POPULARITY
7 episodes with learning resources
5 episodes with learning resources
2 episodes with learning resources
2 episodes with learning resources
2 episodes with learning resources
2 episodes with learning resources
4 episodes with learning resources
9 episodes with learning resources
2 episodes with learning resources
Are you tired of the relentless AI marketing hype but know you can't afford to ignore it? Discover how to stop blindly applying AI and start mastering it as a malleable "design material" to build impactful, user-centered services .It's time to stop buying into the stories big tech companies want us to believe about what Artificial Intelligence can and can't do. Slapping AI mindlessly onto every project doesn't just create bad user experiences. It can do real harm.To set a better example for the service design industry, host Marc sits down with Ovetta Sampson. With a resume that includes Director of UX for Machine Learning at Google and AI design leadership roles at Microsoft and Capital One, Ovetta doesn't just talk theory. She runs Right AI to help teams adopt AI safely, responsibly, and effectively. In this conversation, she breaks down exactly how to understand AI's unique properties, navigate its limitations, and mold it into exactly what you need.In This Episode:The Design Material Mindset: How to stop fearing AI and start shaping it like clay to get the outcomes you want.Steering the Machine: Practical techniques for guiding generic LLMs to reliably produce high-quality, specific results.The Context Crisis: Why understanding your users' real-world context is about to become more important than ever before.When "Wrong" Becomes Dangerous: Why AI will always make mistakes, and how to identify the exact point where those errors become harmful.Breaking the Model: Why you need to start "messing around" and intentionally trying to break AI tools to build your own grounded mastery.If you found value in this episode, please hit the Subscribe button on YouTube, Spotify, or Apple Podcasts so you never miss a conversation. Share this episode with a fellow service designer who needs to hear this!As always, enjoy, and keep making a positive impact!~ Marc[ 1. GUIDE ]00:00 Intro and AI Sycophancy 03:15 Mindless vs. Mindful AI 06:45 Dangers of Automation Bias 10:00 The Humanizing Trap 17:45 Design as a Verb 24:30 Emergent AI Behavior 27:30 AI Confidence Levels 36:15 The Illusion of AI Memory 39:00 Principle 1 of Mindful AI 43:30 Library vs. Netflix Analogy 49:45 Designing for Failure 55:15 The Socio-Technical Challenge 01:01:45 Advice for Designers 01:06:00 Learning Resources 01:09:00 Redefining the Designer 01:11:15 Outro [ 2. LINKS ]LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/ovettasampson/ MindfulAI Masterclass: https://www.ovetta-sampson.com/mindfulai-masterclass[ 3. CIRCLE ]Join our private community for in-house service design professionals. https://servicedesignshow.com/circle [4. FIND THE SHOW ON]Youtube ~ https://go.servicedesignshow.com/259-youtube Spotify ~ https://go.servicedesignshow.com/259-spotify Apple ~ https://go.servicedesignshow.com/259-apple Snipd ~ https://go.servicedesignshow.com/259-snipd
DOCKET ALERTS: The Paramount-Warner Bros. merger is on hold well into next year. The parties stipulated that the merger would not go through pending trial in the antitrust case brought by twelve state AGs, despite massive financial penalties for Paramount if the deal is delayed. Meanwhile, the Writers Guild of America has filed a similar antitrust action, which has also been assigned to Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín. Trump's newest tariff scheme, based on findings of anticompetitive use of forced labor by our trade competitors, drew multiple legal challenges. Learning Resources v. US, Take 3! Fired US Attorney for the Western District of Washington, Roger Rogoff, is suing to get his job back. MAIN SHOW: In March, Trump put out an executive order instructing DHS to compile a list of voters. The states would then be forced to submit all mail-in ballot recipients to a portal and supply each with an individual bar code. The Post Office was instructed to refuse to deliver ballots to anyone not on the list. That order is now being litigated in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, the DC Circuit, the US District for Massachusetts, the First Circuit and, as of today, the Supreme Court. James Comey has moved to dismiss the two-count federal indictment against him for posting an instagram photo of seashells that spelled out "8647." We discuss the "true threat" doctrine and the administration's larger war on freedom of speech when it comes to his critics and journalists. Speaking of which, in the subscriber bonus, we discuss the case of Atlanta "Stop Cop City" protester Sam Tunick, who was charged with destroying evidence when he tricked CBP agents into bricking his phone. California v. Paramount-Skydance https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73606877/the-state-of-california-v-paramount-skydance-corporation/ Writers Guild of America, West, Inc. v. Paramount Skydance Corporation https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73614167/writers-guild-of-america-west-inc-v-paramount-skydance-corporation/ Fact Sheet: USTR Section 301 Action in Response to the Failure of 60 Economies to Ban Imports Produced with Forced Labor https://ustr.gov/about/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2026/july/fact-sheet-ustr-section-301-action-response-failure-60-economies-ban-imports-produced-forced-labor Learning Resources v. US [Section 301 tariffs] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73668290/learning-resources-inc-v-the-united-states-of-america/ Burlap and Barrel v. Greer [Section 301 tariffs] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73667352/burlap-and-barrel-inc-v-greer-in-his-official-capacity-as-united-states/ Rogoff v. Trump https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73647676/rogoff-v-trump California v. Trump [Mail-in ballots, First Circuit] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73568304/state-of-california-v-trump/?order_by=desc League of Women Voters v. Trump [Mail-in ballots, D. Mass.] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73133197/league-of-women-voters-of-massachusetts-v-trump NAACP v. US [Mail-in ballots, D.D.C.] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17461792/national-association-for-the-advancement-of-colored-people-v-united-states NAACP v. USPS [Mail-in ballots, DC Circuit] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73595574/naacp-v-usps/ Trump v. California [Mail-in ballots, SCOTUS] https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docket/docketfiles/html/public26a124.html US v. Comey [North Carolina criminal indictment for 8647; docket via CourtListener] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73256624/united-states-v-comey/?order_by=desc US v. Tunick [Georgia criminal indictment for bricked phone; docket via CourtListener] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71998357/united-states-v-tunick/ Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, joins John to talk about how the company filed a lawsuit on Friday over Trump’s new tariffs.
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, joins John to talk about how the company filed a lawsuit on Friday over Trump’s new tariffs.
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, joins John to talk about how the company filed a lawsuit on Friday over Trump’s new tariffs.
Episode 358 hosts Dr Rob Weiss (GP from Melbourne, Australia) In this episode we explore the trending but highly controversial topic of peptides. We discuss the background to these products, the growing demand from the general public and address the significant dangers of black-market peptides. Our guest explains how he educated himself about this niche speciality and his thoughts about why no significant studies or evidence exists for most commonly used peptides. We learn about his approach to using peptides in patients with musculoskeletal injuries and his clear distinction between this approach vs people using peptides for self-prescribed 'looksmaxing' and within the 'gym bro' culture. 00:00 Introduction 00:41 Peptides Episode Overview 02:06 IA Community App Updates 03:47 Meet Our Special Guest, Dr Robert Weiss 05:41 What Peptides Are 10:50 Why Peptides Went Mainstream 17:46 Evidence and Prescribing 22:59 GLP-1 Breakthroughs 28:41 Clinical Uses and Protocols 33:06 Safety and Misuse 34:55 Retatrutide Explained 37:20 Safety vs Hype 38:59 Black Market Risks 40:58 Compounding and Quality Standards 44:58 Biohacking and Peptide Trends 47:04 Regulation and Oversight 52:11 GHK-Cu and Skin Rejuvenation 58:27 The Future of Peptides 01:02:05 Evidence vs Anecdotes 01:06:09 Learning Resources 01:07:07 Wrap Up and Outro DOWNLOAD OUR NEW APP IA COMMUNITY FOR FREE: DOWNLOAD FOR APPLE DEVICES DOWNLOAD FOR ANDROID DEVICES Our free content includes: Inside Aesthetics podcast - listen to or watch every episode inside the app Conference Diary - browse every major event and booking links Aesthetic News - keep up to date with the latest stories Invites to our live stream events - RSVP for our 1st Unfiltered LIVE with Julie Bass-Kaplan here THEN GET A FREE 30 DAY SUBSCRIPTION: FOR HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS FOR BUSINESS OWNERS/NON-CLINICAL PROFESSIONALS
Tariffs have been front page news since the 2024 presidential campaign. In February 2025 (and again in April 2025), President Donald Trump issued executive orders levying tariffs that threatened small and large businesses alike. But only one CEO of a small family business stepped forward...with only one major law firm.In this episode, Rick Woldenberg, CEO of Learning Resources, Inc. and Hand2Mind, and his counsel, Pratik Shah, Head of the Supreme Court and Appellate Practice at Akin Gump tell the impossible story of how they overturned the Trump tariffs in less than a year.Woldenberg and Shah met on Good Friday in April 2025 and by Tuesday after Easter weekend, filed a complaint in District Court challenging the tariffs, having never met each other in person. This is a story about how aligning on goals, committing to clear and honest feedback, and being engaged and open to other opinions can be rocket fuel for a successful client relationship (and result).
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs were additional duties imposed by the Trump administration starting in early 2025, primarily using IEEPA's emergency powers to address issues like fentanyl trafficking, immigration, and trade deficits. These included "fentanyl" or "trafficking" tariffs on imports from countries such as China, Canada, and Mexico, as well as broader "reciprocal" or "baseline" tariffs (often 10% or higher) applied to goods from many trading partners, and some targeted measures on Brazil and India. Imposed on top of standard duties, they affected millions of entries and raised costs across supply chains. In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that IEEPA did not authorize the president to impose such tariffs, invalidating them and halting new collections as of late February 2026. Approximately $166 billion in IEEPA duties were collected from over 330,000 importers across more than 53 million entries. As of mid-2026, CBP has processed significant refunds through its Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) system in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) portal, with tens of billions paid out (e.g., around $20–24 billion by late May/early June, accelerating to higher amounts like $49 billion in June in some reports, and over $70 billion authorized/paid in updates by July). Refunds include interest and are issued electronically via ACH, but the process is phased and ongoing; not all claims have been fully disbursed yet, and litigation continues over scope. To claim refunds, only the importer of record (or authorized customs broker) who paid the duties can apply, typically via the CAPE claim portal in the ACE Secure Data Portal (ace.cbp.dhs.gov). Prepare by ensuring your importer record and ACH banking details are updated, identifying eligible entries (IEEPA-specific HTS codes on unliquidated or recently liquidated entries), and submitting CAPE Declarations (CSV files listing entries). Phase 1 (launched April 20, 2026) covers many unliquidated cases; later phases expand to reconciliation and more liquidated entries. For older liquidated entries, file protests within 180 days or pursue Court of International Trade action. Consult a customs broker, attorney, or the CBP website for guidance, as eligibility is limited to IEEPA duties (not Section 232, 301, etc.). The U.S.-Iran conflict, which escalated in 2025–2026 involving direct strikes, Israeli actions, and disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, saw a temporary de-escalation via a June 2026 Memorandum of Understanding between President Trump and Iranian leadership aimed at ceasing hostilities, reopening the strait, and starting nuclear talks. However, as of mid-July 2026, the truce has largely collapsed amid renewed tit-for-tat strikes: Iran has attacked shipping and regional targets, while the U.S. (via CENTCOM) has conducted multiple waves of strikes on Iranian military sites, air defenses, missiles, and infrastructure. Blockades, drone/missile exchanges, and diplomatic friction persist, with Trump signaling potential for swift further action but also openness to talks. The situation remains volatile, with risks to global energy flows and regional stability, though full-scale resumption of earlier peak fighting has been avoided so far.This program is brought to you by DAT Freight & Analytics. Since 1978, DAT has helped truckers & brokers discover more available loads. Whether you're heading home or looking for your next adventure, DAT is building the most trusted marketplace in freight. New users of DAT can save 10% off for the first 12 months by following the link below. Built on the latest technology, DAT One gives you control over every aspect of moving freight, so that you can run your business with speed & efficiency.This program is also brought to you by our newest sponsor, GenLogs. GenLogs is setting a new standard of care for freight intelligence. Book your demo for GenLogs today at www.genlogs.io today!
American history is riddled with collisions between legally defensible rulings and morally costly outcomes. Still, "the purpose of law in any society is to embody a moral framework in practice," says Yuval Levin, who joins Mark Labberton to explore the moral architecture in the foundation of the American legal system, as they review the most recent rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court has just closed one of the most consequential terms in recent memory, articulating the tension between faithfulness to the Constitution and enacting justice and morality. Together they reflect on why and how a system founded on equality must be both majoritarian and counter-majoritarian at once; why a judge's job is to articulate their legal (rather than their moral) opinion; the rise of Constitutional originalism; why pre-Trump conservative arguments win at this Court while "Trumpy" ones lose; the contemporary relevance of the Federalist Papers; what recourse citizens have when they believe the Court has done wrong; and why the American legal system's worst failures still cluster around race. They explore several of the 2025-26 rulings of the Supreme Court, including imposition of tariffs, immigration enforcement, and birthright citizenship, and the Voting Rights Act. Episode Highlights "The purpose of law in any society is to embody a moral framework in practice." "This is a very good time to get to know The Federalist Papers." "The role of the judge in the American system is to apply the law, not to find the moral answer per se. We hope the law does that, though it doesn't always and we know it." "The American system of government, very much for moral reasons, is expected to be both majoritarian and counter-majoritarian." [Regarding Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh] "They grew up in the same place. They literally went to the same high school and had the same history teacher. Their mothers knew each other … They agreed with each other 52% of the time in this last term of the Supreme Court." [Courts to Trump] "You are in charge of the executive branch, but the executive branch is not in charge of the American government." "If you come to this court with a pre-Trump conservative legal argument, you're going to win. If you come to this court with a Trumpy legal argument, you're going to lose." "We experienced the high water mark of executive power about a year ago, and it is now receding." "The areas where it has failed most are concentrated around questions of race. That has been true from the beginning. It is thankfully less true than it used to be, but it is still true, and I think we have to be uniquely sensitive to those questions for that reason." About Yuval Levin Yuval Levin is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where he holds the Beth and Ravenel Curry Chair in Public Policy and directs Social, Cultural, and Constitutional Studies. He founded and edits National Affairs, and he is a senior editor at The New Atlantis and a contributing editor at National Review. His books include "The Great Debate," "The Fractured Republic," "A Time to Build," and most recently, "American Covenant." He served on the White House domestic policy staff under George W. Bush and earned his PhD at the University of Chicago's Committee on Social Thought. Helpful Links and Resources Yuval Levin at the American Enterprise Institute: https://www.aei.org/profile/yuval-levin/ National Affairs, the publication Levin founded and edits: https://nationalaffairs.com/authors/detail/yuval-levin American Covenant, by Yuval Levin: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/yuval-levin/american-covenant/9780465040742/?lens=basic-books A Time to Build, by Yuval Levin: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/yuval-levin/a-time-to-build/9781541699281/?lens=basic-books The Federalist Papers, full text at the Library of Congress: https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers Trump v. Slaughter, the decision overturning Humphrey's Executor (June 29, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-332_qn12.pdf Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the IEEPA tariffs decision (February 20, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf Louisiana v. Callais, the Voting Rights Act decision (April 29, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-109_21o3.pdf Coverage of the birthright citizenship ruling in Trump v. Barbara, SCOTUSblog: https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-trumps-order-ending-birthright-citizenship/ Show Notes Yuval Levin's legal/constitutional frame: The law exists to put a society's moral convictions into workable practice. On "All men are created equal": If no one has natural authority over anyone else, we decide by majority vote—but equality also means the minority keeps its rights no matter who wins The Constitution assigns those two jobs to different institutions and lets them fight: Congress and the president answer to majorities, the courts deliberately do not Life tenure and fixed salaries exist so justices can protect minority rights without fear of majority reprisal A judge's job is to say what the law is, not to reach the most just result; therefore good judges regularly land where they might wish they didn't. What citizens can do when the Court rules wrongly: If it misread a statute, Congress can rewrite it. Constitutional rulings are harder to undo, but examples include the 16th Amendment (re: income tax) and the 14th Amendment (re: black citizenship, answering the Court directly) The pro-life movement's 50-year strategy to overturn Roe v. Wade Levin on the difficulty of simply being in the political minority, and why the system tries to make everyone a winner sometimes Originalism began as a limit on judicial power and judges' preferences Legal originalism looks for original public meaning, not the drafters' intent Parallel to biblical interpretation, where faithful readers reach wildly different conclusions The challenge of interpreting and applying the Constitution to matters of freedom and democracy today With Congress mostly absent, the Court is now deciding questions of executive power the Federalist Papers were written about Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch: Same age, same hometown, same high school history teacher, agreed only 52% of the time this term Trump v. Slaughter ends the independent agency: the Court overturned Humphrey's Executor, and the president can now fire FTC-style commissioners at will 2026 Court rulings also told the president no: on tariffs, on the National Guard in Illinois without the governor's consent, and on birthright citizenship Levin's rule of thumb: Pre-Trump conservative arguments win at this Court, Trumpy arguments lose Yuval Levin: Executive power peaked about a year ago and is now receding. Louisiana v. Callais guts Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by requiring proof of racial intent A legal bind: Black voters vote Democratic by 90% in the South, so a racist map and a purely partisan map look identical Levin defends the ruling as law and grieves it as outcome—several Black-held Southern seats will likely be redistricted away Why he opposes reauthorizing the VRA with race-based set-aside districts, and where he thinks change should come from instead Software now lets parties gerrymander voter by voter—in New England, Trump won 35% and Republicans hold zero House seats The deceptions of the human heart Does constitutional structure just launder self-interest? The system's deepest failures have always clustered around race Gratitude for the Constitution in America's 250th year #SupremeCourt #Constitution #VotingRights #Originalism #ExecutivePower #FaithAndPolitics #YuvalLevin #Conversing Production Credits Conversing is produced and distributed in partnership with Comment Magazine and Fuller Seminary.
In this episode, legal scholars Gillian Metzger, Julian Mortenson, and Ilya Somin discuss the Supreme Court's approach to executive power in recent decisions. Thomas Donnelly, lead scholar at the National Constitution Center, moderates. This conversation was recorded live in Philadelphia on July 7, 2026, as part of the National Constitution Center's 2026 Supreme Court Review, which is presented in partnership with the Center on the Structural Constitution at Texas A&M University School of Law. The program featured three panels with scholars of differing perspectives examining the Court's 2025-2026 term, its approach to executive power, and civil discourse within and concerning the Court. Resources 2026 Supreme Court Review: Key Decisions, Executive Power, Civil Discourse, National Constitution Center Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (2026) Trump v. Slaughter (2026) Trump v. Cook (2026) Trump v. Illinois (2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Stay connected with We the People—follow, rate, and review the show wherever you listen. Questions or comments? Email podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Follow @ConstitutionCtr on social media and sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Support our important work by making a donation today. Donate
Martin Birk is a bowyer based in Bornholm, Denmark, an island in the Baltic Sea, where he also teaches archery. He carves bows under the brand of Birk Bows and is known on social media as the Scandinavian Archer. Please enjoy this episode of Project Quiver on Salish Wolf with Martin Birk. Episode Links: https://www.facebook.com/Scandinavianarcherhttps://www.instagram.com/scandinavian_archer_/https://www.youtube.com/@scandinavianarcherProject Quiver at Anchor Point ExpeditionsSummary:In this episode, Martin shares his journey into traditional bow making, the local Danish environment for bow woods, and his unique approach to archery and craftsmanship. Discover insights into sustainable harvesting, different bow styles, and the cultural landscape of primitive archery in Denmark.Show Notes:Martin's background and environment in DenmarkSustainable harvesting of bow woods in DenmarkDifferent types of bows: self bows, laminates, and modern stylesThe cultural landscape of archery in DenmarkTechniques and tools for bow makingThe role of patience and craftsmanship in bow makingArchery as a meditative and recreational activityThe influence of history and lineage in bow makingChapters:00:00 Introduction and Background02:58 The Influence of Geography on Bow Making05:58 The Journey into Bow Making08:54 Materials and Techniques in Bow Making11:56 Types of Wood and Their Characteristics15:07 Crafting Techniques and Bow Styles18:00 Personal Connection to Bow Making History22:06 Crafting Passion: A Family Tradition23:51 Archery as Meditation: Finding Peace in Practice26:40 The Art of Bow Making: Techniques and Materials27:17 Selling Bows: The Market and Pricing Strategies28:44 Leather and Horn: Crafting Details in Bow Making29:48 Exploring Wood Types: From Sapwood to Heartwood34:14 Hunting Regulations in Denmark: A Costly Pursuit37:12 Teaching Archery: Embracing Individual Styles40:32 Instinctive vs. Aiming: Understanding Shooting Techniques47:57 Exploring Archery Styles and Techniques51:56 The Journey of Boxing and Competition54:20 Family Life and Hobbies56:41 The Workshop Experience01:02:03 Lessons from Bow Making01:09:04 Learning Resources and Mentorship01:11:29 Branding and Online Presence
OA1275 - As June ends and another Supreme Court Season wraps, it is time to look back and survey the damage: significant blows to voting and trans rights, harder times for immigrants throughout the system, and a vast expansion of executive powers. But we also go beyond the headlines to see what has been going on with some of the Court's more routine business. What can we learn from their more mundane 9-0 decisions--and can we actually find some good news here among the wreckage? Matt does his best. Finally, in today's seasonal footnote: why the world believed for exactly five minutes that Samuel Alito had closed Supreme Court Season by announcing his retirement on Tuesday, and what we can learn from this weird mistake about how mainstream media covers the Supreme Court. Executive Power / Immigration Trump v. Barbara — 25-365 (June 30, 2026)(birthright citizenship) Learning Resources v. Trump — 24-1287 (Feb. 20, 2026) (IEEPA tariffs) Trump v. Cook — 25A312 (June 29, 2026) (Fed removal) Trump v. Slaughter — 25-332 (June 29, 2026) (FTC removal) Mullin v. Doe — 25-1083 (June 25, 2026) (TPS) Mullin v. Al Otro Lado — 25-5 (June 25, 2026) (asylum at the border) Blanche v. Lau — 25-429 (June 23, 2026)(LPRs at the border) Urias-Orellana v. Bondi — 24-777 (Mar. 4, 2026) (asylum standard of review) Criminal Law Barrett v. United States — 24-5774 (Jan. 14, 2026) (§924(c)/(j) stacking) Bowe v. United States — 24-5438 (Jan. 9, 2026) (successive §2255 petitions) Ellingburg v. United States — 24-482 (Jan. 20, 2026) (restitution / Ex Post Facto) Chatrie v. United States — 25-112 (June 29, 2026) (geofence / 4A) United States v. Hemani — 24-1234 (June 18, 2026) (cannabis & 2A rights) Hunter v. United States — 24-1063 (June 18, 2026) (appeal waivers) Pitchford v. Cain — 24-7351 (May 28, 2026) (Batson / AEDPA challenge) Olivier v. City of Brandon — 24-993 (Mar. 20, 2026) — (§1983 rights with prior conviction) Case v. Montana — 24-624 (Jan. 14, 2026) (emergency-aid / 4A) Villarreal v. Texas — 24-557 (Feb. 25, 2026) (counsel during recess) Clark v. Sweeney — 25-52 (Nov. 14, 2025) (habeas / new-trial reversal) Civil/Voting Rights Landor v. Louisiana DOC — 23-1197 (June 23, 2026) (RLUIPA damages) Louisiana v. Callais — 24-109 (Apr. 29, 2026) (Voting Rights Act §2) West Virginia v. B.P.J. — 24-43 (June 30, 2026) (trans student athletes) Wolford v. Lopez — 24-1046 (June 25, 2026) (2A concealed carry) Chiles v. Salazar — 24-539 (Mar. 31, 2026) (conversion therapy) NRSC v. FEC — 24-621 (June 30, 2026) (1A / campaign finance) Procedural Issues Enbridge Energy v. Nessel — 24-783 (Apr. 22, 2026) (removal deadline) Coney Island Auto Parts v. Burton — 24-808 (Jan. 20, 2026) (Rule 60(b)(4) finality) Other SCOTUSblog Stat Pack (2025-2026)[PDF] “NPR retracts story about Alito retirement,” Kelly McBride, NPR (June 30, 2026) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!
Amy Reichanadter, Chief People Officer at Databricks, joined us on The Modern People Leader to discuss her upskilling journey throughout her career, creating consumer-grade employee experiences, and leading through rapid technological change. ---- Sponsor Links:
DOCKET ALERTS: Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on the stolen documents case must remain sealed forever in perpetuity. Kouri Richins goes on trial for murdering her husband in Utah. She's not being charged for writing a terrible children's book about dealing with grief over the loss of a parent … but maybe she should be? The Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, allowed Louisiana to require the display of the Ten Commandments in every classroom statewide. The law had been blocked, but the Court decided that no one had been injured yet, so the case is unripe. Elon Musk is being sued for securities fraud in California. But they can't seat a jury because everyone hates him. MAIN SHOW: It's all about tariffs. We break down the Supreme Court's Learning Resources v. Trump, and explain why dragging this case out for a year ensures chaos as importers try to recoup money they've already paid. And we'll talk about Trump's plan to impose new illegal tariffs based on a gross misinterpretation of yet another internal statute. The opinion is particularly contentious, revealing the justices' angry, internal feuding over the future of the court. And subscribers will get a deep dive into the origins of this conflict, reaching back to Justice Kagan's famous 2015 "Antonin Scalia Lecture Series" lecture at Harvard Law School and extending through Justice Jackson's concurrence in Learning Resources. US v. Trump [stolen documents case] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/united-states-v-trump Kouri Richins Warrant https://www.scribd.com/document/654496602/Kouri-Richins-Warrant Contempt for Musk clouds jury selection in Twitter takeover trial https://www.courthousenews.com/contempt-for-musk-clouds-jury-selection-in-twitter-takeover-trial/ Roake v. Brumley [Fifth Circuit Ten Commandments] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.221848/gov.uscourts.ca5.221848.389.1.pdf Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump [tariffs case] https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf Congressional Research Service, "Congressional and Presidential Authority to Impose Import Tariffs" https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R48435/R48435.1.pdf Elena Kagan "Antonin Scalia Lecture Series," Harvard Law School (2015) [via YouTube] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpEtszFT0Tg Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod
There are so many places available to learn about photography, even iPhone photography. On this episode, we will share some of the resources that we've used to help us learn more about the craft. Jack Hollingsworth's CourseGavin Hardcastle (Fototripper)Michael ShainblumAlex ArmitageCarla CardelloNikki WiseriPhone Photography SchooliPhone Photography School on YouTubeDavid AddisonDwight's RedditJim NixAnthony TurnhamDave KellyGreg's Camera ClubBuy Me a CoffeeVoicecastGreg's BookThe Podcast WebsiteDave on InstagramDave on ThreadsDave on BlueskyDave on XDave on TikTokDave on VERODave on MastodonDwight on FlickrDwight on VERODwight on GlassDwight on InstagramDwight's Art on InstagramDwight on VSCOGreg's WebsiteGreg on GlassGreg on About.meGreg on InstagramGreg on VEROGreg on FlickrGreg on XThe Podcast YouTube ChannelShayne Mostyn's YouTube ChannelSmartphone Photography TrainingThe iPhoneography Podcast Facebook GroupShayne Mostyn's Bloody Legends Facebook GroupRick Sammon's Smartphone Photo Experience Facebook GroupReeflex's Facebook GroupiPhone 17 Pro & Pro Max Photography
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court ruling against President Trump's tariffs, joins John Williams to talk about when the company expects to see refunds. Stephen also tells John if the company is expecting even more refunds after federal judges ruled yesterday that Trump’s global 10% tariffs were illegal.
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court ruling against President Trump's tariffs, joins John Williams to talk about when the company expects to see refunds. Stephen also tells John if the company is expecting even more refunds after federal judges ruled yesterday that Trump’s global 10% tariffs were illegal.
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court ruling against President Trump's tariffs, joins John Williams to talk about when the company expects to see refunds. Stephen also tells John if the company is expecting even more refunds after federal judges ruled yesterday that Trump’s global 10% tariffs were illegal.
Is titanium still the gold standard for implants? Are zirconia implants just hype from biological dentistry… or something more? Do ceramic implants really integrate as well as titanium? And should we already be offering patients a choice? Zirconia implants are no longer a fringe concept—they're entering mainstream conversations. In this episode, Dr. Pav Khaira returns to break down the science, clinical decision-making, and real-world application of zirconia vs titanium implants. From corrosion and osteoimmunology to occlusion and case selection, this is a practical, evidence-led discussion for clinicians navigating modern implant options. https://youtu.be/-RCvf2KOdSc Watch PDP264 on YouTube Protrusive Dental Pearl: Thriving in Challenging Times
Is titanium still the gold standard for implants? Are zirconia implants just hype from biological dentistry… or something more? Do ceramic implants really integrate as well as titanium? And should we already be offering patients a choice? Zirconia implants are no longer a fringe concept—they're entering mainstream conversations. In this episode, Dr. Pav Khaira returns to break down the science, clinical decision-making, and real-world application of zirconia vs titanium implants. From corrosion and osteoimmunology to occlusion and case selection, this is a practical, evidence-led discussion for clinicians navigating modern implant options. https://youtu.be/-RCvf2KOdSc Watch PDP264 on YouTube Protrusive Dental Pearl: Thriving in Challenging Times
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court ruling against President Trump's tariffs, joins John Williams to talk about the launch of the refund system for businesses that paid tariffs that President Donald Trump imposed without the constitutional authority to do so.
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court ruling against President Trump's tariffs, joins John Williams to talk about the launch of the refund system for businesses that paid tariffs that President Donald Trump imposed without the constitutional authority to do so.
Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court ruling against President Trump's tariffs, joins John Williams to talk about the launch of the refund system for businesses that paid tariffs that President Donald Trump imposed without the constitutional authority to do so.
In this episode of The Lobby Shop, hosts Caitlin Sickles, Paul Nathanson, Dane Pedersen and Omar Nashashibi, are joined by Learning Resources CEO Rick Woldenberg following the Supreme Court's decision in Learning Resources v. United States, striking down tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Woldenberg discusses why he stepped forward as the lead plaintiff, the stakes behind the case, and what the ruling means for companies seeking tariff refunds. The conversation also explores how the administration may recalibrate its trade strategy—and what comes next for businesses navigating an uncertain tariff environment. This is a joint episode with the Talking with One Voice podcast.
In this episode of Talking with One Voice, hosts Omar Nashashibi, Caitlin Sickles, Paul Nathanson, and Dane Pedersen speak with Learning Resources CEO Rick Woldenberg following the landmark Supreme Court decision in Learning Resources v. United States, which struck down tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Woldenberg explains why he chose to step forward as the lead plaintiff, the legal and business stakes behind the case, and what the ruling means for companies now navigating potential tariff refunds. This is a joint episode with Bracewell's The Lobby Shop podcast.
A century-old toy company has taken down Trump's Liberation Day tariffs with a self-funded lawsuit. But how? Today's guest is Rick Woldenberg, CEO of Learning Resources, creator of Spike the Fine Motor Hedgehog, and a successful Supreme Court plaintiff in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump. Co-hosting is Peter Harrell, who submitted an amicus brief on the tariff case that shook the world. Our conversation covers: David v. Goliath — Why a mid-sized toy company sued when industry giants stayed silent, and what that says about incentives and courage in corporate America. The Existential Math — How tariff costs were set to jump from $2 million to $100 million, putting 500 jobs and a century-old family business at risk. Why Manufacturing Stays in China — The hard economics of toy production, supply-chain concentration, and why moving to Vietnam, India, or Mexico isn't a simple fix. Rule of Law and Refunds — What it means to win at the Supreme Court, what should happen with the overcollected tariffs, and the constitutional guardrails around taxation. Legacy and Responsibility — Why taking a stand was necessary to protect this company's mission. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
A century-old toy company has taken down Trump's Liberation Day tariffs with a self-funded lawsuit. But how? Today's guest is Rick Woldenberg, CEO of Learning Resources, creator of Spike the Fine Motor Hedgehog, and a successful Supreme Court plaintiff in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump. Co-hosting is Peter Harrell, who submitted an amicus brief on the tariff case that shook the world. Our conversation covers: David v. Goliath — Why a mid-sized toy company sued when industry giants stayed silent, and what that says about incentives and courage in corporate America. The Existential Math — How tariff costs were set to jump from $2 million to $100 million, putting 500 jobs and a century-old family business at risk. Why Manufacturing Stays in China — The hard economics of toy production, supply-chain concentration, and why moving to Vietnam, India, or Mexico isn't a simple fix. Rule of Law and Refunds — What it means to win at the Supreme Court, what should happen with the overcollected tariffs, and the constitutional guardrails around taxation. Legacy and Responsibility — Why taking a stand was necessary to protect this company's mission. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
A kid builds a website for Game Boy Advance tips. Then another one. Then a racing game with a contact form he didn't think twice about. Until, someone hit it with a SQL injection. That moment cracked open a door he never planned to walk through. Years later, he's still walking. Past classical computing, past the ones and zeros we all know and into a space where a bit doesn't have to choose. One where particles hold their breath until someone measures them. This is the story of someone who cut their teeth building websites about gaming tips and a comedy sketch audio site that hit number one on G4TV. Now he's volunteering at DEF CON's Quantum Village, building browser-based quantum simulations, and trying to make the most complex frontier in computing feel a little less sci-fi.TIMESTAMPS00:00 Introduction to Robert Covington and His Journey00:51 From Web Projects to Security Awareness03:51 Diving into Quantum Computing06:22 Understanding Quantum Concepts08:31 Making Quantum Accessible with Qubitide.dev11:13 Quantum in Enterprise: Use Cases and Costs13:14 Involvement with Quantum Village and Community Initiatives15:17 Emerging Job Opportunities in Quantum Computing17:27 Learning Resources for Quantum Computing19:31 Understanding Q Day and Its Implications23:16 The Role of Quantum Random Number Generators25:38 Unique Bar Experiences and Quantum ThemesSYMLINKS[Robert Covington – LinkedIn] – https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-covington-2693a914b[A LinkedIn profile where Robert Covington shares posts about quantum computing, security conferences, and experiments with quantum simulations and QPU workflows.][QubitIDE] - https://qubitide.dev[A quantum computing learning and experimentation platform created by Robert Covington. It aims to make quantum computing more accessible by allowing developers to explore simulations in the browser and eventually integrate quantum processing workflows.][Amazon Braket] - https://aws.amazon.com/braket/[A cloud-based quantum computing service from Amazon Web Services that allows developers and researchers to run quantum algorithms on simulators and real quantum hardware without needing to own physical quantum machines.][PennyLane] - https://pennylane.ai/[An open-source Python library developed by Xanadu for quantum computing and quantum machine learning. It enables users to build and run quantum programs on simulators or real quantum hardware.][Qiskit] - https://qiskit.org/[An open-source quantum computing software development kit created by IBM. It provides tools for building quantum circuits, running simulations, and executing programs on IBM quantum computers.][D-Wave Systems] - https://www.dwavesys.com/[A quantum computing company specializing in quantum annealing hardware and optimization systems. Their machines are used by research institutions and organizations exploring practical quantum applications.][IBM Quantum Learning] - https://quantum.ibm.com/learn[IBM's official learning platform that provides tutorials, documentation, and educational resources for beginners and developers who want to learn quantum computing and use IBM quantum tools.][Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C)] - https://quantumconsortium.org/[An industry consortium focused on strengthening the quantum technology ecosystem through collaboration, workforce development, and industry initiatives.][Barcode Security Podcast] - https://barcodesecurity.com/[The official website of the Barcode podcast hosted by Chris Glanden, featuring discussions on cybersecurity, emerging technologies, and interviews with experts in the field.]
On February 28, President Trump announced “major combat operations in Iran.” The operation, known as Epic Fury, has renewed a long-standing debate about the scope of presidential war powers and who decides when the nation goes to war. Last week, Congress rejected legislation that sought to require President Trump to obtain congressional approval for military actions against Iran. The Constitution divides war powers between Congress, which has the authority to declare war, and the president, who serves as Commander in Chief. In this episode, Harold Hongju Koh of Yale Law School and Michael D. Ramsey of San Diego Law School explore the constitutional foundations of war powers, as well as the War Powers Resolution of 1973, and how they inform the constitutional authority debates about the use of military force today. Julie Silverbrook, Chief Content and Learning Officer at the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources Article I, Section 8, Declare War Clause, NCC's Interactive Constitution Article II, Section 2, Commander in Chief Clause, NCC's Interactive Constitution War Powers Resolution, congress.gov Michael D. Ramsey, “The Constitution's Check on Warmaking,” Law & Liberty, (January 27, 2026) Michael D. Ramsey, “Textualism and War Powers,” University of Chicago Law Review 69, no. 4 (2002) Harold Hongju Koh, The National Security Constitution: Sharing Power After the Iran-Contra Affair (Second Edition, 2024) Harold Hongju Koh, “Humanitarian Intervention: Time for Better Law,” American Journal of International Law Unbound 111 (2017) National Constitution Center, “Does the War Powers Resolution debate take on a new context in the Iran conflict?,”Constitution Daily Blog, (March 3, 2026) National Constitution Center, “When Congress last used its powers to declare war,” Constitution Daily Blog, (December 8, 2018) Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (2026) Dellums v. Bush (1990) Prize Cases (1863) Ange v. Bush, (D.D.C. 1990) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr Explore the America at 250 Civic Toolkit Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube Support our important work Donate
OA1242 - Ever heard of the “major questions doctrine”? Most lawyers sure hadn't until a few years ago. So how did it get that important-sounding name? Where did it come from? What even is it? How can we call something a “doctrine” or a rule if we don't have a clear rule statement to cite to? (Hint: You can't). If you've been feeling like maybe this is all made up and the points don't matter, you can get your vindication here as we trace back the history of this ever-changing heavily-politicized increasingly-disputed amorphous blob. Jenessa read way too many cases and law review articles to tolerate this nonsense today. Timeline, each citing the one below it: 1. “Major questions doctrine” first appearance in any court case: West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, 597 U.S. 697 (2022) 2. “Major question doctrine” [not plural] in an EPA statement on deregulations: Repeal of the Clean Power Plan, 84 Fed. Reg. 32520, 32529 (proposed Jul. 8, 2019) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. pt. 60). 3. “Major rules doctrine”: U.S. Telecom Association v. F.C.C., 855 F.3d 381, 422-423 (D.C. Cir 2017), Kavanaugh dissent. (Note: There are many decisions by this name, including one from the D.C. Circuit in 2016, all of which are more prevalent online. Only this exact citation, minus the “422-23” pincite, will get you to the right case. Unfortunately I cannot find it outside the paywall to provide a link). 4. “Economic and political significance” allegedly the first unnamed use of the concept: F.D.A. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co. 529 U.S. 120 (2000) 5. “Major questions” first appears in any legal scholarship… well those words appear in that order, at least: Stephen Breyer, Judicial Review of Questions of Law and Policy, 38 Admin. L. Rev. 363 (1986). Meanwhile, in another timeline: Cass R. Sunstein, There are two “Major Questions” Doctrines, 73 Admin. L. Rev. 475, (2021). First ever use of “major questions rule/exception” in a positive light in legal scholarship. Would become more mainstream around 2013-2016: Abigail Moncrieff, Reincarnating the "Major Questions" Exception to Chevron Deference as a Doctrine of Non-Interference as a Doctrine of Non-Interference (Or Why Massachusetts v. EPA Got It Wrong), 60 Admin L. Rev. 593 (2008). Moncrieff, above, cites this as the original coining of “major questions”, not Breyer's 1986 paper: Cass R. Sunstein, Chevron Step Zero, 92 VA. L. Rev. 187 (2006). Other definitions from legal scholarship: Allison Orr Larsen, Becoming a Doctrine, 76 Fla. L. Rev. 1 (2024). Austin Piatt & Damonta D. Morgan, The Three Major Questions Doctrines, Forward Wis. L. Rev. 19 (2024). Thomas B. Griffith & Haley N. Proctor, Deference, Delegation, and Divination: Justice Breyer and the Future of the Major Questions Doctrine, 132 Yale L.J. F. 693 (2022). Chad Squitieri, Who Determines Majorness?, 44 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 463 (2021). Kevin O. Leske, Major Questions about the “Major Questions” Doctrine, 5 Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law 479 (2016). Jonas J. Monast, Major Questions About the Major Questions Doctrine, 68 Admin. L. Rev. 445 (2016). Other relevant cases: Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 607 U.S --- (2026) Biden v. Nebraska, 600 U.S. 477 (2023) King v. Burwell, 576 U.S. 473 (2015) Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 573 U.S. 302 (2014) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!
Linktree: https://linktr.ee/AnalyticJoin The Normandy For Ad-Free NME, Additional Bonus Audio And Visual Content For All Things Nme+! Join Here: https://ow.ly/msoH50WCu0KThe Nintendo Lawsuit Against U.S. Government Over Tariffs (2026) is heating up as Nintendo of America files suit on March 6, 2026, in the United States Court of International Trade. In this segment of Notorious Mass Effect, Analytic Dreamz dives into the high-profile case where Nintendo demands a full refund—with interest—of tariffs paid under now-invalidated policies imposed by the Trump administration starting February 1, 2025.The tariffs, enacted via executive orders under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), targeted imports from numerous countries, including key Nintendo manufacturing hubs like Vietnam and Cambodia. The Supreme Court ruled on February 20, 2026, in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that IEEPA does not authorize such tariffs, deeming them unlawful and triggering over 380 similar corporate lawsuits (with thousands more including prior cases) from companies like Costco, Toyota, and GoPro seeking refunds on billions collected—estimates range from $166 billion to over $200 billion in total duties.Nintendo claims substantial harm from these "unlawful trade measures," citing impacts like delayed U.S. pre-orders for the Nintendo Switch 2 (originally set to begin April 9, 2025, but postponed due to tariff uncertainty) and price hikes on the original Switch and some Switch 2 peripherals in 2025 to offset costs. The suit names agencies including the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Commerce, and the U.S. Trade Representative, plus officials like Scott Bessent and Kristi Noem.Refunds face delays: CBP cites manpower shortages, outdated systems, and massive volume, though a new processing system is expected in about 45 days. A federal judge has ordered reimbursements to begin, but logistical hurdles persist amid broader industry fallout, including potential future pressures like global RAM shortages.Analytic Dreamz breaks down the timeline, Supreme Court ruling, Nintendo's financial arguments, and what refunds could mean for console pricing across gaming—potentially stabilizing or lowering costs for Switch 2, PlayStation, Xbox, and hardware in 2026–2027 if the wave of litigation succeeds.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/analytic-dreamz-notorious-mass-effect/exclusive-contentPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
For today's episode, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sits down with three leading scholars from the Georgetown University Law Center—Professor Kathleen Claussen, Professor Marty Lederman, and Visiting Scholar Peter Harrell of the Institute of International Economic Law—to talk through the Supreme Court's groundbreaking opinion in Learning Resources, Inc v. Trump, which invalidated the array of global tariffs that the Trump administration had imposed using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).Together, Scott and his guests break down the Court's opinion, weigh what it might mean for the Major Questions Doctrine and foreign relations law, and look ahead to the legal fights to come over the other tariff authorities the Trump administration is now using to pursue its agenda.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
OA1239 - Did the Supreme Court just hand Donald Trump the biggest L in US presidential history? We go beyond the headlines to break down the first decision on the merits of any of the second Trump term's policies. What is the deal with the “major questions doctrine” and why can't the conservative justices agree about what it is and how to use it? Why did Neil Gorsuch choose this case to drop a lengthy diss track with bars about every one of his colleagues? And is there anything Clarence Thomas wouldn't let a Republican president do? We then review a lesser-noticed SCOTUS decision from this week on whether you can sue USPS for intentionally stealing your mail for openly racist reasons (the answer may surprise you!). Finally, in today's footnote: Thomas Takes the ICE Exam! Learning Resources, Inc. et al. v. Trump (2/20/2026) United States Postal Service v. Konan (2/24/2026) “The Postmaster,” William Shawn, The New Yorker (11/14/1970)(letter addressed to William Faulkner from Post Office Inspector Mark Webster) Memorandum Summary of Documents Newly Received from DHS Whistleblowers, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (2/23/2026)(with leaked ICE training documents attached) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!
On February 20, the Supreme Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, known as IEEPA, does not authorize President Trump's sweeping tariffs. In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, and the consolidated case, the Court held that the statute does not grant the President the power to impose tariffs under a declaration of economic emergency. In this episode, we explore what the Court held, why the Justices disagreed about the reasoning, and what this decision might tell us about the future of presidential emergency power. To help us explore these questions are two leading Court watchers and constitutional experts, Zachary Shemtob of SCOTUSblog and Ilya Somin of the George Mason University. Julie Silverbrook, vice president of civic education of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (2026) “Supreme Court strikes down tariffs,” SCOTUSblog (2/20/2026) Ilya Somin, “How the Supreme Court Spared America,” The Atlantic (2/21/2026) Ilya Somin, “The Supreme Court Spurns a Presidential Power Grab,” The Dispatch (2/23/2026) Ilya Somin, “Trump's new tariffs are another dangerous presidential power grab,” Boston Globe (2/24/2026) Ilya Somin, “Not Everything Is an Emergency,” The Dispatch (1/31/2025) “Are Trump's Tariffs Lawful?,” We the People (11/06/2025) Biden v. Nebraska (2023) Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, Inc. (2001) Dames & Moore v. Regan (1981) Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1953) United States v. Yoshida International, Inc. (CCPA, 1975) United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936) Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (1935) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr Explore the America at 250 Civic Toolkit Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube Support our important work Donate
DOCKET ALERTS:Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on the stolen documents case must remain sealed forever in perpetuity.Kouri Richins goes on trial for murdering her husband in Utah. She's not being charged for writing a terrible children's book about dealing with grief over the loss of a parent … but maybe she should be? The Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, allowed Louisiana to require the display of the Ten Commandments in every classroom statewide. The law had been blocked, but the Court decided that no one had been injured yet, so the case is unripe.Elon Musk is being sued for securities fraud in California. But they can't seat a jury because everyone hates him.MAIN SHOW:It's all about tariffs. We break down the Supreme Court's Learning Resources v. Trump, and explain why dragging this case out for a year ensures chaos as importers try to recoup money they've already paid. And we'll talk about Trump's plan to impose new illegal tariffs based on a gross misinterpretation of yet another internal statute.The opinion is particularly contentious, revealing the justices' angry, internal feuding over the future of the court. And subscribers will get a deep dive into the origins of this conflict, reaching back to Justice Kagan's famous 2015 “Antonin Scalia Lecture Series” lecture at Harvard Law School and extending through Justice Jackson's concurrence in Learning Resources.US v. Trump [stolen documents case]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/united-states-v-trumpKouri Richins Warranthttps://www.scribd.com/document/654496602/Kouri-Richins-WarrantContempt for Musk clouds jury selection in Twitter takeover trialhttps://www.courthousenews.com/contempt-for-musk-clouds-jury-selection-in-twitter-takeover-trial/Roake v. Brumley [Fifth Circuit Ten Commandments]https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.221848/gov.uscourts.ca5.221848.389.1.pdfLearning Resources, Inc. v. Trump [tariffs case]https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdfCongressional Research Service, “Congressional and Presidential Authority to Impose Import Tariffs”https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R48435/R48435.1.pdfElena Kagan “Antonin Scalia Lecture Series,” Harvard Law School (2015) [via YouTube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpEtszFT0TgShow Links:https://www.lawandchaospod.com/BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPodThreads: @LawAndChaosPodTwitter: @LawAndChaosPodSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
El Tribunal Supremo de Estados Unidos emitió el pasado viernes una trascendental sentencia al declarar ilegales buena parte de los aranceles impuestos por Donald Trump hace casi un año. Con una mayoría de 6 votos frente a 3, los magistrados del Supremo determinaron que el presidente excedió sus facultades al utilizar la Ley de Poderes Económicos de Emergencia Internacional de 1977 para aplicar gravámenes de forma unilateral sin permiso del Congreso. El núcleo de la sentencia sostiene que, si bien esta ley permite regular importaciones en situaciones de emergencia nacional, no otorga al Ejecutivo el poder de establecer impuestos fronterizos ilimitados, una competencia que la Constitución reserva exclusivamente al Congreso bajo el principio histórico de que no puede haber impuestos sin representación. Esta decisión anula más del 60% de los aranceles del llamado "Día de la Liberación", incluyendo el arancel global del 10% y los aranceles adicionales aplicados a China, México y Canadá. El impacto económico es de gran envergadura. Se estima que el gobierno podría verse obligado a reembolsar más de 175.000 millones de dólares a los importadores afectados. Aunque técnicamente estos reembolsos podrían ejecutarse de forma automática mediante los sistemas digitales de aduanas, existe el temor de que la administración imponga trabas burocráticas para retrasar los pagos, obligando así a muchas pequeñas empresas a recurrir a largos y costosos litigios. El origen jurídico de este revés se encuentra en la demanda interpuesta por empresas como Learning Resources, que esgrimieron ante el Tribunal Supremo que la competencia para gravar el comercio internacional pertenece al poder legislativo, no al ejecutivo. La reacción de Trump fue inmediata y virulenta, calificó el fallo de "antiestadounidense" y atacó incluso a los jueces que él mismo había nominado. No obstante, en un intento por esquivar la sentencia, el presidente anunció rápidamente un nuevo arancel global del 15% recurriendo a la Sección 122 de la Ley de Comercio de 1974. Esta vía alternativa, aunque legalmente más sólida para el corto plazo, tiene límites temporales y de cuantía que no existían con las medidas que tomó en abril del año pasado. A largo plazo, el fallo representa una victoria importante para la división de poderes y el Estado de derecho. Impide que futuros presidentes utilicen presuntas emergencias nacionales para eludir el control parlamentario sobre la política fiscal. Pero la batalla comercial persiste. El Gobierno Trump no se da por vencido y explora otros resquicios legales como las Secciones 232 y 301 para mantener los aranceles sobre el acero, el aluminio y productos tecnológicos. Entretanto, la realidad económica ha contradicho los objetivos iniciales del gobierno: el déficit comercial no se ha reducido y el coste de estas tensiones arancelarias sigue recayendo directamente sobre las empresas y los consumidores estadounidenses, que son quienes están pagando los productos importados más caros en un entorno de incertidumbre creciente. En La ContraRéplica: 0:00 Introducción 3:32 Liberación arancelaria 30:57 “Contra el pesimismo”… https://amzn.to/4m1RX2R 32:55 El burka en el mundo islámico 40:57 El fin del Mencho · Canal de Telegram: https://t.me/lacontracronica · “Contra el pesimismo”… https://amzn.to/4m1RX2R · “Hispanos. Breve historia de los pueblos de habla hispana”… https://amzn.to/428js1G · “La ContraHistoria del comunismo”… https://amzn.to/39QP2KE · “La ContraHistoria de España. Auge, caída y vuelta a empezar de un país en 28 episodios”… https://amzn.to/3kXcZ6i · “Contra la Revolución Francesa”… https://amzn.to/4aF0LpZ · “Lutero, Calvino y Trento, la Reforma que no fue”… https://amzn.to/3shKOlK Apoya La Contra en: · Patreon... https://www.patreon.com/diazvillanueva · iVoox... https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-contracronica_sq_f1267769_1.html · Paypal... https://www.paypal.me/diazvillanueva Sígueme en: · Web... https://diazvillanueva.com · Twitter... https://twitter.com/diazvillanueva · Facebook... https://www.facebook.com/fernandodiazvillanueva1/ · Instagram... https://www.instagram.com/diazvillanueva · Linkedin… https://www.linkedin.com/in/fernando-d%C3%ADaz-villanueva-7303865/ · Flickr... https://www.flickr.com/photos/147276463@N05/?/ · Pinterest... https://www.pinterest.com/fernandodiazvillanueva Encuentra mis libros en: · Amazon... https://www.amazon.es/Fernando-Diaz-Villanueva/e/B00J2ASBXM #FernandoDiazVillanueva #aranceles #trump Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court decided that President Trump's global tariffs on imported goods were unconstitutional. With Trump promising to find other ways to impose his tariffs, small business owners are unsure of how or if they'll get their entitled refunds. In the Loop spoke with Stephen Woldenberg, Senior Vice President of Sales for Learning Resources, the Vernon Hills-based business that led the charge to bring the legal case to the country's highest court. Plus, we talk to Cécile Shea, nonresident senior fellow on security and diplomacy at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. For a full archive of In the Loop interviews, head over to wbez.org/intheloop.
With unpredictable timeliness, we have a quasi-emergency episode on the 170-page tariffs decision, Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump. Come for the in-the-weeds legal analysis, stay for the deep dive into the origins of the phrase "no, no, a thousand times no."
This week Ken and Josh discuss the Supreme Court's ruling in Learning Resources v. Trump, throwing out the massive country-specific tariffs the president purported to impose under the Nixon-era International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The opinion was messy: 6-3, but with the six-justice majority not agreeing on exactly why the tariffs were illegal. Also this week, we look at a contempt order from Judge Laura Provenzino, putting a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney in contempt over the government's failure to return identification documents to a non-citizen released from immigration custody on her orders. We discuss how an order like this matters, and how judges could further escalate in the face of widespread noncompliance by the federal government in these immigration cases.Plus, we discuss a mistrial over a defense attorney's t-shirt, Judge Paula Xinis's rejection of yet another effort to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia, Sen. Mark Kelly's exclamation-mark-laden preliminary win against efforts to reduce his military rank and pension, and a Minnesota judge's order directing the government to let ICE detainees talk with their lawyers. And we look at an all-timer performance from billionaire Les Wexner's attorney, who whispered in his ear during a congressional deposition, threatening to kill him if he says any more answers longer than five words.Upgrade your subscription to receive all of our episodes at serioustrouble.show. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe
One of the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case that overturned many of President Trump's tariffs is Rick Woldenberg. He's the owner of the Chicago-based small toy manufacturer, Learning Resources. Woldenberg joined Geoff Bennett to discuss the ruling and what comes next for his business. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy
In this episode, I welcome back Dr. Krista Leh, instructional coach, former high school educator, and founder of Resonance Education, to explore what it really means to personalize learning resources through an SEL lens. You'll also hear practical examples of how teachers can use student interests, relationships, and even AI tools to make academic content more meaningful, motivating, and relevant for individual learners. If you're interested in personalizing learning resources in ways that feel doable, authentic, and impactful for students and families, this episode has you covered! Show notes: https://classtechtips.com/2026/01/30/personalizing-learning-resources-bonus/ Sponsored by Jotform: https://jotform.com/enterprise/education/ Follow Dr. Krista Leh on social: https://www.instagram.com/resonance_ed/ Follow Monica on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/classtechtips/ Take your pick of free EdTech resources: https://classtechtips.com/free-stuff-favorites/
- Announcements and Introductions (0:10) - Dioxin Testing and Food Safety (6:45) - Natural Medicine and Hospital Observations (21:41) - Gold and Silver Market Analysis (26:27) - Preparing for the Big Freeze (32:33) - Decentralized TV Episode with Roger McPhillan and Tracy Thurman (58:21) - Impact of Psychiatric Drugs on Empathy and Connection (1:15:42) - Spiritual Warfare and Psychiatric Drugs (1:21:14) - Mental Illness and Meaning (1:23:24) - Psychosomatic Conditions and Placebo Effect (1:25:57) - Personal Experiences with Psychiatric Drugs (1:28:33) - Alternative Healing Methods and Spiritual Awakening (1:33:27) - Impact of Technology and Isolation on Mental Health (1:36:41) - Spiritual Warfare and Psychiatric Drugging (1:39:36) - Mass Psychological Conditioning and Algorithms (1:47:36) - Empowerment and Sovereignty in Healing (1:54:50) - Final Thoughts and Practical Advice (1:59:13) - Dennis Gray's Interview and Learning Resources (2:35:38) - Silver Price Predictions and Sponsorship (2:38:30) - Dollar-Cost Averaging and Self-Custody (2:41:01) - Historical Silver Purchases and Audience Engagement (2:42:12) For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport NaturalNews videos would not be possible without you, as always we remain passionately dedicated to our mission of educating people all over the world on the subject of natural healing remedies and personal liberty (food freedom, medical freedom, the freedom of speech, etc.). Together, we're helping create a better world, with more honest food labeling, reduced chemical contamination, the avoidance of toxic heavy metals and vastly increased scientific transparency. ▶️ Every dollar you spend at the Health Ranger Store goes toward helping us achieve important science and content goals for humanity: https://www.healthrangerstore.com/ ▶️ Sign Up For Our Newsletter: https://www.naturalnews.com/Readerregistration.html ▶️ Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport ▶️ Join Our Social Network: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger ▶️ Check In Stock Products at: https://PrepWithMike.com
Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe US is now withdrawing from the GCF, the entire plan of the [WEF]/[CB] is imploding. Housing is going to boom, Trump has all the pieces in place. Supreme Court is suppose to make a decision on tariffs, if they rule against Trump he has another card up his sleeve.US trade deficit dropped by 40%. Trump just gave the [WEF] the middle finger and shutdown their entire agenda. The [DS] is doing exactly what Trump wants, they are building the insurrection right in front of the countries eyes. Trump has now set the trap of all traps, never interfere with an enemy while in the process of destroying themselves. Trump has the military, he has the law on his side, everything has been planned for, playbook known. Economy https://twitter.com/SecScottBessent/status/2009264006083522849?s=20 (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/TKL_Adam/status/2009018778294927730?s=20 https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/2009298104764219475?s=20 The Supreme Court is expected to potentially rule on the legality of President Trump’s tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as early as tomorrow, January 9, 2026, at around 10 a.m. ET. The justices heard oral arguments in the consolidated cases (Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc.) on November 5, 2025, where they appeared skeptical of the administration’s position that IEEPA grants the president authority to impose such sweeping tariffs during declared national emergencies. Lower courts had previously ruled against the tariffs’ legality, but they remain in effect pending the Supreme Court’s decision. These options are drawn from existing trade laws and have been used by past administrations. Here’s a breakdown of the key alternatives: Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962: This allows the president to impose tariffs on imports deemed a threat to national security after an investigation by the Department of Commerce. There’s no cap on duty levels or duration, making it flexible for broad application, such as on steel or autos. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974: Through the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), this permits tariffs in response to unfair or discriminatory foreign trade practices that violate international agreements or harm U.S. commerce. No rate limit exists, but it requires an investigation and findings, which could target specific countries like China. Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974: This enables temporary import surcharges of up to 15% (or quotas) for up to 150 days to address “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficits. It’s seen as a quick interim option while longer-term measures are pursued, but extensions need congressional approval. Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974: Known as “safeguard” measures, this authorizes tariffs if surging imports are causing or threatening serious injury to domestic industries. It requires a U.S. International Trade Commission investigation and recommendation, with tariffs potentially lasting up to four years (extendable to eight). Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930: This allows duties up to 50% on imports from countries engaging in “unfair” practices that discriminate against U.S. exports. It’s less commonly used and could face immediate lawsuits due to its broad interpretation potential. The administration has signaled readiness to shift to these tools, potentially starting with Section 122 for rapid implementation. U.S. Trade Deficit Drops 40% in Latest Commerce Dept Report As you review this latest data on trade, remember any drop in trade deficits has two big picture functions: First, lower trade deficits generally mean the accompanying GDP release will be stronger than anticipated because imported products are a deduction from the valuation of all goods and services created in the U.S. economy. Lower imports mean less is deducted. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, a drop in the trade deficit created by diminished imports means more wealth remains inside the USA. We are not spending, sending money overseas, to import foreign goods at the same rate, and that money stays inside the U.S. economy. More wealth inside the U.S. provides the fuel for expanded domestic growth, more investment gains in USA manufacturing and USA industry and the ability to pay higher USA wages. The Commerce Department is reporting today that the U.S. trade deficit for October 2025 dropped to the smallest amount in 16-years. A significant amount of the deficit drop was because a high value of physical precious metals (gold/silver) was exported, simultaneous with big offshore pharmaceutical companies dropping the prices of imported products (policy and tariff pressure). Some may question whether internal consumer demand has declined, causing the significant drop in imports. However, the U.S productivity rate is still very high – which generally means domestic consumer demand is still high and all units produced have a lower overall cost per unit. Economic analysis can get weedy…. so, a simple way to look at productivity is to think about baking bread in your kitchen. If you were going to bake 4 loaves of bread it might take you 2 hrs. start to finish. However, if you were going to bake 8 loaves of bread it would not take you twice as long because most of the tasks can be accomplished with simple increases in batch size, and only minor increases in labor time. Your productivity measured in the last four loaves is higher. Economic Productivity is measured much the same way, within what's called a production probability equation. Additionally, if two hours of your time are worth $40, each of four loaves of bread costs $10 in labor; but if you make 8 loaves in the same amount of time the labor cost is only $5/per loaf. When we see higher productivity in direct alignment with GDP increases, the increased production indicates sustainable GDP growth. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com https://twitter.com/RealEJAntoni/status/2009314808332734604?s=20 Political/Rights https://twitter.com/lizcollin/status/2009046198314008954?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/2009287108796575807?s=20 https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2009306335087665208?s=20 These nine Republican lawmakers joined the Democrats: Fitzpatrick (PA), Bresnahan (PA), Mackenzie (PA), Lawler (NY), Salazar (FL), LaLota (NY), Valadao (CA), Kean (NJ), Miller (OH). Yes, for S.J. Res. 98 (the Venezuela war powers resolution referenced in the post) to become law and enforce limits on further U.S. military actions, it must pass the House of Representatives after its recent advancement in the Senate. If the House approves it, the bill would then go to President Trump, who has indicated he would likely veto it based on similar past actions. If vetoed, Congress would need a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override. Article II of the Constitution, as all Presidents, and their Departments of Justice, have determined before me. Nevertheless, a more important Senate Vote will be taking place next week on this very subject. https://twitter.com/DOGEai_tx/status/2009076665054277855?s=20 101’s 11-point democratization criteria – including releasing political prisoners and restoring National Assembly powers. The 2025 bill mandates strict oversight of any aid through Section 204’s safeguards against regime capture. Taxpayers deserve transparency: Will this embassy facilitate accountability for $150B in stolen oil revenues, or just greenlight more foreign aid slush funds? Strategic engagement only works if tied to verifiable reforms, not symbolic gestures. https://twitter.com/estrellainfant/status/2008948263916015793?s=20 Marco Rubio and Pete Hegseth continue to expose Delcy Rodríguez and, at the same time, prevent the internal fissures of the regime from spiraling into an uncontrolled collapse. That is no coincidence: it is strategy. Rubio is not acting to provoke an immediate implosion, but to manage the decomposition of power. By exposing contradictions, routes, false narratives, and opaque movements, he weakens Delcy in front of the Chavista leadership, but without pushing the system toward a violent break that generates a power vacuum, chaos, or an unpredictable military reaction. This achieves several objectives at once: First, it isolates Delcy. Every time she is exposed, her room to maneuver shrinks in front of her “external allies” and the regime’s hardline elements. She shifts from being an operator to becoming a risk. Second, it deepens internal distrust. When sensitive information starts to align with U.S. actions, within the regime no one knows who is leaking what. That paranoia is corrosive and weakens more than a direct strike. Third, it preserves the minimum governability necessary for a transition. An abrupt collapse favors criminal actors, armed dissidents, and foreign powers. Controlling the pace of the erosion allows maintaining channels, containing damage, and preparing the ground for a subsequent political process. In that context, Delcy is trapped. If she cooperates, she exposes herself. If she doesn’t cooperate, she becomes isolated. Any move weakens her. And Rubio, aware of that, pressures her without touching the final detonator. That’s why this deserves attention: we are not seeing improvisation or personal revenge, but a calibrated operation of attrition, where the goal is not to humiliate for spectacle, but to dismantle the regime piece by piece, avoiding Venezuela paying the cost of an uncontrolled collapse. https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2008967791966376081?s=20 https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2009090766354960453?s=20 War/Peace Security Alert – U. S. Embassy Kyiv, Ukraine (January 8, 2026) Location: Ukraine, all districts Event: The U.S. embassy in Kyiv has received information concerning a potentially significant air attack that may occur at any time over the next several days. The embassy, as always, recommends U.S. citizens be prepared to immediately shelter in the event an air alert is announced. Actions to Take: Identify shelter locations before any air alert. Download a reliable air alert app to your mobile phone, like Air Raid Siren or Alarm Map . Immediately take shelter if an air alert is announced. Check local media for breaking news. Be prepared to adjust your plans. Keep reserves of water, food, and medication. Follow the directions of Ukrainian officials and first responders in the event of an emergency. Review what the Department of State Can and Cannot Do in a Crisis . https://twitter.com/Geiger_Capital/status/2008991231507099730?s=20 tremendous numbers being produced by Tariffs from other Countries, many of which, in the past, have “ripped off” the United States at levels never seen before, I would stay at the $1 Trillion Dollar number but, because of Tariffs, and the tremendous Income that they bring, amounts being generated, that would have been unthinkable in the past (especially just one year ago during the Sleepy Joe Biden Administration, the Worst President in the History of our Country!), we are able to easily hit the $1.5 Trillion Dollar number while, at the same time, producing an unparalleled Military Force, and having the ability to, at the same time, pay down Debt, and likewise, pay a substantial Dividend to moderate income Patriots within our Country! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/DerrickEvans4WV/status/2009097879106015609?s=20 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2009305173395415310?s=20 https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/2009271768121242054?s=20 years, which is happening this morning. This is the arrogant California corruption that has occurred under Newsom's watch and in this case —possibly his own direction or one of his top aide's —because the light was finally beginning to shine on why the Golden State has become so tarnished under his watch. https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2009188335873302712?s=20 She warned that the intimidation is systemic, and basically if you speak up, expect your life to be dismantled. Whistleblowers are supposed to be protected by law, and if they're being hunted for telling the truth, the system is being weaponized. @MarionONeill1 : “Retaliation has been going on for quite some time and it's now escalated. You're going to lose your job. You're going to lose your home. They'll track your children. They'll make sure you can't get a job anywhere Democrats control. https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/2009099844506501431?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009087403575947648?s=20 DHS Sec. Kristi Noem Drops Facts, Cooks Walz and Frey During Presser on MN Anti-ICE Incident https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/2009046495262110138?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2009046495262110138%7Ctwgr%5Ec2c616dd05bfbbc6e3cd4613990f826fb989a6af%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fsister-toldjah%2F2026%2F01%2F07%2Fkristi-noem-drops-facts-cooks-walz-and-frey-during-presser-on-mn-anti-ice-incident-n2197890 these federal law enforcement officers, they’ll say that when you call for back-up…it’s hit and miss.” https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/2009044827158007875?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2009044827158007875%7Ctwgr%5Ec2c616dd05bfbbc6e3cd4613990f826fb989a6af%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fsister-toldjah%2F2026%2F01%2F07%2Fkristi-noem-drops-facts-cooks-walz-and-frey-during-presser-on-mn-anti-ice-incident-n2197890 Noem also shared that the woman in the SUV had been “stalking and impeding” the agents during the course of the day: https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/2009050638232244548?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2009050638232244548%7Ctwgr%5Ec2c616dd05bfbbc6e3cd4613990f826fb989a6af%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fsister-toldjah%2F2026%2F01%2F07%2Fkristi-noem-drops-facts-cooks-walz-and-frey-during-presser-on-mn-anti-ice-incident-n2197890 Source: redstate.com Breaking: The same ICE agent appears to have been dragged roughly 300 feet while executing an arrest warrant on an illegal alien, resulting in 33 stitches just six months ago. Video and full details below. Thanks to @MWhitney93679 for bring this to my attention. @DataRepublican @elonmusk https://cbsnews.com/minnesota/video/shocking-footage-shows-driver-dragging-deportation-officer/?referrer=grok.com https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2009292194406895696?s=20 https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/2009044298486948261?s=20 https://twitter.com/warriors_mom/status/2009038176627876188?s=20 force by an ICE agent becomes unavoidable. And the local Minneapolis politicians decide it's the perfect opportunity to declare war against the federal government? https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009142447905882188?s=20 to the deadly incident, leftists are urging vengeance and riots in Minneapolis. Rioters earlier surged to a federal building and smashed up the entrance. The shooting incident occurred in the context of the far-left and Antifa urging violence against ICE for months. It has led to an Antifa cell carrying out an ambush shooting in Texas on the Prairieland facility. At least seven have pleaded guilty to a federal terrorism charge. Then, in Dallas, an ICE facility was shot up by an anti-ICE activist, killing people. https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/2009040818896830650?s=20 BREAKING: The wife of Renee Nicole Good—the 37-year-old Minneapolis shooting victim who attempted to run over an ICE officer—appears to have been outside the vehicle filming as her wife blocked ICE vehicles. She is seen wearing a flannel shirt, walking around the vehicle and recording ICE officers. She later runs back to the vehicle to check on Renee. Afterward, she tells a nearby man, “That's my wife.” When he asks if she knows any of her wife's relatives she could call, she responds, “We’re new here. I don’t have people… I can't even breathe right now.” Why was she outside the vehicle filming while her wife was blocking ICE officers? Terrible https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/2009143305075097679?s=20 https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/2009103459019002182?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2009270499398893758?s=20 https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2009132509607677966?s=20 https://twitter.com/iAnonPatriot/status/2009087576402219051?s=20 https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/2008995871724355652?s=20 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2009297640555503770?s=20 https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2009197905723216144?s=20 After about two minutes on scene, my security began wanting to bring me out of there due to the immediate threats of violence. I tried to shorten this video as much as possible but it's tough given all the BS that unfolded. As soon as I dialed 911, one of the leftist screamed “Minneapolis Police are on OUR side!” Turns out, he was right. – A vehicle began chasing us the wrong way down a one way and then threatened to kiII me (dispatch heard this and responded by asking for my last name?) – First dispatcher promised they'd respond, asked me if I was “White,” held me on the phone for the 10 mins, and then ended the call – Second one called back and gave me the runaround as the situation worsens – Third one calls me back and tells me to go fck myself, essentially We ended up being FOLLOWED out of town, and requested backup set to arrive in a few hours. We are NOT giving up. Leftists WILL NOT terrorize us into silence. See you in a few hours, Minneapolis. Stay tuned. Will Trump invoke the Insurrection Act? Before Jan 20, 2029 57% Before 2027 43% Before Jan 20, 2029 If the President of the United States has invoked the Insurrection Act to deploy the United States military and/or the federalized National Guard within the United States before Jan 20, 2029, then the market resolves to Yes. Sources from the White House, The New York Times, the Associated Press, Reuters, Axios, Politico, Semafor, The Information, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC. Minneapolis Public Schools Cancel Classes and Activities for Rest of Week Minneapolis Public Schools announced Wednesday night that all classes and activities were canceled for the rest of the week and that students would not have to do ‘e-learning' at home while schools are closed. Protests are expected in the coming days after a woman driver was shot and killed by a federal officer when she allegedly tried to run him over during a protest against ICE in a Minneapolis residential neighborhood Wednesday morning. MPS statement: No school Jan. 8-9 due to safety concerns Source: thegatewaypundit.com Preplanned Riot patterns. https://twitter.com/TheSCIF/status/2009115663848362251?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009077478073979120?s=20 Do you think the criminals are trying to cover their tracks, with the riots are they going to burn down the many Somali daycares will they then file for insurance claims, loss of business revenue claims. https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009131575724625972?s=20 https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2009009290518872568?s=20 https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/2009041195717284106?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2009020845239533590?s=20 TAKE A LISTEN https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2009117399300362278?s=20 DHS makes over 1500 immigration arrests in Minneapolis, Secretary Kristi Noem says https://twitter.com/Sec_Noem/status/2008718230039450008?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2008718230039450008%7Ctwgr%5Ec51cd928497b686ddee7e7e639023089bf1f9b57%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthenationaldesk.com%2Fnews%2Famericas-news-now%2Fdhs-makes-1500-arrests-in-minneapolis-secretary-kristi-noem-says source: wgxa.tv/ https://twitter.com/JDVance/status/2009090255908130994?s=20 https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports/status/2009278938019688755?s=20 President Trump's Plan https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/2009059590726627814?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2009334017250996436?s=20 The saying “don’t fire until you see the whites of their eyes” (or similar variations) is most famously associated with the Battle of Bunker Hill on June 17, 1775, during the early stages of the American Revolutionary War. American colonial forces, low on ammunition and facing British regulars advancing uphill, were reportedly instructed to hold their fire until the enemy was close enough for shots to be effective—maximizing the impact of limited powder and musket balls, which were inaccurate at longer ranges. BREAKING: Obama Judge Disqualifies Trump-Appointed US Attorney Overseeing Letitia James Investigations, Tosses Subpoenas Issued to James A federal judge on Thursday disqualified the Trump-appointed US Attorney for the Northern District of New York overseeing investigations into New York Attorney General Letitia James. US District Judge Lorna Schofield, an Obama appointee, disqualified acting US Attorney John Sarcone and quashed two subpoenas issues to Letitia James. Sarcone is the fifth Trump-appointed US Attorney to be disqualified by a rogue judge Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/2009025328065466665?s=20 WITHDRAWING FROM INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the withdrawal of the United States from 66 international organizations that no longer serve American interests. The Memorandum orders all Executive Departments and Agencies to cease participating in and funding 35 non-United Nations (UN) organizations and 31 UN entities that operate contrary to U.S. national interests, security, economic prosperity, or sovereignty. This follows a review ordered earlier this year of all international intergovernmental organizations, conventions, and treaties that the United States is a member of or party to, or that the United States funds or supports. These withdrawals will end American taxpayer funding and involvement in entities that advance globalist agendas over U.S. priorities, or that address important issues inefficiently or ineffectively such that U.S. taxpayer dollars are best allocated in other ways to support the relevant missions. RESTORING AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY: President Trump is ending U.S. participation in international organizations that undermine America's independence and waste taxpayer dollars on ineffective or hostile agendas. Many of these bodies promote radical climate policies, global governance, and ideological programs that conflict with U.S. sovereignty and economic strength. American taxpayers have spent billions on these organizations with little return, while they often criticize U.S. policies, advance agendas contrary to our values, or waste taxpayer dollars by purporting to address important issues but not achieving any real results. By exiting these entities, President Trump is saving taxpayer money and refocusing resources on America First priorities. This is factually a much bigger deal, a bigger win, than most will initially appreciate. Each of the institutions carry “membership fees” or financial obligations each participating government pays into. Each organization consists of board members, stakeholders and other administrative offices which employ the friends and families of current and former politicians, world “leaders” and essentially well-connected and disconnected elites who run the agencies. It's like a massive network of NGOs, except the entities exist exclusively with government funding. Just like the United Nations itself, the USA always pays the dues, fees and largest portion of the operating expenses, which includes payrolls and travel benefits. Other countries participate, but it is the USA who picks up the largest portion of the financial obligations for the organization itself to exist. Like USAID, the designated “global” organizations (conventions, treaties, etc) operate as massive bureaucratic rule makers for global standards and practices. The organizations themselves employ a network of downstream entities, agencies, contractors, think-tanks, academic liaisons and internal government offices who collaborate with the goals and objectives of the parent organization. Withdrawing the support of the U.S. means cutting that entire apparatus off from receiving funding from the USA. Europe and the USA are the largest funders of each of these World Economic Forum aligned agencies. It is not coincidental that President Trump and Secretary Rubio are making this move in advance of President Trump traveling to Davos, where the network associations congregate. President Trump is expected to deliver a bucket of ice water upon the heads of those who attend Davos annually. The GREAT RESET crew, who design the global government customs and norms, is being reset. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");
Live from Crooked Con in Washington, Leah, Kate, and Melissa unpack the surprisingly not-awful oral arguments for Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, which put the president's tariffs in the hot seat. Then the hosts are joined by Representative LaMonica McIver of New Jersey to discuss the bogus charges against her for “assaulting” federal agents while conducting an oversight visit of an ICE detention center. Finally, friend of the pod Steve Vladeck joins Leah to break down the 3D chess behind Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's Friday night order granting an administrative stay in a case about the funding of SNAP benefits. Read Steve's excellent piece on the subject here, and enter Leah's Lawless giveaway here.Favorite Things:Kate: Judge Sara Ellis's reading of Chicago by Carl Sandburg; How to Be a Good Citizen When Your Country Does Bad Things, M. Gessen (NYT); The 25 Young(ish) New Democrats to Watch, Matt Stieb and Kaleigh Rogers (New York Magazine)Leah: Zohran Mamdani's Victory SpeechMelissa: The Can't Win Victory Fund Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 3/6/26 – San Francisco3/7/26 – Los AngelesLearn more: http://crooked.com/events Order your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad VibesFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
The Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices have been treating the Trump administration with such extreme deference that we were honestly a little flummoxed listening to this week's arguments over his “Liberation Day” tariffs. Shockingly, during Wednesday's arguments in Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, it seemed like the justices were in fact, concerned with presidential overreach. But was this a true bridge-too-far-moment, or were they more concerned about their own pocketbooks? This week, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discussed the arguments with Marc Busch, the Karl F. Landegger Professor of International Business Diplomacy at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Busch is an expert on international trade policy and law, and signed onto an amicus brief on behalf of trade scholars explaining the history and context of IEEPA. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices have been treating the Trump administration with such extreme deference that we were honestly a little flummoxed listening to this week's arguments over his “Liberation Day” tariffs. Shockingly, during Wednesday's arguments in Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, it seemed like the justices were in fact, concerned with presidential overreach. But was this a true bridge-too-far-moment, or were they more concerned about their own pocketbooks? This week, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discussed the arguments with Marc Busch, the Karl F. Landegger Professor of International Business Diplomacy at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Busch is an expert on international trade policy and law, and signed onto an amicus brief on behalf of trade scholars explaining the history and context of IEEPA. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
OA1205 - It's another good news Friday! Voting rights expert Jenessa runs down some of the highlights of the off-year blue sweep in this week's elections, as well as some recent unsung national victories for voting and disability rights. Matt then checks in on the Supreme Court's oral arguments from the challenge to Trump's unprecedented tariffs and why it is looking like he might actually lose his administration's first attempt to defend one of his second administration's policies on the merits. Finally, in today's footnote: Why a federal judge recently decided that a lawsuit brought by the man whose penis was once featured on the cover of the most important albums of 1990s smelled like summary judgment. Supreme Court oral arguments in Learning Resources, Inc v. Trump (11/5/2025) The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977 “Regulating Imports with a Reciprocal Tariff to Rectify Trade Pratcies that Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits,” The White House (4/2/2025)(executive order on tariffs) Solicitor General John Sauer's brief in Learning Resources Plaintiff's second amended complaint in Elden v. Nirvana LLC et al D.C. federal judge Coleen Kollar-Kotelly's opinion in combined litigation challenging Trump's executive order on citizenship requirements for voting (10/31/25) DC federal judge Amir Ali's order in National Association of the Deaf v. Trump (11/4/25) Order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment in Elden v. Nirvana, LLC (9/30/2025)
Sarah Isgur and David French preview the biggest Supreme Court case of the term, Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, which challenges President Donald Trump's power to impose sweeping tariffs on virtually all goods imported into the United States. For additional analysis, join the SCOTUSbloglive blog on November 5 at 10:00 a.m. ET. The Agenda:—How to get CLE credit by listening to Advisory Opinions—Laying the groundwork for Trump's tariffs case—Divided liberal justices—National Guard deployment to Chicago on the interim docket—Sex markers on passports—Justices aren't policy experts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Kate, Leah, and Melissa dive into the legal pushback over ICE and the National Guard in Chicago and Portland, anti-marriage equality goblin Kim Davis's unwelcome return to the courts, the administration's lawless strikes on boats in the waters around South America, and the specter of Trump 3.0. Then, they preview November's SCOTUS cases, including Learning Resources v. Trump, which challenges Trump's authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Favorite things:Leah: Task (HBO Max); West End Girl, Lily Allen; The Kavanaugh Stop - 50 days later, Chris Geidner (Law Dork); The Supreme Court's Self-Defeating Supremacy, Steve Vladeck (The Supreme Court Review); God's Chief Justice, Doug Bock Clark (ProPublica); Lawyers March for Democracy on November 15 at 1-3pm.Kate: The Emergency, George Packer; Expert Backgrounder on War Powers Resolution 60-Day Clock for Boat Strikes Expiring Monday, Rebecca Ingber and Jessica Thibodeau (Just Security)Melissa: Impermissible Punishments: How Prison Became a Problem for Democracy, Judith ResnikHurricane relief for Jamaica:The WalkGood Jamaica Relief FundThe American Friends of JamaicaGlobal Empowerment MissionMercy CorpsFood for the Poor Jamaica Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 3/6/26 – San Francisco3/7/26 – Los AngelesLearn more: http://crooked.com/events Get tickets to CROOKED CON November 6-7 in Washington, D.C at http://crookedcon.com Order your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad VibesFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
“The Chief Justice… is presiding over the end of the rule of law in America”. That quote did not come from host Dahlia Lithwick, but this week's guest, former Federal Circuit Court Judge and George H. W. Bush appointee, J Michael Luttig. On this week's show, Judge Luttig explains the unprecedented split we're seeing between the federal courts and the highest court in the land in response to Trump's lawlessness on everything from tariffs, to due process, to deploying the National Guard, and what it all means for the future of American democracy. Next, Dahlia talks to the CEO of the small family business at the center of the tariffs case that will be argued at SCOTUS on Wednesday. Rick Woldenberg of Learning Resources explains why he's standing up to Trump's monarchic power grab, and why he sees himself standing shoulder-to-shoulder with James Madison. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
© 2020-2026 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
