Podcasts about Jurisprudence

Robert P. George joins John Anderson at the ARC conference in London for a conversation that traces natural law back through Cicero and Aristotle to Martin Luther King's Letter from Birmingham Jail. He also discusses his friendship with utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer on the personhood of the unborn as evidence that serious disagreement and real friendship aren't incompatible.The conversation turns to what happens when that capacity disappears: the tribalism of social media and siloed media ecosystems, and the assassination of Charlie Kirk, which George calls a tragedy not just for Kirk's family but for civic life in the West. He warns that the U.S. may be "one more assassination away from a civil war," and argues that the way back runs through intellectual humility — a willingness to recognise one's own fallibility and to see one's opponent as a fellow citizen rather than an enemy to be destroyed.Robert P. George is an American legal scholar, political philosopher, and public intellectual. He serves as the sixth McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University.

This series is sponsored by Mira and Daniel Stokar.Join Talmud Daily! A new free program from 18Forty. Ten-minute episodes a day (video + audio). Plain English. No prior knowledge assumed. No Hebrew required. Begins August 24, 2026. Join here: Talmuddaily.orgIn this episode of the 18Forty Podcast, we talk to rabbi, attorney, and professor Shlomo Pill about how Torah and teshuva have helped him handle his struggle with addiction.In this episode we discuss:—How do we bring ourselves to do teshuva when things outwardly appear to be going well?—How can we give our children Jewish tools for processing, explaining, and coming to terms with life's difficulties?—How can Torah help us in the inner work of overcoming our negative impulses?Interview begins at 4:53.Tune in to hear a conversation about addiction, teshuva, and the ways Torah can help us make sense of life's struggles and find a path toward growth.Rabbi Dr. Shlomo C. Pill is a rabbi, attorney, and law professor whose scholarship focuses on Jewish, Islamic, and American law, religious liberty, and the relationship between religious traditions and the American legal system. He is an Assistant Professor of Law at Texas Southern University's Thurgood Marshall School of Law and previously taught at Emory University. He is the co-author of Setting the Table: An Introduction to the Jurisprudence of Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein's Arukh Hashulchan and is also the founder of Beis Midrash Nishmas HaTorah in Houston, where he teaches Torah and Penimiyus haTorah.References:Tzidkat HaTzadik 154Story of Our Lives: An Epic Quest for the Soul of our Tradition by Yaakov KleinAttached by Yakov DanishefskyFor more 18Forty:NEWSLETTER: 18forty.org/joinSign up for Talmud DailyCALL: (212) 582-1840EMAIL: info@18forty.orgWEBSITE: 18forty.orgIG: @18fortyX: @18_fortyWhatsApp: join hereBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/18forty-podcast--4344730/support.

The Declaration as a “promissory note”—and what it demands now In the final discussion of The Declaration at 250 series, Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, argues that the Declaration of Independence should be read in the Lincoln–King tradition: not as proof that the American project was completed in 1776, but as a promissory note that sets enduring standards for justice. He confronts the central tension head-on—slavery alongside the Declaration's equality claims—contending that the nation's gravest wrongs were never the result of too much devotion to the Declaration's ideals, but rather repeated failures to honor them. For George, the Declaration's moral architecture depends on natural law and natural rights: rights are not gifts from the state, courts, or political majorities, but are grounded in a “more-than-merely human” authority and therefore cannot be legitimately revoked by human power. He then reframes the most familiar triad—life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—arguing that “liberty” is freedom for worthy ends (not license) and “happiness” is flourishing and character (not mere pleasure or desire satisfaction), which means the founding principles carry substantive moral content rather than a thin, value-neutral individualism. Jonathan Gienapp, Professor of History at Stanford University, broadens and complicates this account by bringing the Declaration's historical context into sharper focus. He emphasizes that the document's immediate purpose was political: to justify revolution and to define legitimate liberty as non-domination—being governed by laws made with genuine representation and consent rather than by an alien will. Gienapp presses George to connect moral freedom-for-flourishing to political freedom-as-self-government: what changes if we place republicanism and democracy at the center of the Declaration's promise, alongside natural rights? He also signals that the Declaration did not simply announce shared principles; it generated intense argument almost immediately over what “liberty” and “licentiousness” meant in practice, setting up a long-running contest over whose interpretation truly carried forward the Revolution's aims. Connect: Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast Website Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn Page Stanford Constitutional Law Center >> Website Stanford Law School >>> Twitter/X Stanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X Chapters: [00:00:26 – 00:04:40] Chapter 1 — Series finale setup + introducing the speakers Host Michael McConnell closes out The Declaration at 250 and tees up the theme: the Declaration as a “promissory note,” then introduces Robert P. George and Jonathan Gienapp and frames the conversation as a capstone debate.[00:04:40 – 00:42:48] Chapter 2 — Robert P. George's case: natural rights, civic virtue, and “freedom for” flourishing George argues America's failures come from infidelity to the Declaration, not devotion to it, and grounds rights in a Creator and natural law. He reframes life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as moral claims aimed at virtue, ordered liberty, and human flourishing—not license or pleasure.[00:43:00 – 00:47:45] Chapter 3 — Jonathan Gienapp's first question: liberty as non-domination and self-government Gienapp presses the political meaning of liberty at the founding—freedom as non-domination under representative institutions and consent. He asks how George's moral account of liberty connects to republican self-rule and the Declaration's grievance-driven justification for revolution.[00:47:45 – 01:00:19] Chapter 4 — Jonathan Gienapp's second and third questions: wealth inequality + early fights over “liberty vs. licentiousness” Gienapp adds the material foundations of republicanism—property distribution, anti-aristocracy reforms like abolishing primogeniture/entail—and asks how inequality threatens civic virtue and ordered liberty. He then argues the Declaration sparked immediate, bitter disputes (Federalists vs. Jeffersonians/Jacksonians) over what counted as true liberty and who “captured the soul” of American democracy.[01:00:27 – 01:09:09] Chapter 5 — George's replies: non-domination affirmed, inequality debated, polarization then vs. now George embraces the non-domination point and explains how founders linked freedom and republican self-government, while suggesting leading founders worried more about forced leveling than wealth gaps. He reflects on early partisan conflict but argues today's divide is deeper because Americans no longer share a common moral vocabulary or civic framework. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

According to research by Gartner, by 2029, sales organizations with AI-driven enablement functions will achieve 40% faster sales stage velocity than those using more traditional approaches. But getting there means building the kind of workflows that tell you what actually works, which is only possible when you can see inside the conversations that selling actually happens in. If you can’t, you might just find yourself scaling an AI-powered program that’s completely misaligned with how your sellers sell and how your buyers buy. So how do you understand what your teams need, and then build an innovative, mature, AI-powered enablement program to match? Riley Rogers: Welcome to the Win/Win Podcast. I’m your host, Riley Rogers. Join us as we dive into changing trends in the workplace and how to navigate them successfully. Here to discuss this topic is Jill Sawyer, Director of Sales Enablement at RL Datix. Thank you so much for joining us today, Jill. I’m really excited to have you here. I think we’ve got a very fun conversation ahead. Could you give us a little bit of an overview of who you are, what your background is, and your work today? Jill Sawyer: Yeah, absolutely. First, thanks so much for having me. I’m super excited to be here. Currently, I sit as the Director of Sales Enablement for North America at RL Datix. I’ve been here for a little over seven and a half years. JS: My background is a bit non-traditional for sales enablement. I started more on the marketing and product marketing side. I moved into the enablement role a few years ago, a little bit over two and a half years ago, but I was really stepping into a function that needed to be built from the ground up. That meant figuring out not just what sellers needed to know, but how to help them actually use it in moments that matter. I’ve also recently gone back to school. I’m currently pursuing my Master’s of Jurisprudence in Health Law at Loyola University Chicago, which has been really valuable in this role. Our customers operate in a highly regulated healthcare environment, so understanding more about compliance, patient safety, risk, and legal frameworks helps me think differently about what our sellers need to understand and how we support them. RR: And you wear so many hats through it all. I’m really excited to see how all of this comes into play in your work today. But before we jump into what you’re working on now, could you give us a little bit of an overview of your sales environment? JS: Yeah. So the way I usually describe RL Datix is that we sit at an intersection of healthcare safety, risk compliance, and operational reliability. Our customers are health systems and hospitals that are trying to solve problems with very real stakes. They’re trying to either prevent harm, respond appropriately when something does go wrong, or maintain regulatory readiness. So it makes our sales environment really complex because those problems rarely belong to one department or one singular buyer. The buying committee can be really broad, and each stakeholder is looking at the problem through a different lens. So for our sellers, the challenge is being able to zoom in and zoom out. They need to understand specific workflows, not only within our product, but within the landscape. But they also need to connect that workflow to the larger operational and strategic priorities of our customers. This is where enablement for us becomes really important. I’m helping translate complex healthcare problems into clear, relevant conversations about value and outcomes and how RL Datix helps raise the standard of care. RR: So a lot for sellers to juggle, and a lot for you to help them juggle, especially because you built the enablement function largely from scratch. While doing so, you were learning what sales enablement as a concept is, what the function should look like, and how you should tailor it to your specific environment. So how did coming in without a more traditional enablement background change the way you thought about what to build, and was that kind of an advantage? JS: Yeah, so I think coming in without a traditional enablement background shaped our function in a really positive way. Since I’ve come from marketing and product marketing, I was always really thinking about our audience, message, positioning, and customer value. But when I moved over into enablement, I quickly realized that having the right message or right content was only part of the equation. I needed to help our field know how to use it in real customer conversations. I really came in thinking about what my sales reps actually need to be more confident, more consistent, and ultimately more effective. Of course, sellers needed content, but they also needed guidance, learning, reinforcement. Our leaders needed coaching and better visibility into what was working and what wasn’t. So in some ways, I approached enablement like building a product. My sellers were the users, the sales process was our workflow, and it was my job to understand their friction points and build them something that made it easier to have stronger customer conversations. RR: I love that. It’s enablement, but make it product marketing. You listed out some things that were important for sellers and things that were important for your leaders, and all of this you had to build from scratch. So as you were looking across what needed to happen, what your first few check boxes on the to-do list were, a key first step was assessing what you had and what you needed. How had RL Datix been supporting its sellers, and where did you start to see those first few gaps? JS: Yeah. When I first stepped into the role, we had a lot of strong subject matter expertise and a ton of people supporting the field in a variety of different ways. The issue wasn’t that our support structure didn’t exist, it was that it wasn’t really connected or, quite frankly, easy to scale. I had a lot of content, but it lived in a variety of different places. We had trainings, but much of it was event-based or dependent on live sessions and then going back and watching re-recordings. I needed to make sure my sellers were hearing the same message and had access to the same guidance on how we wanted our customers to hear about RL Datix and our offerings. And I needed visibility, not only for enablement, but for collaborative teams like product marketing and product, into what was actually being used, what was resonating with our customers, and where we still needed to support the field. So my final assessment really shaped the foundation that we built. It was truly creating what I call that connected enablement environment that could support sellers in the flow of their day-to-day work. RR: Yeah, and I think a recurring theme through all of this is that there were levers to pull, content to create, training to centralize, all of these things, but that wasn’t the end goal. The end goal was that when a seller hits the field, when a seller is on a Zoom call, they’re saying the right things, and they’re not just reading off bullets, they’re tailoring it because they know it and they know it well. So you’re looking at what you need to do. You have your content, you’re beginning to get it centralized and organized, your training is in place, you have data on what reps are using, you’re building. But you still can’t see inside the conversations that sellers are having to understand whether all of that work is, for lack of a better word, working. So what challenges did that lack of visibility create, and why did you start thinking that maybe a conversational intelligence tool was that next step forward? JS: Yeah. So when we brought Highspot in, we truly started with a baseline foundation. Before I could do anything more advanced, I needed to, step one, make it easier for sellers to just find what they needed and understand how to use it. It may sound really basic, but it was a huge step forward because it helped us connect content to the way sellers were actually selling. It also gave us a huge level of visibility. I could start to see what reps were using and what they were not using, to identify those true gaps. But the missing piece was actually our customer conversations. I could easily know if a rep opened a deck or completed a course, but I still didn’t know how that translated when they were in front of a customer. Were they asking strong discovery questions? Were they connecting the message to the customer’s priorities? How were we handling objections? What were we hearing? Without that level of visibility, there was still a lot of guesswork. Enablement, product marketing, product, and sales leaders were all trying to support the field, but a lot of times we were relying on anecdotal feedback or even secondhand information. Conversational intelligence really helped close that gap, and that foundation is really what made the next phase possible. Once we had the content, the training, and guidance all in one spot, I could start to think about how to layer other pieces in, like coaching, conversational intelligence, and eventually deal-level insights on top of it. RR: When you first had that line of sight into the field and what they were actually coming up against, was there anything that you didn’t expect that came through? Things that sellers were either saying that you were like, “Oh my gosh, have you been saying this for the last umpteen months?” Or that you had no idea they were running into that was a problem. You were like, “Oh, we should’ve been helping with this,” or, “We could be enabling differently.” JS: Yeah. I think for us, what it really helped open up was just the level of content that I needed. We had really great high-level intro, top-of-funnel materials, and then I would jump very quickly into technical documents. So I needed to be able to, like you said earlier, customize, and that was a gap that became pretty quickly consistent, that I needed to bring a middle-of-the-road option to help ultimately fast-track opportunities to close. It’s something that we’re still actively working through today. RR: Once you had that line of sight, not only into real-world conversations, but the analytics into usage that we’re talking about, what difference did that make for you and other cross-functional teams? We have this example of middle-of-the-funnel content, realizing this is a necessity and maybe we aren’t serving it. But were there any other moments that made it very clear this was helpful? JS: Yeah. It just gives me, and our whole company honestly, a much better shared understanding of what actually is happening in the field. From an enablement standpoint, it helps us see where reps were confident and where they needed support. Were they asking discovery questions? Were they connecting the message to customer priorities? It helped us figure out if there were gaps and ultimately skills I needed to help upskill. For our leaders, it gives them more specific coaching moments. So instead of coaching from memory or only from a pipeline update, they have the ability to coach from real customer interactions without having to sit in live on 50 calls a week. It also helped open up a level of visibility across cross-functional teams. Product marketing can come in and review whether messaging is landing, whether the decking is being used. They also get a great depth of understanding around customer questions, objections, and needs, more directly. So I’m not relying only on select feedback or the loudest feedback in the room. I use real customer conversation to keep improving our full enablement environment. RR: And as you alluded to, you’re beginning to use Deal Agent to capture deal-level insights and start to act on them. So how do you see it adding value to the environment you’ve already built and the environment you’ve already got your sellers comfortable using? JS: Yeah, Deal Agent is something we’re really excited about. We just launched it and had a full all-sales meeting with our Highspot customer success team, and it’s really that next layer of a foundation we’ve already built. We started with getting content and training all in one place. Now we’re layering in conversational intelligence, but Deal Agent is going to take that a step further for us by connecting the conversations and insights we’re gathering back to the opportunity level. This is really important for us because our sellers and our leaders don’t just need to know what happened on a call, they need to understand what that ultimately means for the deal, for them to close business. Are they talking to the right stakeholders? Are priorities clear? Do we have risks we need to address? For our sales reps, I think the value is that it can reduce some of the manual work and help them stay focused on the right actions. For leaders, it gives clear visibility into deal health and where they may need to coach. For the rest of the organization, it gives us another level of insight, so I can look to see what patterns are building across opportunities. The AI agents built into it are amazing too, because they’re helping eliminate some admin burden by building Digital Rooms faster, with the content needed at that moment for that deal. RR: And I think what’s kind of interesting is that this is a vision you see, and you’re like, “I see so much value in this. I see what the potential is.” But it’s so new, and it’s such a new way of working for literally everybody. You’re not trying to roll out a program you’ve seen elsewhere, you’re on the cutting edge. So how have you been tackling things like the rollout, the behavior change, getting folks accustomed to this very new way of working? JS: Yeah. So for us, it was big. We didn’t really have any tools like this in place already. The biggest thing we’ve learned is that you cannot roll it out as just another tool. Sellers already have a lot of tools, and if something feels disconnected from their day-to-day workflow, adoption is going to be really difficult. So we tried to anchor the rollout in practical use cases. How does it help a rep prepare for a meeting? Does it help them follow up faster, remember what the customer actually said? For our sales leaders, we’re focusing now on that next phase of coaching and visibility, helping them find a better way to understand what’s happening in their field and coach their teams appropriately. But in all honesty, there is a bit of change management. It’s a different way of working for some reps. Some reps were super excited and dove in headfirst, and others really needed to see the value a few times before it clicked and became muscle memory. So I try to keep that adoption path clear and practical. I’m not asking people to change everything overnight. We’re helping them build small habits: review call summaries, look at action items, use that deal-level information to pressure test next steps, use Digital Rooms or Pitches to send content and see what customers are engaging with. The key for us was making it feel useful before making it feel mandatory. Once people saw that it could save them time and improve their follow-up, it became less intimidating, and after a certain period of time, I was actually able to pull down any old resources they may have had a habit of going back to. RR: And since you’ve gone live with both Highspot and Deal Agent, what have you heard from the field on how they’re responding to it? JS: Yeah, so anecdotally we’ve heard that being able to get those next action items and the call takeaway was a really big piece. Being able to more easily share back the call recording also saved some steps from how they used to do it before. Deal Agent is still relatively new for us, but I think where we’re honing in is the ability to slice data in different ways, by our sales forecasting, by our sales stages, and then really pairing that with a lot of the intelligence and reporting we already have in Salesforce. That gives us and our leadership a much deeper understanding of what’s truly happening and where leaders need to step in. RR: So to your point of don’t boil the ocean, there are a handful of use cases that your sellers like, that you like, that your leaders like, that are slowly building the muscle. And over time, things might change, new use cases might emerge, but as of right now, there are a few recurring things that it sounds like people really are finding useful. Super cool, I love that. And you touched on this a little bit, but I’d love to hear a little bit more about how this is helping you solve for some of the guesswork you were feeling. We talked about building without knowing what was being used by the field and what was landing. So now that you have that combination of conversation, deal data, and usage data, how does that change what you and other teams are building and providing to your reps? JS: Yeah. It really helped us move from a state of assumption to being evidence-backed. Before, I had a lot of smart people supporting the field, but we would build materials based on individual feedback or something needed for one deal, and assume it was scalable across all deals. It’s not necessarily a wrong way to do it, but it’s an incomplete way to do it. Now that I’ve got conversations and deal data all in one spot, I can start to pull out patterns. Where can I look to see what customers are actually asking? Where can I look to see what customers are actually engaging with? Is it the same consistent objection that keeps coming up, and are we answering it in the right way? For my team, it means we’re much more targeted. Maybe the answer is a new training. Maybe it’s a better talk track or coaching around certain areas of the sales process. It could be working with product marketing to create a new Sales Play, or a clearer way to help position our value. The biggest change is that we’re actively, every day, listening, learning, and adjusting based on what’s actually happening out in the field. RR: I love that. And I think that middle-of-the-funnel example is such a good example of how you can stitch all that information together and recognize that there’s a component of your strategy you can really pull on that might be particularly valuable. So I love that we have that, not only the high level of what it’s doing, but how it comes into play in the actual work happening. Okay, so looking back, a year ago now, a few months ago now with Deal Agent, from where you started to where you are now, what’s the biggest impact you’ve achieved, or the proudest moment that sticks with you? JS: I think the thing I’m most proud of is that we built something literally from the ground up, and it changed how enablement shows up for our business. The biggest impact has been moving from a fragmented environment to a connected foundation that can be structured, measured, and embedded into how our go-to-market teams work. I can actually see that in a shift in our numbers. When we first brought Highspot on board, it was specifically a sales-only tool. I didn’t have any other broader teams in the tooling, and now we’ve doubled our Highspot user base. I’ve expanded from supporting just sales to supporting the broader go-to-market team. Training has been one of our largest wins. We’ve moved from one-off live training to structured onboarding paths and ongoing learning. We’re actually in the midst of a current go-to-market training refresh, taking everyone through our RL Datix 360, as we call it, and I went from maybe a 4% completion rate in the early days to now seeing nearly 100% completion. Last time I looked, we were at around 97 or 98%. That’s a huge shift in the consistency and accountability I have with my field. For content, 91% of our internal audiences are viewing our content in Highspot, and I’ve got close to 500 opportunities actively engaging with our content. So it’s telling me this isn’t just a repository where things sit. It’s becoming embedded in their daily workflows, in how they prepare, sell, and engage our customers. There’s also a time-savings piece. It’s a little harder to quantify, but I feel it every day. I’m still working toward maturing how we connect this directly to revenue outcomes like win rate and pipeline movement, but now I’ve got a solid foundation, a high level of adoption, and the visibility to keep building toward that. RR: Jill, the volume of work that happened in one year, when we talk about building the foundation, that’s the year. But you took 365 days, built out the foundation, drove the behavior change, and now you’re already in the midst of that next phase of evolution and getting people on board. So bravo, I don’t know how you did that. Hope you’re sleeping. I’d love to get a little bit of perspective on how you did it, for other leaders who are in that phase of building a strategy from the ground up. How would you recommend they get started, especially in an AI-first world? JS: Yeah. We went live with the product really, really fast. I had a great team behind me, and we worked hard every single day to get things built. But my advice would be actually not to start with AI. It’s probably going to be a little controversial, but I think you should start with the problem you’re trying to solve. It can be really tempting to jump straight into the newest tool or capability, but if your foundation isn’t there, AI can just make the mess faster. I would start by understanding where the friction is for your sellers and go-to-market teams. Can they find what they need? Do they understand the message in training? Do they know what good looks like? Are managers coaching consistently? Do you have visibility into what’s happening in customer conversations? Can you tell what’s helping deals move forward or stall? Once you understand those gaps, you can be more intentional about where AI fits. Can it help a rep prepare faster, summarize conversations, surface deal risk, build up Digital Rooms? It should really be tied to a true, real workflow and a business need. This is when AI becomes much more powerful, because it’s got the right context. It’s not just another tool. It’s a way to scale insight, reduce manual work, and help the team make better decisions faster. So for an enablement leader starting from scratch, I’d say: listen first, build your foundation, solve the real frictions in your sales force, and then use AI to scale what’s already working. RR: I really liked the question framework you threw out there. Because I think especially when people are starting to build, you have this insane arena of potential work to be done. And when you can start to ask the right questions that build toward the right purpose, you can get to the exciting work down the line. Well, Jill, thank you so much for chatting with us today. It’s been really wonderful to hear a little bit about what you’re building, how you’re thinking about building, and I’m so curious to see what’s next down the line. We’ll have to stay in touch. JS: Yeah. Thanks so much for having me. This was great. RR: To our audience, thank you for listening to this episode of the Win/Win Podcast. Be sure to tune in next time for more insights on how you can maximize go-to-market success with Highspot.

Civic friendship is not a nicety. For self-governing people, it is a necessity. What happens to a democracy when citizens stop seeing each other as citizens at all? Robert P. George is Princeton's McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions (and known for his enduring friendship with Cornel West) argues that “the collapse of civic friendship is a catastrophic threat to public life.” In this bonus segment from his November 2020 conversation with Evan Rosa, Robert George presents the difference between civility and mere ‘politesse; the habit of wrapping our emotions so tightly around our convictions that we assume a posture of infallibility; and the intellectual humility it takes to consider that a political enemy might have something to teach us as a civic friend. They also discuss the courage required to break ranks—George recounts how he and West, from opposite political poles, each found themselves treated as heretics in 2016 for declining to back their respective party's nominee—and why he urges his students and his own children to cultivate humility, open-mindedness, and courage, knowing exactly what it can cost to stand by a conscientious belief. Episode Highlights ”Civic friendship is actually important for all sorts of policies, but for a self-governing people, for a democratic people, civic friendship is really critically important.” ”But if we do, as we are prone to do, wrap our emotions too tightly around our convictions, then we become dogmatists. Then we become unwilling to consider the possibility that we might be wrong and that a critic might be right.” ”This is hard, but it takes humility to recognize that I might be wrong, not merely about the less important superficial and more trivial things of life, but I might be wrong even about the most important things.” ”Civic friendship, civility is not just politesse … Civility is something deeper. It is genuinely listening to the guy who disagrees with you … listening with an openness to learning, considering whether in fact he might be right.” ”You can't have an open mind unless you have intellectual humility.” ”You can become a heretic very fast by breaking ranks, even on a single issue, if the issue was even moderately important.” ”So I really encourage my young people … to try to develop the virtues of intellectual humility, open-mindedness, and courage, because sometimes courage is going to be needed.” About Robert P. George Robert P. George is the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University and director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. A legal philosopher and public intellectual, he has chaired the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and served on the President's Council on Bioethics and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. His books include ”Making Men Moral,” ”In Defense of Natural Law,” and ”Seeking Truth and Speaking Truth,” and, with Cornel West, ”Truth Matters,” a dialogue on fruitful disagreement. A West Virginia native, he plays bluegrass banjo and guitar. Helpful Links and Resources Civic Friendship, Courageous Humility, and Seeking Truth Together, Episode 38 and the full interview for this clip: https://faith.yale.edu/media/civic-friendship-courageous-humility-and-seeking-truth-together Robert P. George's website: https://robertpgeorge.com/ Robert P. George on X: https://twitter.com/McCormickProf Seeking Truth and Speaking Truth: Law and Morality in Our Cultural Moment, George's most recent book: https://www.encounterbooks.com/books/seeking-truth-speaking-truth/ Truth Matters: A Dialogue on Fruitful Disagreement in an Age of Division, by Robert P. George and Cornel West: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Truth-Matters/Robert-P-George/9798888451700 Making Men Moral: Civil Liberties and Public Morality, George's best-known scholarly book: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/making-men-moral-9780198260240 Election of 1800, from the Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia at Monticello: https://www.monticello.org/encyclopedia/election-1800 Show Notes Civic friendship: indispensable and necessary for a self-governing people Fellow citizens recast as enemies to be defeated and destroyed Are elections as existential contests?—with the losing side expecting retaliation, the winning side claiming the norms Breakdown near the founding of the Republic The election of 1800, incumbent John Adams against Thomas Jefferson: https://www.monticello.org/encyclopedia/election-1800 Federalists seeing Jeffersonians as carriers of the French Revolution; Jeffersonians seeing Federalists as would-be British monarchists Antebellum America: North and South unable to imagine sharing one republic Is our identity constructed around belief? Emotional investment in conviction as a good thing in itself Wrapping emotions too tightly, and the slide into dogmatism A practical posture of infallibility Disagreement recoded as moral defect, and friendship ruled out Intellectual humility as the missing virtue Being wrong about the most important things, not just the trivial ones Civility as more than politesse Listening with an openness to learning, not waiting for a turn to speak Honoring the other as a rational creature with something to teach Open-mindedness without paralysis A conservative and a democratic socialist as frequent interlocutors: https://www.cornelwest.com/about/ Courage as a civic virtue Tribalism in formal institutions and informal friend circles alike Becoming a heretic by breaking ranks on a single issue Excommunication, suspicion, and the social cost of independent thought Two friends at opposite poles, both out of step in 2016 Counsel to students and to his own children: humility, open-mindedness, courage #CivicFriendship #IntellectualHumility #Civility #Polarization #RobertPGeorge #CornelWest #FaithAndCulture #ForTheLifeOfTheWorld Production Notes This podcast featured Robert George Hosted and Produced by Evan Rosa Production assistance and editing by Noah Senthil A Production of the Yale Center for Faith & Culture at Yale Divinity School https://faith.yale.edu/about Support For the Life of the World podcast by giving to the Yale Center for Faith & Culture: https://faith.yale.edu/give

The intersection of domestic civil rights struggles and international human rights law represents a critical frontier in the fight against systemic racism and state-sanctioned violence. The UN Human Rights Council's historic George Floyd resolution marked a watershed moment, demonstrating how international legal mechanisms can be mobilized to address persistent patterns of racial oppression within the United States. This development reflects broader questions about the relationship between legal systems and liberation, particularly when examining how the rule of law itself may function as a mechanism for perpetuating racial hierarchies rather than dismantling them. Critical race theorists have long argued that legal structures, rather than providing pathways to freedom, may actually constitute sophisticated forms of control that maintain white supremacist power relations through seemingly neutral juridical processes.Join host Professor Sahar Aziz for a powerful dual presentation featuring Professor Benjamin Davis, who examines the international legal implications of the UN Human Rights Council's response to systemic racism in America, and Professor Anthony Farley from Albany Law School, whose groundbreaking work in Critical Race Theory explores how the very foundations of law and property rights emerge from and perpetuate anti-Black violence. Professor Davis analyzes how international human rights mechanisms are finally turning their scrutiny toward American racial injustice, while Professor Farley presents his provocative thesis that legal liberation itself may be an impossibility within current juridical structures. Together, these distinguished scholars challenge listeners to confront uncomfortable truths about whether reform within existing legal frameworks can ever achieve genuine racial justice, or whether more fundamental transformations of law and society are necessary.#Racism #CRT #CriticalRaceTheory #CivilRightsBiographyAnthony Paul Farley is the James Campbell Matthews Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence at Albany Law School, where he specializes in constitutional law, criminal procedure, and legal theory. He is a member of the American Law Institute and has served on the Board of Governors of the Society of American Law Teachers (SALT) and the Executive Committee of the Minorities Section of the Association of American Law Schools. Prior to joining Albany Law School, Professor Farley was a tenured faculty member at Boston College Law School for 16 years. Before entering academia, he served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and practiced law as a Corporate/Securities Associate with Shearman and Sterling in New York City. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School and the University of Virginia.Benjamin G. Davis is Professor of Law Emeritus at the University of Toledo College of Law, where he taught public international law, contracts, and alternative dispute resolution. He holds degrees from Harvard College, Harvard Law School, and Harvard Business School. Before entering academia, Professor Davis served as American Legal Counsel at the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris, where he supervised over 1,000 international arbitration and mediation cases. He led the successful effort in the American Society of International Law to pass its Centennial Resolution on Laws of War and Detainee Treatment, only the eighth resolution in that organization's history. He has written and spoken extensively on accountability for torture, military commissions, and international human rights law.Recommended ReadingsThe Black Body as Fetish Object, Oregon Law Review (1997)Perfecting Slavery, Loyola University Chicago Law Journal (2004)The Colorline as Capitalist Accumulation, Buffalo Law Review (2008)Support the showSupport the Center for Security, Race and Rights by following us and making a donation:Donate: https://give.rutgersfoundation.org/csrr-support/20046.html Subscribe to our Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEbUfYcWGZapBNYvCObiCpp3qtxgH_jFy Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rucsrr Follow us on Instagram: https://instagram.com/rutgerscsrr Follow us on Threads: https://threads.com/rutgerscsrr Follow us on Facebook: https://facebook.com/rucsrr Follow us on TikTok: https://tiktok.com/rucsrr 

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comRobert P. George is a legal scholar and political philosopher. At Princetown, he's the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and the director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. He's also a senior fellow at both the American Enterprise Institute and the Witherspoon Institute, which he co-founded. His many books include Making Men Moral and In Defense of Natural Law. We spent many years sparring in print over marriage, gays, and Catholicism.For two clips of the episode — on disobeying unjust laws, and the supposed harms of gay marriage — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: his dad's harrowing service in WWII; Robby growing up in Appalachia with his grandfathers in the coal mines; first in his family to go to college; stories of both of us being at Oxford at the same time; the origins of bluegrass; Robert Byrd's legacy; Plato's Gorgias; Aristotle and friendship; Robby's close friendship with Cornel West; Montaigne; Aquinas; Vatican II; Eastern Orthodox liturgy; neo-scholasticism; Darwin's survival of the fittest; Nietzsche; loving one's enemy as uniquely Christian; just law and unjust law; MLK's letter from a Birmingham jail; Hume; Oakeshott; natural law theorists vs legal positivists; the AIDS crisis; Christian marriage vs civil marriage; divorce; the Manhattan Declaration; Henry VIII's annulments; the sexual habits of Clinton and Trump; illiberalism on the left and right; and the beached squids of Ptown.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. Coming up: Ross Barkan on the DSA and Mamdani, John O'Sullivan on conservatism, Azam Ahmed on terrifying new drugs, and Megan McArdle on pretty much anything. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Where did America get the idea that "all men are created equal"? Princeton's Dr. Robert George traces it back further than Aristotle or Cicero, all the way to Genesis 1. Come along as we explore what this may mean for how we understand faith, truth, and the American founding today.  Guest bio:  Dr. Robert P. George is McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University.  Show Notes:  museumoftheBible.org/america-250 RobertpGeorge.com rgeorge.scholar.princeton.edu x.com/McCormickProf Books by Robert George, PhD (Amazon)  Stay up to date with Museum of the Bible on social media:  Instagram: @museumofBible  X: @museumofBible  Facebook: museumofBible  LinkedIn: museumofBible  YouTube: @museumoftheBible 

Grounded in empirical studies, this book is both a history of the emergence of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India and a model of innovative legal research. The book inaugurates a creative practice of scholarly activism that engages a new way of thinking about law and feminist jurisprudence, one that is geared to acknowledge and take responsibility for the hierarchies in Indian academic practices. Its method of conversation and accountability continues the feminist tradition of taking reciprocity and the time and place of collaboration seriously. It helps make visible the specific ties between post-colonial life and law and joins the work of refusing and reimagining the hierarchical formation of legal knowledge in a caste-based Indian society. A significant contribution to the history and practice of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India, A Jurisprudence of Conversations: Law, Life and Feminism in Post-colonial India (Cambridge University Press, 2026) will appeal to both an academic and activist readership. Debolina Dutta is a Research Fellow at Melbourne Law School's Centre of Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (CEVAW) Saumya Dadoo is a PhD Candidate at MESAAS, Columbia University 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

Grounded in empirical studies, this book is both a history of the emergence of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India and a model of innovative legal research. The book inaugurates a creative practice of scholarly activism that engages a new way of thinking about law and feminist jurisprudence, one that is geared to acknowledge and take responsibility for the hierarchies in Indian academic practices. Its method of conversation and accountability continues the feminist tradition of taking reciprocity and the time and place of collaboration seriously. It helps make visible the specific ties between post-colonial life and law and joins the work of refusing and reimagining the hierarchical formation of legal knowledge in a caste-based Indian society. A significant contribution to the history and practice of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India, A Jurisprudence of Conversations: Law, Life and Feminism in Post-colonial India (Cambridge University Press, 2026) will appeal to both an academic and activist readership. Debolina Dutta is a Research Fellow at Melbourne Law School's Centre of Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (CEVAW) Saumya Dadoo is a PhD Candidate at MESAAS, Columbia University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

Grounded in empirical studies, this book is both a history of the emergence of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India and a model of innovative legal research. The book inaugurates a creative practice of scholarly activism that engages a new way of thinking about law and feminist jurisprudence, one that is geared to acknowledge and take responsibility for the hierarchies in Indian academic practices. Its method of conversation and accountability continues the feminist tradition of taking reciprocity and the time and place of collaboration seriously. It helps make visible the specific ties between post-colonial life and law and joins the work of refusing and reimagining the hierarchical formation of legal knowledge in a caste-based Indian society. A significant contribution to the history and practice of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India, A Jurisprudence of Conversations: Law, Life and Feminism in Post-colonial India (Cambridge University Press, 2026) will appeal to both an academic and activist readership. Debolina Dutta is a Research Fellow at Melbourne Law School's Centre of Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (CEVAW) Saumya Dadoo is a PhD Candidate at MESAAS, Columbia University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

Grounded in empirical studies, this book is both a history of the emergence of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India and a model of innovative legal research. The book inaugurates a creative practice of scholarly activism that engages a new way of thinking about law and feminist jurisprudence, one that is geared to acknowledge and take responsibility for the hierarchies in Indian academic practices. Its method of conversation and accountability continues the feminist tradition of taking reciprocity and the time and place of collaboration seriously. It helps make visible the specific ties between post-colonial life and law and joins the work of refusing and reimagining the hierarchical formation of legal knowledge in a caste-based Indian society. A significant contribution to the history and practice of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India, A Jurisprudence of Conversations: Law, Life and Feminism in Post-colonial India (Cambridge University Press, 2026) will appeal to both an academic and activist readership. Debolina Dutta is a Research Fellow at Melbourne Law School's Centre of Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (CEVAW) Saumya Dadoo is a PhD Candidate at MESAAS, Columbia University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Grounded in empirical studies, this book is both a history of the emergence of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India and a model of innovative legal research. The book inaugurates a creative practice of scholarly activism that engages a new way of thinking about law and feminist jurisprudence, one that is geared to acknowledge and take responsibility for the hierarchies in Indian academic practices. Its method of conversation and accountability continues the feminist tradition of taking reciprocity and the time and place of collaboration seriously. It helps make visible the specific ties between post-colonial life and law and joins the work of refusing and reimagining the hierarchical formation of legal knowledge in a caste-based Indian society. A significant contribution to the history and practice of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India, A Jurisprudence of Conversations: Law, Life and Feminism in Post-colonial India (Cambridge University Press, 2026) will appeal to both an academic and activist readership. Debolina Dutta is a Research Fellow at Melbourne Law School's Centre of Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (CEVAW) Saumya Dadoo is a PhD Candidate at MESAAS, Columbia University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Grounded in empirical studies, this book is both a history of the emergence of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India and a model of innovative legal research. The book inaugurates a creative practice of scholarly activism that engages a new way of thinking about law and feminist jurisprudence, one that is geared to acknowledge and take responsibility for the hierarchies in Indian academic practices. Its method of conversation and accountability continues the feminist tradition of taking reciprocity and the time and place of collaboration seriously. It helps make visible the specific ties between post-colonial life and law and joins the work of refusing and reimagining the hierarchical formation of legal knowledge in a caste-based Indian society. A significant contribution to the history and practice of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India, A Jurisprudence of Conversations: Law, Life and Feminism in Post-colonial India (Cambridge University Press, 2026) will appeal to both an academic and activist readership. Debolina Dutta is a Research Fellow at Melbourne Law School's Centre of Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (CEVAW) Saumya Dadoo is a PhD Candidate at MESAAS, Columbia University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Grounded in empirical studies, this book is both a history of the emergence of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India and a model of innovative legal research. The book inaugurates a creative practice of scholarly activism that engages a new way of thinking about law and feminist jurisprudence, one that is geared to acknowledge and take responsibility for the hierarchies in Indian academic practices. Its method of conversation and accountability continues the feminist tradition of taking reciprocity and the time and place of collaboration seriously. It helps make visible the specific ties between post-colonial life and law and joins the work of refusing and reimagining the hierarchical formation of legal knowledge in a caste-based Indian society. A significant contribution to the history and practice of feminist jurisprudence in post-colonial India, A Jurisprudence of Conversations: Law, Life and Feminism in Post-colonial India (Cambridge University Press, 2026) will appeal to both an academic and activist readership. Debolina Dutta is a Research Fellow at Melbourne Law School's Centre of Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (CEVAW) Saumya Dadoo is a PhD Candidate at MESAAS, Columbia University

As part of our ongoing series of episodes devoted to thecelebration of the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration, we are delighted to bring you an episode devoted to the legal relevance of the Declaration's most famous sentence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” We'll focus in today's episode particularly on that last phrase. In his Commentaries on the Laws of England, William Blackstone described the pursuit of happiness as a science of jurisprudence by which his students could identify, and then apply, the first principles of the Common Law in their future work in law.  Separately, the American founders includedthe pursuit of happiness as one of only three unalienable rights specifically listed in the Declaration of Independence.  Where do Blackstone and the founders agree and disagree in their understanding of the pursuit of happiness? What practical role (if any) did they suggest the concept could serve in English and early American law and legal philosophy? To discuss these subjects, we are pleased to have Carli N. Conklin with us. She is an associate professor at University of Missouri School of Law, an associate professor of constitutional democracy and former associate director at theKinder Institute on Constitutional Democracy, and director of the School of Law's Center for the Study of Dispute Resolution. She earned her JD/MA and PhD in American Legal History from the University of Virginia, where she received the School of Law's John and Madeleine Traynor prize for outstanding written work. This episode is captured from a jointly-sponsored webinar by the James Wilson Institute and the Center for Religion Culture and Democracy of First Liberty Institute.

John Demjanjuk lived for decades as a retired autoworker in suburban Cleveland. Then investigators accused him of being "Ivan the Terrible," one of the most notorious guards at Treblinka. What followed was one of the strangest and most troubling Nazi war-crimes cases of the postwar era: extradition, eyewitness testimony, a death sentence, a reversal, and a final prosecution many years later. In this episode, Michael Shermer talks with Lawrence Douglas, professor at Amherst College and author of The Criminal State: War Atrocity and the Dream of International Justice, about Demjanjuk, Eichmann, Nuremberg, Holocaust denial, and the problem of proving atrocities decades after they happened. How reliable is eyewitness memory after 40 or 50 years? What did Nuremberg actually establish? Was Eichmann really just a bureaucrat? And can a courtroom ever deliver justice for crimes almost too large to comprehend? Lawrence Douglas is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought at Amherst College and a Guggenheim fellow. His many books include The Right Wrong Man and The Memory of Judgment. His writing has appeared in leading publications such as Harper's, The Wall Street Journal, and The Economist. His new book is The Criminal State: War Atrocity and the Dream of International Justice.

What does recent polling data reveal about Americans' focus on God and country? Robert P. George is a political philospher and the sixth McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University. He joins Kirk Cameron to discuss the origins of Fidelity Month and the role it plays in keeping America on a steady religious and political pathway. Don't miss this insightful interview on Takeaways with Kirk Cameron on TBN! Missed the last episode? Listen in as Dr. Kathy Koch and Dr. Jeff Myers share how parents can counter confused cultural gender ideologies with Biblical truth. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠WATCH Takeaways with Kirk Cameron episodes for free on TBN+⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! Each episode of Takeaways with Kirk Cameron features knowledgeable guests having a respectful and thoughtful conversation surrounding topics that are impacting our society every day. Kirk's hope is that you will walk away from this show with practical steps on how to better your family, your community, and your nation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In today's episode, David explains why he believes some well-intentioned Christian political advocates, notably in regard to the politics of abortion, have been taken captive by the empty traditions and philosophies of men that are “not according to Christ” (Colossians 2:8). He says why he thinks enacting "righteous" statutes is not really the issue: It's far bigger than many Christians realize.Support the show: https://www.factennessee.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this week's episode of the RealClearInvestigations Podcast, J. Peder Zane and James Varney speak with Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, about the national civics education he has spearheaded and how to have conversations across the political divide. On the news round-up, Zane and Varney discuss a range of articles responding to the violence that erupted in England and Belfast following racially charged incidents.  00:00 Introduction and Personal Anecdote 01:30 Current Events and Political Climate 03:52 Racial Inequality and Public Response 06:16 Media Framing and Public Perception 09:44 Civics Education and Its Importance 13:01 Interview with Robert George on Civics Education 20:32 The Shift in Academic Focus 24:25 Conservative Perspectives in Academia 31:17 The Pursuit of Truth and Intellectual Humility 32:04 The Role of Academic Freedom in Education 33:25 Bridging the Gap: Intellectual Honesty in Discourse 37:34 Navigating the Age of Feeling and Humility 48:44 The Machinery of Dispute Resolution in Democracy 56:35 Hope vs. Optimism: The Future of American Democracy Articles Discussed in This Podcast: Robert P. George Official Websitehttps://robertpgeorge.com/ Robert P. George X Accounthttps://x.com/McCormickProf Video: Robert P. George in Conversation with Cornel Westhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwBxVjkOeV0 New York Times: In the U.K., a Violent Cycle: Hateful Attacks, Right-Wing Agitation and Riots https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/11/world/europe/northern-ireland-stabbing-immigration.html Atlantic: How Britain Became as Poor as Mississippi https://archive.is/6q9Gp Telegraph: Erect Sea Barrier Off Belgium To Halt Migrant ‘Taxi Boats,'https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/belgians-propose-sea-barrier-halt-151307951.html Sign up for the RealClearInvestigations Newsletter. Watch each episode on the RealClearPolitics YouTube ChannelContact us with your thoughts and feedback: jpederzane@realclearinvestigations.com

Have a comment? Send us a text! (We read all of them but can't reply). Email us: Will@faithfulpoliticspodcast.comWhat happens when feelings become the test of truth?Robert P. George joins Faithful Politics to talk about what he calls “the age of feeling,” a moment where many people treat personal emotion as the final word on what is true. George argues that this does not lead to tolerance. It often makes disagreement feel like a personal attack, which shuts down honest conversation and creates real problems for democracy. The conversation moves through faith, reason, truth, tribalism, intellectual humility, and the challenge of disagreeing with your own side. Will brings in Jonathan Haidt's work on intuition and political identity, while Josh and George work through harder questions around same-sex marriage, gender, Obergefell, Loving v. Virginia, and the deeper moral assumptions underneath those debates.At its core, this episode is about whether Americans can still disagree seriously without turning each other into enemies. George's answer is that truth-seeking requires more than strong opinions. It requires reasons, evidence, humility, and the courage to listen when your tribe says one thing and your conscience says another.website: robertpgeorge.comGuest BioRobert P. George is the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. He is a legal scholar, political philosopher, and public intellectual whose work focuses on natural law, constitutionalism, religious liberty, conscience, civil discourse, and moral reasoning in public life. He is the author of several books, including Conscience and Its Enemies, Making Men Moral, Seeking Truth and Speaking Truth, and Truth Matters, co-authored with Cornel West. Support the show

The Rod and Greg Show Daily Rundown – Wednesday, June 3, 20264:20 pm: Scott McKay, Contributing Editor to American Spectator, joins the show for a conversation about his piece on the demise of 60 Minutes and CBS News.4:38 pm: Sarah Parshall Perry, Vice President of Defending Education, joins the show to discuss how the courts have finally put a stop to the Biden administration's attempts to change Title IX to allow males into traditionally female-only spaces.6:05 pm: Robert George, Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, joins the show to discuss the idea behind “Fidelity Month,” which calls for a rededication to patriotism, family and faith. Governor Spencer Cox has declared June as “Fidelity Month” in Utah.6:20 pm: Susan Crabtree, White House and National Political Correspondent for Real Clear News, joins Rod and Greg to discuss her piece about how Republican “change agents” have infiltrated the elections in deep-blue California.6:38 pm: Author and journalist Bethany Mandel joins the show to discuss her piece for the New York Post on how scientists are finally moving off the predictions of climate doom.

The Criminal State: War, Atrocity, and the Dream of International Justice (Princeton University Press, 2026) offers a gripping account of how law has confronted the most radical forms of state violence. Beautifully written, broad in scope, and bracingly original, it weaves history with political thought to trace the shifting legal response to state aggression and atrocities, from Leopold's rule over the Congo to Putin's war in Ukraine. At its heart is Lawrence Douglas's fresh interpretation of the law's reckoning with Nazi aggression and atrocity. He shows how the Nuremberg trials challenged centuries of thought—rooted in Hobbes and other canonical thinkers—that shielded sovereigns from legal scrutiny. Yet Nuremberg's bid to frame aggression as the cornerstone of a new order of international criminal law largely failed, giving way to a system now centrally concerned with crimes against humanity and genocide—while leaving unresolved the legality and effectiveness of using force to stop the worst violations of human rights. Providing rare historical perspective on the dilemmas facing international courts, The Criminal State is a sweeping, provocative history of the struggle to bring perpetrators of state violence to justice. Our guest is Professor Lawrence Douglas, who is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College. Our host is Eleonora Mattiacci, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Amherst College. She is the author of "Volatile States in International Politics" (Oxford University Press, 2023). 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 Criminal State: War, Atrocity, and the Dream of International Justice (Princeton University Press, 2026) offers a gripping account of how law has confronted the most radical forms of state violence. Beautifully written, broad in scope, and bracingly original, it weaves history with political thought to trace the shifting legal response to state aggression and atrocities, from Leopold's rule over the Congo to Putin's war in Ukraine. At its heart is Lawrence Douglas's fresh interpretation of the law's reckoning with Nazi aggression and atrocity. He shows how the Nuremberg trials challenged centuries of thought—rooted in Hobbes and other canonical thinkers—that shielded sovereigns from legal scrutiny. Yet Nuremberg's bid to frame aggression as the cornerstone of a new order of international criminal law largely failed, giving way to a system now centrally concerned with crimes against humanity and genocide—while leaving unresolved the legality and effectiveness of using force to stop the worst violations of human rights. Providing rare historical perspective on the dilemmas facing international courts, The Criminal State is a sweeping, provocative history of the struggle to bring perpetrators of state violence to justice. Our guest is Professor Lawrence Douglas, who is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College. Our host is Eleonora Mattiacci, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Amherst College. She is the author of "Volatile States in International Politics" (Oxford University Press, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

The Criminal State: War, Atrocity, and the Dream of International Justice (Princeton University Press, 2026) offers a gripping account of how law has confronted the most radical forms of state violence. Beautifully written, broad in scope, and bracingly original, it weaves history with political thought to trace the shifting legal response to state aggression and atrocities, from Leopold's rule over the Congo to Putin's war in Ukraine. At its heart is Lawrence Douglas's fresh interpretation of the law's reckoning with Nazi aggression and atrocity. He shows how the Nuremberg trials challenged centuries of thought—rooted in Hobbes and other canonical thinkers—that shielded sovereigns from legal scrutiny. Yet Nuremberg's bid to frame aggression as the cornerstone of a new order of international criminal law largely failed, giving way to a system now centrally concerned with crimes against humanity and genocide—while leaving unresolved the legality and effectiveness of using force to stop the worst violations of human rights. Providing rare historical perspective on the dilemmas facing international courts, The Criminal State is a sweeping, provocative history of the struggle to bring perpetrators of state violence to justice. Our guest is Professor Lawrence Douglas, who is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College. Our host is Eleonora Mattiacci, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Amherst College. She is the author of "Volatile States in International Politics" (Oxford University Press, 2023). 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 Criminal State: War, Atrocity, and the Dream of International Justice (Princeton University Press, 2026) offers a gripping account of how law has confronted the most radical forms of state violence. Beautifully written, broad in scope, and bracingly original, it weaves history with political thought to trace the shifting legal response to state aggression and atrocities, from Leopold's rule over the Congo to Putin's war in Ukraine. At its heart is Lawrence Douglas's fresh interpretation of the law's reckoning with Nazi aggression and atrocity. He shows how the Nuremberg trials challenged centuries of thought—rooted in Hobbes and other canonical thinkers—that shielded sovereigns from legal scrutiny. Yet Nuremberg's bid to frame aggression as the cornerstone of a new order of international criminal law largely failed, giving way to a system now centrally concerned with crimes against humanity and genocide—while leaving unresolved the legality and effectiveness of using force to stop the worst violations of human rights. Providing rare historical perspective on the dilemmas facing international courts, The Criminal State is a sweeping, provocative history of the struggle to bring perpetrators of state violence to justice. Our guest is Professor Lawrence Douglas, who is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College. Our host is Eleonora Mattiacci, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Amherst College. She is the author of "Volatile States in International Politics" (Oxford University Press, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

The Criminal State: War, Atrocity, and the Dream of International Justice (Princeton University Press, 2026) offers a gripping account of how law has confronted the most radical forms of state violence. Beautifully written, broad in scope, and bracingly original, it weaves history with political thought to trace the shifting legal response to state aggression and atrocities, from Leopold's rule over the Congo to Putin's war in Ukraine. At its heart is Lawrence Douglas's fresh interpretation of the law's reckoning with Nazi aggression and atrocity. He shows how the Nuremberg trials challenged centuries of thought—rooted in Hobbes and other canonical thinkers—that shielded sovereigns from legal scrutiny. Yet Nuremberg's bid to frame aggression as the cornerstone of a new order of international criminal law largely failed, giving way to a system now centrally concerned with crimes against humanity and genocide—while leaving unresolved the legality and effectiveness of using force to stop the worst violations of human rights. Providing rare historical perspective on the dilemmas facing international courts, The Criminal State is a sweeping, provocative history of the struggle to bring perpetrators of state violence to justice. Our guest is Professor Lawrence Douglas, who is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College. Our host is Eleonora Mattiacci, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Amherst College. She is the author of "Volatile States in International Politics" (Oxford University Press, 2023).

The Criminal State: War, Atrocity, and the Dream of International Justice (Princeton University Press, 2026) offers a gripping account of how law has confronted the most radical forms of state violence. Beautifully written, broad in scope, and bracingly original, it weaves history with political thought to trace the shifting legal response to state aggression and atrocities, from Leopold's rule over the Congo to Putin's war in Ukraine. At its heart is Lawrence Douglas's fresh interpretation of the law's reckoning with Nazi aggression and atrocity. He shows how the Nuremberg trials challenged centuries of thought—rooted in Hobbes and other canonical thinkers—that shielded sovereigns from legal scrutiny. Yet Nuremberg's bid to frame aggression as the cornerstone of a new order of international criminal law largely failed, giving way to a system now centrally concerned with crimes against humanity and genocide—while leaving unresolved the legality and effectiveness of using force to stop the worst violations of human rights. Providing rare historical perspective on the dilemmas facing international courts, The Criminal State is a sweeping, provocative history of the struggle to bring perpetrators of state violence to justice. Our guest is Professor Lawrence Douglas, who is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College. Our host is Eleonora Mattiacci, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Amherst College. She is the author of "Volatile States in International Politics" (Oxford University Press, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

The Criminal State: War, Atrocity, and the Dream of International Justice (Princeton University Press, 2026) offers a gripping account of how law has confronted the most radical forms of state violence. Beautifully written, broad in scope, and bracingly original, it weaves history with political thought to trace the shifting legal response to state aggression and atrocities, from Leopold's rule over the Congo to Putin's war in Ukraine. At its heart is Lawrence Douglas's fresh interpretation of the law's reckoning with Nazi aggression and atrocity. He shows how the Nuremberg trials challenged centuries of thought—rooted in Hobbes and other canonical thinkers—that shielded sovereigns from legal scrutiny. Yet Nuremberg's bid to frame aggression as the cornerstone of a new order of international criminal law largely failed, giving way to a system now centrally concerned with crimes against humanity and genocide—while leaving unresolved the legality and effectiveness of using force to stop the worst violations of human rights. Providing rare historical perspective on the dilemmas facing international courts, The Criminal State is a sweeping, provocative history of the struggle to bring perpetrators of state violence to justice. Our guest is Professor Lawrence Douglas, who is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College. Our host is Eleonora Mattiacci, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Amherst College. She is the author of "Volatile States in International Politics" (Oxford University Press, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  OA1262 - How are a car accident in California, a tax fraud case in Nevada, and two bus accidents in New York and Pennsylvania all connected to the Dobbs abortion case? Find out on this week's accidental too-deep dive into state sovereignty. Jenessa read a bunch of extra cases just to be thorough, and accidentally uncovered Kavanaugh planting the seeds that would grow into the “egregiously wrong” “rule” for ignoring stare decisis. But also mostly we'll talk about the weird world of state sovereignty, Clarence Thomas being obnoxious and ahistorical while accusing everyone else of being ahistorical, and Sotomayor getting some peace for a change to write a pleasant little 9-0 decision about some non-partisan procedural legal nerdery that benefits injured plaintiffs. Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979) Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, 587 U.S. 230 (2019) Listen to oral arguments on Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-1299; Timestamp for Kavanaugh dropping the “egregiously wrong” bomb: 50:47 Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. 83 (2020), Kavanaugh concurrence Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022) Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp., 607 U.S. ___ (2026) The “major questions doctrine” Kavanaugh inception timeline: U.S. Telecom Association v. F.C.C., 855 F.3d 381, 422-423 (D.C. Cir 2017), Kavanaugh dissent Repeal of the Clean Power Plan, 84 Fed. Reg. 32520, 32529 (proposed Jul. 8, 2019) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. pt. 60). West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, 597 U.S. 697 (2022) Additional sources: Episodes 1229 & 1230 for an in-depth explanation of immunities, including state and federal sovereign immunity: “The complicated web of immunities that makes accountability so difficult” Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793) U.S. Const. amend. XI Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890) Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!  

On today's episode, Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sits down with Lawrence Douglas, the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought at Amherst College to discuss Douglas's new book, “The Criminal State: War, Atrocity, and the Dream of International Justice.”They talk about how and why international criminal justice shifted from a focus at Nuremberg on the crime of aggression to an “atrocity paradigm,” as well as the “belatedness problem” and other limitations of atrocity trials. They even get into Douglas's thoughts on casting decisions for Robert Jackson, Herman Göring, and characters in last year's film “Nuremberg.” 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.

The Department of Justice has historically been largely independent from the White House, despite the fact that the Attorney General is appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. However, Donald Trump's DOJ has been different. Recently fired AG Pam Bondi sought to prosecute the President's political opponents and the Department has gone to great lengths to protect the President amid the revelations of the Epstein Files. On today's show, we will discuss the legacy of Pam Bondi as Attorney General and what this means for the future of the Justice Department. [ dur: 28mins. ] Austin Sarat is William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. He is the editor of Is Democracy Doomed? and Lethal Injection and the False Promise of Humane Execution and Pam Bondi's extreme political loyalty to Trump wasn't enough to save her job, in The Conversation. The criminal indictments of President Trump have created an unprecedented political crisis. Historically, U.S. presidents have not faced criminal charges—even in cases where guilt appeared likely—due in part to longstanding institutional norms surrounding the presidency. Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon embodies this norm. What can the U.S. learn from other countries that have prosecuted former presidents? What can we learn from past prosecutions of political figures in American history? Is the prosecution of former heads of state simply the weaponization of justice mechanisms? How common is this political charge? [ dur: 30mins. ]. This is a portion of our hour long discussion originally posted in August, 2023. Link to full interview. Jeremi Suri is Professor in the Department of History and the LBJ School of Public Affairs and the Mack Brown Distinguished Chair for Leadership in Global Affairs at The University of Texas at Austin. He is the author of The Impossible Presidency: The Rise and Fall of America's Highest Office and his latest book Civil War by Other Means: America's Long and Unfinished Fight For Democracy. He hosts the podcast This is Democracy. Tom Ginsburg is Leo Spitz Professor of International Law and Ludwig and Hilde Wolf Research Scholar at the University of Chicago Law School. He is the author of the books The Endurance of National Constitutions, Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes, and co-author of the paper The Comparative Constitutional Law of Presidential Impeachment. Ezequiel González Ocantos is Associate Professor in the Department of Politics and International Relations and a Professorial Fellow of Nuffield College at the University of Oxford. He is the author of Shifting Legal Visions: Judicial Change and Human Rights Trials in Latin America, The Politics of Transitional Justice in Latin America: Power, Norms and Capability Building, and co-author of Prosecutors, Voters, and the Criminalisation of Corruption in Latin America (w/ Paula Muñoz, Nara Pavao & Viviana Baraybar). This program is produced by Doug Becker, Ankine Aghassian, Maria Armoudian, Anna Lapin and Sudd Dongre. Politics and Activism, Governance / Law, Congress, Courts

This episode I am reading from Nanci Danison's book '33 Souls Who Met God: Accounts of Atheists, Buddhists, and Christians Who Died and Met the Same God' This new Near-death Experience research explains why NDErs have different experiences after they die. "33 Souls" answers whether your religion or human behavior make any difference in what happens to you after death. This is the book that will allow you to understand what happens when a near-death experiencer does not return to the human body right after the life review. "33 Souls" will remove all worry you might have about death, crossing over, and what awaits you on the other side. 33 Souls Who Met God provides firsthand, in person reports of the true energetic nature of God/Source/the Creator from those who have literally been inside its energetic field. These souls—who in human incarnation were atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, Hindus, Catholics, Christians, and held various other spiritual beliefs—returned from death and the afterlife believing in the same non-humanoid, all-encompassing, all-loving Creator of everything. Their incredible journeys show that regardless of our divisive pre-death human beliefs, we all return to reunification with the same Source of life and love of which we are a part, and with each other. The 33 Souls learned the eternal truth about our origin, the purpose of human life, and our ultimate destiny in eternal life. Bio Nanci L. Danison, BS, BA, JD, retired from practicing law as a health lawyer in Ohio, having been in practice for 36 years, first with a prestigious, Midwestern, 270-attorney regional law firm, and then as a solo practitioner. She graduated from Morris Harvey College magna cum laude with a BA in Psychology and a BS in Biology/Chemistry. Her Doctorate in Jurisprudence is from The Ohio State University College of Law. Ms. Danison has for years been recognized by Martindale-Hubbell's "Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers" as one of the top 5% of lawyers in the country. Prior to 1994, Ms. Danison devoted her attention to developing a national reputation in the fields of Medicare fraud defense and general health law; served on the Boards of Directors of the National Kidney Foundation of Ohio, Inc. and the Gestalt Institute of Ohio; and represented the local Bar Association on TV interview segments on the Noon News for several years. Ms. Danison now writes books and conducts workshops detailing her memories of an extensive afterlife experience following her death in March 1994. After that experience, Ms. Danison left the security of her law firm and set up her own firm, earned her private pilot's license, and became a licensed private detective. She continued her community service on the Boards of Directors of The Columbus Cancer Clinic and of National Church Residences. Her expanded afterlife experience provided Nanci with the unique opportunity to view human life from the perspective of one who has transformed into a Being of Light, like the Beings of Light other near-death experiencers encounter. Ms. Danison learned how to consciously manifest reality, hold multiple simultaneous levels of self-awarenesss, access Universal Knowledge on a wide variety of subjects, recognize and experience unconditional love, apply self-healing techniques, and utilize many other abilities natural to us all in our spiritual state. During her afterlife experience, she viewed the history of planet Earth and how religion developed and has been woven into the fabric of human evolution. Just at the moment when Nanci was to merge fully and finally into the Source/God, she decided to return to her body in order to bring back messages of hope and love, which are contained in her various works. Since that original visit to the afterlife, Ms. Danison has died twice more and returned to the afterlife to meet with groups of Light Beings that monitor the mission she undertook at the end of her 1994 visit, i.e., to tell anyone who would listen what she experienced and learned in the afterlife. She has also had multiple near-death experiences when being treated in a hospital. Nanci was also privileged to share part of her mother's going into the Light experience when her mother died. https://nancidanison.com https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GQBTSY5T https://www.pastliveshypnosis.co.uk/https://www.patreon.com/ourparanormalafterlifeMy book 'Verified Near Death Experiences' https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DXKRGDFP Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week I'm talking to Nanci Danison about her book '33 Souls Who Met God: Accounts of Atheists, Buddhists, and Christians Who Died and Met the Same God' This new Near-death Experience research explains why NDErs have different experiences after they die. "33 Souls" answers whether your religion or human behavior make any difference in what happens to you after death. This is the book that will allow you to understand what happens when a near-death experiencer does not return to the human body right after the life review. "33 Souls" will remove all worry you might have about death, crossing over, and what awaits you on the other side. 33 Souls Who Met God provides firsthand, in person reports of the true energetic nature of God/Source/the Creator from those who have literally been inside its energetic field. These souls—who in human incarnation were atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, Hindus, Catholics, Christians, and held various other spiritual beliefs—returned from death and the afterlife believing in the same non-humanoid, all-encompassing, all-loving Creator of everything. Their incredible journeys show that regardless of our divisive pre-death human beliefs, we all return to reunification with the same Source of life and love of which we are a part, and with each other. The 33 Souls learned the eternal truth about our origin, the purpose of human life, and our ultimate destiny in eternal life. Bio Nanci L. Danison, BS, BA, JD, retired from practicing law as a health lawyer in Ohio, having been in practice for 36 years, first with a prestigious, Midwestern, 270-attorney regional law firm, and then as a solo practitioner. She graduated from Morris Harvey College magna cum laude with a BA in Psychology and a BS in Biology/Chemistry. Her Doctorate in Jurisprudence is from The Ohio State University College of Law. Ms. Danison has for years been recognized by Martindale-Hubbell's "Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers" as one of the top 5% of lawyers in the country. Prior to 1994, Ms. Danison devoted her attention to developing a national reputation in the fields of Medicare fraud defense and general health law; served on the Boards of Directors of the National Kidney Foundation of Ohio, Inc. and the Gestalt Institute of Ohio; and represented the local Bar Association on TV interview segments on the Noon News for several years. Ms. Danison now writes books and conducts workshops detailing her memories of an extensive afterlife experience following her death in March 1994. After that experience, Ms. Danison left the security of her law firm and set up her own firm, earned her private pilot's license, and became a licensed private detective. She continued her community service on the Boards of Directors of The Columbus Cancer Clinic and of National Church Residences. Her expanded afterlife experience provided Nanci with the unique opportunity to view human life from the perspective of one who has transformed into a Being of Light, like the Beings of Light other near-death experiencers encounter. Ms. Danison learned how to consciously manifest reality, hold multiple simultaneous levels of self-awarenesss, access Universal Knowledge on a wide variety of subjects, recognize and experience unconditional love, apply self-healing techniques, and utilize many other abilities natural to us all in our spiritual state. During her afterlife experience, she viewed the history of planet Earth and how religion developed and has been woven into the fabric of human evolution. Just at the moment when Nanci was to merge fully and finally into the Source/God, she decided to return to her body in order to bring back messages of hope and love, which are contained in her various works. Since that original visit to the afterlife, Ms. Danison has died twice more and returned to the afterlife to meet with groups of Light Beings that monitor the mission she undertook at the end of her 1994 visit, i.e., to tell anyone who would listen what she experienced and learned in the afterlife. She has also had multiple near-death experiences when being treated in a hospital. Nanci was also privileged to share part of her mother's going into the Light experience when her mother died. https://nancidanison.com https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GQBTSY5T https://www.pastliveshypnosis.co.uk/https://www.patreon.com/ourparanormalafterlifeMy book 'Verified Near Death Experiences' https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DXKRGDFP Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This episode features two guests. Dr Eze Paez is a returning guest; he first appeared on the podcast back in 2018. Eze is Tenure-Track Professor in Jurisprudence and Bioethics of Pompeu Fabra Universityin Barcelona. He works on questions in moral and political philosophy, and is perhaps best known for his work on wild animal suffering and animals in republican political theory. Dr Pablo Magaña, however, is a new guest. Pablo is an Irish Research Council postdoctoral fellow at Trinity College Dublin. He's a political philosopher, with particular interests in questions about animals in democratic theory. We discuss a paper that Eze and Pablo co-authored: 'Sentientist political liberalism'. This paper was published open access in the Pacific Philosophical Quarterly in 2026. This episode is proudly sponsored by the Animal Politics book series at Sydney University Press. In answer to the regular questions, Pablo mentioned: Jesús Mosterín's book El triunfo de la compasión: Nuestra relación con los otros animales [or, in English: Triumph of Compassion: Our Relation with the other Animals]; learn more at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jes%C3%BAs_Moster%C3%ADn His early work on animals and the all-affected interests principle; for his published work on this topic, see https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13698230.2022.2100962. Various forthcoming work, including a collaboration with          Adrià Moret (https://www.adriamoret.com/)

To explain to us how institutional academic freedoms implicate corporate rights—and how Harvard could have leveraged these corporate rights in its 2025 lawsuit over the Trump Administration's funding freeze—Michael Banerjee, a graduate of Harvard Law School and a Ph.D. Candidate in Jurisprudence and Social Policy at UC Berkeley Law, joins us today to talk about his piece, “What Harvard's Lawsuit Should Have Said.” This piece was published as an online Article on August 4, 2025. This episode was recorded in September 2025. Host & Script: Juliette Draper (Volume 114 Podcast Editor) Transcript: Davis Rich (Volume 115 Podcast Editor) Production: Jonah Smith (Volume 115 Senior Technology Editor); Petra Hilton (Volume 115 Technology Editor) Soundtrack: Composed and performed by Carter Jansen (Volume 110 Technology Editor) Introductory Quote: Judge Thelton E. Henderson

In this episode of The Sound of Economics, host Rebecca Christie speaks about the European Union's innovation hopes with Bruegel's Fiona Scott Morton and Reinhilde Veugelers as well as Tobias Tröger, SAFE Chair of Private Law, Trade and Business Law, Jurisprudence at Frankfurt's Goethe University. The European Commission on March 18 released its “EU Inc.” proposal to make it easier for innovative companies to get their start and scale up. The new plan uses a lawmaking tool known as the 28th regime. What is it and how does it work – will it help companies find financing and navigate thickets of national and local bureaucracy? What else can you do with it? Is the Commission proposal good? What are some alternatives? And what will this mean for Europe's notaries? Promising firms have a lot to gain from these conversations, if good policy design follows. Relevant research: Christie, R. (2026) ‘28th regimes to help Europe's capital markets', First Glance, 09 March, Bruegel.  Enriques, L., Casimiro A. Nigro and Tobias H. Tröger (2026) ‘Why the 28th Regime Proposal Falls Short of Europe's Challenge', Oxford Business Law Blog. Enriques, L., Casimiro A. Nigro and Tobias H. Tröger (2025) ‘Mandatory Corporate Law as an Obstacle to Venture Capital Contracting in Europe', The CLS Blue Sky Blog. Scott Morton, F. and R. Veugelers (2025) ‘Regime 0: Europe-wide incorporation for startups to kickstart innovative growth,' Policy Brief 33/2025, Bruegel.

Abraham taught German and European history at Princeton University from 1977 to 1985. After transitioning to law, he clerked for Judge Leonard Garth of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit from 1989 to 1990 and then worked as an associate at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett in New York City. In 1991, he joined the faculty at the University of Miami School of Law, becoming a full Professor in 1996 and later Professor Emeritus. He has taught courses in Labor and Employment Law, Property Law, Immigration Law, and Jurisprudence and Political Theory. He has also lectured internationally at institutions such as the University of Tübingen, Deakin University, the Jena Center for 20th Century History, and the University of Ulster.

Episode 377 of RevolutionZ starts with a brief segment that describes some major robot and AI innovations as warm up for more related commentary to come in the future. When AI can imitate any face and voice, what anchors truth? Who decides what justice looks like when evidence itself is in doubt? When robots can dance and do gymnastics while they juggle feathers make and implement plans, nurture children and help the infirm, what can't they do? What do we do?Then the episode pivots to courts, cops, and cages. Miguel Guevara interviews Robin Zimmerman, a former criminal defense attorney, who lays bare how the adversarial model is fueled by warped incentives to reward convictions and legal theatrics over truth. He traces his break from “organized cruelty” to building justice along with RPS. He describe activism to reorient pay and prestige from wins to effort, and explains how reimagine trials to surface facts, context, and repair. He explores how lie detection tech and deepfakes collide with due process, and why no single blueprint will fix jurisprudence. Instead, he and RPS argue we need context-driven methods, transparent checks and balances, and an ethos that centers dignity.Next, Peter Cabral provides a ground level view: the gang as survival, prison as a factory of harm, and the strategy that changed everything—nonviolent work stoppages that spread by discipline, solidarity, and visible dignity. He explains how prison strikes reframed demands from modestly better conditions to real participation, living wages, rich education, and preparation for life beyond the walls. He tracks how reforms gained ground via civilian control of policing, demilitarization, restorative justice, and a still bolder proposition to replace prisoner exile with structured, humane communities focused on accountability and growth. Separation for safety remains; degradation does not. Who sets incentives? Who verifies claims? Who pays the price when systems fail? Our judicial activists don't pretend to have every answer. They do insist on a north star: fewer victims, fewer cages, and institutions that measure success by truth, repair, and human dignity. Support the show

Jacob Mchangama, founder and director of the think tank Justitia, has written a one-volume history of freedom of thought, which ranges from the lone Demosthenes of 4th-century BCE Athens to the recent controversies regarding Donald Trump. In Free Speech: A History from Socrates to Social Media (Basic Books, 2022), Mchangama argues that the history of freedom of thought has recurrent themes, such as a free speech entropy: the perception of rulers or governments that if speech is not restricted then social or political decline or disorder is inevitable. Mchangama also notes how restrictions usually have the unintended effect of emboldening the speakers and making the forbidden speech even more attractive to potential listeners. This history also reveals advocates of free speech less familiar to Western readers, such as the ninth-century Persian scholar Ibn al-Rawandi, a theologian and later skeptic whose life illustrates the debates possible in medieval Islam. Mchangama reviews the modern debates regarding freedom of thought and the latest iterations of arguments about whether free speech will lead to social decline and chaos. Mchangama is a champion of free speech but his history provides a fair minded account of the concerns of speech restrictionists throughout history. Ian J. Drake is Associate Professor of Jurisprudence, Montclair State University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Jacob Mchangama, founder and director of the think tank Justitia, has written a one-volume history of freedom of thought, which ranges from the lone Demosthenes of 4th-century BCE Athens to the recent controversies regarding Donald Trump. In Free Speech: A History from Socrates to Social Media (Basic Books, 2022), Mchangama argues that the history of freedom of thought has recurrent themes, such as a free speech entropy: the perception of rulers or governments that if speech is not restricted then social or political decline or disorder is inevitable. Mchangama also notes how restrictions usually have the unintended effect of emboldening the speakers and making the forbidden speech even more attractive to potential listeners. This history also reveals advocates of free speech less familiar to Western readers, such as the ninth-century Persian scholar Ibn al-Rawandi, a theologian and later skeptic whose life illustrates the debates possible in medieval Islam. Mchangama reviews the modern debates regarding freedom of thought and the latest iterations of arguments about whether free speech will lead to social decline and chaos. Mchangama is a champion of free speech but his history provides a fair minded account of the concerns of speech restrictionists throughout history. Ian J. Drake is Associate Professor of Jurisprudence, Montclair State University. 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

Jacob Mchangama, founder and director of the think tank Justitia, has written a one-volume history of freedom of thought, which ranges from the lone Demosthenes of 4th-century BCE Athens to the recent controversies regarding Donald Trump. In Free Speech: A History from Socrates to Social Media (Basic Books, 2022), Mchangama argues that the history of freedom of thought has recurrent themes, such as a free speech entropy: the perception of rulers or governments that if speech is not restricted then social or political decline or disorder is inevitable. Mchangama also notes how restrictions usually have the unintended effect of emboldening the speakers and making the forbidden speech even more attractive to potential listeners. This history also reveals advocates of free speech less familiar to Western readers, such as the ninth-century Persian scholar Ibn al-Rawandi, a theologian and later skeptic whose life illustrates the debates possible in medieval Islam. Mchangama reviews the modern debates regarding freedom of thought and the latest iterations of arguments about whether free speech will lead to social decline and chaos. Mchangama is a champion of free speech but his history provides a fair minded account of the concerns of speech restrictionists throughout history. Ian J. Drake is Associate Professor of Jurisprudence, Montclair State University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Jacob Mchangama, founder and director of the think tank Justitia, has written a one-volume history of freedom of thought, which ranges from the lone Demosthenes of 4th-century BCE Athens to the recent controversies regarding Donald Trump. In Free Speech: A History from Socrates to Social Media (Basic Books, 2022), Mchangama argues that the history of freedom of thought has recurrent themes, such as a free speech entropy: the perception of rulers or governments that if speech is not restricted then social or political decline or disorder is inevitable. Mchangama also notes how restrictions usually have the unintended effect of emboldening the speakers and making the forbidden speech even more attractive to potential listeners. This history also reveals advocates of free speech less familiar to Western readers, such as the ninth-century Persian scholar Ibn al-Rawandi, a theologian and later skeptic whose life illustrates the debates possible in medieval Islam. Mchangama reviews the modern debates regarding freedom of thought and the latest iterations of arguments about whether free speech will lead to social decline and chaos. Mchangama is a champion of free speech but his history provides a fair minded account of the concerns of speech restrictionists throughout history. Ian J. Drake is Associate Professor of Jurisprudence, Montclair State University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/communications

Something New!  For HR teams who discuss this podcast in their team meetings, we've created a discussion starter PDF to help guide your conversation. Download it here https://goodmorninghr.com/EP237  In episode 237, Coffey and DeDe Church discuss recent news items about how shifting economic conditions, technology, and leadership gaps are reshaping the employment landscape.  They discuss the realities of a “low-hire, low-fire” labor market; dehumanizing hiring processes and AI-driven recruiting tools; challenges facing early-career workers and liberal arts graduates; emerging roles created by artificial intelligence; the growing importance of soft skills like problem solving and communication; workforce restructuring, layoffs, and job hugging; employee disengagement and the great detachment; why strong frontline workers often struggle as supervisors; the risks of promoting without leadership training; transparency, feedback, and promotion decisions; and how kindness, accountability, and continuous feedback drive engagement.  Good Morning, HR is brought to you by Imperative—Bulletproof Background Checks. For more information about our commitment to quality and excellent customer service, visit us at https://imperativeinfo.com.   If you are an HRCI or SHRM-certified professional, this episode of Good Morning, HR has been pre-approved for three quarters of a recertification credit. To obtain the recertification information for this episode, visit https://goodmorninghr.com.   Media mentioned in this podcast:  From AI bubble fears to the job market's ‘Great Freeze': Economists answer your biggest questions about 2026  Private-Sector Hiring Turned Positive in December After November Losses   Private Hiring Sank in November, ADP Says  US Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook: Fastest Growing Occupations  The 2026 Job Market Outlook: Where the Jobs Are  Economists Are Studying the Slowing Job Market—and Feeling It Themselves  When Good Frontline Workers Make Bad Supervisors  Is Your Leadership Style Too Nice? The Friendship Recession: The Lost Art of Connecting Use Situation-Behavior-Impact (SBI)™ to Understand Intent  About our Guest:  DeDe Church is an attorney, employee relations counselor, workplace and University investigator, and nationally recognized trainer with more than 30 years of experience. She has trained thousands of employees and managers on how to create a productive, respectful culture for clients ranging from Fortune 50 companies to her favorite local pizza shop. Known for her humor and practicality, DeDe is often invited and then re-invited to deliver her high-energy workshops at distinguished conferences and to create videos for employee onboarding and annual training.  As an expert investigator, DeDe relies upon a depth of knowledge to find the facts without causing unnecessary disturbances. Witnesses often say they feel at ease when talking with her because of her approachable nature. In addition, DeDe is often retained to review investigation procedures and to train in-house HR and University professionals on investigation best practices. In recognition of her skills, DeDe has been retained to testify as an expert witness in employment cases more than 20 times by organizations including Uber, BP, and MD Anderson Cancer Center.  DeDe is a former Senior Assistant Attorney General for the State of Texas in the Civil Rights/General Litigation Division. During almost seven years there, she advised dozens of state agencies on the proper response to employee complaints, represented the State in over 30 trials involving discrimination in the workplace, and successfully argued before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court. DeDe received the prestigious Presidential Citation from the President of the Texas State Bar in recognition of outstanding service to the citizens of Texas. Her Bachelor of Arts degree is from Louisiana State University, magna cum laude, and she received a Doctorate of Jurisprudence with Honors from the University of North Carolina School of Law in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.  DeDe Church can be reached at www.dedechurch.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/dede-wilburn-church-a71b748/  About Mike Coffey:  Mike Coffey is an entrepreneur, licensed private investigator, business strategist, HR consultant, and registered yoga teacher. In 1999, he founded Imperative, a background investigations and due diligence firm helping risk-averse clients make well-informed decisions about the people they involve in their business. Imperative delivers in-depth employment background investigations, know-your-customer and anti-money laundering compliance, and due diligence investigations to more than 300 risk-averse corporate clients across the US, and, through its PFC Caregiver & Household Screening brand, many more private estates, family offices, and personal service agencies. Imperative has been named a Best Places to Work, the Texas Association of Business' small business of the year, and is accredited by the Professional Background Screening Association.  Mike shares his insight from 25+ years of HR-entrepreneurship on the Good Morning, HR podcast, where each week he talks to business leaders about bringing people together to create value for customers, shareholders, and community. Mike has been rec...

Laura Gómez moderates a conversation with Yvette Borja, Laura E. Gómez Latinx People and the Law Teaching Fellow, UCLA School of Law, Gabriela Ibañez Guzmán, staff attorney at Somos Un Pueblo Unido, Mariel Bustamante, PhD student at the UC Berkeley School of Jurisprudence and Social Policy, Emily Morel, community organizer with Red De DefensAZ, and Alejandra Pablos, co-founder of Red De DefensAZ. They discuss the successful policies passed in New Mexico during the last 25 years that allow immigrant New Mexicans to pursue higher education and workforce training, obtain driver's licenses, receive protection from wage theft and discrimination, and access state guaranteed-basic-income pilots. By contrast, Arizona has passed several anti-immigrant laws, including a ban on cities passing sanctuary policies, served as the center stage for racist policing as immigration enforcement, and is home to many localities that use immigration detention centers as a means for economic development. But Arizona has also served as an incubator for participatory defense community organizing led by directly impacted people, from Puente to Red De DefensAZ. This roundtable explored the reasons behind these divergences and what they can teach us about non-carceral futures in the Southwest.To support the podcast, become a patreon member at: https://patreon.com/radiocachimbona?utm_medium=unknown&utm_source=join_link&utm_campaign=creatorshare_creator&utm_content=copyLinkFollow @radiocachibona on Instagram, X, and Facebook

Jennifer (Jenny) Rozelle is one of the Owners of Indiana Estate & Elder Law. She serves in a leadership role focusing on firm management, strategic growth, team development, and speaking locally and nationally on various estate and elder law topics.  Jenny obtained her bachelor's degree in both political science and history from Butler University and a Doctor of Jurisprudence from Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. • • • This episode of the podcast is hosted by Jon Luskin, CFP®, a long-time Boglehead and financial planner. The Bogleheads® are a group of like-minded individual investors who follow the general investment and business beliefs of John C. Bogle, founder and former CEO of the Vanguard Group. It is a conflict-free community where individual investors reach out and provide education, assistance, and relevant information to other investors of all experience levels at no cost. The organization supports a free forum at Bogleheads.org, and the wiki site is Bogleheads® wiki.    Since 2000, the Bogleheads® have held national conferences in major cities across the country. The 2025 conference will take place in San Antonio, Texas, from October 17 to 19. In addition, local Chapters and foreign Chapters meet regularly, and new Chapters form periodically. All Bogleheads activities are coordinated by volunteers who contribute their time and talent.   This podcast is supported by the John C. Bogle Center for Financial Literacy, a non-profit organization approved by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) public charity on February 6, 2012. Your tax-deductible donation to the Bogle Center is appreciated.   Show Notes: Legal Tea podcast Bogleheads on Investing with Ryan Barrett and Mike Piper: Episode 52 Bogleheads® Live with Cameron Huddleston: Episode 34 Legal Tea podcast - Ep. No. 203. Current Trends - When Good Deeds Go Bad: Transfer on Death Deed Version The National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA)

In our new podcast, Pursuit: The Founders' Guide to Happiness, Jeffrey Rosen explores the founders' lives with the historians who know them best. Plus, filmmaker Ken Burns shares his daily practice of self-reflection.  The “pursuit of happiness” is one of the most famous phrases in American history. When America's founders wrote it in the Declaration of Independence, they intended it to mean happiness through lifelong learning and self-improvement.  To start our series, Jeffrey Rosen and Robert P. George, the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, trace how the meaning of the pursuit of happiness has changed over time. Then, American filmmaker Ken Burns, who has spent his “entire life trying to figure out the United States,” shares how daily self-reflection has given him new perspectives on what the founders faced 250 years ago.    Follow Pursuit: The Founders' Guide to Happiness on Apple Podcast and Spotify.  Stay Connected and Learn More  Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.  Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr.  Explore the America at 250 Civic Toolkit. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.  Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen.  Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube.  Support our important work: Donate

Is there an innate human knowledge of Truth? Socrates in the City host Eric Metaxas sits down with Robert P. George, Princeton University Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program, to discuss his new book, Seeking Truth and Speaking Truth. Their conversation delves into the nature of humanity, examining how our understanding of it influences our perception of truth, and the interplay between biblical perspectives, classical traditions, and modern philosophies. From moral contrasts to reflections on great philosophers, they examine belief, feeling, and the shared foundations of truth.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Is there an innate human knowledge of Truth? Socrates in the City host Eric Metaxas sits down with Robert P. George, Princeton University Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program, to discuss his new book, Seeking Truth and Speaking Truth. Their conversation delves into the nature of humanity, examining how our understanding of it influences our perception of truth, and the interplay between biblical perspectives, classical traditions, and modern philosophies. From moral contrasts to reflections on great philosophers, they examine belief, feeling, and the shared foundations of truth.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Is there an innate human knowledge of Truth? Socrates in the City host Eric Metaxas sits down with Robert P. George, Princeton University Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program, to discuss his new book, Seeking Truth and Speaking Truth. Their conversation delves into the nature of humanity, examining how our understanding of it influences our perception of truth, and the interplay between biblical perspectives, classical traditions, and modern philosophies. From moral contrasts to reflections on great philosophers, they examine belief, feeling, and the shared foundations of truth.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.