Podcasts about mahmoud

Following their moral compass, student activists at Columbia demanded an end to the genocide in Gaza and called for a ceasefire. The response? Intimidation, suspensions, wrongful arrests, and, in Mahmoud's case, being illegally detained by ICE and threats of deportation. How and why did the current student movement begin? What were the consequences of speaking out on Palestine? And what does the future hold for student activism and for Mahmoud himself? In this powerful conversation, Columbia graduate student and activist Mahmoud Khalil shares the full story.Thank you for tuning into This is Palestine, the official podcast of The IMEU! For more stories and resources, visit us at imeu.org. Stay connected with us:  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theimeu/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/theIMEU Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theIMEU/ For more insights, follow our host, Diana Buttu, on:  Twitter: https://twitter.com/dianabuttu     

U.S. Supreme Court Affirms Parental RightsPlaintiff in Mahmoud v Taylor Case on Show TodayIn 2022, a Washington, DC public school district told parents they were introducing a bundle of LGBTQIA+ affirming books to students to be more "inclusive."One of the books tasked three- and four-year-olds to search for images from a word list that includes “intersex flag,” “[drag] queen,” “underwear,” “leather,” and the name of a celebrated LGBTQ activist and sex worker.Turns out the school district kicked a bee hive and droves of parents took advantage of a Maryland law allowing them to opt their kids out.The school district then decided to double down and take another kick at the hive by refusing parents their right to opt out. Parents sued and lower courts stood with the school district's intent to "advocate a child-knows-best approach to gender transitioning, telling students that a decision to transition doesn't have to “make sense” and that doctors only “guess” when identifying a newborn's sex anyway." and "suppress free speech and independent thinking by having teachers tell students they are “hurtful” if they question these controversial ideologies."Ultimately, the United States Supreme Court took up the case (Mahmoud v Taylor) and on June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the parents have the right to opt their children out of the storybooks. In the Court's decision, Justice Alito writing for the majority said, “Today's decision recognizes that the right of parents ‘to direct the religious upbringing of their' children would be an empty promise if it did not follow those children into the public school classroom.”Jeff Roman, one of the plaintiffs in this historical parental rights legal victory, is on the show today..In a declaration, Roman noted that “We believe that much of what is taught via the pride storybooks is false religiously and scientifically. Issues of sexuality and gender identity are complex and sensitive. Our son is not old enough to be thinking about many of the issues presented in the books MCPS is requiring him to read, and would find them confusing.”I hope you can tune in.Support the show

Liz and Rebecca explain the final three Supreme Court rulings with huge stakes for true religious freedom. They discuss the Court's continued zeal for religious favoritism in the Catholic Charities, Mahmoud, and Skrmetti rulings—further expanding exemptions from the law for religious employers, giving ultra-conservative religious parents veto power over public school curriculum, and upholding state bans gender-affirming care for minors with gender dysphoria.  Cases Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission (2025) SCOTUSblog Opinion AU Blog - “The Catholic Charities SCOTUS case: Some relief and a word of caution” Previous episode: High Unholy Season: Catholic Charities Bureau vs. Working Americans Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025) SCOTUSblog Opinion AU Blog - “Mahmoud v. Taylor: What representation would have meant to me” Previous episode: High Unholy Season Continues: Mahmoud v. Taylor United States v. Skrmetti (2025) SCOTUSblog Opinion Previous episode: Skrmetti v. U.S.   Check us out on YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, Bluesky, and X. Our website, we-dissent.org, has more information as well as episode transcripts.

Chris wants to stop talking politics as feels we are just going in circles – the goal posts keep moving?  Are men becoming losers? What is a loser? What is an INCEL – listen and find out.  Are kids hooked on social media now – do they know how to self-entertain?  Do parents use electronics as babysitters – you all know the answer already.  Are boomers more aggressive than the newer generations? The Moscow killer – Bryan Kohberger sentenced, and we discuss it.  Are kids safe today to go out to play? Finial thoughts on politics and possible democratic leaders.  Mahmoud shows up to give his feelings in the end.

Mahmoud and Jilla came to America from Tehran, leaving behind their language, culture, and families. Would the culture shock save them or drive them further into a Godless existence? Don't miss their true story on the next UNSHACKLED!

Au surlendemain de la déclaration d'Emmanuel Macron sur la reconnaissance d'un État de Palestine, la guerre continue et la faim aussi. Dans la bande de Gaza, les enfants et les adultes ne meurent plus seulement sous les bombes. Ils meurent les bras ballants et le ventre vide. Un tiers des Gazaouis ne mange pas pendant plusieurs jours, nous alerte la BBC en Une de son site internet. Et cette famine fait l'objet d'un reportage glaçant de l'Associated Press, publié hier vendredi… émaillé de photos des corps décharnés de ceux qui ne mangent pas à leur faim. À l'hôpital « Friends of the Patient », dans la ville de Gaza, cinq enfants sont morts en quatre jours. Le docteur Rana Soboh, nutritionniste, raconte l'indicible à AP : « On les voit glisser et on n'a plus rien pour les sauver ». Plus de perfusions, plus de réserves thérapeutiques. Les traitements basiques contre la malnutrition sont épuisés. Les bébés et les jeunes enfants sont morts les uns après les autres poursuit AP. « Les enfants sont trop faibles pour pleurer ou bouger. Les symptômes s'aggravent, les patients restent plus longtemps à l'hôpital et ne guérissent pas », raconte la docteur Rana Soboh avant de poursuivre : « il n'y a pas de mots face au désastre dans lequel nous nous trouvons. Des enfants meurent aux yeux du monde entier, il n'y a pas de phase plus laide et plus horrible que celle-ci ». La diplomatie pourra-t-elle venir au secours des enfants de Gaza ?  « La faim est utilisée comme une arme de guerre » titre le quotidien canadien Le Devoir. Dans le camp de réfugiés de Shati, un visage de cette famine a un nom : Yazan Abu Ful, deux ans. Sa mère le déshabille pour montrer son dos. On distingue chaque vertèbre. Il ne bouge pas. Il ne parle plus. Il ne joue plus avec ses frères. Il reste allongé. Son père, Mahmoud, maigre lui aussi, a cette phrase : « Si on le laisse, il va nous filer entre les doigts. Et on ne pourra plus rien faire. ». Ce jour-là, le repas de la famille, c'est deux aubergines coupées dans de l'eau chaude.   Pour venir en aide à Gaza, les capitales européennes ont choisi la voie diplomatique. Deutsche Welle publie les détails de l'appel tripartite entre Emmanuel Macron, Friedrich Merz et Keir Starmer, rendu public vendredi. L'Allemagne, la France et le Royaume-Uni y pressent Israël d'autoriser un accès humanitaire complet et sans restriction à la bande de Gaza. Ils évoquent ensemble une « catastrophe humanitaire », réclament un cessez-le-feu immédiat, et affirment être prêts à prendre d'autres mesures pour soutenir un processus de paix.   Au Honduras, le retour du Covid-19  Cinq ans après sa propagation massive et tandis qu'on l'avait quand même un peu oublié, une nouvelle forme de variant se propage à vitesse grand V au Honduras. Le XFG aussi appelé Frankenstein, peut-on lire dans le quotidien El Heraldo. Alors les autorités ont décidé de rendre à nouveau obligatoire le port du masque dans la plupart des lieux publics. Dans le pays tout le monde ne voit pas d'un très bon œil le retour de ces mesures. Certains médecins rapporte le site de La Prensa, sont opposés à ces mesures du gouvernement qu'ils jugent inutiles. « Ils sont ignorants » répond la secrétaire d'État à la santé Carla Paredes, « près de la moitié des fonctionnaires présentent des symptômes, nous les avons donc mis en congés pendant deux jours pour briser la chaine de contamination ». Et si la vérité était ailleurs, pour certains commentateurs, il y aurait un lien entre ces mesures et les mobilisations contre le gouvernement prévues dans le week-end. La réponse de la ministre dans La Prensa est sans appel : « ce sont des imbéciles, les problèmes de santé n'ont rien à voir avec la politique ». Dont acte.  Mobilisation des médecins en Angleterre Qui dénoncent leurs conditions de travail et réclament une revalorisation de leur salaire. Médecins juniors et seniors ont entamé vendredi une grève illimitée et défilent dans la rue en blouse blanche pour réclamer une hausse de leur pouvoir d'achat, détaille le Guardian. Malgré des perturbations importantes, des opérations reportées, des patients redirigés dans le privé, le gouvernement de Keir Starmer campe sur ses positions. Mieux payer les médecins présenterait un danger pour les finances publiques.

After 104 days in detention, Mahmoud Khalil is home. And this week, we're honored to have him join us in studio for his first extended conversation with the ACLU. He and Kamau reflect on Mahmoud's time in ICE custody, the importance of people power, and how he's settling back into life in New York — from attending a widely publicized comedy show to spending quiet moments with his family. Our senior executive producer is Sam Riddell. This episode was executive produced by Jessica Herman Weitz for the ACLU, and W. Kamau Bell, Kelly Rafferty, PhD, and Melissa Hudson Bell, PhD for Who Knows Best Productions. It was recorded at Gotham Production Studios in NYC. At Liberty is edited and produced by Erica Getto and Myrriah Gossett for Good Get.

Grace and Alvina talk about summer--what their relationship is to summer, what their favorite childhood memories from summer are, and what their favorite summer reading books are. For the Fortune Cookie segment, they discuss the recent Mahmoud vs Taylor Supreme Court ruling and read part of a statement written by author Katherine Locke. Then, Grace tells Alvina about her book DUMPLING DAYS which is about a summer trip to Taiwan. And then end as always with what they're grateful for. See complete show notes at www.bookfriendsforever.com.  Click here to become a Patreon member: https://www.patreon.com/Bookfriendsforever1.  See info about Grace's new book "The Gate, the Girl, and the Dragon": https://linktr.ee/gracelinauthor.  Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/bookfriendsforever_podcast/  

Connecting Communities: Abir Mahmoud - Early Childhood Education by 2mfm

[00:18:26] Carley Shimkus   [00:36:50] Josh Holmes   [00:55:12] Sen. Lindsey Graham   [01:13:37] Batya Ungar-Sargon   [01:32:01] Joe Lavorgna Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Two Market Basket executives who were suspended as part of the Arthur T. Demoulas drama, were fired yesterday. Then, Mahmoud Khalil was interviewed by CNN yesterday and he couldn't bring himself to condemn Hamas.  Visit the Howie Carr Radio Network website to access columns, podcasts, and other exclusive content.

Washington State Supreme Court just changed a rule and now judges have the power to arbitrarily decide to drop charges against defendants. Jason got a very unsatisfactory response from Snohomish County about the booking requirements for their youth detention center. // LongForm: GUEST: Rep. Lauren Davis (D-Shoreline) reacts to a new Supreme Court rule that lets activist judges arbitrarily dismiss charges against defendants. // Quick Hit: Mahmoud Khalil refuses to condemn Hamas.

Ambasador Palestyny dr Mahmoud Khalifa mówi o zbrodniczej polityce Izraela, wymierzonej w Palestyńczyków. To dzieje się przed naszymi oczami - podkreśla dyplomata.

Was the Scopes “Monkey Trial” ever really about science—or was it a staged showdown with a hidden agenda?  In this episode of All Rise, we talk to Dr. Rick Townsend, a historian of ideas whose groundbreaking dissertation uncovers the real story behind one of the most famous courtroom dramas in American history: the 1925 Scopes Trial.  For a century, we've been told it was the moment science defeated religion. But what if the real battle wasn't evolution vs. creation—but parental rights vs. elite control? Dr. Townsend walks us through how the trial was orchestrated, how William Jennings Bryan became a media caricature, and how a false narrative took root that still shapes educational debates today.  We also explore Mahmoud v. Taylor, a 2025 Supreme Court decision that echoes the same themes 100 years later. Are we still fighting the same battle—just with different labels?  Whether you're a believer, skeptic, or just someone tired of being told a one-sided version of history, this episode will change the way you think about the “Monkey Trial”—and what's really at stake in the classroom.   Dr. Rick Townsend's PhD Dissertation, "Reconsidering Bryan: William Jennings Bryan's Advocacy of Causes Using Rights-Based Arguments," can be accessed at https://utd-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/3aa73f5e-5985-4a20-8a04-7131c391dffb/content.    Dr. Townsend's recent article in Salvo Magazine, "Still Unrefuted," about the anti-evolution arguments of William Jennings Bryan: https://salvomag.com/article/salvo73/still-unrefuted.   Salvo Magazine's most recent issue, which includes Dr. Townsend's articles along with several others', can be accessed here: https://salvomag.com/issue/current (note that this link will only go to the correct issue while it is the "current" issue. For future reference, this is issue #73 from Summer 2025).   You can keep up with Dr. Townsend through his LinkedIn page at www.linkedin.com/in/rick-townsend-271b2920.   

In this case, the court considered this issue: Do public schools burden parents' religious exercise when they compel elementary school children to participate in instruction on gender and sexuality against their parents' religious convictions and without notice or opportunity to opt out?The case was decided on June 27, 2025The Supreme Court held that Parents challenging the Montgomery County Board of Education's introduction of certain “LGBTQ+-inclusive” storybooks, along with the Board's decision to withhold parental opt outs from that instruction, are entitled to a preliminary injunction because the policy poses “a very real threat of undermining” the religious beliefs and practices parents wish to instill. Justice Samuel Alito authored the 6-3 majority opinion of the Court.The Montgomery County Board of Education introduced LGBTQ+-inclusive storybooks into its elementary school English curriculum and initially allowed parents to opt their children out of related instruction. When the Board rescinded this opt-out policy, citing administrative burdens and concerns about classroom disruption, parents from diverse religious backgrounds sued. The Court applied the principle from Wisconsin v Yoder that government policies violate parents' free exercise rights when they “substantially interfere with the religious development” of children by placing them in environments “hostile” to their religious beliefs with “pressure to conform” to contrary viewpoints. The storybooks present normative messages about same-sex marriage and gender identity that directly contradict the religious teachings these parents seek to instill. Combined with teacher guidance that encourages specific responses reinforcing these viewpoints, the curriculum creates precisely the kind of “objective danger to the free exercise of religion” that the First Amendment prohibits.When a burden on religious exercise matches the character found in Yoder—substantial interference with parents' ability to guide their children's religious development—strict scrutiny applies regardless of whether the policy is neutral and generally applicable. While schools have a compelling interest in maintaining an undisrupted educational environment, the Board's no-opt-out policy fails narrow tailoring. The Board continues to permit opt-outs for other curricula, including family life and human sexuality instruction, and provides parallel programming for other student populations. The Board cannot create administrative burdens through its own curriculum design choices and then cite those burdens to justify denying constitutional rights. The availability of private school or homeschooling does not cure the constitutional violation, as public education is a public benefit that cannot be conditioned on surrendering religious exercise rights.Justice Clarence Thomas authored a concurring opinion arguing that the Board's policy represents an impermissible attempt at ideological conformity comparable to that rejected in Pierce v Society of Sisters, and that sex education for young children lacks the historical pedigree necessary to override parents' fundamental rights.Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, arguing that mere exposure to ideas conflicting with religious beliefs does not constitute a Free Exercise violation under established precedent, and warning that the majority's ruling will create administrative chaos for public schools while effectively granting religious parents a veto over curricular decisions traditionally left to democratically elected school boards.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

Nia and Aughie discuss the following case rulings: Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, Mahmoud v. Taylor, and Trump v CASA.

Sarah Isgur, David French, and Kannon Shanmugam again reunite for the annual Paul, Weiss summer associate live recording. The three discuss Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's mysterious jurisprudence, political pressure on the Supreme Court bench, and firmly bound, braggadocious briefs.Plus: billable hours, a (not) blockbuster term, and Sarah's insecurity over Texas' quaint size. The Agenda:—The Biter and Aqua Girl—Trump v. Casa, injunctions, and class actions—Pushback on Justice Jackson as the #Resistance justice (and how to write an email)—Splitting the baby on paper vs. digital cert petitions—Guess where Kannon puts his Supreme Court quill pens—It wasn't a blockbuster term—Circuit court crash course—Don't mess with Texas—My big fat 9th Circuit Court—Free speech or parental rights? United States v. Skrmetti and Mahmoud v. Taylor This episode is brought to you by Burford Capital, the leading global finance firm focused on law.Burford helps companies and law firms unlock the value of their legal assets. With a $7.2 billion portfolio and listings on the NYSE and LSE, Burford provides capital to finance high-value commercial litigation and arbitration—without adding cost, risk, or giving up control.Clients include Fortune 500 companies and Am Law 100 firms, who turn to Burford to pursue strong claims, manage legal costs, and accelerate recoveries.Learn more at burfordcapital.com/ao. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of School Business Insider, host John Brucato is joined by Sonja H. Trainor, Executive Director of the National School Attorneys Association, for a timely conversation about the U.S. Supreme Court's major rulings and what they mean for school leaders.From religious objections to curriculum (Mahmoud v. Taylor) to transgender rights and medical procedures (U.S. v. Skrmetti), and from charter school governance (Drummond v. OK) to E-Rate funding's uncertain future, this episode covers it all.Sonja unpacks the legal reasoning, the risks, and the real-world changes SBOs need to anticipate as law and education policy collide.Contact School Business Insider: Check us out on social media: LinkedIn Twitter (X) Website: https://asbointl.org/SBI Email: podcast@asbointl.org Make sure to like, subscribe and share for more great insider episodes!Disclaimer:The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed are the speaker's own and do not represent the views, thoughts, and opinions of the Association of School Business Officials International. The material and information presented here is for general information purposes only. The "ASBO International" name and all forms and abbreviations are the property of its owner and its use does not imply endorsement of or opposition to any specific organization, product, or service. The presence of any advertising does not endorse, or imply endorsement of, any products or services by ASBO International.ASBO International is a 501(c)3 nonprofit, nonpartisan organization and does not participate or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for elective public office. The sharing of news or information concerning public policy issues or political campaigns and candidates are not, and should not be construed as, endorsements by ASBO Internatio...

Behold the great 3WHH fugitive episode. Although it was posted over the weekend, somehow an Internet gremlin or something disappeared it! But now it's back, in its restored glory. (Well, almost restored. Steve had a problem with his mic that was undetected while we were recording, and we weren't able to improve it much in pist-production. We have to cut out a whole new segment on prog rock!)And what glory there is: Lucretia hosts this week as we welcome a special guest, Prof. Phil Munoz of Notre Dame, though he is on assignment this semester at the University of Texas at Austin. Phil decided to try to outflank even Lucretia with the bold proposition that the Mahmoud v Taylor decision, which empowered parents to have their children opt-out of phonics instruction in the LGBTQ alphabet, was actually a defeat for social conservatives. It's a lively discussion, as we did our bnest to make Phil regret his decision to join the show this week.

Free after more than 100 days without charge, Christiane speaks with Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil as the Trump Administration continues its efforts to deport him in what is his first interview on CNN. They speak about the accusations against him, whether the campus protests were antisemetic and about what it was like missing his son's birth while in I.C.E. custody. Then, after New York Mayoral Candidate Zohran Mamdani's stunning victory in the democratic primary, Christiane speaks with Senator Bernie Sanders about whether a new wave of progressive activism is rocking the Democratic party.  Plus. with a ceasefire deal on the line, Galia David, mother of Israeli hostage Evyatar David who remains in Gaza, joins Christiane to talk about why she's hopeful for the first time her son will come home. And, thirty years since the Srebrenica massacre took place, Christiane revisits her face-to-face interview with Ratko Mladić, known as the "Butcher of Bosnia," who conducted the genocide, to understand how the world let it happen. She also recalls witnessing the families of the victims looking for closure and coming to bury the bodies of the victims 20 years later. And finally, 40 years since the humanitarian concert event that made history, Christiane takes peek at the road to Live Aid.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Pigweed and Crowhill drink and review Summerfest lager from Sierra Nevada, then dive into the most consequential U.S. Supreme Court decisions handed down since the Dobbs ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade.We explore the Court's growing willingness to redraw the legal map on race, religion, executive power, parental rights, and the limits of judicial authority. Highlights include:Affirmative Action Implosion: Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard ends race-based college admissions.Free Speech vs. Anti-Discrimination: In 303 Creative v. Elenis, religious liberty takes precedence over LGBTQ protections.Executive Power Check: Biden v. Nebraska smacks down student loan forgiveness via the HEROES Act.Trump v. CASA: The Court ends the era of universal injunctions, with Justice Barrett dressing down Justice Brown's call for judicial supremacy.Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton: Age verification for online porn upheld, raising quiet questions about whether obscenity should be protected speech at all.Mahmoud v. Taylor: Do public schools have the right to impose moral instruction against parents' religious beliefs?Riley v. Bondi: A case on the expedited removal of a Jamaican immigrant underscores due process boundaries.Medina v. Planned Parenthood: Can states exclude abortion providers from Medicaid reimbursement?We break down what these decisions mean for American law and society, and where the Court may go next. Whether you see these rulings as a return to constitutional sanity or a shift toward reactionary retrenchment, the terrain is shifting fast. Buckle up.More at ... https://www.pigweedandcrowhill.com/https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYAjUk6LttQyUk_fV9F46R06OQgH39exQ#SCOTUS #CASA #Trump #Mahmoud #Riley #Bondi #Medina #PlannedParenthood

The International Criminal Court finds war crimes evidence in Sudan's Darfur region, Donald Trump threatens a 35% tariff on Canadian goods, The U.N. warns that Rohingya refugee services face collapse amid funding crisis, Slovakia blocks EU sanctions on Russia over a gas phase-out, Argentina's senate passes a pension increase despite opposition from Javier Millei, Detained activist Mahmoud Khalil is seeking $20M from the Trump administration, The Pentagon launches a major drone overhaul, A poll suggests that 79% of Americans see immigration as beneficial for the country, The U.N. alleges that US AIDS funding cuts could cause 4 million deaths by 2029, and a robot performs autonomous surgery with a 100% success rate. Sources: www.verity.news

Columbia graduate and campus activist Mahmoud Khalil is suing the Trump administration for $20 million, alleging he was falsely imprisoned, maliciously prosecuted, and smeared as an anti-Semite. Meanwhile, a dozen crisis workers in New York and New Jersey who staff the 988 Lifeline's LGBTQ+ support line are expected to lose their jobs this month. Plus, WNYC's David Furst speaks with Phillip Markle, artistic director of the Brooklyn Comedy Collective, about this weekend's Fun & Dumb Improv Festival.

This Day in Legal History: Richard and Mildred Loving ArrestedOn this day in legal history, July 11, 1958, Richard and Mildred Loving were arrested in Central Point, Virginia, for violating the state's Racial Integrity Act, which banned interracial marriage. The couple had legally wed in Washington, D.C., but upon returning to Virginia, they were charged with "cohabiting as man and wife, against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth." Richard, a white man, and Mildred, a Black and Indigenous woman, pled guilty and were sentenced to one year in prison, suspended on the condition that they leave the state for 25 years.The Lovings relocated to Washington, D.C., but their desire to return home ultimately led to a pivotal civil rights case. In 1963, they wrote to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, who referred them to the ACLU. Attorneys Bernard Cohen and Philip Hirschkop took up their case, arguing that Virginia's law violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. After years of legal battles, the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court.In Loving v. Virginia (1967), the Court unanimously struck down laws banning interracial marriage, declaring that "the freedom to marry… may not be infringed by the State." Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote that Virginia's law served no legitimate purpose "independent of invidious racial discrimination." The decision invalidated similar laws in 15 other states.The Lovings never sought to become civil rights icons—they simply wanted to live as a married couple in their home state. Their quiet determination reshaped American constitutional law, affirming marriage as a fundamental right and setting a legal precedent that continues to influence equal protection jurisprudence.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily paused a lower court ruling that had blocked President Donald Trump's executive order removing collective bargaining rights for large segments of the federal workforce. U.S. District Judge James Donato had issued the initial injunction in June, finding the executive order likely violated federal employees' First Amendment rights and targeted unions viewed as adversarial to Trump. The appeals court's administrative stay keeps the order in limbo while it considers the administration's appeal, with oral arguments scheduled for July 17.Trump's order affects 21 federal agencies and would make it easier to discipline or fire employees while restricting union challenges. The order notably broadened national security exceptions to collective bargaining beyond intelligence agencies like the CIA and FBI. Unions argue the move is retaliatory and affects many workers who don't handle national security matters.Earlier, a Washington, D.C. judge blocked the same order at seven agencies, including the DOJ and Treasury, but that ruling is also stayed pending appeal. The Trump administration has also filed lawsuits to void existing union contracts, though one such suit by the Treasury was dismissed for lack of standing. A related case remains pending in Texas.US court pauses block on Trump eliminating union bargaining for federal workers | ReutersThe White House is currently reviewing federal agency layoff plans following a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that permits large-scale downsizing of the government workforce. Two senior officials confirmed the review is aimed at minimizing future legal challenges by ensuring all plans comply with congressional rules and civil service regulations. Coordination is being handled through the White House Counsel's Office and the Office of Personnel Management. Although no specific timeline has been announced, officials say the layoffs are an "immediate priority," with a goal to reduce the size of government swiftly.The ruling, welcomed by the Trump administration, allows agencies to act on plans developed earlier this year under the guidance of the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk. However, the administration acknowledged that labor contracts and due process protections still apply, and lawsuits are expected even if legal thresholds are met.The State Department has already confirmed it will begin issuing termination notices imminently, having proposed nearly 2,000 job cuts in May. Overall, about 260,000 federal employees have already exited through firings, resignations, or early retirements since January. The layoffs are expected to affect more than a dozen departments, including Agriculture, Commerce, and Veterans Affairs.White House reviews mass federal layoff plans, aims for swift action | ReutersMahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University student and permanent U.S. resident, has filed a $20 million claim against the Trump administration, alleging false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. Khalil, a pro-Palestinian activist, was detained for over 100 days by immigration authorities who accused him of undermining U.S.–Israel relations. His legal team submitted the claim under federal rules requiring damages claims to be filed before a lawsuit. Homeland Security dismissed the claim as "absurd," defending its actions as lawful.Khalil argues his arrest was politically motivated, targeting him for his pro-Palestinian speech, and says he would accept an official apology and a policy change as an alternative to monetary compensation. He was released on bail in June after a federal judge ruled his detention violated his First Amendment rights. The case has drawn widespread attention from civil rights and Palestinian advocacy groups, who accuse the administration of equating criticism of Israel with antisemitism.Trump has publicly pledged to deport foreign students participating in anti-Israel protests, and Khalil was the first high-profile detainee under this initiative. His lawyers continue to challenge his deportation, and the administration has six months to respond to his compensation claim.Mahmoud Khalil seeks $20 million from Trump administration over immigration arrest | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by George Gershwin.This week's closing theme is dedicated to one of America's most iconic composers—George Gershwin, who died on July 11, 1937, at just 38 years old. Though his life was short, Gershwin's musical legacy is vast, bridging the worlds of classical music and jazz with unprecedented flair. His compositions resonate with a distinctively American voice, and no piece captures that better than Rhapsody in Blue. Premiered in 1924, the work opens with a now-famous clarinet glissando and bursts into a vibrant, restless energy that seems to embody the optimism and chaos of early 20th-century New York.Commissioned by bandleader Paul Whiteman, Rhapsody in Blue was Gershwin's first major attempt to merge classical form with jazz idioms. What emerged was a concerto-like work that thrilled audiences and critics alike and marked the beginning of serious recognition for jazz as a concert-hall art form. Gershwin performed the piano solo himself at the premiere, having written much of it in a hurry and leaving some sections to be improvised on the spot.His sudden death from a brain tumor shocked the music world. It cut short the career of a composer who had already revolutionized American music and was poised to do much more. In works like Porgy and Bess and An American in Paris, Gershwin demonstrated a rare ability to synthesize European traditions with American vernacular music. But Rhapsody in Blue remains his most enduring testament—a collision of elegance, innovation, and vitality.As we reflect on Gershwin's passing this week, we close with Rhapsody in Blue, a work that continues to pulse with life nearly a century after its premiere. Its blend of bluesy lyricism and orchestral sweep makes it a fitting tribute to a composer whose voice was silenced too soon.Without further ado, George Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue, enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Ghinwa Mahmoud is a Lebanese actress and content creator who began her career after studying public relations. She made her acting debut in the 2010 Lebanese series Maitre Nada and has since appeared in a variety of Arabic television shows and films. Some of her notable works include If It Wasn't for Love (2012), Private Relationships (2015), Kalabsh 3 (2019), and Wa Akheeran (2023). Her growing filmography reflects her versatility, and she continues to take on diverse roles in both drama and entertainment projects across the region.#hikmatwehbipodcast #podcast#arabicpodcast #ghinwamahmoud#wstudiodxbحكمت_وهبي#حكمت_وهبي_بودكاست##

El activista palestino y exestudiante de la Universidad de Columbia acusa de daños y perjuicios al gobierno federal, por lo que describe como un intento con motivaciones políticas para silenciarlo.

Your daily news in under three minutes. At Al Jazeera Podcasts, we want to hear from you, our listeners. So, please head to https://www.aljazeera.com/survey and tell us your thoughts about this show and other Al Jazeera podcasts. It only takes a few minutes! Connect with us: @AJEPodcasts on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Threads and YouTube.

AP correspondent Julie Walker reports Mahmoud Khalil has filed a multimillion dollar suit against the Trump administration.

The Mahmoud v. Taylor case has sparked debate about the balance between parental religious freedom, the authority of school boards to establish curricula and the constitutional rights of children. In the case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a group of parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, have the right to opt their children out of classroom readings that include LGBTQ themes, citing religious objections. Tanya Monique Washington, a professor at the Center for Access to Justice and the Marjorie F. Knowles Chair in Law at Georgia State University, returned to the program to provide an analysis and break down the implications of the decision. Plus, we remember the legacy of the late poet, author, and educator Nikki Giovanni, whose work championed freedom of expression. We revisit Rose’s conversation with Atlanta-based journalist Ann Hill Bond, who reflects on the power of Giovanni’s words.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We look at the final orders list before summer break, and then continue to work through last month's opinions, this time with an extended analysis of two decisions about children and culture wars -- Mahmoud v. Taylor (religious objections to LGBTQ+-inclusive books) and Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton (age verification for accessing online pornography).

After being abducted from his New York apartment building by plainclothes agents and locked away in an ICE jail in Louisiana for over 100 days, Mahmoud Khalil has been freed and reunited with his family. A federal judge ruled that Khalil's detention was unconstitutional and that he was neither a flight risk nor a threat to the public, and the Syrian-born Palestinian activist, husband, father, and former Columbia University graduate student was finally released on June 20, 2025. But the fight for Khalil's freedom is not over, and we have by no means seen the last of the Trump administration's authoritarian attacks on immigrants, universities, and the movement to stop Israel's US-backed genocide of Palestinians. In this exclusive interview, TRNN Editor-in-Chief Maximillian Alvarez speaks with Amy Greer, an associate attorney at Dratel & Lewis and a member of Mahmoud Khalil's legal team, about the epic legal battle to free Khalil.Guest:Amy Greer is an associate attorney at Dratel & Lewis, and a member of Mahmoud Khalil's legal team. Greer is a lawyer and archivist by training, and an advocate and storyteller by nature. As an attorney at Dratel & Lewis, she works on a variety of cases, including international extradition, RICO, terrorism, and drug trafficking. She previously served as an assistant public defender on a remote island in Alaska, defending people charged with misdemeanors, and as a research and writing attorney on capital habeas cases with clients who have been sentenced to death.Additional resources:Mahmoud Khalil arrest videoACLU Press Release (June 20, 2025): Mahmoud Khalil to be freed from detention, reunite with wife and son as case proceedsMaximillian Alvarez, The Real News Network, “‘A tremendous chilling effect': Columbia students describe dystopian reality on campus amid Trump attacks”Credits:Studio Production / Post-Production: David HebdenHelp us continue producing radically independent news and in-depth analysis by following us and becoming a monthly sustainer.Sign up for our newsletterLike us on FacebookFollow us on TwitterDonate to support this podcast

From Skrmetti to Medina to Mahmoud, the Supreme Court has been busy issuing devastating rulings on cases that carry profound implications for LGBTQI+ health and rights and reproductive health and rights. Chris Geidner, author of Law Dork, sits down to talk with us about these recent cases out of the Supreme Court, and what these rulings mean for our rights and wellbeing.United States v. Skrmetti was a challenge of Tennessee's Senate Bill 1, which prohibits gender-affirming care for transgender minors. By a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court ultimately upheld the state's ban on gender- affirming care for transgender minors. Medina v. Planned Parenthood of South Atlantic was another case heard this term—in fact, it was a culmination of decades of attacks to Planned Parenthood and other providers, specifically targeting efforts to kick these providers out of Medicaid. In another devastating 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court sided against reproductive health care. Mahmoud v. Taylor was a case related to LGBTQI+ inclusive textbooks in Maryland. If parents had a religious objection to anything in the curriculum, they fought to exempt their children from the lesson. By a 6-3 ruling, the Court ruled in favor of the Maryland parents. Lastly, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management Inc. upheld a key Affordable Care Act provision requiring health insurance companies to cover certain care cost-free, but also allows the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services –Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—more autonomy to reshape the provision.For more information, check out Aborsh: https://www.aborsh.com/Support the showFollow Us on Social: Twitter: @rePROsFightBack Instagram: @reprosfbFacebook: rePROs Fight Back Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.comRate and Review on Apple PodcastThanks for listening & keep fighting back!

In this powerful testimony, a former Muslim revolutionary guard named Mahmoud shares how he entered a church intending to burn it down but instead encountered Jesus in a life-changing way. His remarkable journey from Islamic zealot to follower of Christ demonstrates the transformative power of experiencing God as Father.• Mahmoud was a respected revolutionary guard and "living martyr" who initially wanted to prove the Bible hadn't changed him• Inside the church, he experienced an overwhelming desire to call God "Father" and felt God's presence holding him• After conversion, the Holy Spirit prompted him to apologize to his sister – something culturally unthinkable that demonstrated his new heart• Imprisoned for his faith for nearly two years, he endured severe torture but experienced Christ's presence throughout his suffering• Just days before his scheduled execution, international pressure led to his release• After escaping to England, he founded "Father's Heart" ministry, serving in conflict zones and with refugees• His life mission is helping Muslims discover they "are not orphans" but have a Father in God• He now advises European parliaments about Middle Eastern issues despite being "just a mechanic"Join us in praying for the Persian-speaking world, that many would encounter Jesus through dreams, visions, and the witness of believers.Helpful Links:Church in Iran is growing!https://www.24-7prayer.com/unprecedented-growth-of-the-church-in-iran/OneWay Love Muslims Testimonieshttps://prayercast.com/testimonies-landing.htmlLet us know what you thought of the show!Follow One80 on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or our website.Never miss a One80. Join our email list. Follow us on Instagram.Share One80, here's how!OneWay Ministries

Mahmoud v. Taylor concerns the question of whether parents have the right to be notified and opt their children out of classroom lessons on gender and sexuality that violate their religious beliefs.In 2022, the Montgomery County, Maryland, School Board introduced storybooks for pre-K through fifth-grade classrooms covering topics like gender transitions and pride parades. Maryland law and the Board’s own policies provide parents the right to receive notice and opt their kids out of books that violate their religious beliefs. However, when parents attempted to exercise this right, the School Board eliminated notice and opt-outs altogether. In response, a diverse coalition of religious parents, including Muslims, Christians, and Jews, sued the School Board in federal court. The parents argue that storybooks are age-inappropriate, spiritually and emotionally damaging for their kids, and inconsistent with their beliefs.Last year, the Fourth Circuit upheld the School Board’s policy, ruling that the removal of notice and opt-outs does not impose a legally cognizable burden on parents’ religious exercise. The parents appealed.On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, held that parents challenging the Board’s introduction of the “LGBTQ+-inclusive” storybooks, along with its decision to withhold opt-outs, are entitled to a preliminary injunction. Join us for a breakdown of this decision and its implications.Featuring:Eric Baxter, Vice President and Senior Counsel, Becket Fund for Religious Liberty(Moderator) Prof. Teresa Stanton Collett, Professor and Director, Prolife Center, University of St. Thomas School of Law

Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern answer your questions about threats to federal judges, how far religious opt-outs can go in public schools in light of  Mahmoud v. Taylor, and whether or not the rule of law in America is, in fact, cooked.  This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also 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

Public education is under serious pressure. The Supreme Court's Mahmoud v. Taylor decision allowing parents to opt students out of instruction featuring LGBTQ-related themes or materials, $6.8 billion in federal funds being withheld by the US Department of Education, and attacks on higher education all signal a new chapter for education in the United States. John Arthur breaks it all down this week with special guest Rebekah Cummings, librarian extraordinaire and 2024 candidate for Utah's Lieutenant Governor.

On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court delivered its final decisions of the 2024–25 term. In this episode, Steve Vladeck of the Georgetown University Law Center and Sarah Isgur of SCOTUSblog join to discuss the significant cases from this Supreme Court term.    Resources Trump v. CASA, Inc. (2025)  Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025) DHS v. DVD (2025) Steve Vladeck, “163: A New Kind of Judicial Supremacy,” One First (June 30, 2025) Advisory Opinions podcast 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. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Support our important work. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

On our season 6 finale, Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman explore some of the consequential decisions from the final days of the Supreme Court term, including Mahmoud v. Taylor – which involves parents who want to opt their children out of curriculum they find in conflict with their religious beliefs – and U.S. v. Skrmetti, which focuses on access to medical care for transgender youth. They discuss the real world implications of these and other recent rulings. Amanda and Holly also celebrate a decision from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals striking down Louisiana's law requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom and share why this case might find its way up to the Supreme Court before too long.     SHOW NOTES Segment 1 (starting at 00:38): Recent activities and news For the latest on the budget reconciliation bill and ways to make your voice known, visit BJConline.org/budgetbill2025   Segment 2 (starting at 07:01): A federal court decision and a Supreme Court case with far-reaching implications Roake v. Brumley is the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals case that struck down the Louisiana law mandating the posting of the Ten Commandments in classrooms. Read more about the decision and BJC's brief on our website: Federal appeals court finds Louisiana's Ten Commandments law unconstitutional as Texas enacts a similar measure Trump v. CASA is the case often called the “birthright citizenship” case that is about national injunctions. Amanda and Holly recommended listening to the oral arguments and reading the decision and the dissent. All are available on the Supreme Court's website.    Segment 3 (starting at 19:07): The decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor and its potential impact Amanda and Holly discussed oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor in episode 15 of season 6. You can read the decision and the dissent on the Supreme Court's website. Holly mentioned this piece on the case from Religion News Service: ‘We were called book burners': Families react to SCOTUS LGBTQ+ books decision   Segment 4 (starting 46:13): U.S. v. Skrmetti and what's ahead for the Court Amanda and Holly discussed U.S. v. Skrmetti in episode 6 of season 6. You can read the decision and the dissent on the Supreme Court's website. For more on the case involving the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act that the Supreme Court will hear this fall, read this piece by Adam Liptak for The New York Times: Supreme Court to Hear Rastafarian Prisoner's Suit Over Shaved Dreadlocks Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

The end of the term arrives, and the Court is busy.  We begin our dive into  the cases with Mahmoud v. Taylor, a case involving inclusive books in a school, parental guidance of religious education, opt-outs, advance notification, and issues of gender and sexual education.  Professor Amar goes beyond the case with an overall theory of religious accommodation; indeed, he goes beyond this into questions of parental rights and how it may interact with first amendment law.  We also have some announcements of future events.  And as always, CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Sarah Isgur and David French break down the biggest takeaways from the Supreme Court's latest term using SCOTUSblog's stat pack as their guide. They also explain the outcomes in the Texas explicit content case and the “pride puppy” case. The Agenda:—OT25 in review—The most influential justice—What makes a case “important”—Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton—Explaining tiers of scrutiny—The pride puppy case—Curriculum opt-outs— Mahmoud v. Taylor This episode is brought to you by Burford Capital, the leading global finance firm focused on law. Burford helps companies and law firms unlock the value of their legal assets. With a $7.2 billion portfolio and listings on the NYSE and LSE, Burford provides capital to finance high-value commercial litigation and arbitration—without adding cost, risk, or giving up control. Clients include Fortune 500 companies and Am Law 100 firms, who turn to Burford to pursue strong claims, manage legal costs, and accelerate recoveries. Learn more at ⁠burfordcapital.com/ao⁠. Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠click here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Here at the end of Pride, I want to discuss the long, bigoted history and false scriptural basis of religious opposition to LGBTQ rights, and the effort of the religious right to seek an exemption to anti-discrimination laws so that they can persecute gay and trans people. UPDATE: since the production of this episode, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of religious objection to LGBTQ+ books in the case Mahmoud v. Taylor. I encourage you to visit ⁠5calls.org⁠ and find their page to help you ⁠Oppose Efforts to Dehumanize Transgender and LGBTQ+ People⁠. And attend a demonstration to make your voice heard. Visit ⁠https://www.mobilize.us/⁠ to find an event near you! Get 3 months of premium wireless service for $15 bucks a month at ⁠⁠⁠⁠MintMobile.com/Blindness⁠⁠⁠⁠ Check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠the show merch⁠⁠⁠⁠, perfect for gifts!  ⁠⁠⁠⁠Pledge support on Patreon to get an ad-free feed with exclusive episodes!⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Check out my novel, Manuscript Found!⁠⁠⁠⁠ Find a transcript of this episode with source citations and related imagery at ⁠⁠⁠⁠www.historicalblindness.com⁠⁠⁠⁠. Direct all advertising inquiries to ⁠⁠⁠⁠advertising@airwavemedia.com⁠⁠⁠⁠. Visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠www.airwavemedia.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ to find other high-quality podcasts! Some music on this episode was licensed under a Blue Dot Sessions blanket license at the time of this episode's publication. Tracks include "Black Ballots," "Lacaille," "The Gran Dias," "Leatherbound," "Tarte Tatin," "Illa Villardo," "Voyager," and "Game Lands." Additional music, including "Remedy for Melancholy," is by Kai Engel, licensed under Creative Commons. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Supreme Court's last day of the term was an exercise of raw power. The six conservative justices gave lower courts the back of their hand, making clear that they — and only they! — will decide the law. Nationwide injunctions are out, and so is stare decisis. Andrew and Liz will break down the power grab, along with Mahmoud v. Taylor, in which the howler monkey wing allowed religious parents to opt their kids out of the “religious coercion” of reading books about gay people.   Links: Kennedy v. Braidwood Management. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-316_869d.pdf   Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers' Research https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-354_0861.pdf   Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1122_3e04.pdf   Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf   Mahmoud v Taylor  https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf   Trump v. CASA https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf   Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod  

In this timely episode of "Talkin' Politics & Religion Without Killin' Each Other," host Corey Nathan speaks with Professor Daniel Mach, Director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief and adjunct professor of law at the George Washington University Law School. They explore the complexities of First Amendment rights, the historical Scopes Trial, and the fine line between religious freedom and government endorsement of religion. What We Discuss: How Daniel Mach's passion for First Amendment law began. The ACLU's approach to defending speech across ideological lines. Key legal principles behind landmark cases like Kennedy v. Bremerton. The modern-day impact of church-state separation rulings. The importance of defending civil liberties regardless of popularity. Episode Highlights: [00:01:00] Dan's origin story, sparked by a high school paper on the Scopes Trial. [00:05:00] ACLU's surprising position in the Boston Christian flag case. [00:09:00] The real facts behind Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. [00:23:00] Historical insight into the Scopes Trial and why it still matters. [00:38:00] Breakdown of the opt-out debate in Mahmoud v. Montgomery County. [00:48:00] Can a Catholic public school exist? Oklahoma says maybe. [00:56:00] Concerns about threats to the rule of law. [01:00:00] How to speak across ideological divides and why it matters. Featured Quotes: "Rights for all — the right to speak even hateful things — triggered something in my mind where I thought, yeah, that's the way to go." – Daniel Mach "If the rules only protect people you like, then those rules are not rules at all." – Daniel Mach "Part of religious liberty is keeping religion and government separate — not just to protect government, but to protect religion." – Daniel Mach Resources Mentioned: ACLU: https://www.aclu.org Kennedy v. Bremerton: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-418 Scopes Trial History: https://www.history.com/topics/roaring-twenties/scopes-trial Mahmoud v. Montgomery County: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf Oklahoma Catholic Charter School Ruling: https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/05/split-supreme-court-blocks-first-religious-charter-school-in-oklahoma/

Leah, Melissa and Kate roll up their sleeves and unpack last Friday's huge day at the Court, starting with Mahmoud v. Taylor, the case that tested Sam Alito's ability to comprehend picture books. They also break down the outcomes of cases involving age verification for adult entertainment and the nondelegation doctrine. If you missed last Friday's emergency episode on the birthright citizenship case, you can find it here. Hosts' favorite things:Melissa: Jackson and Sotomayor dissents (Mahmoud v. Taylor, Trump v. CASA, Inc.); Outrageous (BritBox); Dream Count, Chimamanda Ngozi AdichieKate: Green-Wood Cemetery's Living Dead, Paige Williams (New Yorker); Dying for Sex (FX on Hulu); Chris Hayes' lecture at the Chautauqua InstitutionLeah: KBJ and Sotomayor dissents; The 21 Best Croissants in New York City Right Now, Mahira Rivers (NYT);  YELLOW, Washington, D.C. Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 10/4 – ChicagoLearn more: http://crooked.com/eventsOrder 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

SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S ⁠FREE NEWSLETTER⁠. Get the facts, without the spin. UNBIASED offers a clear, impartial recap of US news, including politics, elections, legal news, and more. Hosted by lawyer Jordan Berman, each episode provides a recap of current political events plus breakdowns of complex concepts—like constitutional rights, recent Supreme Court rulings, and new legislation—in an easy-to-understand way. No personal opinions, just the facts you need to stay informed on the daily news that matters. If you miss how journalism used to be, you're in the right place. In today's episode: What We Know About the Idaho Brush Fire Shooting (1:02) What's in the Senate's Version of the Bill? And What Can We Expect From Here? (3:41) Trade Talks with Canada Resume After Canada Folds (13:53) Supreme Court Releases Final Decisions of Term (18:50) Trump vs. CASA; Birthright Citizenship Injunction (21:00) Planned Parenthood vs. Medina; Planned Parenthood Cut from State Medicaid (29:16) Free Speech vs. Paxton; Age-Restriction Laws for Porn Sites (32:06) Mahmoud vs. Taylor; Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Classroom Instruction (35:19) Braidwood Management vs. Kennedy; HIV Prevention Medication (38:13) Quick Hitters: P. Diddy Deliberations Begin, Trump Admin Says Harvard Violated Civil Rights Laws, Supreme Court to Hear Campaign Finance Limitations Case, New App Reports ICE Sightings (44:09) Critical Thinking Segment (46:45) SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S FREE NEWSLETTER. Watch this episode on YouTube. Follow Jordan on Instagram and TikTok. All sources for this episode can be found here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In these episodes, the hosts break down two critical Supreme Court decisions reshaping American politics. The first ruling sharply limits activist district judges' power to issue sweeping national injunctions against presidential policies—a move that curtails what they call “judicial dictatorship” and restores constitutional boundaries. The second case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, defends parental rights by striking down mandatory transgender and LGBTQ storytime in Maryland schools, sparking fierce dissent from Justice Sotomayor, who warned public education itself could be doomed. Meanwhile, the hosts highlight the sudden disappearance of nationwide riots they claim were fueled by NGO funding and Democrat-aligned billionaires—an effort now under federal investigation. They spotlight Florida's “Alligator Alcatraz,” a vast Everglades detention center created by Ron DeSantis to deport migrants en masse, and criticize Republican leaders in other states for failing to help Trump enforce immigration law. Together, these stories illustrate the escalating battle over the courts, the classroom, the streets, and the border—and why the hosts argue 2024 is a defining moment for America's future.

The cataclysmic opinions from SCOTUS on Friday certainly suggest that the courts can no longer save us. In fact, in Trump v. CASA., we learned that it's somehow not actually the job of the courts to save us from blatant violations of our rights. With universal injunctions drop-kicked and district court judges sidelined, it's going to be nearly impossible to vindicate your rights in Trump's America. No rights are safe when the only way to get relief is to sue the government yourself. And yet in a definitely-not-planned-last-day-of-the-term-with-all-the-big-cases lineup, several other bad things happened as well. Hosts Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discuss all of Friday's big decisions including Mahmoud v. Taylor, which will allow parents to opt-out of having to hear about LGBTQ+ people in schools.  This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also 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. Also! Sign up for Slate's Legal Brief: the latest coverage of the courts and the law straight to your inbox.  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 cataclysmic opinions from SCOTUS on Friday certainly suggest that the courts can no longer save us. In fact, in Trump v. CASA., we learned that it's somehow not actually the job of the courts to save us from blatant violations of our rights. With universal injunctions drop-kicked and district court judges sidelined, it's going to be nearly impossible to vindicate your rights in Trump's America. No rights are safe when the only way to get relief is to sue the government yourself. And yet in a definitely-not-planned-last-day-of-the-term-with-all-the-big-cases lineup, several other bad things happened as well. Hosts Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discuss all of Friday's big decisions including Mahmoud v. Taylor, which will allow parents to opt-out of having to hear about LGBTQ+ people in schools.  This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also 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. Also! Sign up for Slate's Legal Brief: the latest coverage of the courts and the law straight to your inbox.  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 cataclysmic opinions from SCOTUS on Friday certainly suggest that the courts can no longer save us. In fact, in Trump v. CASA., we learned that it's somehow not actually the job of the courts to save us from blatant violations of our rights. With universal injunctions drop-kicked and district court judges sidelined, it's going to be nearly impossible to vindicate your rights in Trump's America. No rights are safe when the only way to get relief is to sue the government yourself. And yet in a definitely-not-planned-last-day-of-the-term-with-all-the-big-cases lineup, several other bad things happened as well. Hosts Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discuss all of Friday's big decisions including Mahmoud v. Taylor, which will allow parents to opt-out of having to hear about LGBTQ+ people in schools.  This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also 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. Also! Sign up for Slate's Legal Brief: the latest coverage of the courts and the law straight to your inbox.  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

Columbia University graduate, Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil reunited with his wife and met his newborn son after being released from over 100 days in ICE detention. After flying from Louisiana to New Jersey, Khalil told reporters, “If they threaten me with detention, even if they would kill me, I would still speak up for Palestine.”