Podcasts about jurists

Eric Heinze (Maîtrise, Paris; JD, Harvard; Ph.D. Leiden), a former Fulbright, DAAD and Chateaubriand fellow, is Professor of Law and Humanities at Queen Mary, University of London. He writes on justice theory and on human rights, and has worked with the International Commission of Jurists and the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. He has advised NGOs on human rights, including Liberty, Amnesty International and the Media Diversity Institute. Heinze is author of The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech Is Everything. Suzanne Nossel is the CEO of PEN America, the foremost organization working to protect and advance human rights, free expression and literature. She has also served as the Chief Operating Officer of Human Rights Watch and as Executive Director of Amnesty International USA; and held senior State Department positions in the Clinton and Obama administrations. A graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, Nossel frequently writes op-eds for the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other publications, as well as a regular column for Foreign Policy magazine. She lives in New York City. Nosssel is author of Dare to Speak: Defending Free Speech for All. Jonathan Zimmerman is the Judy and Howard Berkowitz Professor in Education at the University of Pennsylvania. A former Peace Corps volunteer, he is the author of Campus Politics: What Everyone Needs to Know and seven other books. He is also a frequent op-ed contributor to The New York Times, the Washington Post, and other national newspapers and magazines. Zimmerman received the 2019 Open Inquiry Leadership Award from Heterodox Academy, which promotes viewpoint diversity in higher education. Zimmerman is author of Free Speech: And Why You Should Give a Damn.

In this episode of Occupied Thoughts, FMEP Fellow Hilary Rantisi speaks with analyst Mouin Rabbani about political and diplomatic developments relating to the Israeli genocide in Gaza. They discuss the "20 Point Plan" that President Donald Trump released today, as well as his joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, asking about actual provisions to limit Israel's genocidal behavior and noting the colonial structure of the internationally-headed "Board of Peace" that will rule Gaza, according to the proposal. They discuss the symbolic measure of many countries recognizing Palestinian statehood at the UN last week; Mouin notes that this recognition is the first time that Western governments have taken steps for Palestinians in response to pressure from their own constituencies, and suggests that this action demonstrates that popular pressure can affect policy. Finally, Hilary and Mouin look at current initiatives, including the "United for Peace" proposal and the Gaza Sumud Flotilla, that aim to intervene directly in the genocide.  Mouin Rabbani is a nonresident fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs. He is a researcher, analyst, and commentator specializing in Palestinian affairs, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and contemporary Middle East issues. Among other previous positions, Rabbani served as principal political affairs officer with the Office of the UN Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria, head of the Middle East unit with the Martti Ahtisaari Peace Foundation, and senior Middle East analyst and special advisor on Israel-Palestine with the International Crisis Group. He was also a researcher with Al-Haq, the West Bank affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists.  Rabbani is a co-editor of Jadaliyya, where he also hosts the Connections podcast and edits its Quick Thoughts feature. He is also the managing editor and associate editor of the Journal of Peacebuilding and Development and a contributing editor of Middle East Report. In addition, Rabbani is a nonresident fellow at the Center for Conflict and Humanitarian Studies (CHS) and at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN).  Hilary Rantisi grew up in Palestine and has been involved with education and advocacy on the Middle East since her move to the US. She is a 2025 Fellow at FMEP and was most recently the Associate Director of the Religion, Conflict and Peace Initiative (RCPI) and co-instructor of Learning in Context: Narratives of Displacement and Belonging in Israel/Palestine at Harvard Divinity School. She has over two decades of experience in institution building at Harvard, having been the Director of the Middle East Initiative (MEI) at Harvard Kennedy School of Government prior to her current role. She has a BA in Political Science/International Studies from Aurora University and a master's degree in Middle Eastern Studies from the University of Chicago. Before moving to the US, Hilary worked at Birzeit University and at the Jerusalem-based Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center. There, she co-edited a photo essay book Our Story: The Palestinians with the Rev. Naim Ateek.

On May 15, international legal experts Lara Elborno, Richard Falk, and Penny Green joined me to discuss the work of the Gaza Tribunal, a group devoted to creating an archive of facts and a set of documents and arguments to help international civil society fight against the genocide in Gaza and the Zionist regime that, along with the United States, has perpetrated this atrocity.  Today they all return to update us. They present a grim picture of what they call the final phase of genocide and note both the overwhelming global support for Palestine and the concurrent repression against advocacy and protest. This is a critical episode to listen to and share.Lara Elborno is a Palestinian-American lawyer specialized in international disputes. She has worked for over 10 years as counsel acting for individuals, private entities, and States in international commercial and investment arbitrations. She dedicates a large part of her legal practice to pro-bono work including the representation of asylum seekers in France and advising clients on matters related to IHRL and the business and human rights framework.  She previously taught US and UK constitutional law at the Université de Paris II - Panthéon Assas. She currently serves as a board member of ARDD-Europe and sits on the Steering Committee of the Gaza Tribunal. She has moreover appeared as a commentator on Al Jazeera, TRTWorld, DoubleDown News, and George Galloway's MOAT speaking about the Palestinian liberation struggle, offering analysis and critiques of international law."Richard Falk is Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University (1961-2001) and Chair of Global Law, Faculty of Law, Queen Mary University London. Since 2002 has been a Research Fellow at the Orfalea Center of Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Between 2008 and 2014 he served as UN Special Rapporteur on Israeli Violations of Human Rights in Occupied Palestine.He is Senior Vice President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, having served for seven years as Chair of its Board. He is Chair of the Board of Trustees of Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor. He is co-director of the Centre of Climate Crime, QMUL.Falk has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize several times since 2008.His recent books include (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance (2014), Power Shift: The New Global Order (2016), Palestine Horizon: Toward a Just Peace (2017), Revisiting the Vietnam War (ed. Stefan Andersson, 2017), On Nuclear Weapons: Denuclearization, Demilitarization and Disarmament (ed. Stefan Andersson & Curt Dahlgren, 2019.Penny Green is Professor of Law and Globalisation at QMUL and Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences. She has published extensively on state crime theory, resistance to state violence and the Rohingya genocide, (including with Tony Ward, State Crime: Governments, Violence and Corruption, 2004 and State Crime and Civil Activism 2019). She has a long track record of researching in hostile environments and has conducted fieldwork in the UK, Turkey, Kurdistan, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Israel, Tunisia, Myanmar and Bangladesh. In 2015 she and her colleagues published ‘Countdown to Annihilation: Genocide in Myanmar' and in March 2018 ‘The Genocide is Over: the genocide continues'. Professor Green is Founder and co-Director of the award winning International State Crime Initiative (ISCI); co-editor in Chief of the international journal, State Crime; Executive member of the Gaza Tribunal and Palestine Book Awards judge. Her new book with Thomas MacManus Chronicle of a Genocide Foretold: Myanmar and the Rohingya will be published by Rutgers university Press in 2025

This episode of 35 West originally aired on October 17, 2024. Since the blatant electoral fraud that took place on July 28, the Maduro regime in Venezuela has sought to repress its way out of mass protests demanding political change. The regime's heavy-handed crackdown comes at a time when the International Criminal Court has already been investigating Venezuela for alleged crimes against humanity. As the regime seeks to silence dissent and close the civic space, this pending case may represent one of the few remaining levers the international community can apply to instill restraint, but only if such an approach is carefully considered. In this episode, Christopher Hernandez-Roy sits down with Santiago Canton, Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists and a member of the Panel of Independent International Experts on the Possible Commission of Crimes against Humanity in Venezuela of the Organization of American States. Together, they discuss the state of the ICC's investigation and how it is likely to develop in light of the abuses the regime has committed in the past three months. They also delve into the debate around whether the ICC case represents an impediment to political change, or if it remains a useful means of applying pressure on the regime.

Since the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he has passed freely through France's airspace in early February and April of this year. French lawyer Sarah Sameur, a member of the Council for JURDI, Jurists for the Respect of International Law, explains how France has been derelict as a signatory to the Rome Statute in not apprehending the plane. She rebuts French officials' claims that France's airspace did not fall under its jurisdiction in this case.

Jurists par tiesībām uz reliģiju.

On Midday Edition, we speak with local attorneys about federal threats against freedom of speech on college campuses, following the arrest of Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil.

In this episode of Occupied Thoughts, FMEP Fellow Peter Beinart speaks with analyst Mouin Rabbani about the current state of affairs, including: the potential for Gaza ceasefire negotiations, Palestinian political dynamics and possibilities, Israeli aspirations and actions in Syria and the Syrian regime's response, and the Trump administration's "unpredictable and erratic" policymaking. Mouin Rabbani is a nonresident fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs. He is a researcher, analyst, and commentator specializing in Palestinian affairs, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and contemporary Middle East issues. Among other previous positions, Rabbani served as principal political affairs officer with the Office of the UN Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria, head of the Middle East unit with the Martti Ahtisaari Peace Foundation, and senior Middle East analyst and special advisor on Israel-Palestine with the International Crisis Group. He was also a researcher with Al-Haq, the West Bank affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists.  Rabbani is a co-editor of Jadaliyya, where he also hosts the Connections podcast and edits its Quick Thoughts feature. He is also the managing editor and associate editor of the Journal of Peacebuilding and Development and a contributing editor of Middle East Report. In addition, Rabbani is a nonresident fellow at the Center for Conflict and Humanitarian Studies (CHS) and at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN).  Peter Beinart is a Non-Resident Fellow at the Foundation for Middle East Peace. He is also a Professor of Journalism and Political Science at the City University of New York, a Contributing opinion writer at the New York Times, an Editor-at-Large at Jewish Currents, and an MSNBC Political Commentator. His newest book (published 2025) is Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning. Original music by Jalal Yaquoub.

Salahuddin Ahmed, a constitutional lawyer and expert from Pakistan, visited the City Bar Middle East and North African Affairs Committee to discuss the 26th Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan and its impact on the independence of the Supreme Court and the Rule of Law. For a brief background on how the 26th Amendment attempts to subjugate the judiciary to the present regime in Pakistan, read the statement of the International Commission of Jurists. https://www.icj.org/pakistan-26th-constitutional-amendment-is-a-blow-to-the-independence-of-the-judiciary/ At least two Senators said in television interviews that they were compelled to vote for the Amendment after being kidnapped and having their family members kidnapped. The inducements and coercion adopted during the process were widely reported in Pakistani media and even raised in Parliament. For example, see: https://www.nation.com.pk/18-Oct-2024/senators-seek-end-to-coercion-to-get-vote-on-judicial-reforms The preliminary problem with this legal challenge will be - who hears this petition? Will it be the Supreme Court as it existed prior to the Amendment or can it now only be the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court specially selected for this purpose by the post-Amendment Judicial Commission (which, post-Amendment, has a majority of political appointees and a minority of judges)? The subsequent challenge is whether courts should ever be involved in determining the validity of constitutional amendments (even if clearly aimed at undermining democracy or the rule of law) or whether it must always be left to the political process? In the past, the judiciary in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh have declared they have the power to strike down constitutional amendments if Parliament attempts to subvert the democratic essence of the Constitution by eliminating fundamental rights or the independence of judiciary. If you enjoyed this podcast, watch Hon. Athar Minallah, Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, address the City Bar alongside City Bar President Muhammad U. Faridi, Kabir Hashmi of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, and special guest Hon. Rowan Wilson, Chief Judge of the State of New York. Justice Minallah spoke about the role of the judiciary in ensuring accountability and promotion of the rule of law, and the dangers of judicial overreach and activism. Video of the event is available here: https://www.nycbar.org/videos/the-independence-of-the-judiciary-and-rule-of-law-in-pakistan/?back=1&ref=media

Since the blatant electoral fraud that took place on July 28, the Maduro regime in Venezuela has sought to repress its way out of mass protests demanding political change. The regime's heavy-handed crackdown comes at a time when the International Criminal Court has already been investigating Venezuela for alleged crimes against humanity. As the regime seeks to silence dissent and close the civic space, this pending case may represent one of the few remaining levers the international community can apply to instill restraint, but only if such an approach is carefully considered. In this episode, Christopher Hernandez-Roy sits down with Santiago Canton, Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists and a member of the Panel of Independent International Experts on the Possible Commission of Crimes against Humanity in Venezuela of the Organization of American States. Together, they discuss the state of the ICC's investigation and how it is likely to develop in light of the abuses the regime has committed in the past three months. They also delve into the debate around whether the ICC case represents an impediment to political change, or if it remains a useful means of applying pressure on the regime.

The Salamanca School is known for important contributions to free-market economics and the Austrian School. The Bolognese jurists also made key contributions. Original article: The Bolognese Jurists behind the Proto-Austrians of the Salamanca School

The Salamanca School is known for important contributions to free-market economics and the Austrian School. The Bolognese jurists also made key contributions. Original article: The Bolognese Jurists behind the Proto-Austrians of the Salamanca School

A new MP3 sermon from Alpha and Omega Ministries is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: The Emptiness of Secularist Jurists Demonstrated; Twitter Bookmarks Subtitle: The Dividing Line 2024 Speaker: Dr. James White Broadcaster: Alpha and Omega Ministries Event: Podcast Date: 5/23/2024 Length: 64 min.

This was the fourth of a series of Public Conversations that Just World Ed is presenting in May 2024, on the theme of "Understanding Hamas and Why That Matters." The series is presented by JWE President Helena Cobban and board member Rami G. Khouri. Our  guest in this episode was Mouin Rabbani, a super-smart Dutch-Palestinian researcher and analyst who specializes in Palestinian affairs, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and contemporary West Asia, the region also known by its Eurocentric monicker, "the Middle East." Rabbani has previously served as Principal Political Affairs Officer with the Office of the UN Special Envoy for Syria; as Senior Middle East Analyst and Special Advisor on Israel-Palestine with the International Crisis Group: and a Researcher with Al-Haq, the West Bank affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists. He is currently Co-Editor of Jadaliyya and has numerous other important affiliations. You can see much more information about this project and access the multimedia records of this session and all the others as they occur, at this Online Learning Hub on our website.Support the Show.

Listened to Senator Ted Cruz roasting a leftist, radical female judge and took the time to consider the issues at a deeper level. Then I looked at a few videos I've marked for review in my Twitter bookmarks, including a PCUSA minister denying the deity of Christ and a Roman Catholic arguing for the necessity of an infallible canon to have an inerrant text. Just a tad over an hour today-

Listened to Senator Ted Cruz roasting a leftist, radical female judge and took the time to consider the issues at a deeper level. Then I looked at a few videos I've marked for review in my Twitter bookmarks, including a PCUSA minister denying the deity of Christ and a Roman Catholic arguing for the necessity of an infallible canon to have an inerrant text. Just a tad over an hour today!

Listened to Senator Ted Cruz roasting a leftist, radical female judge and took the time to consider the issues at a deeper level. Then I looked at a few videos I've marked for review in my Twitter bookmarks, including a PCUSA minister denying the deity of Christ and a Roman Catholic arguing for the necessity of an infallible canon to have an inerrant text. Just a tad over an hour today-

Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director of the Africa Programme at the International Commission of Jurists, discusses the impact of a resolution proposing a ceasefire during Ramadan and the release of hostages seized in a Hamas-led attack.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Author and professor Eric Heinze joins Tim to talk about freedom of speech and expression at the most fundamental level. He recently wrote a book on free speech, but it's not exactly what you might expect. He explores free speech in a larger more fundamental context than America's First Amendment. He talks about it in the context of universal human rights. Eric tells us about the thinking behind his new book called, “The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech is Everything.” This episode was originally released May 9, 2022. https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/shapingopinion/337_-_Eric_Heinze_Free_Speech.mp3 One of the benefits of having a podcast is that you get the chance to talk to a diverse set of really smart and interesting people. Sometimes those people write books, and that's the case with our guest today. As mentioned, the book Eric Heinze wrote is about free speech and human rights. Eric is a professor of law and humanities at Queen Mary University of London. In his book, he asks questions like, “What are human rights?” “Are they laid out definitively in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the U.S. Bill of Rights?” Or, are they just items on a checklist, like a good standard of living, housing, dignity? That's how Eric frames his new book. But what caught my attention when reading the book is how deep he really goes on this topic. He doesn't flinch when he takes the stance that when global human rights programs fail, it is often the result of people being denied one basic human right – freedom of speech. Links Eric Heinze: Queen Mary University of London “The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech is Everything,” by Eric Heinze (Amazon) About this Episode's Guest Eric Heinze After completing studies in Paris, Berlin, Boston, and Leiden, Eric Heinze worked with the International Commission of Jurists and UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights, in Geneva, and on private litigation before the United Nations Administrative Tribunal in New York. He conducts lectures and interviews internationally in English, French, German, and Dutch, and is a member of the Bars of New York and Massachusetts, and has also advised NGOs on human rights, including Liberty, Amnesty International and the Media Diversity Institute. He has recently served as Project Leader for the four nation EU (HERA) consortium Memory Laws in European and Comparative Perspective (MELA).  His prior awards and fellowships have included a Fulbright Fellowship, a French Government (Chateaubriand) Fellowship, a Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD) fellowship, a Nuffield Foundation Grant, an Obermann Fellowship (Center for Advanced Studies, University of Iowa), and several Harvard University Fellowships, including a Sheldon grant, an Andres Public Interest grant, and a C. Clyde Ferguson Human Rights Fellowship. Heinze co-founded and currently directs Queen Mary's Centre for Law, Democracy, and Society (CLDS).  His opinion pieces  have appeared in The Washington Post, The Guardian, The Independent, Times Higher Education, Aeon, The Raw Story, openDemocracy, Speakers' Corner Trust, Quillette, The Conversation, Left Foot Forward, Eurozine, and other publications, and he has done television, radio and press interviews for media in Denmark, Brazil, the Netherlands, Norway, South Korea, the UK and the US.  He serves on the Advisory Board of the International Journal of Human Rights, the University of Bologna Law Review and the British Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. Heinze recently completed The Most Human Right for MIT Press.  His other books include Hate Speech and Democratic Citizenship (Oxford University Press, 2016), The Concept of Injustice (Routledge 2013), The Logic of Constitutional Rights (Ashgate 2005; Routledge 2017); The Logic of Liberal Rights (Ashgate 2003; Routledge 2017); The Logic of Equality (Ashgate 2003; Routledge 2019), Sexual Orientation: A Human Right (Nijhoff 1995),

Welcome. This time I trying something a little different. Some people have time to read, others would rather listen. So this time, you get your choice. Pick the one that suits you best. Or OD on both and get some sleep! Use the Comments section to let me know your preference.Thanks!Grab your Tin Foil Hat and read on…Everyone from Tucker Carlson to (insert Sage Pundit here) is saying “Something big about to happen.” You can feel it in the air. Things are super wrong and something's gonna pop. Soon.Do you agree? Are you getting that nervous tingle more now than then? It's OK. It's going around. Even cable “news” shows are mentioning “Armageddon” – but only in sentences that start with Trump and end with Elected! So what else could it be?Well, there are lots of theories out there. Some actually have more than a tad of credibility: The end of the petro dollar. The implosion of the Fed. EMP. Civil War III. Another pandemic. Epstein didn't commit suicide. Michelle Obama for President, and, of course, CLIMATE CHANGE!!!We've heard them all plenty of times. Most make the “News” frequently enough. But this new one is crafty, conniving cleaver and you haven't heard of it until now! It's not some flaming disaster that would wipe out millions in a matter of days. But just as deadly. Here it is: Destroy the Supreme Court and in doing so, the Constitution and Rule of Law will follow.Consider: The only branch of Government holding our three branch system together is the Supreme Court and its reliance of the Constitution and the Rule of Law. Like Extreme Democrats (and they're all Extreme), you may have a philosophical problem with certain SCOTUS decisions. Personally, I'm still pissed about Wickard v. Filburn. Today, the EDs are ripped about Marbury v Madison. Last week, it was Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.  Next week, they'll get back to dumping on the Alabama Supreme Court ruling on frozen embryos. But it's Marbury v. Madison that's threatens death to the Liberals', Progressives' and Democrats' addiction to power bordering on blood lust. Why Marbury? Because it established judicial review, allowing the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of laws and confirming the Supreme Court as a co-equal branch of government.With Trump's surprise win over HRC, Liberals started seriously sweating coming SCOTUS vacancies. Hillary's loss guaranteed Trump SCOTUS replacements would put the future of Roe V Wade, the Democrats (un)Holy Grail of Re-Election, in critical danger.  First came the Gorsuch nomination and the embarrassing confirmation hearings. Then came the Super Spectacle of the Kavanagh confirmation which exposed the obscene conduct of Senate Democrats and the extremes of character assassination they would employ to ruin an individual's reputation - all for the sake of abortion. In addition to the repulsive conduct of Democrat Senators during the televised confirmation, 83 ethics complaints were simultaneously filed against Kavanagh. Following his confirmation, protesters began singing, "We Shall Not Be Moved," outside the capitol and a gang of protesters broke through a police line, storming up steps to pound on the doors of the U.S. Supreme Court.Then came Roe v. Wade's second day in court. “Politico leaked an initial draft majority opinion written by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. The draft, which allegedly had five votes needed to constitute the majority opinion, would strike down the landmark case Roe v. Wade” (earthrights.org).That really set the Liberals on fire. This was proof President Orange Man had nominated Justices Kavanagh and Gorsuch specifically to overturn Roe, the Extreme Liberals nightmare and the Christian Right's sweetest dream. Always the Left's campaign wedge issue, it now became worse.  For over a year, protesters picketed outside SCOTUS houses in violation of Federal law. In what could be correctly identified as an early example of Lawfare, Attorney General Merrick Garland repeatedly ignored the violations. No arrests were made until a man was caught with a gun near Justice Kavanagh's residence, arrested notably by Montgomery County Police, not Federal agents.As angry reactions to the leaked draft grew, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer executed the most egregious action of all. Smirking and screaming into microphones before roaring protestors on the steps of the Supreme Court building, he bellowed his threats to Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch personally “I'm telling you Kavanagh, I'm telling you Gorsuch! You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price!” Denying this was a direct threat leveled at two Supreme Court justices confirms one's flaccid grasp of the English language or status as a frothing rabid Liberal as mentally diseased as Schumer. Of course, with MSM support, the bulletproof hubris of elected officials and the two-tiered system of lawfare practiced by liberal judges and the entire Biden DOJ, Schumer paid no price for his threats. The Secret Service has arrested law-abiding American citizens for less.It's constructive to remember Democrats and their evil spawn have a congenital fault. They dependably telegraph their actions and intentions by accusing their opponents of precisely what they are doing in real time or plan for the future. For this New Conspiracy Theory, you'll want to recall the overt war against the Supreme Robes had its first public showing during the 2010 SOTU presented by Barry O. This was followed by other SCOTUS decisions that did not sit well with the first Black megalomaniacal President.Now, direct your attention to MSNBC, Lisa Rubin, Sky News, Chris Hayes,   Joy Reid,  Wolf Blitzer  the Democrat's primary PR firm and their choreographed, invidious melt down over the recent SCOTUS decision to hear former President Trump's immunity claim. But the prime piece de resistance came from MD Representative Jamie Raskin in a chat with CNN's Anderson Cooper in which he said “the courts weren't fast enough. The people need to become “Engaged and aroused and demand action.”Notice all of the comments have been hyper-critical attacks on the Supreme Court and its unethical allegiance to Donald Trump's legal problems. These are the ‘dog whistles' Democrats like to talk about, the ‘clues' of subversion, racism, homophobia, only MAGA Republicans can hear – as translated by Extreme Liberals. This is the foundation of the New Conspiracy Theory.By example and current events, Extreme Democrats are desperate to do anything to prevent Donald Trump becoming President again. Yet, so far, all the rumors, fake Russian dossiers, salty language, strippers, taxes, family business, election interference, insurrection, business fraud ad nauseam have done nothing other than cost Trump millions in legal fees and hours of campaigning time in court while his poll numbers grow and grow and opponents lose and lose. With Extreme Dems hair on fire fanned by the ineffectiveness of their MSM's Yellow Journalists, it has come down to a Supreme Court decision.The seeds of chaos, social unrest, economic upheaval have all been sewn by Extreme Democrats, the “party of chaos”, the illegal immigrants Best Friends, the foster parents of Ukraine – all at the expense the American economy and the American Middle Class. And still Trump wins. The ‘fundamental transformation of America” cannot wait any longer. The backbone of America, the US Constitution, already downgraded to a relic for tourists and settling the occasional legal issue, is already ignored by the Chief Executive. He even brags about it. Respect and preservation of Constitutional principles, the Bill of Rights and Rule of Law must be destroyed in order to “save our Democracy.” If successful, it will obviously do the exact opposite. That's the Super Bowl Game Plan of the Extreme Dems.Having disparaged the Constitution as being written by white supremacist slave owners, Supreme Court decisions derided by a sitting President during the State of the Union address, attacking Trump appointed Justices, the refusal of the Attorney General to act in accordance with his Constitutional responsibilities by enforcing Federal law protecting Jurists, Biden threatening to ‘pack the court' to guarantee the passage of unconstitutional Liberal schemes, gives anticipatory credence to this New Conspiracy Theory. Now add the white hot hatred and blood curdling fear of another Donald Trump presidency that would cancel the cherished New Green Deal, close the border, rebuild the military and hold accountable those who have lead the treasonous efforts to betray the American dream. Extreme Democrats and their myrmidons will go to any and all lengths in their paranoid desperation to prevent another Trump presidency. In the months leading up to the November election, with a Supreme Court decision coming that can destroy the dreams of more than half of American voters and, likely, most of those in power, the New Conspiracy Theory, the “something big” now being bandied about will come to pass at some point. In some way. But the desperation of the Extreme Democrats all but guarantees it.Like any armature Conspiracy Theorist, you wish mightily to be wrong, that everything will return to the good Old Normal of Mom, God, apple pie, baseball, hot dogs and Chevy trucks. Of course, you're free to disregard it all; have some giggles, point and laugh with your friends. If I'm wrong, you'll read it here first. If I'm right, what are your choices?BWWell…there you have it! Mash the Buttons below to Subscribe and Share with everyone you've ever met through your entire life! That should take care of the entire weekend for ya!Back with The Two and Only in a couple days. Brian Wilson Writes is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Brian Wilson Writes at brianwilsonwrites.substack.com/subscribe

Mark David Hall, professor of politics and government at Regent University, joins Timon to talk about his scholarship on the American founding, Christian jurisprudence, and religious liberty.

Judges and jurists employ distinctive, and distinctly different, styles of reasoning. Judges develop the common law cautiously, by incremental analogical development. Judicial reasoning is characteristically practical, even pragmatic, with the resolution of concrete disputes paramount. The stability of the common law depends on strong shared, albeit implicit, understandings about its content. Academia might seem hostile to much of this. Academics are expected to build ambitious theories, to investigate legal rules to their theoretical foundations, to question and reject consensus, and above all to innovate. In pursuing such goals, legal scholars risk misconceiving the nature of the common law enterprise, and overlooking its strengths. Jonathan Morgan delivered his inaugural lecture as Professor of English Law on Friday 26 January 2024 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Judges and jurists employ distinctive, and distinctly different, styles of reasoning. Judges develop the common law cautiously, by incremental analogical development. Judicial reasoning is characteristically practical, even pragmatic, with the resolution of concrete disputes paramount. The stability of the common law depends on strong shared, albeit implicit, understandings about its content. Academia might seem hostile to much of this. Academics are expected to build ambitious theories, to investigate legal rules to their theoretical foundations, to question and reject consensus, and above all to innovate. In pursuing such goals, legal scholars risk misconceiving the nature of the common law enterprise, and overlooking its strengths. Jonathan Morgan delivered his inaugural lecture as Professor of English Law on Friday 26 January 2024 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

Judges and jurists employ distinctive, and distinctly different, styles of reasoning. Judges develop the common law cautiously, by incremental analogical development. Judicial reasoning is characteristically practical, even pragmatic, with the resolution of concrete disputes paramount. The stability of the common law depends on strong shared, albeit implicit, understandings about its content. Academia might seem hostile to much of this. Academics are expected to build ambitious theories, to investigate legal rules to their theoretical foundations, to question and reject consensus, and above all to innovate. In pursuing such goals, legal scholars risk misconceiving the nature of the common law enterprise, and overlooking its strengths. Jonathan Morgan delivered his inaugural lecture as Professor of English Law on Friday 26 January 2024 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Judges and jurists employ distinctive, and distinctly different, styles of reasoning. Judges develop the common law cautiously, by incremental analogical development. Judicial reasoning is characteristically practical, even pragmatic, with the resolution of concrete disputes paramount. The stability of the common law depends on strong shared, albeit implicit, understandings about its content. Academia might seem hostile to much of this. Academics are expected to build ambitious theories, to investigate legal rules to their theoretical foundations, to question and reject consensus, and above all to innovate. In pursuing such goals, legal scholars risk misconceiving the nature of the common law enterprise, and overlooking its strengths. Jonathan Morgan delivered his inaugural lecture as Professor of English Law on Friday 26 January 2024 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

Judges and jurists employ distinctive, and distinctly different, styles of reasoning. Judges develop the common law cautiously, by incremental analogical development. Judicial reasoning is characteristically practical, even pragmatic, with the resolution of concrete disputes paramount. The stability of the common law depends on strong shared, albeit implicit, understandings about its content. Academia might seem hostile to much of this. Academics are expected to build ambitious theories, to investigate legal rules to their theoretical foundations, to question and reject consensus, and above all to innovate. In pursuing such goals, legal scholars risk misconceiving the nature of the common law enterprise, and overlooking its strengths. Jonathan Morgan delivered his inaugural lecture as Professor of English Law on Friday 26 January 2024 at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Hello Everyone, and welcome to the dystopia that is Episode 719. I'm your Host Judge Kirkham. Every Month on the Lambcast, we have a movie put forward by a member and voted on in a poll, to be the MOTM. For January, that Movie is “Dredd”, the 2012 action dystopia featuring Karl Urban as the masked executioner of Justice. In addition to myself, we have three other Jurists on the show today, to dispense sentences on the perpetrators of this film. Listen and be Judged. Also, Sequels that we really wanted to see. 

This episode's guest is Fiona Rutherford, the Chief Executive of Justice, a UK law reform and human rights charity. Justice strives for a fair, accessible, and equal justice system and is also the UK section of the International Commission of Jurists. Fiona chats to Yasmin about a landmark report the charity recently published addressing the erosion of the rule of law in the UK, which you can access here: https://justice.org.uk/the-uks-longstanding-commitment-to-the-rule-of-law-is-under-grave-threat-according-to-landmark-report-from-justice/. The pair also discuss what it really means to live under the rule of law and have access to justice, Fiona's career journey from barrister to policy and advocacy work, and a particular case that deeply impacted Fiona and motivates her work in helping to make our justice system more humane.

In this week's episode, Judge Toni Clarke shared how international coalitions helped women judges escape Afghanistan when the Taliban took over.

From the early days of the American Republic to the present, Christian jurists have played pivotal roles in shaping American law, drawing inspiration from their faith. Figures like Roger Williams, John Cotton, Mary Ann Glendon, and Antonin Scalia, among others, have left enduring marks on our jurisprudence through their remarkable lives and legal contributions rooted in Christianity.The Heritage Foundation and the Project on Constitutional Originalism and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition (CIT) are delighted to host Mark David Hall, author of Great Christian Jurists in American History, and Judge Kyle Duncan of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit as they explore the profound influence of Christian jurists on American law. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this day, June 26th, in legal history, the Statute of the International Court of Justice was signed, establishing the International Court of Justice at The Hague. The history of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) can be traced back to its predecessor, the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), which was established under the League of Nations in accordance with Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The Council of the League of Nations was responsible for developing the idea of the PCIJ and formed an Advisory Committee of Jurists in 1920 to prepare a report on its establishment. A draft scheme was subsequently presented to the League's Assembly and was unanimously adopted as the Statute of the PCIJ in 1920.While the PCIJ operated independently from the League of Nations, it played a crucial role in resolving contentious cases and providing advisory opinions from 1922 to 1940. In 1946, the ICJ was established with its own Statute, building upon the foundations of the PCIJ's Statute. This process involved redrafting the statute with adjustments based on historical experience. The United Nations Committee of Jurists and the Fourth Committee of the United Nations Conference on International Organization (UNCIO) in San Francisco in 1945 were responsible for finalizing the ICJ Statute.One significant innovation introduced by the ICJ Statute was its close relationship with the United Nations Charter, which provided a structural interrelationship between the ICJ and the broader framework of the United Nations. Significantly, the ICJ defines its role in the judicial settlement of international disputes, as the judicial organ of the legal order of the international community as a whole, and not only of the contending parties appearing before it.Here is kind of a mini-column Tuesday, on a Monday. I wrote in the Week in Insights for Bloomberg on a recent study that had some interesting implications for where the IRS should be directing its influx of capital under the Inflation Reduction Act.Recent research from Harvard University reveals that auditing high-income individuals yields a higher return, with a $1 investment in audits of the top 10% income bracket resulting in a $12 return, compared to $5 for those below the median income. These findings hopefully have policy implications for the IRS and will impact tax practitioners and taxpayers.Week in Insights: Harvard Study Shows Auditing the Rich Pays OffThe US Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Coinbase Global Inc., affirming the company's ability to direct customer and employee disputes into arbitration. The decision, with a 5-4 vote, states that lawsuits filed in federal court must be paused while the defendant pursues an appeal to send the case to arbitration. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the court, argued that allowing district courts to proceed with pre-trial and trial proceedings during an ongoing appeal would undermine the advantages of arbitration. Business groups supported Coinbase, claiming that permitting litigation to continue would impose unnecessary costs, while consumer advocates argued that judges should have discretion in deciding which claims can proceed during an appeal. The case involved claims against Coinbase by Abraham Bielski regarding losses due to a scammer and allegations of inadequate disclosure in a Dogecoin sweepstakes. The ruling reinforces the power of companies to enforce arbitration clauses and the benefits associated with arbitration agreements in various industries, including the cryptocurrency sector.Coinbase Wins at Supreme Court as Ruling Backs Arbitration (1)U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith has requested a delay in the start of former President Donald Trump's trial on charges of willful retention of classified government records and obstruction of justice. Smith asked the federal judge to push the trial start date from August 14 to December 11, citing the need for reasonable time for effective preparation. Trump, who is seeking the Republican nomination for the 2024 presidential election, pleaded not guilty to the charges in a federal court in Miami. The trial will adhere to the Classified Information Procedures Act, which governs the handling and disclosure of classified evidence. Smith stated that the delay is necessary to allow Trump's lawyers to obtain security clearances and review classified documents. While Trump's lawyers do not oppose scrapping the August 14 start date, they are expected to file a motion opposing the proposed schedule.US special counsel seeks delay to start of Trump documents trial until December | ReutersU.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has denied allegations made by an Internal Revenue Service whistleblower that the investigation into Hunter Biden's tax affairs was impeded by the Justice Department. Garland stated that U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who was appointed by former President Trump, had complete authority to make charging decisions on his own regarding Hunter Biden's case. Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, was charged with two misdemeanor counts of willfully failing to pay income taxes. The charges were revealed in a court filing by Weiss's office, and Hunter Biden has agreed to plead guilty to the charges. Republicans have criticized the plea deal, claiming it is a lenient arrangement. A transcript of an interview with an IRS agent involved in the probe, Gary Shapley, was released, alleging that the Justice Department delayed the case. Shapley claimed that Weiss sought permission to bring charges from anywhere in the country but was denied by Garland. Garland denied the claim, stating that Weiss never made such a request, and emphasized that Weiss had more authority than a special counsel. Hunter Biden's attorney also defended the thoroughness of the investigation.U.S. attorney general denies allegations that Hunter Biden tax probe was stymied | ReutersThe U.S. Justice Department has filed criminal charges against four Chinese chemical manufacturing companies and eight individuals for allegedly trafficking the chemicals used to produce fentanyl, a highly addictive painkiller that has contributed to the opioid crisis in the United States. This marks the first time the U.S. has sought to prosecute Chinese companies involved in manufacturing precursor chemicals for fentanyl. China's foreign ministry responded by urging the U.S. to stop using fentanyl-related pretexts to sanction and prosecute Chinese entities, demanding the release of those "illegally arrested." The move comes after U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken's visit to China, where he emphasized the need for Chinese cooperation to address the fentanyl trade. The indicted companies are accused of supplying precursor chemicals to Mexico's Sinaloa Cartel, which has flooded the U.S. with fentanyl. The cases aim to disrupt the fentanyl supply chain and highlight the unique threat posed by the synthetic drug. In addition, Blinken announced plans to convene a virtual ministerial meeting to establish a Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats.US files first-ever charges against Chinese fentanyl manufacturers | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Founded by three doctors in 1986, the mission of Physicians for Human Rights is built on the idea that health professionals can help prevent human rights abuses. The organization works across the globe on a variety of issues including asylum, sexual violence, and mass atrocities. Research and investigations by the group have led to policy changes in the United States and have secured the rights and protection of asylum seekers, protestors, and frontline health care workers.rnrnIn March, Physicians for Human Rights named Sam Zarifi as its new Executive Director. Zarifi brings 30 years of experience in law and advocacy to the position. Before coming to Physicians for Human Rights, Zarifi was the Secretary-General of the International Commission of Jurists, an NGO that defends and sets international human rights standards through the legal system. Zarifi will lead Physicians for Human Rights during a pivotal time as the organization tackles human rights violations in Ukraine, emergency abortion care in a post-Dobbs country, and more.rnrnSam Zarifi will join The City Club for a discussion about the work of Physicians for Human Rights and the important role the organization plays in the fields of humanitarianism and advocacy.

♀♀♀♀♀♀♀♀♀ Feminist Question Time with speakers from India, Austria, USA Enjoying our webinars? If you are a position to make a one-off or recurring donation to support our work, you can find out how to do so (and see our financial reports) at https://www.womensdeclaration.com/en/donate/ - thank-you! ♀♀♀♀♀♀♀♀♀ This week's speakers: Vaishnavi Sundar - India - Behind The Looking Glass - an upcoming film on the lives of trans widows - Vaishnavi is fundraising to complete her feature length documentary Behind The Looking Glass, and in this talk she will explain the project and answer any questions. Bio: Vaishnavi Sundar is a filmmaker, writer and a feminist activist from Chennai India. She is also the country contact for India. To donate: https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=EMKWNQ5HBJFCU Donna Krasniqi - Austria - Report from Vienna Let Women Speak meeting Bio: Donna is 34 years old, mother of a little boy, spokesperson in the city hall of Vienna, social democrat & feminist for 13 years L Beatrice - India - Issues with the UN Endorsed 8 March Principles and WDI Legal Response - Analysis of the highly objectionable 8 March International Legal Principles released as a guiding standard, by the International Commission of Jurists, UNAIDS and OHCHR. Bio: Background in international law and human rights, works on various issues relating to sexual violence against women, particularly effective prosecution. Currently working on a campaign to verify the claimed existence of help centers in India for victims of domestic and sexual violence. Zanne D'Aglio - USA - About ‘Why did I sign the Declaration?' campaign Women's Declaration International (#WDI) Feminist Question Time is a weekly online webinar (Saturdays 3-4.30pm UK time). It is attended by a global feminist and activist audience of between 200-300. The main focus is how gender ideology is harming the rights of women and girls. See upcoming speakers and register to attend at https://bit.ly/registerFQT. There is also a monthly AUS/NZ FQT, on the last Saturday of the month at 7pm (Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney)/9pm (NZ). Register to attend at https://bit.ly/registerFQTAUSNZ. On Sundays (10am UK time), our webinar series, Radical Feminist Perspectives, offers a chance to hear leading feminists discuss radical feminist theory and politics. Register at https://bit.ly/registerRFP. WDI is the leading global organisation defending women's sex-based rights against the threats posed by gender identity ideology. Find out more at https://womensdeclaration.com, where you can join more than 30,000 people and 418 organisations from 157 countries in signing our Declaration on Women's Sex-based Rights. The Declaration reaffirms the sex-based rights of women which are set out in the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 18 December 1979 (#CEDAW). Disclaimer: Women's Declaration International hosts a range of women from all over the world on Feminist Question Time (FQT), on Radical Feminist Perspectives (RFP) and on webinars hosted by country chapters – all have signed our Declaration or have known histories of feminist activism - but beyond that, we do not know their exact views or activism. WDI does not know in detail what they will say on webinars. The views expressed by speakers in these videos are not necessarily those of WDI and we do not necessarily support views or actions that speakers have expressed or engaged in at other times. As well as the position stated in our Declaration on Women's Sex-based Rights, WDI opposes sexism, racism and anti-semitism. For more information, see our Frequently Asked Questions (https://womensdeclaration.com/en/about/faqs/) or email info@womensdeclaration.com. #feminism #radicalfeminism #womensrights

In conversation with Mr Lloyd Kuveya Africa Day is celebrated annually on May 25th to commemorate the founding of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), now the African Union (AU) created on May 25th, 1963. Today marks the 60th anniversary of the OAU-AU and the day is intended to celebrate and acknowledge the successes of the African Union in the fight against colonialism and apartheid, as well as the progress that Africa has made while reflecting upon the common challenges that the continent faces in a global environment. Celebrations on May 25th recite the annual commemorations of Africa's independence, freedom and liberation. On this episode, in celebration of Africa Day 2023, Africa Rights Talk chats with Mr Lloyd Kuveya on the significance of Africa Day for unity, peace, security, and development in Africa. He highlights that Africa Day is a day to celebrate the principles of African unity, the evolution of the principles of the African Union and the key achievements of the African Union. He iterates that the African Union provides mechanisms such as African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), the Pan-African Parliament (PAP) as well as the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) to resolve conflicts and bring states together to hold each other accountable on human rights protection and adherence to the rule of law. He expresses excitement for the acceleration of economic unity and integration through the Acceleration of African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) implementation, a theme for this year's celebration to promote intra-Africa trade, investments and accessible borders to the African people towards the achievement of Agenda 2063.   Lloyd Kuveya is the Assistant Director at the Centre for Human Rights, at the University of Pretoria. He obtained his LLB from the University of Zimbabwe and LLM in Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa from the University of Pretoria. Mr Kuveya is an avid human rights advocate with research interests in international law, human rights law, rule of law, litigation and advocacy.  He was the Executive Director of the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum from October 2015 to May 2017. Before taking up his position at the Centre, Lloyd was Regional Researcher and Advocacy Manager with Amnesty International. Also, he was the Senior Legal Advisor for the International Commission of Jurists from 2013-2015 and Regional Advocacy Manager for the Southern Africa Litigation Centre from 2007-2013. Mr Kuveya is passionate about advocacy for human rights in Africa and developing human rights mechanisms for human rights promotion and protection in Africa.    Watch this episode on our Youtube channel.                This conversation was recorded on 22 May 2023.   Music and news extracts: Inner Peace by Mike Chino https://soundcloud.com/mike-chinoCreative Commons — Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported — CC BY-SA 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/b...Music promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/0nI6qJeqFcc  limitless https://stock.adobe.com/za/search/audio?k=452592386  

Nominate The Mikey Podcast ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠HERE⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Remember vote best Afternoon Drive Radio, Best Rock Radio Station, Best Talk Radio Station And be sure to tell everyone to vote!!   To get all podcast with video and commercial free subscribe ⁠⁠⁠HERE⁠⁠⁠ or at ⁠⁠⁠MikeyPodcast.com⁠⁠⁠ Tap to Connect with me on ⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠ Personal ⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠ Personal ⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠ Support the show and grab some merch ⁠⁠⁠⁠HERE⁠⁠⁠⁠  Save 20% at ⁠⁠⁠⁠HigherElevation.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ with promo code MIKEY Need help accessing this podcast? Tap this ⁠⁠⁠⁠HELP⁠⁠⁠⁠ ______________________________ The UN, CDC, and TikTok: Are They Censoring Doctors and Promoting Pedophilia? Find Out on The Mikey podcast Today I'm starting off with a report from the International Commission of Jurists, backed by the UN, claiming that some sexual behaviors should not be criminalized in the name of "human rights." But wait, it gets worse - they're also saying sex with people below the legal age of consent might be consensual in fact, if not in law. Are you kidding me? We are not about to normalize pedophilia, folks. Children should never be put in a position to "consent" to something they can't handle. It's disgusting. Next, I'm off to San Francisco, aka the city that's turned into a dumpster fire. Homeless people are camping out, using dumpsters for heat, and pooping on the streets. Seriously, what the actual fck?! And the politicians in charge are clueless, defunding the police has only made things worse, and long-time residents are getting pushed out. I don't have all the answers, but I do know that allowing people to poop and pee on the streets is not the solution. And we need to prevent Gavin Newsom from becoming president - can you even imagine? Last but not least, I'm diving into how the UN and CDC have teamed up with TikTok to censor doctors who question COVID-19 vaccines and alternative treatments in the name of public health. “Shots Heard” and “Team Halo” are out there monitoring social media, trying to silence anyone who disagrees with them, even if they're right. But guess what? I'm not going to be silenced. I'm bringing you the truth, even if it makes some people uncomfortable. So keep listening, folks - I promise it'll be worth it. #PedophiliaNormalization #SanFranciscoDumpsterFire #TikTokCensorship #BigBrotherWatching #themikeypodcast

The UN along with the International Committee of Jurists have released their new legal principles on laws criminalizing "conduct in relation to sex, drug use, HIV, sexual and reproductive health, homelessness and poverty." The thing they don't talk about in this particular article is the use of these "principles" to normalize and de-criminalize pedophilia under the guise of "consent." New legal principles launched on International Women's Day to advance decriminalization efforts | UNAIDS --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/factcheckthis/support

Photo: No known restrictions on publication. @Batchelorshow #Canada: Ontario's jurists voting on 2016 progressive policy principles that were set aside in 2019.  Conrad Black, National Post https://nationalpost.com/opinion/election-will-decide-if-ontario-law-society-devolves-into-woke-tyranny

Hi everyone. Thank you for being here for this new episode of Nepal Now, the podcast where we highlight different ideas and ways of moving the country forward. I'm Marty Logan, and I hope you can hear those birds chirping in the background. We just had a light rain so they've come out to celebrate. Before we get into this episode, I want to let you know that you're now able to support Nepal Now financially — if you wish. Go to our website, nepalnow.buzzsprout.com, then to the narrow black box titled Nepal Now +, where you can click to support the show. I've also included the link in the notes to this episode. This is strictly voluntary; we will not restrict new episodes to people who support us, but it will help pay for the time that we put into the show. And, I must say, for me it is also a vote of confidence in our work. If you have any questions or suggestions you can write to me at martylogancomms@gmail.com. Thank you.Today we're speaking with Dr Mandira Sharma, a human rights activist, founder of the NGO Advocacy Forum, and senior international legal advisor at the International Commission of Jurists. She was involved in the very first exhumation of a body in a conflict-related case in Nepal, in 2007, and has been training in the process since then as a non-medical expert. Mandira says that Nepal has been slow to undertake exhumations to try to find some of the more than 3,000 people said to be ‘disappeared' during the conflict, from 1996 to 2006. It has also neglected to develop technical expertise and policies and guidelines to undertake the work. We also chat about how exhumation fits into the four pillars of transitional justice and if Nepal is neglecting most of those pillars. Finally, Mandira argues that the state of the country today, including economic under-development and political instability can be traced back to the impunity that has reigned over Nepal since before the conflict.Importantly, in the days following our recording, a case was filed in Nepal's Supreme Court against Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal. Known as Prachanda when he led the Maoist uprising, in 2020 Dahal admitted that the Maoists were responsible for 5,000 of the 17,000 people estimated killed during the conflict. Starting on Thursday, the Supreme Court will hear if the prime minister should be investigated for that crime. And a warning before we start: This episode discusses exhumation of the bodies of victims of conflict. Please take care while listening. Resources-       Mandira Sharma on Twitter-       Ongoing news about the case against Prime Minister Dahal-       Support Nepal NowNepal Now social linksFacebookInstagramTwitterLinkedInThanks as always to Nikunja Nepal for advice and inspiration.Music: amaretto needs ice ... by urmymuse (c) copyright 2018 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial  (3.0) license. http://dig.ccmixter.org/files/urmymuse/57996 Ft: ApoxodeStay in touch on:Instagram Twitter LinkedIn

“And the Male Is Not like the Female”: Sunni Islam and Gender Nonconformityhttps://www.academia.edu/34017417/_And_the_Male_Is_Not_like_the_Female_Sunni_Islam_and_Gender_Nonconformity "And the Male Is Not like the Female": Sunni Islam and Gender Nonconformity (Part II)https://www.academia.edu/44843268/_And_the_Male_Is_Not_like_the_Female_Sunni_Islam_and_Gender_Nonconformity_Part_II_The Business of Gender: What is all the fuss about?Why this Topic?: 00:00-06:50Language Games: 06:51-10:20Psychology: 10:21-13:10Literature and Film: 13:11-15:44Setting the Foundation: Part 1What does the Shariah say about Gender Nonconformity? – 15:45-20:29Gender is Binary: 20:30-23:25Biological Nonconformity: 23:26-32:01Dispositional Nonconformity: 32:02-44:23Affected Nonconformity: 44:24-48:38Conclusions: 48:39-53:30Understanding Transgenderism: Part 2Gender Ontology: 53:31-1:07:09Islam and Gender: 1:07:10-1:11:22Transgenderism: History: 1:11:23-1:20:13Transgenderism: Schema, Theories: 1:20:14-1:26:07Childhood-Onset GID/GD: 1:26:08-1:46:20Autogynephilic GD: 1:46:21-1:49:41Rapid-Onset GD: 1:49:42-1:56:15Medical “Treatments”: 1:56:16-1:57:02Puberty Suppression: 1:57:03-2:01:14Hormone Therapy: 2:01:15-2:04:56Surgery: 2:04:57-2:12:59Islam and Transgenderism: What does the Shariah say?Islam and Gender: 2:13:00-2:19:52History of Jurists and Transgenderism: 2:19:53-2:32:32Ruling: 2:32:33-2:37:50Concluding Remarks + Q&A: 2:37:51-3:12:25Support Blogging Theology on Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/BloggingtheologyMy Paypal Link: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/bloggingtheology?locale.x=en_GBSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/blogging-theology/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Twitter chats sparked the connected educator movement and gave many educators support and a voice. But Twitter gave a megaphone to all voices and movements raising questions about free speech and the limits of what we should be able to say on social media. It turns out that free speech is not as free as many of us believe, and though we have the right to speak, we don't have a right to be heard. These are two of several discoveries we found among our misunderstandings about our freedom to say what we want, any way we want. Listen to this thoughtful and informed conversation about what's changing at Twitter and why it matters now that Elon Musk bought the social media platform that many educators rely on for informal professional learning. Follow on Twitter: @Eric_Heinze @SuzanneNossel @jonharper70bd @bamradionetwork Eric Heinze (Maîtrise, Paris; JD, Harvard; Ph.D. Leiden), a former Fulbright, DAAD and Chateaubriand fellow, is Professor of Law and Humanities at Queen Mary, University of London. He writes on justice theory and on human rights, and has worked with the International Commission of Jurists and the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. He has advised NGOs on human rights, including Liberty, Amnesty International and the Media Diversity Institute. Heinze is author of The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech Is Everything. Suzanne Nossel is the CEO of PEN America, the foremost organization working to protect and advance human rights, free expression and literature. She has also served as the Chief Operating Officer of Human Rights Watch and as Executive Director of Amnesty International USA; and held senior State Department positions in the Clinton and Obama administrations. A graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, Nossel frequently writes op-eds for the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other publications, as well as a regular column for Foreign Policy magazine. She lives in New York City. Nosssel is author of Dare to Speak: Defending Free Speech for All. Jonathan Zimmerman is the Judy and Howard Berkowitz Professor in Education at the University of Pennsylvania. A former Peace Corps volunteer, he is the author of Campus Politics: What Everyone Needs to Know and seven other books. He is also a frequent op-ed contributor to The New York Times, the Washington Post, and other national newspapers and magazines. Zimmerman received the 2019 Open Inquiry Leadership Award from Heterodox Academy, which promotes viewpoint diversity in higher education. Zimmerman is author of Free Speech: And Why You Should Give a Damn.

Kim and Carolyn speak with W. Clark Aposhian, president of the Utah Shooting Sports Council about some stories out of Deleware and Missouri where ATF or local law enforcement is trying to get citizens to divulge information about firearms they own. Clark explains the privacy safeguards in place in Utah. Kim and Carolyn also spoke with Sen. Kirk Cullimore who is a practicing attorney and serves on the state Senate Judicial Confirmation Committee. Kirk explains the way Supreme Court nominations take place in Utah and some of the potential deficiencies with this process.    https://utahshootingsportscouncil.org/ https://www.facebook.com/gunradioutah https://www.facebook.com/VoteKirkCullimore/

Itālijas valdība piedzīvo neuzticības balsojumu. Džo Baidens pirmo reizi apmeklējis Tuvos Austrumus, būdams ASV prezidenta amatā. Savukārt Ukrainas prezidents Volodimirs Zelenskis atstādinājis no amata vairākas augstas amatpersonas - Ukrainas Drošības dienesta vadītāju Ivanu Bakanovu un valsts ģenerālprokurori Irinu Venediktovu. Pasaules aktualitātes raidījumā Divas puslodes vērtē Ģeopolitikas pētījumu centra direktors, Rīgas Stradiņa universitātes asociētais profesors Māris Andžāns un Latvijas Ārpolitikas institūta asociētais pētnieks Gints Jegermanis. Sašūpojas Itālijas valdība Bezpartejiskā premjerministra Mario Dragi valdība Itālijā tika izveidota 2021. gada februārī kā izteikta varavīksnes valdība, kuru līdz šim atbalstījis absolūtais vairākums abu Itālijas parlamenta palātu deputātu. Vairāk nekā puse no Dragi kabineta ministriem, t. sk. iekšlietu, tieslietu un ekonomikas un finanšu resoru vadītāji ir bezpartejiski, savukārt partiju deleģētie kabineta locekļi pārstāv visplašāko politisko spektru. Starp viņiem ir labēji populistiskās partijas „Līga”, populistiskās Pieczvaigžņu kustības, labēji centriskās “Forza Italia”, centriskās „Kopā nākotnei”, liberālās „Italia Viva”, mēreni kreiso partiju – Demokrātiskās partijas un kustības „Articolo Uno” ministri. Taču šī sarežģītā konstrukcija sašķobījās, kad pirms izšķiroša balsojuma par valdības turpmākās rīcības plānu parlamenta augšpalātā Senātā zāli pameta Pieczvaigžņu kustības senatori. Kustības līderis Džuzepe Konte vaino premjeru nepietiekamos centienos apkarot pieaugušo dzīves dārdzību. Lai arī bez Pieczvaigžņu kustības balsojums bija pozitīvs, premjerministrs vērsās pie valsts prezidenta Serdžio Matarellas ar ierosinājumu demisionēt, kas tomēr nenotika. 20. jūlija vakarā paredzēts balsojums par uzticību valdībai abās parlamenta palātās, tomēr neatkarīgi no tā premjerministrs Dragi līdz šim norādījis, ka nebūtu gatavs turpināt valdības darbu, ja no tās aizietu Pieczvaigžņu kustība. Šādā gadījumā teju vienīgais scenārijs būtu jaunu parlamenta vēlēšanu izsludināšanas septembrī vai oktobrī. Tikām pašā Pieczvaigžņu kustībā vērojama nopietna šķelšanās valdības atbalsta jautājumā, un izskan viedokļi par partijas vadības vēlmi uz valdības destabilizācijas un ārkārtas vēlēšanu rēķina konsolidēt savu politisko spēku un elektorātu. Līdzīgi pieņēmumi izskanējuši arī radikāli labējo spēku sakarā. Prezidenta Baidena Tuvo Austrumu tūre 13. jūlijā Džo Baidens pirmo reizi devās vizītē uz Tuvajiem Austrumiem Savienoto Valstu prezidenta statusā. Četru dienu maršrutā bija iekļauta Izraēla, Palestīnas autonomija un Saūda Arābija. Kā jau bija sagaidāms, šīs vizītes pamatā apstiprināja amerikāņu politikas nemainīgās prioritātes reģionā un bija ieturētas „aso šķautņu” nogludināšanas garā. Viesojoties Telavivā, prezidents vēlreiz apliecināja Savienoto Valstu principiālo gatavību balstīt Izraēlas drošību. Izpalika kritika par ebreju apmetnēm palestīniešu teritorijā vai jautājums par iespējamo amerikāņu konsulātu palestīniešu autonomijai, kas varētu tikt atvērts Jeruzalemē. Toties prezidents Baidens un Izraēlas premjerministrs Jairs Lapids pauda vienotu nostāju, ka nav pieļaujama kodolieroču nonākšana Irānas rīcībā. Vaicāts, vai pieļauj iespēju šai sakarā lietot militāru spēku pret Irānu, prezidents Baidens atbildēja, ka jā, ja citas iespējas nebūtu. Savukārt viesojoties Palestīnas autonomijā un tiekoties ar tās prezidentu Mahmūdu Abāsu, Baidens pauda simpātijas palestīniešu neatkarības centieniem, tos pat netieši salīdzinot ar Īrijas savulaik izcīnīto neatkarības cīņu pret britu virskundzību. Ar lielu interesi starptautiskā sabiedrība gaidīja prezidenta vizīti Saūdu karaļvalstī, jo sevišķi tikšanos ar tās faktisko vadītāju kroņprinci Muhamedu bin Salmanu. Savulaik pašreizējais prezidents asi kritizēja kroņprinci par viņa domājamo saistību ar Amerikā dzīvojošā Saūdu izcelsmes žurnālista Džamala Hašogi noslepkavošanu. Izskanēja pat pieņēmumi, ka vizītes laikā Baidens atteicies tikties ar princi un tikšoties tikai ar Saūdu valsts galvu karali Salmanu bin Abdulazizu. Tomēr prezidents un kroņprincis draudzīgi sasveicinājās uz karaļa pils kāpnēm Riādā, un arī visa turpmākā vizītes gaita, kas iekļāva arī Baidena dalību arābu valstu vadītāju samitā, noritēja pozitīvā gaisotnē. Vašingtonas un Riādas pozīcijas pilnībā sakrīt pretestībā Irānas ekspansijas tieksmēm, un uz šī fona prezidents Baidens turnejas laikā vairakkārt uzsvēra Amerikas atbalstu attiecību uzlabošanai starp Saūda Arābiju un Izraēlu. Un kaut arī prezidenta administrācijas pārstāvji pirms vizītes tika uzsvēruši, ka Saūdu naftas ieguves palielināšana, stabilizējot globālo enerģijas resursu tirgu, nebūs sarunu degpunktā, naftas cenas biržās jau reaģējušas uz prezidenta Tuvo Austrumu turneju ar pamanāmu krišanos. Prezidents Zelenskis atstādina struktūru vadītājus Ukrainas prezidents Volodimirs Zelenskis nolēmis atstādināt no amata Ukrainas Drošības dienesta šefu Ivanu Bakanovu un valsts ģenerālprokurori Irinu Venediktovu. Kā motīvu prezidents minēja vairāk nekā 650 šobrīd izmeklējamo gadījumu par Ukrainas likumsargājošo struktūru darbinieku valsts nodevību un kolaborāciju ar okupētājvalsti Krieviju. Nepilni divi simti šādu darbinieku atzīti par aizdomās turētajiem. Visskaļākais gadījums ir nesen arestētais Ukrainas Drošības dienesta Krimas reģionālās pārvaldes vadītājs Olehs Kuļiņičs. Sākotnējai Bakanova un Venediktovas atstādināšanai sekoja parlamenta vakar notikušais balsojums par abu amatpersonu atbrīvošanu no amata. Abi atlaistie ir prezidenta ilglaicīgi līdzgaitnieki un pieder pie viņa komandas kodola. Jurists un ekonomists Ivans Bakanovs ir Volodimira Zelenska bērnības draugs, vēlāk darbojies kopā ar nākamo valsts galvu vairākos projektos, t.sk. kā administrators viņa televīzijas producēšanas kompānijā „Studija 95. kvartāls”, vadījis viņa priekšvēlēšanu štābu. Arī Irina Venediktova darbojas kopā ar prezidentu kopš 2018. gada, t. sk. izstrādājot viņa partijas „Tautas kalps” priekšvēlēšanu programmas tieslietu sistēmas reformas sadaļu. Par Ukrainas Drošības dienesta vadītāja pienākumu izpildītāju iecelts drošības sistēmas profesionālis, brigādes ģenerālis Vasilijs Maļuks, par ģenerālprokurora pienākumu izpildītāju – līdzšinējais ģenerālprokurora vietnieks Oleksijs Simonenko. Informāciju sagatavoja Eduards Liniņš.    Eiropas Parlamenta granta projekta „Jaunā Eiropas nākotne” programma.* * Šī publikācija atspoguļo tikai materiāla veidošanā iesaistīto pušu viedokli. Eiropas Parlaments nav atbildīgs par tajā ietvertās informācijas jebkādu izmantošanu.

With all that is going on in the world, Steven Pressfield has some words of wisdom for us about how to deal with it all.

Evictions constitute gross violations of a range of internationally recognised human rights, including the rights to adequate housing, food, water, health, education, work, security of the person, security of the home, freedom from cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and freedom of movement. Evictions intensify inequality, segregation and ghettoization, and invariably affect the poorest, most socially and economically vulnerable and marginalised. In this episode, we speak to Nerishka Singh, a researcher at the Socio-Economic Rig​hts Institute of South Africa (SERI), and Timothy Fish Hodgson, Legal Advisor to the International Commission of Jurists on Economic, Social and Cultural rights in Africa, about eviction cases before the Magistrate's Courts in Johannesburg, South Africa. The Magistrate's Courts fall lowest in the hierarchy of courts in South Africa, but are most accessible to the public, and yet these are least studied by researchers. This podcast delves into cutting-edge research by SERI on how the constitutional requirements of the right to adequate housing and right against arbitrary evictions under s 26 of the South African Constitution are implemented by the Magistrate's Courts. Recorded August 2019. Transcript available on the Oxford Human Rights Hub website (ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk).

Hey, you can't say that here: Surprise, we have the right to speak but don't have a right to be heard.  This is one of several discoveries that surfaced among the misunderstandings we have about our freedom to say what we want, when we want, any way we want.  Listen in to this robust conversation about what you can and cannot say, It's more (and less) than you think. Follow on Twitter: @Eric_Heinze @SuzanneNossel @jonharper70bd @bamradionetwork Eric Heinze (Maîtrise, Paris; JD, Harvard; Ph.D. Leiden), a former Fulbright, DAAD and Chateaubriand fellow, is Professor of Law and Humanities at Queen Mary, University of London. He writes on justice theory and on human rights, and has worked with the International Commission of Jurists and the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. He has advised NGOs on human rights, including Liberty, Amnesty International and the Media Diversity Institute. Heinze is author of The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech Is Everything. Suzanne Nossel is the CEO of PEN America, the foremost organization working to protect and advance human rights, free expression and literature. She has also served as the Chief Operating Officer of Human Rights Watch and as Executive Director of Amnesty International USA; and held senior State Department positions in the Clinton and Obama administrations. A graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, Nossel frequently writes op-eds for the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other publications, as well as a regular column for Foreign Policy magazine. She lives in New York City. Nosssel is author of Dare to Speak: Defending Free Speech for All. Jonathan Zimmerman is the Judy and Howard Berkowitz Professor in Education at the University of Pennsylvania. A former Peace Corps volunteer, he is the author of Campus Politics: What Everyone Needs to Know and seven other books. He is also a frequent op-ed contributor to The New York Times, the Washington Post, and other national newspapers and magazines. Zimmerman received the 2019 Open Inquiry Leadership Award from Heterodox Academy, which promotes viewpoint diversity in higher education. Zimmerman is author of Free Speech: And Why You Should Give a Damn.

Author and professor Eric Heinze joins Tim to talk about freedom of speech and expression at the most fundamental level. He recently wrote a book on free speech, but it's not exactly what you might expect. He explores free speech in a larger more fundamental context than America's First Amendment. He talks about it in the context of universal human rights. Eric tells us about the thinking behind his new book called, “The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech is Everything.” https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/shapingopinion/Eric_Heinze_auphonic.mp3 One of the benefits of having a podcast is that you get the chance to talk to a diverse set of really smart and interesting people. Sometimes those people write books, and that's the case with our guest today. As mentioned, the book Eric Heinze wrote is about free speech and human rights. Eric is a professor of law and humanities at Queen Mary University of London. In his book, he asks questions like, “What are human rights?” “Are they laid out definitively in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the U.S. Bill of Rights?” Or, are they just items on a checklist, like a good standard of living, housing, dignity? That's how Eric frames his new book. But what caught my attention when reading the book is how deep he really goes on this topic. He doesn't flinch when he takes the stance that when global human rights programs fail, it is often the result of people being denied one basic human right – freedom of speech. Links Eric Heinze: Queen Mary University of London “The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech is Everything," by Eric Heinze (Amazon) About this Episode's Guest Eric Heinze After completing studies in Paris, Berlin, Boston, and Leiden, Eric Heinze worked with the International Commission of Jurists and UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights, in Geneva, and on private litigation before the United Nations Administrative Tribunal in New York. He conducts lectures and interviews internationally in English, French, German, and Dutch, and is a member of the Bars of New York and Massachusetts, and has also advised NGOs on human rights, including Liberty, Amnesty International and the Media Diversity Institute. He has recently served as Project Leader for the four nation EU (HERA) consortium Memory Laws in European and Comparative Perspective (MELA).  His prior awards and fellowships have included a Fulbright Fellowship, a French Government (Chateaubriand) Fellowship, a Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD) fellowship, a Nuffield Foundation Grant, an Obermann Fellowship (Center for Advanced Studies, University of Iowa), and several Harvard University Fellowships, including a Sheldon grant, an Andres Public Interest grant, and a C. Clyde Ferguson Human Rights Fellowship. Heinze co-founded and currently directs Queen Mary's Centre for Law, Democracy, and Society (CLDS).  His opinion pieces  have appeared in The Washington Post, The Guardian, The Independent, Times Higher Education, Aeon, The Raw Story, openDemocracy, Speakers' Corner Trust, Quillette, The Conversation, Left Foot Forward, Eurozine, and other publications, and he has done television, radio and press interviews for media in Denmark, Brazil, the Netherlands, Norway, South Korea, the UK and the US.  He serves on the Advisory Board of the International Journal of Human Rights, the University of Bologna Law Review and the British Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. Heinze recently completed The Most Human Right for MIT Press.  His other books include Hate Speech and Democratic Citizenship (Oxford University Press, 2016), The Concept of Injustice (Routledge 2013), The Logic of Constitutional Rights (Ashgate 2005; Routledge 2017); The Logic of Liberal Rights (Ashgate 2003; Routledge 2017); The Logic of Equality (Ashgate 2003; Routledge 2019), Sexual Orientation: A Human Right (Nijhoff 1995), and the collection Of Innocence and Autonomy: Children, Sex and Human Rights (2000).

This week on Talk World Radio we're discussing the state of international law and the war in Ukraine. Our guest Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, and member of the bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers and the advisory boards of the American Association of Jurists and of Veterans for Peace. Marjorie is a legal and political analyst who writes a regular column for Truthout ( https://truthout.org/series/human-rights-and-global-wrongs ). She has published several books about U.S. foreign policy, torture, and drones. Marjorie is co-host of Law and Disorder radio, and she lectures, writes, and provides commentary for local, regional, national and international media outlets.

Mayor Gabriel Groisman of Bal Harbour, Florida, is Partner at LSN Partners, and a tireless advocate for strengthening the US-Israel partnership and expanding the Abraham Accords. Mayor Groisman joins America's Roundtable Radio co-hosts Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy for a conversation about principled pro-growth policies advanced by Florida's elected officials, business leaders and engaged stakeholders, and the state's unique approach in addressing the Covid pandemic which have become a model for America. The discussion with Mayor Gabriel Groisman also focuses on the growing concerns of the Biden administration's insistence on closing a deal with Iran, a state sponsor of terrorism, thus handing over to the Iranian regime access to $90 billion dollars in foreign currency reserves and sanctions relief. The program also brings to the forefront urgency to expand the Abraham Accords, a principled policy initiative which is bringing together countries in the Middle East to promote trade and investments, and advancing pro-growth policies for the region. The discussion will also address the rise of anti-Semitism in America and around the world, as well as the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement targeting the sovereign state of Israel — which adversely impacts both Arabs and Jews. The Economist, April 2, 2022: What America can learn from Florida's boom "In fact, Florida has become emblematic of much of America and central to all of it. The state is on the rise, as our special report this week explains. Between 2010 and 2020 its population grew at double the national rate. Florida has overtaken New York to become America's third-most-populous state after California and Texas, with a dynamic and diverse demography, including fast-rising numbers of Hispanics. It is now the number-one destination for American and foreign movers." — The Economist Mayor Groisman will also share his insights on Passover, commemorating one of the high-holidays in the Jewish calendar commencing next week. He will invite us to learn more about the timeless principles from the historic events that led to the Israelites gaining their freedom from slavery in ancient Egypt, and their extraordinary journey to the Promised Land — today's Jewish State of Israel. Mayor Gabriel Groisman's Brief Bio Mayor Gabriel Groisman has been serving his community since November 2014, first being elected as a Councilman, and then in November 2016 was elected as the Mayor of Bal Harbour, Florida. He wrote and passed the nation's first municipal anti-BDS ordinance in December 2015 and was the first in the nation to codify a uniform definition of anti-Semitism in December 2017. Groisman's subsequent dealings with a local church who had previously boycotted and divested from Israel is the first documented success story of anti-BDS legislation. He is a sought after public speaker, regularly speaking to groups about fighting anti-semitism and the BDS movement, and related topics. Mayor Groisman has presented on two occasions at the United Nations in New York as a legal scholar on combating unjust and illegal commercial and academic boycotts of Israel, and has also presented at conferences held at the Italian Parliament in Rome, the Israeli Knesset and across the country. Still, Mayor Groisman prides himself in speaking to high school and college-aged students, who are the most directly impacted by the rise of anti-Semitism, always delivering a much needed sense of pride and strength. In his private life, Groisman is also a practicing attorney and government affairs consultant. He is a partner at the prestigious firm of LSN Partners where he focuses on government relations in correlation with the firm's state and national practice. At LSN Gabriel established an International Tech practice, working primarily with Israeli tech companies in various sectors, helping them navigate the world of government procurement and regulatory affairs in the United States. He also often advises on cases around the world related to protecting the Jewish community from discriminatory conduct by governments and private individuals alike. In 2017, Groisman was named as a member of Advisory Council for Israel and Middle East Issues by then-Congressman Ron DeSantis, Chairman of National Security Subcommittee. In 2018, Mayor Groisman was awarded the Pursuit of Justice Award by the prestigious American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists. https://ileaderssummit.org/services/americas-roundtable-radio/ https://ileaderssummit.org/ | https://jerusalemleaderssummit.com/ America's Roundtable on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/americas-roundtable/id1518878472 Twitter: @GabeGroisman @ileaderssummit @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk America's Roundtable is co-hosted by Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy, co-founders of International Leaders Summit and the Jerusalem Leaders Summit. America's Roundtable radio program - a strategic initiative of International Leaders Summit, focuses on America's economy, healthcare reform, rule of law, security and trade, and its strategic partnership with rule of law nations around the world. The radio program features high-ranking US administration officials, cabinet members, members of Congress, state government officials, distinguished diplomats, business and media leaders and influential thinkers from around the world. America's Roundtable is aired by Lanser Broadcasting Corporation on 96.5 FM and 98.9 FM, covering Michigan's major market, SuperTalk Mississippi Media's 12 radio stations and 50 affiliates reaching every county in Mississippi and also heard in parts of the neighboring states, including Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee, and through podcast on Apple Podcasts and other key online platforms.

The launch of India WHRC A webinar with speakers from India and Sri LankaDiscussing legal, sociopolitical challenges in achieving women's sex-based rights Speakers: Vaishnavi Sundar - writer, filmmaker, country contact WHRC India (host) Linda Louis - a lawyer specialised in international human rights law and women's rights. Originally from Chennai, Linda graduated from NLSIU Bangalore in 2012, has a Masters in International Law and Human Rights, and worked with prominent NGOs such as the International Commission of Jurists with their Women's Rights and SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) Divisions. Shefali Sequeira - works as a teacher of French. She is also a member of the LGB Alliance India. Saranya Das Roy - a STEM student from the Northeastern state of Tripura. She desisted about a year ago. She is a member of LGB Alliance India. Thulasi Muttulingam - a journalist based in Jaffna, Sri Lanka from where she reports on post-war issues, particularly those affecting women and marginalised minorities. Volunteers write to india@womensdeclaration.org More info: https://www.womensdeclaration.com/en/country-info/india/

Few in Malaysia command as much admiration as Ambiga Sreenevasan – admiration among her contemporaries as a skilled litigator, and among the public as a courageous political activist. Sreenevasan has served as President of the Malaysian Bar Council, co-chairperson of Bersih (an NGO advocating for local election reform), and member of the International Commission of Jurists. Catch Ambiga Sreenevasan on Advocates, The Podcast.