins us for our monthly examination of the intersection of human and animal behavior. Montgomery is a journalist, naturalist and a BPR contributor. Her latest book is "How to Be A Good Creature: A Memoir in Thirteen Animals." WGBH’s Executive Arts Editor Jared Bowen joins us to talk about new leadership at the Peabody Essex Museum.

On this episode of The Critical Hour, Dr. Wilmer Leon is joined by Alex Rubinstein, MintPress News analyst and journalist. Federal Judge Claude M. Hilton in Alexandria, Virginia, has ordered Chelsea Manning, the former US Army intelligence officer and whistle-blower who served seven years in prison for passing information to WikiLeaks, to be held in jail for refusing to answer questions before a grand jury. Manning will be held until she testifies or until the grand jury concludes its work, the judge ruled in the closed contempt hearing earlier today. What's going on with Chelsea Manning?It started as a resolution condemning anti-Semitism. Then, anti-Muslim bias was added in. After that came white supremacy. And by the end, it cited “African-Americans, Native Americans, and other people of color, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, immigrants and others” victimized by bigotry. Notably absent were Catholics who don't like puppies and Protestants who don't like re-runs of "Barney Miller." The resolution condemning “hateful expressions of intolerance” passed the House of Representatives by an overwhelming 407 to 23 vote late yesterday afternoon. Twenty-three Republican lawmakers voted against the resolution, arguing the measure was “watered down” and failed to properly condemn Rep. Ilhan Omar's (D-MN) recent controversial remarks on US-Israel relations.The sentencing of Paul Manafort was highly anticipated, but it was an unlikely candidate to become the latest example of a conflict that has vexed legal professionals and activists for decades: systemic inequality in the criminal justice system. It's interesting to me that it takes this sentencing to raise this issue. For example, in 2009, Judge T.S. Ellis III was the judge in the corruption case of former United States Representative William J. Jefferson, who was indicted and convicted of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. On August 5, 2009, he was found guilty of 11 of 16 corruption counts. On November 13, 2009, Jefferson was sentenced to 13 years in prison, the longest sentence given to a congressman. He began serving his sentence in 2012, and in 2017, Judge Ellis addressed Jeffersons's appeal, throwing out seven of his convictions; in December of that year, Jefferson pleaded guilty to three charges in a retrial, and Ellis sentenced him to time served, making Jefferson a free man. Yet, as Judge Ellis handed down Manafort's sentence in a jam-packed Alexandria, Virginia, courtroom Thursday, and observers digested the judge's decision — 47 months — Manafort's case was immediately perceived as a high-profile instance of the justice system working one way for a wealthy, well-connected man, while working in another, harsher way for indigent defendants facing lesser crimes.During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Thursday, Republican Sen. Marco Rubio condemned Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro as a “clear danger” and a “threat to the national security of the US.” As was to be expected, the hearing was filled with plenty of threats and talk of flipping “military elites” and enforcing tougher sanctions. At the same time, Venezuela was suffering one of its most severe power outages in recent history, which stretched into a second day Friday, with hospital patients languishing in the dark, most supermarkets closed, and phone service largely out in the oil-rich but economically collapsing country. Maduro blamed the outage on sabotage by the US government, which has backed an opposition effort to force out the leader. He offered no evidence for the claim and ordered schools and offices closed Friday because of the blackout. But perhaps unexpected was just how out in the open and brazen were Rubio's own admissions of how far he's willing to go in promoting regime change in Caracas. In public testimony, he called on the US to promote “widespread unrest” in Venezuela in order to eventually bring down the Maduro government.GUESTS:Alex Rubinstein — MinstPress News analyst and journalist. Jim Kavanagh — Political analyst and commentator and editor of The Polemicist.Daniel Lazare — Journalist and author of three books: "The Frozen Republic," "The Velvet Coup" and "America's Undeclared War."

The judge in Paul Manafort's Virginia trial for financial crimes sentenced him last night to 47 months in prison - substantially less time than the sentencing guidelines that could have held him behind bars for up to 24 years. Judge Ellis also proclaimed that Manafort (who spent years defrauding the government and representing foreign dictators) led an "otherwise blameless life." MOMocrats Aliza Worthington and Donna Schwartz Mills discuss that, the reported rift in the House Democratic Caucus over remarks made this week by freshman Representative Ilhan Omar - and this week's scandals out of the White House.  Politics from a progressive point of view, produced by Engender Media Group.

Today's Rapid Response Tuesday takes an in-depth look at OA's new favorite clownhorn, Carter Page, and his delightfully mad lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee, the law firm of Perkins Coie, and (I think) the Ancient Order of the Illuminati.  Strap in! We begin with some good ol'-fashioned yodeling, with a roundup of stories with Yodel Mountain implications, including (1) the report that Mueller's probe will conclude after the midterms; (2) Paulie Manafort's latest motion; (3) the departure of White House counsel Don McGahn; and (4) some news regarding Michael Avenatti's White House run in 2020. Then -- oh man -- it's time for a deep dive into Carter Page's lawsuit regarding this September 23, 2016 Yahoo news story, written by esteemed reporter Michael Isikoff, that Mr. Page delightfully believes is defamatory. After all that, we end with an all new Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #98 regarding constitutional law standards for a group home.  Remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE! Recent Appearances None!  If you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links This is the Bloomberg News article suggesting that Mueller's probe will conclude after the midterms. You can click here to read Judge Ellis's order denying Manafort's motion to appear in street clothes. This is the New York Times story on McGahn's departure. Click here to read the FEC data on Michael Avenatti's Fight PAC. This is the Sep. 23, 2016 Yahoo story This is the Carter Page lawsuit, which you absolutely must read.  Oh, and check out the (heavily redacted) FISA application showing that the FBI believes Page to have been the subject of targeted recruitment by the Russian government. This is the September 23, 2016 Isikoff story in Yahoo that Page believes is defamatory; we also referenced Page's trip to Moscow, the terrorism statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2332b, and, of course, the fact that Page previously sued Yahoo over this exact same story and lost. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ Don't forget the OA Facebook Community! For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

Opening Monologues. Matt Dunn guest-hosting Chuck & Julie Show. Manafort Trial Updates. MSM threatens to doxx jurors. Judge Ellis now protected by U.S. Marshals. Fired Strzok's Bad Week compounded by Wal-Mart MAGA Economy. Omarosa Ongoing Fraud. Nate Silver still prognosticating, undimmed by humiliation. Contrasting MSM portrayals of Democrat Keith Ellison and Republican Jim Jordan. Just Another Day for 350 Fake Newspapers coordinating against Trump. Left Power Lust, beyond standards, beyond hypocrisy. Stapleton v. Polis. With Listener Calls & Music via Paul McCartney and AC/DC.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today's episode takes an in-depth look at Donald Trump's favorite "liberal," Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz as seen through the eyes of one of his former students. We begin, however, with an update from the Paul Manafort trial, taking a look at the prosecution's strategy, witness list, and some preliminary rulings by Judge Ellis. After that, we dive very deeply into what looks like a very weird phenomenon:  why is Alan Dershowitz carrying water for a President whom he ostensibly opposes?  Why is he saying things that are demonstrably and indefensibly untrue about the law? Andrew has a theory.  Mostly, though, he has stories and research... but they lead to a theory (we promise)! Finally, we end the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #87 regarding constitutional law and a state vs. the federal Confrontation Clause.  Remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE! Recent Appearances None!  If you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links This is the article in The Hill indicating that the prosecution would, in fact, call Rick Gates; earlier, friend of the show Randall Eliason gave a bunch of reasons why they might not.  Oh, and Eliason also has you covered as to why 'collusion' is, in fact, a crime. This is the laughable Fox News report on how Judge Ellis hates the prosecution; for a dose of reality, you might want to check out this other article in The Hill about how Judge Ellis chastised both sides's lawyers. If you missed it, this is our Episode 107 where we tackled Serial. Here's the PBS retrospective on Dershowitz and the OJ trial. Our Dershowitz story on 'testilying' begins with Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) and the origins of the exclusionary rule; Dershowitz coined the term 'testilying' in this New York Times article from 1994. Testilying is, of course, a consistent problem today (see A, B) -- but Dershowitz hasn't spoken about it since 1998 (and even then, in an entirely different context). Instead, he attacked Baltimore's decision to indict the police in the Freddie Gray case in 2015. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ Don't forget the OA Facebook Community! For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

Today's episode tells you everything you need to know before Paul Manafort's trial in the Eastern District of Virginia, which begins Wednesday, July 25, 2018.  Oh, and we break down the recent lawsuit against McDonald's to boot! We begin, however, with a very good listener question from "Judicial Noir" regarding ethics, science, and a summer internship! After that, it's time to discuss an actual lawsuit over actual cheese.   Yes, there's a class action lawsuit against Thomas's favorite restaurant (McDonald's) -- and we're here to help you separate fact from fiction!  Oh, and along the way, you might learn something about Microsoft, illegal tying arrangements, and antitrust law! Then, it's back to Yodel Mountain to explain in depth exactly what's going on with our buddy Paulie M, and what you can expect over the next two weeks. Finally, we end the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #85 regarding real property.  Remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE! Recent Appearances If you didn't see Andrew's live appearance on Left-Right Radio with Chuck Morse, you can check out the YouTube archive of it.  And if you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links Before we get to McDonald's, you'll need to read all about US v. Microsoft, 253 F.3d 34 (2001).  While you're at it, you might as well brush up on the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. After that, you can read the class action lawsuit against McDonald's regarding the Quarter Pounder and Double Quarter Pounder. Andrew first broke down Judge Ellis in Episode 172. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ Don't forget the OA Facebook Community! For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

The conservative media got very excited when Judge T.S. Ellis questioned the propriety of the Mueller investigation. Yesterday, he actually ruled. 

It's time for another SUPER-SIZED Rapid Response Friday, which means we get to break down Judge Ellis's statements in the Paul Manafort criminal trial (amongst many, many other issues)! We begin, however,  with a brief Andrew (well, mostly ABC and NBC) Was Wrong. After that, the guys discuss a recent 10th Circuit opinion regarding the treatment of detainees in private prisons.  What does it mean for the future of class action litigation?  Listen and find out! After that, it's back to Yodel Mountain, where we break down not only Judge Ellis, but all the developments in or connected to the Mueller investigation, including Michael Flynn and Michael Cohen's "follow the money" report.  Phew! Finally, we end with an all new Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #75 about a contract and a subsequent oral modification that Andrew admits he would have muffed.  If you'd like to play along and show Andrew you're the better lawyer, just retweet our episode on Twitter or share it on Facebook along with your guess.  We'll release the answer on next Tuesday's episode along with our favorite entry! Recent Appearances None!  If you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links Here's the link to a Washington Times story covering the correction regarding Michael Cohen's supposed "wiretap" (that turned out to be a pen register). The case we discussed in the main segment was Menocal v. GEO Group (10th Cir., Feb. 9, 2018). Click here to read the 2016 Obama directive on ending privatized prisons, or (if you're a masochist) here to read the 2017 Trump directive rescinding it. If you only read one thing from this show, please do read the transcript of the May 4 hearing before Judge Ellis.  It's great.  I love this guy. The opposition to Michael Avenatti's pro hac vice motion is here; it also contains the "Executive Summary" laying out Avenatti's "follow the money."  If you prefer to see it in chart form, click here (H/T Washington Post). The TPM article suggesting that Avenatti must have had access to SARs is here. To understand bribery, we highly recommend this primer by Randall Eliason. Finally, please click here to check out Thomas's May 19 talk in New Orleans. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ Don't forget the OA Facebook Community! And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

Today we're going to discuss the legal trial of Paul Manafort. The judge has now demanded the unredacted memoranda spelling out Mueller's exact commission to determine where is authority begins and ends. The FBI has been fond, in recent years, of using "shady" tactics to force people into testifying or illicit guilty pleas for things like lying when there is no evidence of a real crime. Apparently, Judge Ellis is having none of it in his courtroom. Can I just say "way to go Ellis!" ***In a sign the government just can't leave well enough alone, the FDA has gone ahead with a new requirement for businesses to post calorie labels on all their food and drink offerings. Not only will this not reduce calorie consumption but it also puts an undue burden on businesses which should not be required to help ensure you don't eat too many calories. Jason     Support the show.