Podcast appearances and mentions of justice scalia

On this episode of The Federalist Radio Hour, James Rosen, chief Washington correspondent for Newsmax and author of Scalia: Supreme Court Years 1986-2001, joins Federalist Staff Writer Shawn Fleetwood to discuss how Justice Antonin Scalia's time on the Supreme Court reoriented the nation towards originalism and fundamentally transformed the high bench forever.You can find Rosen's book here: https://www.betterworldbooks.com/product/detail/scalia-supreme-court-years-1986-to-2001-9781510786912/newThe Federalist Foundation is a nonprofit, and we depend entirely on our listeners and readers — not corporations. If you value fearless, independent journalism, please consider a tax-deductible gift today at TheFederalist.com/donate. Your support keeps us going.

Justice Scalia and the Unitary Executive Theory. Reflecting on Justice Antonin Scalia's legacy, Professor John Yoodetails the concept of the unitary executive. Scalia powerfully argued that the Constitution vests all executive power directly in the president, warning that independent agencies fragment federal authority, diminish democratic accountability, and disrupt the essential separation of powers. #151910 BOOK OF MINES

On this episode of The Federalist Radio Hour, James Rosen, chief Washington correspondent for Newsmax and author of Scalia: Supreme Court Years 1986-2001, joins Federalist Staff Writer Shawn Fleetwood to discuss how Justice Antonin Scalia's time on the Supreme Court reoriented the nation towards originalism and fundamentally transformed the high bench forever. You can find Rosen's […]

Preview for later today. Professor John Yoo of Berkeley Law explores Justice Scalia's legacy, emphasizing his defense of the unitary executive and belief that clear, predictable laws should govern independent federal agencies.1889 SCOTUS

One can see the true heart of the Democrats' so-called concern for the most vulnerable among us in Caetano v. Massachusetts, decided just a month after Justice Scalia died, in March of 2016. They criminalized a woman for innocent conduct. The Republicans corrected this. Democrats and some Republicans have made the grave error of upending the true purpose of government : by criminalizing paradigmatically innocent conduct. The Republican Professor is a pro-non-criminalization-of-innocent-conduct podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D.

One of the major challenges in religious freedom law is figuring out to what extent a claim of accommodation is justified given the low barrier of entry for claims of sincerity. While American law tries to prevent a man from becoming what Justice Scalia in Smith called “a law unto himself,” something of the sort is happening when a person claims that his faith prevents him from following the normal course of obedience. My conversation today helps illuminate some of this in a profound way, specifically looking at Soren Kierkegaard's ethical system and considering its corollary in the rule of law. My guest is Joshua Neoh, a senior lecturer in law at the Australian National University (ANU), Australia. He has an LLB, LLM and PhD from the ANU, Yale and Cambridge, respectively. Full bio. His paper at the heart of this conversation is called Kierkegaardian Ethics and the Rule of Law, available here. Cross & Gavel is a production of CHRISTIAN LEGAL SOCIETY. The episode was produced by Josh Deng, with music from Vexento.

If you've ever wondered who really makes laws in this country or what happens when protest and free speech collide, stick around. Let's look at President Trump's executive order on flag burning. There's a lot of chatter out there about what an executive order actually is, what power the president really has, and how the Constitution fits into all this—and honestly, a lot of people are getting it wrong.So, I'm here to clear things up. I'll break down exactly what Trump is trying to do with this order, why it's not quite what some people think, and what the law actually says about flag burning (hint: we're talking about First Amendment rights and the Supreme Court's big decision in Texas v. Johnson). Additionally, I'll share a great quote from Justice Scalia and discuss why our right to criticize the government—even in contentious ways—matters so much.Here's the real story, beyond the barstool chatter and media soundbites:Executive Orders Aren't LawsThe President can issue executive orders to guide administrative agencies, but they can't make new laws—that power comes from Congress.The Limits of Presidential PowerExecutive actions can't override the Constitution. Flag burning, for example, is considered symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment (see: Texas v. Johnson, 1989).Fighting Words & Incitement MatterTrump's directive targeted flag burning only if it “incites violence”—a narrow exception that still faces tough constitutional scrutiny and likely doesn't change much in practice.Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2025 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law Mentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

In April, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to rescind a regulation defining the Endangered Species Act’s prohibition against “harm” to an endangered species to include destruction and modification of habitat. That regulation was previously upheld by the Supreme Court under Chevron in Sweet Home v. Babbitt, over a sharp dissent by Justice Scalia accusing the agency of imposing “unfairness to the point of financial ruin—not just upon the rich, but upon the simplest farmer who finds his land conscripted to national zoological use.” Citing Loper Bright’s overturning of Chevron, the Service proposes to rescind this regulation and adopt Justice Scalia’s opinion as the best reading of the statute. This would substantially curtail regulation of habitat, the loss of which is purportedly the leading threat to endangered species. Join this FedSoc Forum in discussing this proposal, its interpretation of the Endangered Species Act, and the effect of Loper Bright on agencies’ modification of regulations previously upheld under Chevron. Featuring: Karrigan Börk, Professor of Law, UC Davis School of Law; Senior Fellow, California Environmental Law and Policy Center; and Director, UC Davis Center for Watershed SciencesWill Yeatman, Senior Legal Fellow, Pacific Legal Foundation(Moderator) Jonathan Wood, Vice President of Law & Policy, Property and Environment Research Center

In this episode of Good Morning Liberty, hosts Nate Thurston and Charles Chuck Thompson discuss various topics, starting with a technical issue they're facing with their camera setup and a lighthearted conversation about Chuck's past nickname. They transition into discussing Nate's potential solo hosting responsibilities next week and their current cluttered studio space. The main discussion revolves around a new executive order from President Donald Trump concerning flag desecration. They dive deep into Trump's stance on punishing countries that tax American tech companies, with a specific focus on the Daily Wire's report about Trump's threats of tariffs. They debate the implications of this executive order and the historical context provided by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's viewpoint on flag desecration. The episode concludes with their thoughts on identity, idolatry, and the appropriate response to flag desecration. (00:00) Intro (03:01) Trump's Stance on Digital Taxes (08:33) Flag Burning Executive Order (16:36) Emotional Opening (16:44) The Symbolism of the American Flag (17:09) Protests and Flag Burning (17:20) Respect and Standards (17:41) Personal Anecdotes and Analogies (19:22) Legal Perspectives on Flag Desecration (21:57) Justice Scalia's View on Free Speech (24:41) Debate on Executive Orders and Legal Implications (27:50) Controversial Cases and Hate Crimes (31:58) Hypocrisy and Idolatry in Flag Protection  

This Day in Legal History: United States v. VirginiaOn this day in legal history, June 26, 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in United States v. Virginia, striking down the Virginia Military Institute's (VMI) male-only admissions policy. The 7–1 ruling held that the exclusion of women violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Writing for the majority, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg emphasized that gender-based government action must demonstrate an “exceedingly persuasive justification” to be constitutional.VMI had long argued that its adversative, military-style education would be compromised by the inclusion of women. In response to the lawsuit, Virginia created a separate program for women at Mary Baldwin College, which the Court found to be inherently unequal. The Court concluded that Virginia failed to show that its gender-based admissions policy was substantially related to an important governmental objective.Justice Ginsburg's opinion stressed that generalizations about gender roles cannot justify the denial of opportunity. The ruling did not require VMI to change its core program but made clear that women must be given equal access to it. This decision marked a significant moment in the legal evolution of gender equality and helped to dismantle one of the most visible public institutions that had resisted coeducation.Justice Scalia dissented, arguing that the decision imposed a rigid standard of gender equality that went beyond the Constitution's text and history. Nevertheless, the ruling reflected the Court's growing skepticism of laws that enforce traditional gender roles. United States v. Virginia remains one of the most cited gender discrimination cases and is considered a hallmark of Ginsburg's judicial legacy.A federal judge has extended a block on the Trump administration's attempt to dismantle Job Corps, a longstanding job training program for low-income youth. U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter ruled that the Department of Labor's plan to abruptly end the program without congressional approval likely violates federal law. The decision came in response to a lawsuit filed by the National Job Corps Association and several of its contractors.Job Corps, established in 1964, provides educational and vocational training for disadvantaged individuals aged 16 to 24. It currently serves about 25,000 participants at 120 centers nationwide, with an annual budget of $1.7 billion. The administration argued the program was inefficient, citing low graduation rates, poor job placement, and issues with violence and security at centers.However, plaintiffs maintain that only Congress can terminate a federally funded program and that the Labor Department failed to follow statutory procedures for closing individual centers. Judge Carter agreed, stating that once Congress mandates and funds a program, the executive branch cannot unilaterally terminate it.US judge extends block on Trump's bid to eliminate Job Corps program | ReutersA federal judge in San Francisco ruled in favor of Meta Platforms, dismissing a copyright lawsuit brought by authors who accused the company of using their books without permission to train its AI system, Llama. U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria found the authors failed to show sufficient evidence that Meta's AI training harmed the market for their work—an essential element in proving copyright infringement under U.S. law.While Chhabria emphasized that unauthorized use of copyrighted works for AI training could be illegal in many scenarios, he clarified that his ruling was limited to the plaintiffs' failure to present the right arguments or evidence. This position diverges from another recent ruling in which Judge William Alsup found that Anthropic's AI use of copyrighted content qualified as fair use.The authors' legal team criticized the decision, calling Meta's actions a form of “historically unprecedented pirating,” while Meta praised the outcome and defended fair use as essential for developing transformative AI technologies.This case is part of a broader legal wave in which creators are challenging companies like OpenAI, Microsoft, and Anthropic over AI systems trained on copyrighted materials. At the heart of the dispute is whether using such content without payment or permission to create AI-generated works constitutes fair use or undermines creative incentives.Meta fends off authors' US copyright lawsuit over AI | ReutersAnd in a piece I wrote for Forbes yesterday, I note the IRS managed an objectively successful 2025 filing season—processing nearly 138 million returns, most of them electronically—but also that success masks deeper structural weaknesses. While headline numbers are strong, the IRS suspended over 13 million returns, largely due to fraud checks or errors, delaying refunds and spotlighting operational vulnerabilities. One of the most glaring issues is the average 20-month wait time for identity theft victims to resolve their cases, many of whom are low-income taxpayers urgently awaiting those refunds.Staffing levels are at crisis lows: the IRS workforce shrank by 26% in the first half of 2025, casting doubt on its ability to maintain performance as the temporary funding from the Inflation Reduction Act winds down. Looking ahead, the 2026 expiration of key provisions from the 2017 tax law will require major administrative overhauls—updates to forms, guidance, and withholding tables—that the current IRS may be too under-resourced to handle.The agency has promising plans, including digitization of paper returns and case system integration, but even the best-designed systems require trained staff to implement and maintain them. Moreover, modernization must be inclusive: 17% of Americans still lack internet access, and an effective IRS must serve them too. Ultimately, tax administration is not just a technical task—it's a distributive justice issue, and how we fund and staff it determines who bears the burden when the system falters.What The IRS' 2025 Filing Season Tells Us About The Future Of Taxes This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

We finish our journey through the swirly twirly gumdrops of the Unitary Executive, our study of Justice Scalia's great dissent in Morrison v. Olson (1988) and what it teaches us about Separation of Powers as established by the Constitution of the United States of America. Part 7, going through Roman numeral five (V), entire. We stop and say hi to the Claremont Review of Books, Winter 2024-2025 edition, Charles R. Kesler's piece called "The Eruption of Mount Elon," along the way, available here : https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/the-eruption-of-mount-elon/ We thank Claremont Review of Books for making this material available. Go to their website and subscribe to get a hard copy mailed to you 4 times a year for a very good price. The Republican Professor is a pro-Separation-of-Powers-rightly-understood-executive-power-correctly-contemplated podcast. Therefore, welcome Justice Antonin Scalia to the podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. To support the podcast, support it. Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

Michael Steele speaks with Leah Litman about how Congress could reform the Supreme Court if it wanted to. Plus, how Mitch Mconnell's blockade after Justice Scalia's death impacted our current composition of the Supreme Court. Check out the book here:  https://www.amazon.com/Lawless-Supreme-Conservative-Grievance-Theories/dp/1668054620 If you enjoyed this podcast, be sure to leave a review or share it with a friend! Follow Leah Litman @LeahLitman Follow Michael Steele @MichaelSteele Follow the podcast @steele_podcast Follow The Bulwark @BulwarkOnline

Today, the Two Mikes welcome back Sheriff Richard Mack—America's most fearless Constitutional Sheriff. Sheriff Mack breaks down why law enforcement has become a political weapon, and how the real solution is found in the forgotten truths of the U.S. Constitution. Mack explains how training academies deliberately neglect the Constitution, pushing case law over God-given rights. He also exposes the lie of “defending democracy” and reminds us that we are a Republic—not a democracy spiraling into tyranny.Sheriff Mack recounts his historic Supreme Court victory in Mack-Prinz v. United States—a 10th Amendment triumph authored by Justice Scalia—and how it reinforces the sheriff's duty to protect the people, not enforce the elites' agenda. From the traffic law money racket to the globalist push for authoritarian control under the guise of democracy, this episode is a masterclass in American liberty.Want to stand with real lawmen who still believe in the Founders' vision? Join the movement at https://cspoa.orgFollow Maverick Broadcasting Network on Pickax to catch the full lineup of shows and breaking news: https://pickax.com/maverickbroadcasting Protect your financial future with precious metals! Get your FREE Gold and Silver Guide from My Gold Guy today and take control of your financial destiny. https://mygoldguy.com/mbnIndulge in the finest quality with Prepper All-Naturals – sous vide, freeze-dried, and ready to savor today or in a decade. Order now using code MBN for a 25% discount. https://prepperbeef.com/freedomfirstbeefBe ready for anything life throws your way with The Wellness Company's Medical Emergency Kit. Order today using code MBN for a 10% discount at https://twc.health/mbn.Unleash the spirit of liberty in every cup with Supermassive Black Coffee. Order now using code MBN and savor the unparalleled taste of freedom in every patriotic sip. https://supermassiveblackcoffee.com

We continue our journey through the swirly twirly gumdrops of the Unitary Executive, our study of Justice Scalia's great dissent in Morrison v. Olson (1988) and what it teaches us about Separation of Powers as established by the Constitution of the United States of America. Part 6, going through Roman numeral four (IV), entire. The Republican Professor is a pro-Separation-of-Powers-rightly-understood-executive-power-correctly-contemplated podcast. Therefore, welcome Justice Antonin Scalia to the podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. To support the podcast, support it. Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

We continue our journey through the swirly twirly gumdrops of the Unitary Executive, our study of Justice Scalia's great dissent in Morrison v. Olson (1988) and what it teaches us about Separation of Powers as established by the Constitution of the United States of America. Part 5, going through Roman numeral three, entire. The Republican Professor is a pro-Separation-of-Powers-rightly-understood-executive-power-correctly-contemplated podcast. Therefore, welcome Justice Antonin Scalia to the podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. To support the podcast, support it. Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

There are pleasantly surprising lessons about Second Amendment jurisprudence throughout this section as we continue our study of Justice Scalia's great dissent in Morrison v. Olson (1988) and what it teaches us about Separation of Powers as established by the Constitution of the United States of America. Part 4, going through Roman numeral two, the second half. We'll finish Roman numeral two. Pay attention to the criticism of interest balancing tests in adjudicating Constitutionally vested powers and rights in this episode, connecting the issue in this case to the Second Amendment . The Republican Professor is a pro-Separation-of-Powers-rightly-understood-executive-power-correctly-contemplated podcast. Therefore, welcome Justice Antonin Scalia to the podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. To support the podcast, support it. Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

Did President Biden refuse to allow Elon Musk to help rescue two stranded astronauts in space because he feared the bad optics? Glenn exposes Biden's pattern of deserting his own people due to politics. President Trump's latest message to Hamas is a clear distinction from the Biden administration: We will not leave our people behind, and justice will be swift to anybody who harms Americans. The Supreme Court has ruled against the Trump administration, forcing President Trump to release $2 billion of USAID funding. Glenn breaks down the ruling and explains why he believes the justices got it wrong. We need the next SCOTUS justice to be the next Justice Scalia. Is Trump's newest executive order the first step to dismantling the Department of Education? Glenn explains why the cowboy way of life is making a comeback in America. Glenn and Stu discuss the accusation that Stacey Abrams received over a billion in taxpayer dollars to form a committee. Professional Bull Riders CEO and commissioner Sean Gleason joins to discuss why heartland values are being embraced and resonating with more Americans than ever before. Glenn previews his newest podcast with Kid Rock.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We continue our study of Justice Scalia's great dissent in Morrison v. Olson (1988) and what it teaches us about Separation of Powers as established by the Constitution of the United States of America. Part 3, going through Roman numeral two, the first half. We'll finish Roman numeral two next time. Pay attention to the criticism of interest balancing tests in adjudicating Constitutionally vested powers and rights in this episode, connecting the issue in this case to the Second Amendment . The Republican Professor is a pro-Separation-of-Powers-rightly-understood-executive-power-correctly-contemplated podcast. Therefore, welcome Justice Antonin Scalia to the podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. To support the podcast, support it. Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

We continue our study of Justice Scalia's great dissent in Morrison v. Olson (1988) and what it teaches us about Separation of Powers as established by the Constitution of the United States of America. Part 2, going through Roman numeral one. Next time, we get to Roman numeral two and beyond. The Republican Professor is a pro-Separation-of-Powers-rightly-understood-executive-power-correctly-contemplated podcast. Therefore, welcome Justice Antonin Scalia to the podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. To support the podcast, support it. Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

We begin our study of Justice Scalia's great dissent in Morrison v. Olson (1988) and what it teaches us about Separation of Powers as established by the Constitution of the United States of America. Part 1. Next time, we get to Roman numeral one and beyond. The Republican Professor is a pro-Separation-of-Powers-rightly-understood-executive-power-correctly-contemplated podcast. Therefore, welcome Justice Antonin Scalia to the podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. To support the podcast, support it. Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

On this episode, join John Solomon as he takes a look into the fascinating life and career of Alan Dershowitz, as chronicled in the new biography "Legal: The Life of Alan Dershowitz" by historian Solomon Schmidt. Join us as we explore the intersections of history, law, and personal anecdotes from Alan's remarkable journey. From navigating the eras of McCarthyism to engaging with notable figures like Mike Tyson, O.J. Simpson, and Justice Scalia, this episode offers a deep dive into the complexities of Alan's life and the enduring impact of his work. Discover the stories behind the man who has been at the forefront of American legal history for over 70 years. Additional interview with Nick Giordano from Campus Reform, reflecting on the life and legacy of former President Jimmy Carter, who has passed away at the age of 100. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this riveting episode, Michael Jaco sits down with Sheriff Richard Mack, the man who took on the federal government and won in a landmark Supreme Court case that redefined the limits of federal authority. Sheriff Mack recounts his courageous battle against the Brady Bill in the 1990s, a fight that culminated in a historic 10th Amendment decision penned by Justice Scalia. This case not only safeguarded states' rights but also laid the foundation for the Constitutional Sheriffs movement—a rallying cry for law enforcement to uphold their oaths to the Constitution, even against federal overreach. The discussion delves into the critical role of sheriffs as guardians of local autonomy, exploring how they can act as a "barrier" against unconstitutional laws, mandates, and agencies that overstep their bounds. Sheriff Mack shares gripping stories of sheriffs who stood firm, such as Sheriff Hamilton in New Mexico, who risked jail to defend religious freedoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. With the stakes higher than ever, the episode highlights the importance of grassroots movements like the CSPOA Posse in empowering communities to take back their rights "county by county." From calls to abolish agencies like the IRS and DEA to fiery critiques of federal policies on property rights, immigration, and public health, this episode is a rallying cry for Americans to stand up and reclaim their freedoms. Packed with bold ideas and unfiltered truths, this conversation is more than just a history lesson—it's a roadmap for patriots ready to restore America's greatness through courage, conviction, and constitutional integrity. Don't miss Sheriff Mack's inspiring message of resistance, resilience, and renewal. Join host Michael Jaco, Ex-Navy Seal, who teaches you how to tap into your Intuition and Unleash the Power within, so you can become the Master of your Reality. Connect with Michael Jaco at his website - michaelkjaco.com

In a special emergency Advisory Opinions/Dispatch Podcast crossover, Sarah, David, and Steve react to Donald Trump's Cabinet picks so far, break down the constitutionality of recess appointments, and Sarah offers a ... controversial take on the Matt Gaetz pick. The Agenda: —Tale of two Januaries —The Gaetz report —Recess appointments —Justice Scalia on recess appointments —Sarah's defense of Gaetz Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In a special emergency Advisory Opinions/Dispatch Podcast crossover, Sarah, David, and Steve react to Donald Trump's Cabinet picks so far, break down the constitutionality of recess appointments, and Sarah offers a ... controversial take on the Matt Gaetz pick. The Agenda: —Tale of two Januaries —The Gaetz report —Recess appointments —Justice Scalia on recess appointments —Sarah's defense of Gaetz Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hour 3 for 9/30/24 Drew continued his conversation with Deacon Tom Biegel about his deliverance ministry Penitent Soldiers of Mary. Callers: why are Catholics against tarot cards (1:55), I went to a new age shop (7:07), and St. Kolbe and miraculous medal (10:46). Then, James Hirsen joined Drew to discuss the importance of the Constitution (15:55) and George Soros' radio buy (36:22). Callers asked about Justice Scalia (43:44) and January 6th (49:38).  Links: https://jameshirsen.com/ https://x.com/thejimjams https://www.stgilbert.org/psom

Send us a textOn today's episode of the Cops and Writers Podcast, we are going into the courtroom with Attorney and Author Mark Bruce. California native Mark Bruce attended Humboldt State University, where he graduated Magna Cum Laude with a degree in Journalism. He then attended UC Berkeley Law School, where he graduated with his jurist doctorate. While attending UC Berkeley, he was a finalist in an oral advocacy competition where he appeared before Justice Scalia, who told him. “I like you because you're not a wimp.”Attorney Bruce has been a lawyer for 38 years, 18 as a public defender. Presently, he works for Estelle & Kennedy doing criminal and family law.In 2018, he won the Black Orchid Novella Award and has appeared four times in Alfred Hitchcock Mystery Magazine, including the May 2023 Cover Short Story. In today's episode, we discuss:·      His education in journalism and his shift to attend UC Berkeley law School. ·      His encounter with Supreme Court Justice Scalia as a law student.·      38 years as an attorney, 18 as a public defender. ·      Why is he a defense attorney?·      One of his most memorable cases as a defense attorney and what it meant to him personally.·      Winning the 2018 Black Orchid Novella Award and appearing 4 times in the Alfred Hitchcock Mystery Magazine, including the May 2023 Cover Short Story.·      Why Perry Mason was a terrible lawyer.·      Has he ever refused to defend a client? Why?·      How he explains the fact that he defends guilty criminals.Visit Mark at his website to learn more about him and his work.Check out the new Cops and Writers YouTube channel!Check out my newest book, The Good Collar (Michael Quinn Vigilante Justice Series Book 1)!!!!!Enjoy the Cops and Writers book series.Please visit the Cops and Writers website. Support the show

Aughie and Nia discuss the importance of Judge Aileen Cannon's ruling in the Florida documents case against former President Donald Trump. The 93 page ruling relies heavily on a dissent written by Justice Scalia in Morrison v. Olson, one that has waxed and waned in support since 1988.

The inevitable nature of future events is shaped by echos from the past. Enduring truths will always be told. Justice Scalia's most important opinion was a lone dissent. Who was Jack Smith? AOC calls for an investigation. Our 250th year will showcase many big events. Their attacks just strengthen our resolve. They can't be too obvious. They cannot win with Kamala. Testimony on the stolen 2020 election is upcoming. It was solvable, but they took the profitable route. If we use their words and documents then we can't fail. Roe vs Wade and the difficult truth. The reversal could be dangerous. The legal landscape is evolving rapidly around data privacy. Healthy competition should be the goal. It's about who truly has power. The grifty media is on to the DMV voter games now. Your data may be more important than you. Net neutrality complicates things. Where are the smart people? They are going after Paxton with everything. Election theft won't happen cuz it's too big to rig. Some know that relying on real citizens is best. That is because people who want change will fight like hell for it.

On September 26, 2020, then-President Donald Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the United States Supreme Court. Upon confirmation, Justice Barrett took the seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who had passed away one week before Justice Barrett's nomination. Writing in the Fall 2023 issue of the Criminal Justice Magazine, Daniel Kaplan observes that Justice Barrett's voting pattern in the court's criminal cases has been notably Scalia-esque. That's perhaps not surprising, given that Justice Barrett was a law clerk for Justice Scalia after her graduation from Notre Dame Law School. She remains the only former Scalia clerk among the 9 justices currently on the court. Daniel Kaplan is an Assistant Federal Public Defender in Phoenix, Arizona. His article is "Amy Coney Barrett: A Mellower Scalia". You can read his article here

On this episode of Our American Stories, author James Rosen tells the story of Antonin Scalia's unlikely but inevitable rise to the U.S. Supreme Court. His family, his faith, and his immigrant roots were the drivers. Support the show (https://www.ouramericanstories.com/donate)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

James and Al critique coastal elitism, explore how the Israel-Gaza war ends, and welcome Justice Breyer to discuss the role of the Supreme Court and its judges.  They compare textualism and pragmatism using Justice Scalia as a foil, weigh the factors that go into reading the Constitution, debate politics' place on the bench, review the ethics governing the court, and look at why public approval of the judicial branch is plummeting.  In their conversation they also break down the language of the 2nd Amendment, explain how history is the ultimate arbiter of past decisions, and call on us to listen to one another to find compromise where we can. Email your questions to James and Al at politicswarroom@gmail.com or tweet them to @politicon.  Make sure to include your city, we love to hear where you're from! Watch James Carville Explains on YouTube Playlist James Carville & Al Hunt have launched the Politics War Room Substack Get More From This Week's Guest: Justice Stephen Breyer: SupremeCourt.gov | Oyez | Harvard | Author of “Reading The Constitution” & Other Books Please Support Our Sponsors: Miracle Made: For 40% off high quality self-cooling sheets plus an extra 20% off with 3 free towels, use promo code WARROOM when you go to trymiracle.com/warroom

SERIES 2 EPISODE 114: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SURPRISE! A decade ago, conservative icon Justice Antonin Scalia issued a Supreme Court opinion in which he declared - and reiterated to two stunned conservative attorneys - that the President of the United States IS an OFFICER OF THE UNITED STATES. Thus the man who Trump called one of "the greatest Americans to ever live" has already destroyed Trump's only argument that he cannot be disqualified for the presidency under the 14th Amendment because the president is NOT an officer of the United States. Unearthed by Roger Parloff of Lawfire - how, as the cliche goes, is this not the lead story everywhere in the nation? The Scalia ruling and letter (which may itself have been agreed with by Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Alito, and Justice Thomas) destroys Trump's only argument for why the 14th Amendment Disqualification Clause does NOT apply to him and can't be used to kick him off the ballot. Trump insists the president is NOT an "officer." Yet four years ago Trump proposed a garden dedicated to the 30 greatest Americans who ever lived - and Scalia was one of them! Historians have also found a Senate argument confirming that body agreed that the disqualification clause applied to Presidents, and that it was self-enforcing, and that it was acknowledged as such by everybody from Jefferson Davis to President Andrew Johnson. Also, the Illinois Election Board was to meet today to address the bid there to enforce the 14th. Also: Trump has now enabled Biden to run on the Bipartisan Border Enforcement and Great Economy platform, while his House lackeys have made DHS Secretary Mayorkas look like the border hardliner of the bunch. On Day 15 of his mental health crisis Trump's mind continues to corrode, and damn but Nikki Haley isn't letting up, and more importantly seems to be having a gas calling Trump unhinged and in decline EVERY SINGLE DAY. B-Block (22:32) IN SPORTS: The Clay Travis Taylor Swift/Travis Kelce/Super Bowl/Joe Biden conspiracy theory has now been disproved. It has been replaced by the Vivek Ramaswamy Taylor Swift/Travis Kelce/Super Bowl/Joe Biden conspiracy theory. And why Bill Belichick going to do TV football could be the greatest move since John Madden did it. (29:36) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Charlie Kirk defames one of the Central Park Five while trying to dig himself out from having already defamed him; Elise Stefanik scrubs her website; South Dakota Governor (former South Dakota Snow Queen) Kristi Noem thinks the Constitution is a treaty signed between the 13 Colonies and Texas. C-Block (36:51) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: In memory of the late Red Sox, Astros, and Blue Jays' manager Jimy Williams, the saga of the day I was thrown off the field at Fenway Park and directed to sit next to Yankee owner George Steinbrenner who promptly joined me on the Fox game broadcast and accused Williams of trying to instigate a riot during the game.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Moscow Mitch delivered the goods to help Trump's electoral prospects, Justice Scalia speaks from beyond, Lindsey may have flipped on Trump in Georgia, and reading the tea leaves on why the presidential immunity ruling is taking so long. Ben Wittes joins Charlie Sykes for The Trump Trials. show notes: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-justice-scalia-thought-about-whether-presidents-are-officers-of-the-united-states 

Rundown -   Intro with Troubadour Dave Gunders - 00:35   "Fire In My Hearth" by Dave Gunders - 09:37   Judge J. Michael Luttig - 15:40   Judge J. Michael Luttig, a prominent conservative jurist 1991 -2006, worked as Boeing's general counsel from 2006 - 2019. Beginning his career in the Jerry Ford White House, he developed close ties with Supreme Court members and was a lawyer for President Ronald Reagan. In 1991, George H.W. Bush appointed him to the Fourth Circuit.   Republican leaders know Judge Luttig as an expert on the US Constitution, which is why VP Pence wanted Judge Luttig to weigh in publicly on whether the VP had any right to not count the electoral college votes on January 6. Thrilling US history comes alive in the captivating and vibrant narrative Judge Luttig provides.   Born in Texas, Judge Luttig became the federal appellate court judge who fed clerks like John Eastman to the most conservative members of the United States Supreme Court. Judge Luttig and the late Justice Scalia were close. Judge Luttig tells us what Scalia would do with the Article Three - 14th Amendment case. He'd affirm the Colorado Supreme Court.   Discover how Judge Luttig discovered our show—it all began with Craig Silverman's Colorado Sun column, caught by Judge Luttig during his time in Vail. Impressed, he reached out, on X of all places. Xitter played a huge role 3 Christmas breaks ago as Luttig and Pence saved democracy. https://coloradosun.com/2023/12/23/colorado-supreme-court-trump-opinion-silverman/   Learn more about this historic and legendary American attorney. Judge Luttig delves deep into American history, highlighting pivotal moments post Civil War, 3 years ago and last week as CO S/Ct followed his Article Three, Fourteenth Amendment trail with an epic opinion resonating across Maine and the entire nation.    Judge Luttig commends the exceptional scholarship and historical significance evident in the majority ruling of Anderson v Griswold. His expertise in Constitutional writing lends weight to his high praise. Judge Luttig's view may influence justices like Thomas, Alito, Roberts, Kavanaugh and conservatives who hold his opinion in high regard.   Show Troubadour Dave Gunders' music sets the scene as Judge Luttig candidly shares insights, sitting by his historic Vail fireplace. “Fire in My Hearth” echoes the warmth felt for Judge and Elizabeth Luttig, honoring their pivotal role in safeguarding America. This musical ode is dedicated to their valor! Is there a special obligation on lawyers now? You bet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=SaHK3aZYiWE   The Craig Silverman Show - Every Saturday morning at 9 a.m. Colorado time

On this episode of Animal Amicus, hosts Senior Policy Program Manager Nicole Pallotta and Managing Attorney David Rosengard discuss how the laws against bestiality have evolved throughout history, how bestiality is distinct from other animal cruelty laws, and recent court cases that have also tackled these questions.    Resources referenced in this episode along with additional relevant articles are listed below:   Animal Legal & Historical Center: Table of State Animal Sexual Assault Laws   North Carolina Law Review: The Law of Crime Against Nature by James R. Spence   UNC School of Government: The Legal Status of Bestiality by Jeffrey B. Welty   MDPI: Bestiality Law in the United States: Evolving Legislation with Scientific Limitations by Brian James Holoyda   Animal Legal & Historical Center: Detailed Discussion of Dog Fighting by Hanna Gibson   Wiley Online Library: Sexual Behavior in the Human Male by A.C. Kinsey et al.   The Physiological Society: Sexual Behaviour in the Human Female by A.C. Kinsey et al.   Gender and Sexuality in Critical Animal Studies by Amber E. George   Research Gate: Zoophilia and the Law: Legal Responses to a Rare Paraphilia by Brian Holoyda and William Newman   ZETA-VEREIN: ZETA Principles   American Psychiatric Association: Paraphilic Disorders   Newsweek: How Common Is Sex Between Different Species? That Monkey and Deer Are Not Alone by Kristin Hugo   Oyez: Lawrence v. Texas, 539 US 558 (2003)   Penn State Dickinson Law: The Future of Justice Scalia's Predictions of Family Law Doom by Robert E. Rains   Animal Legal Defense Fund: Virginia Court of Appeals Upholds Bestiality Law by Nicole Pallotta   The University of the Pacific Law Review: Chapter 86: Nevada Finally Outlaws Bestiality by Emily Malhiot   Oyez: United States v. Stevens, 559 US 460 (2010)   The First Amendment Encyclopedia: Miller Test by David L. Hudson Jr.   Oyez: New York v. Ferber, 458 US 747 (1982)   Animal Legal Defense Fund: Fifth Circuit Rules that Animal Crush Video Law Prohibits Obscenity and Congress Has Significant Interest in Preventing Animal Cruelty   Animal Legal & Historical Center: Justice v. the State of Texas, 532 S.W.3d 862 (Tex. App. 2017).   Animal Welfare Institute: Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture (PACT) Act   Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act, H.R. 724, 116th Cong. (2019)   Animal Legal Defense Fund: What to Do if You Witness Animal Cruelty Online  

By advancing his judicial philosophies of "originalism" and "textualism," Antonin Scalia became one of the 20th century's most influential justices. This week, James Rosen talks about Book One of his two-part biography of Antonin Scalia, titled "Scalia: Rise to Greatness, 1936-1986," Rosen who is Newsmax's Chief White House Correspondent examines Justice Scalia's life prior to the Supreme Court. We talk about Nino Scalia's early years, the importance of his Catholic faith, his first years as a corporate lawyer, his teaching career at the University of Chicago and UVA, his time in government during the Nixon and Ford administrations, and his appointment to the U.S. Court of Appeals.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

By advancing his judicial philosophies of "originalism" and "textualism," Antonin Scalia became one of the 20th century's most influential justices. This week, James Rosen talks about Book One of his two-part biography of Antonin Scalia, titled "Scalia: Rise to Greatness, 1936-1986," Rosen who is Newsmax's Chief White House Correspondent examines Justice Scalia's life prior to the Supreme Court. We talk about Nino Scalia's early years, the importance of his Catholic faith, his first years as a corporate lawyer, his teaching career at the University of Chicago and UVA, his time in government during the Nixon and Ford administrations, and his appointment to the U.S. Court of Appeals.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Episode 145-Tell The USPS to honor Justice Scalia  Also Available On Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer Episode 145 SUMMARY KEYWORDS new jersey, guns, stamp, gun, gun rights, law, great, jersey, honoring, justice scalia, scalia, post office, folks, id card, subjects, book, second amendment,

In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 2 of 2 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald v. Chicago.McDonald is the seminal 2010 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Samuel Alito extending the finding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to the STATES and not merely to the Federal government (extending the finding of the 2008 Heller decision against the Federal government, written by Justice Scalia, which I read here).As a result, the then-existing laws of Chicago and nearby Oak Park effectively prohibiting the ownership by American citizens of handguns in the home was deemed unconstitutional.Prior this reading of McDonald I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller, and I will follow McDonald with a reading of the 2022 decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc. v. Bruen (2022) (entire decision, 7-part reading), which applies the Second Amendment outside the home.You can read the entirety the DC v. McDonald decision here:  https://lawofselfdefense.com/mcdonaldEnjoy! #McDonaldBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/LAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of Self Defense"https://youtube.com/lawofselfdefenseFREE BOOK! “The Law of Self Defense: Principles”Physical book, 200+ pages, we just ask that you cover the S&H:http://lawofselfdefense.com/freebookFREE 5-ELEMENTS OF SELF-DEFENSE LAW CHEAT SHEET!Totally free cheat sheet explaining the 5-elements of any claim of self-defense.If you don't understand these five elements you have no idea what legally qualifies as lawful self-defense.PDF download, zero cost:http://lawofselfdefense.com/elementsDisclaimer - Content is for educational purpose only.Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes

In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 1 of 2 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald v. Chicago.McDonald is the seminal 2010 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Samuel Alito extending the finding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to the STATES and not merely to the Federal government (extending the finding of the 2008 Heller decision against the Federal government, written by Justice Scalia, which I read here).As a result, the then-existing laws of Chicago and nearby Oak Park effectively prohibiting the ownership by American citizens of handguns in the home was deemed unconstitutional.Prior this reading of McDonald I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller, and I will follow McDonald with a reading of the 2022 decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc. v. Bruen (2022) (entire decision, 7-part reading), which applies the Second Amendment outside the home.You can read the entirety the DC v. McDonald decision here:  https://lawofselfdefense.com/mcdonaldEnjoy! #McDonaldBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/LAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of Self Defense"https://youtube.com/lawofselfdefenseFREE BOOK! “The Law of Self Defense: Principles”Physical book, 200+ pages, we just ask that you cover the S&H:http://lawofselfdefense.com/freebookFREE 5-ELEMENTS OF SELF-DEFENSE LAW CHEAT SHEET!Totally free cheat sheet explaining the 5-elements of any claim of self-defense.If you don't understand these five elements you have no idea what legally qualifies as lawful self-defense.PDF download, zero cost:http://lawofselfdefense.com/elementsDisclaimer - Content is for educational purpose only.Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit nealkatyal.substack.comI cannot tell you in words how excited I am for you to hear this episode. I've been struck by John Mulaney for years — his delivery, his unique understanding of the world, his deep empathy for the human condition. I didn't know until last year he is also a Constitutional Law nerd. I mean, seriously, he texts me all sorts of questions about random Supreme Court cases. All the time. And they are damn good questions.John's questions are really what launched me on this podcast Courtside, because it occurred to me that Constitutional Law should not be the province of a bunch of lawyers — it belongs to all of us.You are about to get treated (whether a paying subscriber or not) for what I've had the privilege of seeing with John, an absolutely first rate mind who brings joy and playfulness to everything he encounters. He picked Morrison v. Olson (1988), one of the most important cases in constitutional law. The case concerns how to prosecute Presidential or high level Executive Branch wrongdoing. When he picked it, we didn't know Donald Trump would be getting a target letter for the January 6 events at the same time, but the imminent criminal indictment of Donald Trump raises the importance of this episode even more.Morrison v. Olson was a sweeping Supreme Court decision, decided in 1988, that found the Independent Counsel Act of 1978 constitutional. This Act was responsible for the appointment of independent prosecutors such as Ken Starr, who kickstarted the sprawling and viciously partisan investigation of Monica Lewinsky, and Lawrence Walsh, who was tasked with investigating the Iran-Contra affair during the Reagan Administration. While the Court issued a 7-1 ruling in favor of the Act (with Chief Justice Rehnquist writing for the majority), the decision is widely thought to have been a mistake. Most believe that Justice Scalia's lone dissent was ultimately correct, and some even argue that it is the finest dissent he ever wrote.John is pinpoint accurate in describing Morrison, and the ways in which it matters. Paid subscribers are also going to get a bunch of bonus material from John, including the ways in which he thinks Supreme Court argumentation is similar to comedy, and its differences. It's a remarkable discussion, and I can't wait for you to hear it.We also spend some time describing the different models for prosecuting a President. Ultimately, the big problem is that the Constitution vests the prosecution power in the President. And if it's the President (or his friends or family) who are the ones accused of wrongdoing, there is an inherent conflict of interest in the investigation. Yet the Constitution doesn't provide for any alternative. This is a problem of governance that goes back millenia — to Juvenal's query Who Guards the Guardians? (Or, as Dr. Seuss put it, bee-watchers watching the bees, and bee-watcher-watchers watching the watchers.)Regardless, the American public is about to see one model, the Special Counsel regulations, come into force as Jack Smith prosecutes former President Donald Trump. Understanding Morrison v. Olson is essential to understanding the constitutional architecture of this prosecution, and what we can expect. Enjoy this remarkable discussion with John Mulaney.Paid subscribers will have access to the full interview and some bonus material, along with information and writeups about Morrison v. Olson, all on the substack website. https://nealkatyal.substack.com/. Sign up there for all the goodies.

On this episode of Our American Stories, author James Rosen tells the story of Antonin Scalia's unlikely but inevitable rise to the U.S. Supreme Court. His family, his faith, and his immigrant roots were the drivers. Support the show (https://www.ouramericanstories.com/donate)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of Our American Stories, author James Rosen tells the story of Antonin Scalia's unlikely but inevitable rise to the U.S. Supreme Court. His family, his faith, and his immigrant roots were the drivers. Support the show (https://www.ouramericanstories.com/donate)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We revisit a story about Justice Scalia from last episode and then discuss recent allegations about Justice Thomas's financial disclosures, and Supreme Court ethics more broadly. We also briefly turn to two recent merits opinions --  Türkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. United States and Reed v. Goertz.

Episode 230: James Rosen joins Bryce Eddy to discuss his book "Scalia, Rise To Greatness" as well as his experiences and fond stories of Justice Scalia.Putting the "MAN" back in mankind!Visit https://www.friendofbryce.com/ to get your free copy of Alliance Entrust's book on financial stewardship, 'Wisdom Before Wealth'.Go to https://www.goodranchers.com to receive FREE applewood-smoked bacon with every subscription through the end of March. Also, use code Bryce for $20 off your order.Text BRYCE to 989898 to claim your free info kit on converting an IRA or 401k into an IRA in precious metals with Birch Gold and be entered to win a FREE safe on qualifying purchases through March 31st.Claim your 5 FREE bonus gifts from Pure Health by visiting https://getliverhelp.com/bryceBE A THREAT TO THE GREAT RESET!Please subscribe and follow us on the following platforms!Rumble - https://rumble.com/c/TheBryceEddyShowSpotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/0S9VEEBrxdXaKdLvSHPue6Apple Podcast - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bryce-eddy-show/id1635204267Google Podcast - https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9vbW55LmZtL3Nob3dzL2xpYmVydHktc3RhdGlvbi9wbGF5bGlzdHMvbGliZXJ0eS1zdGF0aW9uLnJzcwInstagram - https://www.instagram.com/thebryceeddyshow/

James Rosen, Chief White House Correspondent for Newsmax and the author of Scalia: Rise to Greatness, joins The P.A.S. Report to discuss Justice Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court, and the White House press room. James Rosen has written the definitive account of Justice Scalia's personal experiences that shaped his life and character.   More Information If you enjoyed this episode and found it useful, please give The P.A.S. Report Podcast a 5-star rating and take 30 seconds to write a review. Make sure to hit the follow button so you never miss an episode. Please share this episode on social media and with your family and friends. Please visit 4Patriots. 4Patriots champions freedom and self-reliance. Use code PAS to get 10% off your order. Don't forget to visit https://pasreport.com.  *PA Strategies, LLC. may earn advertising revenue or a small commission for promoting products or when you make a purchase through any affiliate links on this website and within this post.

In this episode, Hugh Hewitt talks with James Rosen, author of "Scalia: Rise to Greatness, 1936 to 1986," about Justice Scalia's remarkable life, legal philosophy, and lasting impact on American law and society.

Many remember Justice Antonin Scalia for his commitment to the Constitution, his razor-sharp wit, and his unlikely friendship with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but little has been written about his pre-Supreme Court years. Award-winning reporter James Rosen reveals never-before-reported information in the definitive, masterful biography “Scalia: Rise to Greatness, 1936–1986” – a comprehensive and detailed account of Scalia's monumental accomplishments in the 50 years preceding his appointment to the Supreme Court in 1986. Newt's guest is James Rosen. He is the chief White House correspondent for Newsmax, a veteran Washington correspondent and best-selling historian.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As more information becomes public about Ginni Thomas's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, there is increasing pressure on her husband, Justice Clarence Thomas, to recuse himself from election-related cases. But what are the rules around recusal for Supreme Court justices? And who can enforce them? Preet speaks with Kathleen Clark, an expert in legal ethics and a professor at Washington University in St. Louis School of Law, about whether Justice Thomas should recuse — and the likelihood that he will.  Stay Tuned in Brief is presented by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Please let us know what you think! Email us at letters@cafe.com, or leave a voicemail at 669-247-7338. References and Supplemental Materials: 28 U.S. Code § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge Texas v. Pennsylvania (2020) Justice Scalia's memorandum on recusal, Richard B. Cheney v. District Court for the District of Columbia (2004) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices