Podcasts about National Lawyers Guild

On June 7, 2025, the Trump administration overstepped the state government and federalized the national guard in California. They were deployed to Los Angeles to suppress protests against the rampant raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In an unprecedented move, the administration also ordered marines to Los Angeles to join the guard. Clearing the FOG speaks with attorney James Branum of the Military Law Task Force, a branch of the National Lawyers Guild, about the history and legality of domestic troop deployments, the dangers of escalation and violations of civil rights, and what rights members of the military have to refuse to participate. Branum outlines the resources available to military members who want more information or need legal support. For more information, visit PopularResistance.org.

Guests:  Sonali Kolhatkar is an award winning journalist, broadcaster, writer, and author. She is the founder, host, and executive producer of Rising Up With Sonali that airs at KPFK, KPFA and the Pacifica Radio stations. She is also a Senior Editor at YES! Media, and the author most recently of Talking About Abolition: A Police-Free World is Possible. Ben Camacho is an investigative journalist and documentary photographer. His work focuses on state-sponsored violence and the communities impacted by it.  He is part of The Southlander, a new worker-led outlet in the LA area.  He has been covering the ICE raids in LA. Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, dean of the People's Academy of International Law and past president of the National Lawyers Guild. Her books include Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral and Geopolitical Issues.  Her articles can be found on Truthout.org. Mohamed Shehk is with the Arab Resource and Organizing Center. He talks about Trump's attacks on immigrants and his latest travel ban. AROC is organizing in the Bay Area to prepare, respond and resist these attacks.   Photo credit: Ben Camacho, ICE Raids, Compton, CA, 2025 The post Trump Deployment of the National Guard to LA appeared first on KPFA.

This week we spoke with Moira Meltzer-Cohen, an anarchist and lawyer with the National Lawyers Guild who practices mostly in New York City. For the hour, Mo talks about knowing ones rights and risks during interactions with law enforcement in the US during Trump 2.0, why even scofflaws should know some basic Bill of Rights trivia, info on warrants and house visits, airports and borders, and the importance of face-to-face practice with local lawyers who know the legal precedents on the ground in your jurisdiction. Links NLG Anti-Repression Hotline: 212.679.2811 NLG website: https://www.nlg.org/ CUNY CLEAR website: https://www.cunyclear.org/ instagram: https://www.instagram.com/cuny_clear/ LLWD episode with Mo on Federal Grand Juries Our past episodes on Grand Juries and Grand Jury Resistance Magic Words flyer to stick on the back of your door in case of police visits: https://thefinalstrawradio.noblogs.org/files/2025/05/Magic-Spell_2025.pdf Announcements June 11th, 2025 Asheville We're a week and a half out from the annual June 11th Day of Solidarity with Long Term Anarchist Prisoners. If you're in the Asheville area, Wednesday, June 11, 2025 at The Odd (1045 Haywood Rd near Firestorm in West AVL) . $10 door, opens at 7pm, music at 8pm Featuring XOR, Lo Wolf, Run Over By A Horse and Blake Hornsby with lots of free lit and prizes available including books, stickers, clothing, jewelry and more. More info on the mastodon post: https://kolektiva.social/@BlueRidgeABC/114589079620149305 Also coming soon at the BRABC website: https://brabc.noblogs.org/june-11th-2025/ Elsewhere If you're elsewhere, you can check out announced local events in your area by checking out the social media accounts for June11.Noblogs.Org, particularly their mastodon account on @june11@kolektiva.social Fire Ant Movement call to action Finally, the Fire Ant Movement released the following statement concerning June 11, 2025: "Fire ant movement defense, an organization that works to gather mass opposition to the political prosecutions of the stop cop city movement in atlanta, is calling for a “movement defense day of action” on June 11 to support stop cop city defendants and long term anarchist political prisoners. Their statement reads: This year, June 11th arrives amid growing repression: Pro-palestine protesters are facing indefinite detention in ice facilities, and in Georgia, the state continues its aggressive persecution of the stop cop city movement, with 61 activists currently facing RICO charges. In response, we call for a united front, to link the defense of the stop cop city struggle with the june 11th tradition of solidarity with long-term anarchist political prisoners.   We invite people to learn about Marius Mason and other long-term anarchist prisoners, host public events, drop banners, throw fundraisers, and take action to defend our movements for total liberation.”   Fire ant movement defense says that this will be the first of many movement defense days of action, drawing connections and lines of solidarity between movements fighting for liberation. You can find more information at fireantmovement.org and follow them on instagram, twitter or bluesky." They also wanted to point people to learn more at supportmariusmason.org and weelauneethefree.org . ... . .. Featured Track: Know Your Rights by The Clash from Combat Rock  

Amanda Yarusso, attorney for the National Lawyers Guild, gives a progressive response to the curfew crackdown targeting teens in a number of U.S. cities and offers a refresher course on how to deal with an encounter with police.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/tavis-smiley--6286410/support.

Trevor Loudon Reports – West drew a chilling parallel between America's current judicial system and Bolshevik justice. She cited Tom Homan's observation that illegal immigrants face no vetting entering the U.S. but intense scrutiny upon deportation — a hallmark of a system designed to enforce a dictatorial agenda, not equal justice. Influenced by Marxist organizations like the National Lawyers Guild...

Trevor Loudon Reports – West drew a chilling parallel between America's current judicial system and Bolshevik justice. She cited Tom Homan's observation that illegal immigrants face no vetting entering the U.S. but intense scrutiny upon deportation — a hallmark of a system designed to enforce a dictatorial agenda, not equal justice. Influenced by Marxist organizations like the National Lawyers Guild...

"Abolition and Capitalism: Breaking the Ties" w/ Andy “Hood Candidate” Williams Jr.Mass incarceration isn't just about crime and punishment—it's about profit. In this episode, we examine how capitalism fuels the prison-industrial complex, from private prisons to forced prison labor, and why abolition is inherently an economic justice movement. We'll also explore alternative systems that prioritize care over punishment and justice over profit.Andy “Hood Candidate” Williams, Jr., is an abolitionist, advocate, and social entrepreneur. He is the ambassador of AWJ Ministries, a marketplace ministry that sets people free from financial, physical, and spiritual bondage. He is the director of litigation, advocacy, and strategy at For the People: Kingdom Litigators, LLC, a public interest law firm. He has made two bids to become President of the United States, running with the Libertarian Party in 2020 and as an independent in 2024.His life mission is to set people free by any means necessary. To achieve his vision, Andy co-founded a series of social enterprises, including National Coalition for Prisoner Voting Rights, Jailhouse and Street lawyers Association, and the Radical Republicans. Andy serves on the committee for the National Lawyers Guild, New Illinois, and collaborates with many National Organizations and freedom led movements. He speaks regularly about freedom issues primarily around the current and formerly incarcerated rights and government accountability as he strives for freedom of all the people.Turning A Moment Ino A Moment Team:-Jay Love Host: Founder and Creator of Turning A Moment Into A Movement, The Justice for Gerard Movement, to learn more about The Justice for Gerard Movement go to: ⁠www.change.org/Justice4Gerard⁠Executive Board member of Michigan Coalition of Human Rights, G100 Prison Reforms & Reintegration Global Advisory Council Member -Rev. Tia Littlejohn: Behavioral Therapist, Founder of the Choice Zone, G100 Global Chair G100 Prison Reforms & Reintegration, Co-Chair & Executive Board member of Michigan Coalition of Human Rights, Author, www.thechoicezone.com-Trische' Duckworth: Executive Director/Founder of Survivors Speak, Founder/ Lead Consultant of Value Black Lives, Social Worker, Justice Advocate, Board member of Michigan Coalition of Human Rights,https://www.survivorsspeak.info-Alexanderia Hudges: Mental health and human rights Activist, Master's degree student at Wayne State University, and Board member with the Michigan Coalition of Human Rights https://linktr.ee/AlexandriaJHughes -Leslie McGraw: Poet, Writer, and Social Media and Voting Rights ActivistOwner, Les Go Social Media Marketing & Training (Les Go Social MM&T) Founder, Elbert Williams Voting Corner, Board Member and VOTE Caucus Leader, Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice (ICPJ) Communications Lead, Protectors of Equality in Government (PEG), Member, Allies of Mental Health of Washtenaw County www.elbertwilliamsvotingcorner.com***Turning A Moment Into A Movement Podcast MISSION:To bring awareness, organize, and create content that will be a resource that will aide families, communities, and those seeking Justice for WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS and Injustice. ...and advocating for Justice & Exoneration for GERARD HAYCRAFT. change.org/Justice4GerardI do not own the rights to the music.No copyright infringement intended.Musical Content Copyright Disclaimer (Fair Use) under section 107 Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes.

Send us a textCriminal defense usually includes keeping the burden with the prosecution to attempt to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. That approach can be turned upside down with activists who broadcast their actions loudly and clearly. Fairfax criminal lawyer Jonathan Katz first faced that situation when teaming with Ramsey Clark to defend four Plowshares activists who hammered on warplanes outfitted to fire depleted uranium missiles. The four defendants' openness about their actions made winning the destruction of property count a challenge to win at their jury trial, while pretrial, Jon still convinced the trial judge to dismiss the sabotage and sabotage conspiracy counts. Early in his criminal defense career, Jon Katz heard Gerald Lefcourt tell about how his client Abby Hoffman sought for Lefcourt to keep him out of jail so that he could pursue his activism. Jon wondered if he had missed the boat for defending activists until he was asked to defend the Plowshares. Ramsey Clark told Jon that the opportunities to defend activists are many, at least when doing so pro bono. When Jon asked about a lawyer(s) to turn to for suggestions for defending activists, Mark Goldstone's name immediately came up. Mark was delighted when he received a court appointment for an activist protesting in the Capitol against Ronald Reagan's policies in supporting anti-communist combatants in Nicaragua, and was even more delighted when the lawyers for the 130 other defendants withdrew their representation, leaving those defendants with Mark. When Jon met Mark, Mark led the demonstrations committee of the local National Lawyers Guild, which Jon Katz first joined because of its work for criminal defendants and immigrants, and its stand for racial justice and gender equality, but left several years later when the group became too doctrinaire, and even issued a call to support Muntadhar al-Zaid -- who in 2008 threw his shoes at George W. Bush in Iraq -- and called to donate shoes for needy people, with not a peep against violence that was part of the shoe throwing. Over the decades, Mark has become a go-to lawyer for political activists -- including supporting their First Amendment free expression rights -- and for judges seeking criminal defense lawyers for appointments for such defense. Mark is a devoted, principled and caring person and attorney. Jon has great respect for him.This podcast with Fairfax, Virginia criminal / DUI lawyer Jon Katz is playable on all devices at podcast.BeatTheProsecution.com. For more information, visit https://BeatTheProsecution.com or contact us at info@BeatTheProsecution.com, 703-383-1100 (calling), or 571-406-7268 (text). Hear our prior podcasts, at https://podcast.BeatTheProsecution.com/If you like what you hear on our Beat the Prosecution podcast, please take a moment to post a review at our Apple podcasts page (with stars only, or else also with a comment) at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/beat-the-prosecution/id1721413675

     On this show we welcome back Zane McNeill to discuss their new edited collection: Building Multispecies Resistance Against Exploitation: Stories from the Frontline of Labor and Animal Rights (published by Peter Lang, 2024). This incredible collection of contributions from activists and scholars about the structures of violence and oppression that are shared by human and non-human labourers working and dying in necropolitical facilities. The book also asks readers to consider the intersection between class and species, race, gender and other categories of oppression, and the ways that the contemporary Animal Activist Non-profit Sector (AANS) upholds hierarchies in its mission towards animal liberation. There are some powerful examples of successful social and political campaigns that we can draw from and that can help us to build strategic alliances and coalitions between social movements and political subjects.    Zane McNeill is a scholar-activist, 15-year vegan, and National Lawyers Guild's Animal Liberation Committee chair. They have worked closely with the Institute of Critical Animal Studies (ICAS) and have published chapters in ICAS collections, including Vegans on Speciesism and Ableism: Ecoability Voices for Disability and Animal Justice and Expanding the Critical Animal Studies Imagination: Essays on Solidarity and Total Liberation. He has also edited Queer and Trans Voices: Achieving Liberation Through Consistent Anti-Oppression, Vegan Entanglements: Dismantling Racial and Carceral Capitalism, and Building Multispecies Resistance Against Exploitation: Stories from the Frontlines of Labor and Animal Rights.     The music we played on the show:  Álmatlanság by Magashegyi Underground L by Laveda I exist, I exist, I exist by Flatsound

This week we're featuring three segments. First up, you'll a conversation I had with Asphalt, a supporter of a recent federal grand jury resister in Charleston, South Carolina. [00:04:53 - 00:36:28] After that Cyprus Hartford, the grand jury resister, speaks for herself and reads her statement of resistance and here's her GoFundMe. [00:36:28 - 00:40:39] Finally, you can find an interview that Ian did with Marisa Holmes and Molly of the Metropolitan Anarchist Coordinating Committee about their recent anarchist film festival. [00:42:32 - 01:01:29] Then you'll hear Sean Swain's review of the presidential debate [01:02:06 - 01:09:16] Past GJ Eps Steve Martinez resists NoDAPL GJ in 2021 Jeremy Hammond resists Wikileaks-related GJ in 2019 & 2020 Chelsea Manning resists Wikileaks-related GJ in 2019 Katie Yow resists NC GJ in 2017 Standing Rock GJ resistance in 2016 Jerry Koch resists NYC GJ in 2013 Resistance to GJ in Pacific Northwest in 2013 ( 1 & 2) San Francisco GJ with Ian Coldwater in 2012 Federal Grand Juries By way of introduction to this first segment, I'd like to remind people that none of the people speaking about grand juries here are lawyers, but we are sharing information we've gotten from lawyers and legal experts to the best of our abilities. I'm going to read a bit from the website NCResistsTheGrandJury.Wordpress.Com: What is a Grand Jury? In the federal legal system, the grand jury is used to decide whether someone should be charged (“indicted”) for a serious crime. The grand jury hears evidence presented by the prosecutor: the U.S. Attorney. The grand jury uses subpoenas to gather this evidence. It can subpoena documents, physical evidence, and witnesses to testify. The “special” federal grand jury, created in 1970, can be used to investigate “possible” organized criminal activity rather than a specific crime. The California legal system also has grand juries, but it is optional whether criminal prosecutions are initiated by grand jury indictment, or by a complaint by the District Attorney and preliminary hearing before a judge. How is a Grand Jury Different Than a Trial Jury? Unlike the “petit” jury, which is used to determine guilt in a trial, a grand jury consists of 16 to 23 jurors who are not screened for bias. The purpose of the grand jury is not to determine guilt or innocence, but to decide whether there is probable cause to prosecute someone for a felony crime. The grand jury operates in secrecy and the normal rules of evidence do not apply. The prosecutor runs the proceedings and no judge is present. Defense lawyers are not allowed to be present in the grand jury room and cannot present evidence, but may be available outside the room to consult with witnesses. The prosecutor and the grand jury members may not reveal what occurred in the grand jury room and witnesses cannot obtain a transcript of their testimony. How Has the Grand Jury Been Used by the State? Because of their broad subpoena powers and secretive nature, grand juries have been used by the government to gather information on political movements and to disrupt those movements by causing fear and mistrust. The grand jury lends itself to being used for improper political investigation due in part to the prosecutor's ability to question witnesses without regard for rules that prohibit irrelevant, unreliable or unlawfully obtained evidence. Those called before the grand jury may be compelled to answer any question, even those relating to lawful personal and political activities. That information has been used by the government as a basis to conduct further surveillance and disruption of political dissent. When used against political movements, the grand jury causes fear and mistrust because persons who refuse to answer questions about their First Amendment political activities, friends and associates may be jailed for the life of the grand jury: up to 18 months. If a witness asserts their Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, they may be forced to accept immunity or go to jail for contempt. Even a witness who attempts to cooperate can be jailed if minor inconsistencies are found in their testimony. Such a perjury charge may stand even when the grand jury fails to hand down any indictment for what it was ostensibly investigating. The grand jury is a complicated and opaque process, by design.  Our movements have decades of experience resisting grand juries, and there are resources available to learn more and support those who resist. If you have been contacted by federal law enforcement, the National Lawyers Guild has a national federal defense hotline at 212-679-2811. . ... . .. Featured Track: Setting Sun (instrumental) by The Chemical Brothers from Setting Sun

After more than a decade of sexual harassment, coerced encounters, and psychological abuse by San Diego vice, Kata Pierce-Morgan and her fellow Les Girls dancers were ready to tap into their stripper energy and fight back. If polite society and the legal system were not going to help them end the abuse, then they would take matters into their own hands. If no one was willing to believe a bunch of strippers, then Kata would install video cameras to prove their claims. If the rat pack cops thought they could terrorize them into silence, then they would find their voice and speak up. And if internal affairs refused to take their complaints seriously, then Kata would simply have to come up with a new game plan. Prepare for Chapter 5, Fighting Back, or the Rise of Stripper Energy. In this chapter: Kata Pierce-Morgan, poet, activist, former dancer, current owner of Les Girls Theater John Barriage, lawyer who represented James Morgan and Les Girls in 1980s Kate Yavenditti, lawyer and co-founder of the County's Task Force on Domestic Violence, also involved with WomenOccupySan Diego and the National Lawyers Guild. J.W. August, journalist Pepper, former dancer and cashier at Les Girls Theater Mel, current manager of Les Girls Theater Credits: Beth Accomando, Producer/Host Christopher Maue, Videographer/Lighting Designer Kurt Kohnen, Sound Designer Phil Nenna, Designer/Animator Sanns Dixon, Videographer Amy Fan and Gaby Moreno, Assistants David Washburn, Editor More information at kpbs.org/stripperenergy #strippers #adultentertainment #lesgirlstheater #sandiegohistory #1980s #vice #policeabuse #fighting back Explicit content.

How dare a stripper, a fringe woman, not stay silent and compliant as vice officers sexually harassed her ... and worse. And how dare Kata Pierce-Morgan challenge stereotypes and fight back? But Les Girls Theater had a history of fighting back starting with its owner James Morgan who spoke up against police abuse to a county Grand Jury in the hopes that the California Attorney General would crack down on the San Diego Police Department's Rat Pack. Kata was a midwestern Catholic girl who believed, like her late husband Jim, in not being a silent bystander. Even if you were a dancer at Les Girls. After all, Jim had won a groundbreaking victory over censorship in the late 1960s. But as the 60s became the 70s, Kata and her fellow dancers faced an onslaught of police raids, nude interrogations and coerced encounters. In this chapter: Kata Pierce-Morgan, poet, activist, former dancer, current owner of Les Girls Theater John Barriage, lawyer who represented James Morgan and Les Girls in 1980s Kate Yavenditti, lawyer and co-founder of the County's Task Force on Domestic Violence, also involved with WomenOccupySan Diego and the National Lawyers Guild. J.W. August, journalist Pepper, former dancer and cashier at Les Girls Theater Mel, current manager of Les Girls Theater Credits: Beth Accomando, Producer/Host Christopher Maue, Videographer/Lighting Designer Kurt Kohnen, Sound Designer Phil Nenna, Designer/Animator Sanns Dixon, Videographer Amy Fan and Gaby Moreno, Assistants David Washburn, Editor More information at kpbs.org/stripperenergy #strippers #adultentertainment #lesgirlstheater #sandiegohistory #1980s #vice #policeabuse Explicit content.

National Lawyers Guild former President Marjorie Cohn: International Criminal Court Targets Both Israeli & Hamas Leaders for War CrimesPeople's Tribunal conveners Crystal Cavalier-Keck and Jason Crazy Bear Keck: People's Tribunal Convened to Expose Mountain Valley Pipeline's Violation of the Rights of NatureJust Associates' Global Solidarity & Learning Coordinator Laura Carlsen: Claudia Sheinbaum Wins Historic Election as Mexico's First Female PresidentBob Nixon's Under-reported News SummaryWho will form South Africa's next government?Is bird flu destined to be next pandemic?Proud Boys re-emerge to rally around TrumpVisit our website at BTLonline.org for more information, in-depth interviews, related links, transcripts and subscribe to our BTL Weekly Summary and/or podcasts. New episodes every Wednesday at 12 noon ET, website updated Wednesdays after 4 p.m. ETProduced by Squeaky Wheel Productions: Scott Harris, Melinda Tuhus, Bob Nixon, Anna Manzo, Susan Bramhall, Jeff Yates and Mary Hunt. Theme music by Richard Hill and Mikata.

* International Criminal Court Targets Both Israeli & Hamas Leaders for War Crimes; Marjorie Cohn, prof. emerita Thomas Jefferson School of Law, past pres. National Lawyers Guild; Producer: Scott Harris. * People's Tribunal Convened to Expose Mountain Valley Pipeline's Violation of the Rights of Nature; Dr. Crystal Cavalier-Keck, convener of the People's Tribunal and her husband Jason Crazy Bear Keck; Producer: Melinda Tuhus. * Claudia Sheinbaum Wins Historic Election as Mexico's First Female President; Laura Carlsen, Coordinator of Global Solidarity & Learning, with Just Associates in Mexico City; Producer: Scott Harris

National Lawyers Guild former President Marjorie Cohn:  Arms Embargo and Sanctions Can Hold Israeli & Hamas Leaders Accountable for War CrimesPeople's Tribunal conveners Crystal Cavalier-Keck and Jason Crazy Bear Keck: People's Tribunal Convened to Expose Mountain Valley Pipeline's Violation of the Rights of NatureJust Associates' Global Solidarity & Learning Coordinator Laura Carlsen: Claudia Sheinbaum Wins Historic Election as Mexico's First Female PresidentBob Nixon's Under-reported News SummaryWho will form South Africa's next government?Is bird flu destined to be next pandemic?Proud Boys re-emerge to rally around TrumpVisit our website at BTLonline.org for more information, in-depth interviews, related links and transcripts and to sign up for our BTL Weekly Summary. New episodes every Wednesday at 12 noon ET, website updated Wednesdays after 4 p.m. ETProduced by Squeaky Wheel Productions: Scott Harris, Melinda Tuhus, Bob Nixon, Anna Manzo, Susan Bramhall, Jeff Yates and Mary Hunt. Theme music by Richard Hill and Mikata.

Today on the show: We'll speak to the president of the National Lawyers Guild, and to Chip Gibbons of Defending Rights & Dissent about the resurgence of police power in the face of the new national student movement against genocide in Palestine.  Also we'll have a report from UCLA in the aftermath of an attack by a violent pro-Israel contingent, and we'll talk to the author of a new book Resisting the Right-Wing Attack on Academic Freedom The Right to Learn: Resisting the Right-Wing Attack on Academic Freedom The post A Nationwide Spree of Police Violence Against Genocide Protestors appeared first on KPFA.

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear McKesson v. Doe. The case involves a police officer injured during a Black Lives Matter protest after the police murder of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, La in 2016. The injured police officer sued the organizer DeRay McKesson for damages. Last year, the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit sided with the officer. The Supreme Court, for a second time, declined to hear the case. The impact of the Supreme Court's decision to decline to hear the case is potentially devastating for organizers of mass protests. In our latest, Scott talks with movement lawyer Maggie Ellinger-Locke about the case and the precedent it may be setting up. Bio// Maggie Ellinger-Locke, she/her, is a movement lawyer based in the Washington DC area, living on the stolen land of the Anacostan and Piscataway peoples. She works for the Thurgood Marshall Civil Rights Center at Howard University School of Law, where she helps train the next generation of movement lawyers. Previously she worked as a staff attorney at Greenpeace USA, and has also worked in public policy and private practice. She is currently co-chair of the DC chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. --------------------------------------------------- Outro- "Green and Red Blues" by Moody Links// +Supreme Court declines to hear appeal from Black Lives Matter organizer facing damages suit (https://bit.ly/3xNTh5K) Follow Green and Red//+G&R Linktree: ⁠⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/greenandredpodcast⁠⁠⁠+Our rad website: ⁠⁠⁠https://greenandredpodcast.org/⁠⁠⁠+We're part of the Labor Podcast Network: ⁠⁠⁠https://www.laborradionetwork.org/⁠⁠+ Join our Discord community ( https://discord.gg/AzY3gmpm )Support the Green and Red Podcast//+Become a Patron at https://www.patreon.com/greenredpodcast+Or make a one time donation here: ⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/DonateGandR⁠⁠⁠This is a Green and Red Podcast (@PodcastGreenRed) production. Produced by Bob (@bobbuzzanco) and Scott (@sparki1969). “Green and Red Blues" by Moody. Editing by Scott.

This week on Talk World Radio we are discussing the documentary Beyond Bars by Brave New Films. We have two guests. Robert Greenwald is the filmmaker. He is is an award-winning producer and director of more than 60 features, television movies and miniseries. His work has garnered awards from organizations including the ACLU and Physicians for Social Responsibility, in addition to an Office of the Americas Activist in the Trenches award, a Liberty Hill Upton Sinclair Award, the Robert Wood Johnson Award, and a Peacemaker Award from The Los Angeles Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. Chesa Boudin is the subject of the film. He was District Attorney of San Francisco from January 8, 2020 to July 8, 2022, and is now the founding executive director of the Criminal Law & Justice Center at University of California, Berkeley, School of Law. Boudin was born in 1980 to Weather Underground members Kathy Boudin and Dvid Gilbert who were convicted of murder and went to prison when Chesa Boudin was 14-months old. Watch Beyond Bars here: https://form.123formbuilder.com/6591824/beyondbars

Connecting veganism to other justice causes is critical to our success and our guest today recognized this at a very young age. Zane McNeill is a scholar-activist, chair of the National Lawyers Guild's Animal Liberation Committee, and was the co-manager of the collective Right for Animal Rights Activists. They have worked closely with the Institute of Critical Animal Studies (ICAS) and have published chapters in ICAS collections, including Vegans on Speciesism and Ableism: Ecoability Voices for Disability and Animal Justice and Expanding the Critical Animal Studies Imagination: Essays on Solidarity and Total Liberation. They have also edited Queer and Trans Voices: Achieving Liberation Through Consistent Anti-Oppression, Vegan Entanglements: Dismantling Racial and Carceral Capitalism, and Building Multispecies Resistance Against Exploitation: Stories from the Frontlines of Labor and Animal Rights (forthcoming, Peter Lang Publishing).Zane will help us to unpack new terms like “consistent anti-oppression” and “total liberation” as well as “carceral veganism” where animal activists align with agencies to criminalize and deport people in marginalized communities of color when we should be targeting the system of oppression itself. They discuss the parallels of body autonomy issues for humans and non-humans. Zane addresses everything from micro aggressions experienced by animal activists within the movement to larger, structural issues of oppression. Join us for this important discussion.Resources:Zane's Book Vegan Entanglements Hope for the Animals PodcastCompassionate LivingCompassionate Living's YouTube Page 

Here's your local news for Monday, February 19, 2024:We get a democracy advocate's perspective on Wisconsin's new voting maps - signed into law today,Investigate how the maps will affect the Madison area,Share the government's calendar for this week,Mark the anniversary of the National Lawyers Guild's founding,Unveil a new mixology feature,Review two new movies,And much more.

On January 11 and 12, the International Court of Justice, also called the World Court, will hear testimony in South Africa's case charging the state of Israel with genocide. Organizations around the world are mobilizing to press their governments to support South Africa publicly and through Declarations of Intervention in the hope that Israel will be held accountable and that effective actions will be taken to protect the rights and lives of people in Palestine. Clearing the FOG speaks with Suzanne Adely, president of the National Lawyers Guild, about the Genocide Convention, the new International Coalition to Stop Genocide in Palestine and the risk of a broader war in Western Asia. For More information, visit PopularResistance.org.

In this free edited version of the weekly "Unauthorized Disclosure" podcast, Kevin Gosztola speaks with Azadeh Shahshahani. Azadeh is the legal and advocacy director for Project South and a past president of the National Lawyers Guild. In our conversation, Azadeh discusses the deactivation of Palestinian activist or solidarity groups on university campuses, legal scholars and law students facing repercussions for speaking out in support of Palestinians, and the cruel indifference of the Biden administration to violence in Gaza (as well as the West Bank). BECOME A SUBSCRIBER: Go to patreon.com/UnauthorizedDisclosure or subscribe at TheDissenter.org

On November 4, people from across the country will gather in Washington, DC for the 15th Annual March to the White House organized by the Black is Back Coalition. Clearing the FOG speaks with Chairman Omali Yeshitela about the theme of this year's march, building an anti-colonial free speech movement in solidarity with peoples who struggle around the world. Yeshitela is one of the Uhuru 3, who are facing 15 years in jail for their activism. Yeshitela speaks about the historic ties between the black and Palestinian liberation movements. Then, Marjorie Cohn, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, joins the program to speak about a new legal brief on the complicity of the United States with Israel in its commission of genocide and other war crimes. For more information, visit PopularResistance.org.

Dr. Jeanette Rowley holds a PhD in Law and has a special interest in veganism and human rights. She has published widely and presented globally on the subject of legal protection for vegans. She founded and chaired The Vegan Society's International Rights Network. Last year, she and Dr. Carlo Prisco edited Law and Veganism: International Perspectives on the Human Right to Freedom of Conscience (2022). Dr. Rowley is the driving force behind a decade of symposiums on vegan rights. She has given evidence in Mr. Casamitjana's case and gave oral evidence for Canadian firefighter Adam Knauff. Astrid Prevost is an ethical vegan and aspiring dietician. She battled bulimia for several years, until veganism gave Astrid the strength to create boundaries; to reject what she didn't want; to say “no.” In respecting other animals, she found self-respect. Those boundaries are being tested now, by a cooking class that demands Astrid use animal products or risk failing. Astrid offered to substitute animal ingredients with vegan ones and submitted a doctor's note. When both were rejected, she initiated a lawsuit in France for discrimination. Tamara Bedić, is an ethical vegan, animal rescuer, employment attorney. Tamara is a past-President of the National Lawyers Guild, NYC chapter. She is chair of the Animal Rights Committee. When she's not championing the rights of women in the workplace, she is organizing webinars or rescuing birds in distress. She is ‘Mom' to two FIV+ tom cats.     Links mentioned in the podcast: 1. FREE WEBINAR: Expanding Vegan Rights, Tuesday, October 17, 2023, 12 – 1pm EDT Four plaintiffs and three lawyers will discuss vegan discrimination cases in the U.S., UK, Canada and France. The laws of these countries differ, but the common goal is having ethical veganism recognized as a “creed” or “ethical belief” worthy of protection from discrimination. The ethical vegans who will be speaking about their individual cases are: Jerold Friedman, Jordi Casamitjana, Adam Knauff and Astrid Prevost. 2. Crowdfunding for Mathias, who will also speak on the above October 17th webinar: https://www.ulule.com/droit-detre-vegane/ Astrid shares this message with us: I'd like to take this opportunity to let you know about this existential project supported by the AVF: in many collective catering places, vegans are prevented from eating according to their philosophy, and attempts are made to force them to consume animal products. This is what happened to Mathias during a preventive incarceration. He was left with no access to vegan meals during 11 months, and sometimes could not eat anything for days as all dishes were cooked with dairy or eggs. Although he was in perfect health before being held in custody, he came out of detention malnourished and with several nutrient deficiencies. Today, Mathias and his lawyer are taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights: if they win, this will have consequences in all 46 member countries of the Council of Europe. Beyond the prison setting, access to vegan meals will be recognized as a fundamental right. We need your help to turn our right into a reality : we have a crowdfunding going on to finance Maître Olivier Peter's work, a lawyer specializing in European and international law. Every euro counts: please support us, and spread the word! His lawyer, Olivier Peter, defended a lot of antispeciest and does it pro bono in front of national courts, but going to an international court like the ECHR requires a lot more work, and that's why there is this crowdfunding.  

Tamara Bedić, Jerold Friedman, Jordi Casamitjana: Vegan Discrimination Cases, Part I Tamara Bedić, is an ethical vegan, animal rescuer, employment attorney. Tamara is a past-President of the National Lawyers Guild, NYC chapter. She is chair of the Animal Rights Committee. When she's not championing the rights of women in the workplace, she is organizing webinars or rescuing birds in distress. She is ‘Mom' to two FIV+ tom cats. Jerold “Jerry” Friedman is vegan, an animal rights activist, and California attorney. Jerry was not yet a law student when he challenged South California Permanente Group (commonly known as Kaiser Permanente) for rescinding their employment offer after he refused a mandatory MMR vaccine. Later, as co-plaintiff with Viva!USA (the American arm of Viva!UK), Jerry won a lawsuit against Adidas from selling shoes made of kangaroo skin in California that violated California's endangered species law. Jerry is founder of the Animal Law Practitioner listserv that helps animal attorneys from across the USA collaborate and a long-time member of the National Lawyers Guild. Jordi Casamitjana is an ethical vegan, activist and author of (among other things) Ethical Vegan: A Personal and Political Journey to Change the World. Born in Spain but living in the UK, Jordi is a zoologist with a special love for wasps. Jordi was surprised to discover his pension fund at League Against Cruel Sports was supporting unethical industries– e.g. tobacco, oil and pharmaceutical companies that tested on animals. This is the official link of the rulings on his case. Links mentioned in the podcast: 1. FREE WEBINAR: Expanding Vegan Rights, Tuesday, October 17, 2023, 12 – 1pm EDT Four plaintiffs and three lawyers will discuss vegan discrimination cases in the U.S., UK, Canada and France. The laws of these countries differ, but the common goal is having ethical veganism recognized as a “creed” or “ethical belief” worthy of protection from discrimination. The ethical vegans who will be speaking about their individual cases are: Jerold Friedman, Jordi Casamitjana, Adam Knauff and Astrid Prevost. 2. Tyson and Perdue Are Facing Child Labor Investigations

This special episode is a recording of Yvette's lecture on "How To Be a Movement Lawyer," for the National Lawyers Guild and Immigration Law Students Association chapters at the University of Arizona law school. Yvette critiques mainstream impact litigation techniques, shares how she became a movement lawyer, and explains the critical role that the Radio Cachimbona plays in her movement lawyering. To support the podcast, become a patron and get exclusive access to the #litreview online book club for as little as $3 a month: https://patreon.com/radiocachimbonaFollow @radiocachimbona on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook Email radiocachimbona@gmail.com to book Yvette for similar guest lectures at your campus

"Project Elephant" Hosts: Darren Weeks, Vicky Davis Website for the show: https://governamerica.com Vicky's website: https://thetechnocratictyranny.com COMPLETE SHOW NOTES AND CREDITS AT: https://governamerica.com/radio/radio-archives/22523-govern-america-july-1-2023-project-elephant Listen LIVE every Saturday at 11AM Eastern time at http://radio.governamerica.com Text GOVERN to 80123 to be notified of live transmissions that may occur outside of our regularly-scheduled Saturday broadcasts. These transmissions will occur when/if circumstances warrant.Wildfires continue to rage in Canada. Could weather modification and geoengineering play a role in the drought conditions and rampant wildfires that are leaving much of the nation blanketed in smoke? Solar panels destroyed by hail. Conflicting globalist agendas: as the "climate change" pushers promote solar, Bill Gates and the Europeans look to block the sun through geoengineering. Bill Gates genetically-modified mosquitoes, released to "vaccinate" people may be causing new disease. Netherlands are continuing to push for the shutting down of farms under the guise of "sustainability". Electric vehicles are damaging roads at twice the rate of their internal combustion counterparts. Ford took "green" government cash and then promtly laid off 1,000 employees. France under attack by rioting migrants. Rep. Adam Kinzinger confirms troublemakers at Proud Boys rally were feds. National Lawyers Guild's unsavory ties. John Sullivan a.k.a. JaydenX, the left-wing BLM/Antifa agitator who dressed up as a Trump supporter and entered the capitol and broke things on January 6, was released from jail and allowed to leave the country. The persecution of Miles Guo and the secret CCP police that are operating inside the United States. Communist Chinese front companies are buying up land and building businesses throughout rural America. Mexico fights to keep U.S.-Canada GMO corn out of their country. COVID shot bioweapon continues to kill. Fauci's top advisor, Dr. David Morens, apparently used private e-mail to avoid FOIA. Also, the weaponization of CISA, mutiny in Russia, a code of ethics for the Supreme Court, and more.

This episode is focused on the campaign to free Sundiata Jawanza. Sundiata Jawanza is a New Afrikan, abolitionist and human rights activist currently incarcerated in the South Carolina. Today we have four guests, Audrey Bomse and Jenipher Jones both co-chairs of the Mass Incarceration Committee of the National Lawyers Guild, Darren Mack of Prison Lives Matter, and Roc, the Jailhouse Lawyers Speak Housing Program Coordinator.  In this discussion J shares a bit about the Sundiata Jawanza's freedom campaign, a bit about the case itself, and primarily we focus on a political discussion of Sundiata Jawanza's work in part discussing his individual contributions, but primarily through the political work that he and his comrades have done through Jailhouse Lawyers Speak. As part of that discussion, we also discuss the overall importance of jailhouse lawyers to the legal education and opportunities at freedom and defense of human rights within US prisons.  We want to ask all of our listeners to please get involved, to connect with Sundiata Jawanza, and to support his freedom campaign by writing the parole board on his behalf. Full details on how to do that can be found at SundiataJawanza.com. To learn more about Jailhouse Lawyers Speak. People can write JLS by mail at:  JAILHOUSE LAWYERS SPEAK PO BOX 673 MERCER, PA 16137 Or email jailhouselawyersspeak@protonmail.com or outthemud.jls@gmail.com Some prior episodes with (or in solidarity with) Jailhouse Lawyers Speak: Jailhouse Lawyers Speak's 2020 Call To Action  “In The Spirit of Abolition” - Jailhouse Lawyers Speak Calls For Shut ‘Em Down Demonstrations "Building Infrastructure: Identifying Tactics for Sustainable Formations": A Panel Discussion Supporting Jailhouse Lawyers Speak's #SHUTEMDOWN2021 Demos

GORDON CHANG, Contributor, Gatestone Institute, Newsweek, Author, “The Coming Collapse of China,” “Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes the World, “Losing South Korea,” and “The Great US-China Tech War,” @Gordongchang Is there a new partnership brewing between China and Russia? Is a war with China "coming home"? How is the Belt and Road progressing? Are the Paris Accords slowing climate change? KYLE SHIDELER, Director/Senior Analyst for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism at Center for Security Policy Updates on the Nashville Covenant School shooting   Are the police going to release the shooter's manifesto? Was the shooting politically motivated? What is the National Lawyers Guild?

What connects the disruptive protests against a conservative judge's speech to Stanford Law and the arrests of over two dozen demonstrators outside Atlanta? Both involved people aligned with the National Lawyers Guild, a radical-left association of attorneys, law students, legal workers, and jailhouse lawyers. Joining me to discuss the NLG is our colleague Robert Stilson, […]

What connects the disruptive protests against a conservative judge's speech to Stanford Law and the arrests of over two dozen demonstrators outside Atlanta? Both involved people aligned with the National Lawyers Guild, a radical-left association of attorneys, law students, legal workers, and jailhouse lawyers. Joining me to discuss the NLG is our colleague Robert Stilson, who has written and researched extensively on the history of the Guild. Links: https://capitalresearch.org/article/national-lawyers-guild-part-1/ https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/national-lawyers-guild/ https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/national-lawyers-guild-foundation/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/atlanta-cop-city-attacks-georgia-police-training-site-63c4cf40 https://www.wsj.com/articles/struggle-session-at-stanford-law-school-federalist-society-kyle-duncan-circuit-court-judge-steinbach-4f8da19e?mod=article_inline Follow us on our Socials: Twitter: @capitalresearch Instagram: @capitalresearchcenter Facebook: www.facebook.com/capitalresearchcenter YouTube: @capitalresearchcenter

Marjorie Cohn, professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild explains that Israel is guilty of apartheid, a crime against humanity, according to 2 international treaties: the Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute.

Friends,At President Biden's State of the Union address last week, Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene repeatedly yelled “Liar!,” Tennessee Republican Rep. Andy Ogles shouted, “It's your fault!,” and another Republican yelled “B******t!”Fourteen years ago, Republican Rep. Joe Wilson was formally rebuked by the whole House after shouting “you lie” at Obama.Yet now, anything goes.Meanwhile, Rep. George Santos remains in Congress despite mounting revelations of outright lies, fabrications, and shady deals that years ago would have sent a member of Congress packing.We've also just learned about Jared Kushner's quid pro quo with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). As Middle East adviser to his father-in-law, Kushner gave MBS everything he wanted — Trump's first trip abroad, permission to blockade Qatar, a pass on imprisoning leading Saudi citizens until they paid him billions and another on killing and dismembering journalist Jamal Khashoggi (as Trump later put it, “I saved his [MBS's] ass.”).Then, after Kushner left the White House, MBS reciprocated by putting $2 billion from the sovereign wealth fund he chaired into Kushner's private equity company.Where's the shame?Elon Musk's concern about the dwindling number of people seeing his tweets prompted the zillionaire to convene a group of engineers last Tuesday to discover why his engagement numbers were tanking. When one of the company's two remaining principal engineers explained it was likely due to waning public interest in Musk's antics, Musk fired the engineer.We used to call such behavior shameless. Now, it's just what the rich and powerful do.Shame once reenforced social norms. Through most of human history, survival depended on extended families, clans, and tribes. To be shamed and ostracized for violating the common good often meant death.Charles Darwin, in his book The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, thought shame may have evolved as a way to maintain social trust necessary for the survival of a group and, therefore, of its members.In a 2012 paper, psychologists Matthew Feinberg and Dacher Keltner and sociologist Robb Willer found evidence that shame and embarrassment function as a kind of “nonverbal apology” for having done something that violates social norms. A display of embarrassment shows others that the embarrassed person is still aware of the group's expectations and is still committed to the group's well-being.Four centuries ago, public shaming included scarlet A's. “Ignominy is universally acknowledged to be a worse punishment than death,” wrote Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence who also sought to put an end to public stocks and whipping posts.A more recent version of public shaming occurred in 1954 when Joseph Welch, then chief council for the U.S. Army, stood up to Sen. Joseph McCarthy before a nationwide television audience. During a hearing in which McCarthy accused the army of harboring communists, McCarthy attacked one of Welch's young assistants for having once belonged to the National Lawyers Guild, which McCarthy considered a communist front.Welch responded: “Until this moment, Senator, I think I have never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness …. Have you no sense of decency, sir?” Millions of Americans watching the proceedings from their living rooms saw McCarthy as the dangerous bully he was. By shaming him, Welch shamed America for having tolerated McCarthy and the communist witch hunt he was leading. It was the beginning of the end of McCarthy's reign of terror.But today, shamelessness has gained a certain elan. Audacity, insolence, and impudence are welcomed. Irreverence is celebrated. We hoot when someone gives society the bird. Many Americans love Donald Trump's loutishness. Meanwhile, instead of being directed at behavior that undermines the common good, shame is now often deployed against people who don't fit in. Social media unleashes torrents of invective on people for little more than saying something silly or looking different or being socially inept. Shaming like this can cause a sensitive teenager to take his or her life.Why are those who violate social norms now treated like Wild West outlaw heroes, while those who are different are ridiculed? Why are bullies now applauded while those at the margin are ostracized? This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit robertreich.substack.com/subscribe

On today's show, a conversation with Dr Rabab Abdulhadi, who has recently won a major national award from the Middle East Studies Association for her lifetime of work.Dr. Abdulhadi is an organic intellectual and a renowned scholar-activist. She is the founding director and Senior Scholar of Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Studies (AMED) at the College of Ethnic Studies at San Francisco State University (SFSU).Her publications include the influential and much-cited articles, “The Palestinian Women's Autonomous Movement: Emergence, Dynamics & Challenges” (1998) and “Tread Lightly: Teaching Gender and Sexuality in Time of War” (2005); as well as the more recent, “Framing Resistance Call & Response: Reading Assata Shakur's Black Revolutionary Radicalism in Palestine” (2018), and Israeli Settler Colonialism in Context: Celebrating (Palestinian) Death and Normalizing Gender and Sexual Violence (2019).In 2017, Dr. Abdulhadi, along with Suzanne Adely (President of the National Lawyers Guild), Angela Davis, and Selma James (feminist activist and partner of the Black radical thinker C.L.R. James), co-authored an article in Mondoweiss titled, “Confronting apartheid has everything to do with feminism."As a community organizer, she co-founded the Palestine Solidarity Committee and the Union of Palestinian Women's Associations in North America; and served as a founding member of the recently launched Palestinian Feminist Collective.In our conversation we talk about the institutional pressures she has worked under, and the slew of harassing frivolous lawsuits that have been leveled at her, and others who teach about Palestine, and the connections between Palestine work and all struggles for justice.  We end by talking about the ways we can take on the burden of activism and lean on and learn from each other in struggle.   

In our first episode of Season 2, we delved into the Biden Administration's recent new immigration policies, which include “parole” programs for a limited number of people from 4 countries: Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Last season we talked about the administration's other specialized parole program for Ukrainians, as well as humanitarian parole for Afghan.Since our last episode went live, a number of states filed a lawsuit taking aim at some of these parole programs. Here with us today to talk about the lawsuit is Victoria Neilson, Supervising Attorney at the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild.

Di Barbadillo is a community organizer who works alongside Black Lives Matter LA, the Check the Sheriff Coalition, and the Philippines-US Solidarity Organization (PUSO SoCal). In addition, Di is an active Legal Observer and Co-President of the Executive Board for the National Lawyers Guild, Los Angeles. Di was born and raised in Los Angeles and is second-generation Filipina-American. She went to college at UCLA and law school at The University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law. In her free time, she likes to organize pop-up markets for local small businesses owned by people of color. She is a power house and we are so happy to have her on CTN with JD todayWhat You Will Hear:IntroductionHow Di's education facilitated her activismDi's parent immigration experiencesPrivilege vs opportunitySecond generation definedCultural student groups in collegeTension and change between the black and asian communitiesWhite supremacy and proximity to whitenessUnifying, bonding and solidarity across culturesThe phrase “Asian Hate” and why we should stop using itBuilding collective powerConversation and facing internal conflictLAPDMental healthQuotes:“When you realize how much you didn't learn, you are kinda wondering how much of the history you were taught was revisionist, and you realized it was probably all of it.”“Capitalism is very much like white supremacists”“I look at Gen Z and I see a lot more open-mindedness. I see a lot more young people fighting for ethnic studies and I think if we can make people understand that we're trying to solidify a bond that used to be there and that was broken apart at some point, we're not just building something new.”“We are not free until black people are free.” “I takes conflict, cooperation, and solidarity moving together in different spaces.”“Conflict is necessary. And conflict doesn't have to be a knock down, drag out, we're falling out, end all, be all like discussion.”Mentioned@DeeeeezzyyyInstagramlinktr.eeRescission Act

Today on Sojourner Truth, Nana Gyamfi guest hosts. Nana is an attorney & Executive Director of Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI). Our first guest is co-founder of Black Voters Matter Fund, Cliff Albright who kicks off the show discussing some of the most contentious races in Georgia during the midterm, voter suppression and the conservative wave of votes cast by white women in Georgia. WNBA basketball superstar Britney Griner has been sentenced to a 9.5 year sentence in Russia for allegedly carrying cannabis cartridges in her luggage. Britney Griner is a recent example of a Black American being criminalized for a nonviolent crime, and while her case gained international awareness due to her celebrity as a pro star athlete, this is the reality for many Black Americans and immigrants criminalized for marijuana offenses impacting their daily experience, we contextualize the history of criminalization of cannabis in the U.S. and its continued iterations with executive director of the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild and attorney Sirine Shebaya. To conclude, we discuss French President Emmanuel Macron and U.S. Presidential envoy for climate John Kerry and their friendly treatment of Venezuelan President Maduro at the Cop 27 conference with José Luis Granados Ceja, journalist and political analyst and staff writer with Venezuela Analysis, who shares his take on why the West and its allies appear to be changing their narrative and treatment towards Venezuela, a country recognized for its extensive oil reserves.

Today on Sojourner Truth, Nana Gyamfi guest hosts. Nana is an attorney & Executive Director of Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI). Our first guest is co-founder of Black Voters Matter Fund, Cliff Albright who kicks off the show discussing some of the most contentious races in Georgia during the midterm, voter suppression and the conservative wave of votes cast by white women in Georgia. WNBA basketball superstar Britney Griner has been sentenced to a 9.5 year sentence in Russia for allegedly carrying cannabis cartridges in her luggage. Britney Griner is a recent example of a Black American being criminalized for a nonviolent crime, and while her case gained international awareness due to her celebrity as a pro star athlete, this is the reality for many Black Americans and immigrants criminalized for marijuana offenses impacting their daily experience, we contextualize the history of criminalization of cannabis in the U.S. and its continued iterations with executive director of the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild and attorney Sirine Shebaya. To conclude, we discuss French President Emmanuel Macron and U.S. Presidential envoy for climate John Kerry and their friendly treatment of Venezuelan President Maduro at the Cop 27 conference with José Luis Granados Ceja, journalist and political analyst and staff writer with Venezuela Analysis, who shares his take on why the West and its allies appear to be changing their narrative and treatment towards Venezuela, a country recognized for its extensive oil reserves.

* Meet Italy's neo-Fascist Prime Minister-Elect Giorgia Meloni; Jason Stanley, Jacob Urowsky professor of philosophy at Yale University; Producer: Scott Harris. * Supreme Court Poised to Legalize Election Theft, Further Erode Democracy; Marjorie Cohn, prof. emerita Thomas Jefferson School of Law, past pres. National Lawyers Guild; Producer: Scott Harris. * Amid Rising Temperatures Caused by Climate Change Farm Workers Union Fights for Safety Regulations; Edgar Franks, political director of Familias Unidas por la Justicia; Producer: Melinda Tuhus.

Carolyn Harding with Maggie Scotece, Interim Executive Director of the Abortion Fund of Ohio. Maggie Scotece, JD is a long-time abortion advocate, doula, and former AFO volunteer & Board Member currently serving as the organization's Interim Executive Director. Since transitioning to this role in February 2022, Maggie has demonstrated her dedication to uplifting the stories of those most impacted by the barriers in Reproductive Justice spaces. She is a licensed attorney in Ohio with six years of experience in civil-rights law and direct, short-term legal assistance. Maggie has worked to make civic engagement and public policy conversations more accessible through her tenure on the Fair Districts Mapping Competition Advisory Committee and the Ohio Democratic Disability Caucus. They bring deep-rooted connections to Disability Justice organizing to their work at AFO, including their experience as a disabled activist and co-founder of the Supported Decision Making Network of Ohio. Over the last decade, Maggie has played an active role in community organizing spaces, including her involvement with the Ohio Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild where she began volunteering on their Protestor Jail Support and Legal Helpline in 2020. Maggie continues to work with local clinic escort programs, Racial Justice organizing, criminal justice reform, and movement lawyering. Welcome. When Row v. Wade was overturned on June 24, 2022. What was the Abortion Fund of Ohio focused on before the ruling, and what has changed since then? abortionfundofohio.org GrassRoot Ohio - Conversations with everyday people working on important issues, here in Columbus and all around Ohio. Every Friday 5:00pm, EST on 94.1FM & streaming worldwide @ WGRN.org, Sundays at 2:00pm EST on 92.7/98.3 FM and streams @ WCRSFM.org, and Sundays at 4:00pm EST, at 107.1 FM, Wheeling/Moundsville WV on WEJP-LP FM. Contact Us if you would like GrassRoot Ohio on your local station. Check us out and Like us on Face Book: https://www.facebook.com/GrassRootOhio/ Check us out on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/grassroot_ohio/ If you miss the Friday broadcast, you can find it here: All shows/podcasts archived at SoundCloud! https://soundcloud.com/user-42674753 GrassRoot Ohio is now on Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/.../grassroot-ohio/id1522559085 This GrassRoot Ohio interview can also be found on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAX2t1Z7_qae803BzDF4PtQ/ Intro and Exit music for GrassRoot Ohio is "Resilient" by Rising Appalachia: https://youtu.be/tx17RvPMaQ8 There's a time to listen and learn, a time to organize and strategize, And a time to Stand Up/ Fight Back! https://facebook.com/events/s/grassroot-ohio-radio-abortion-/635421758167449/

In the first half of the show, Mickey talks with attorney and author Heidi Boghosian and Project Censored associate director Andy Lee Roth about the confluence of surveillance and censorship, and how that impacts journalism. Many people believe they have nothing to hide online, but that myth is dispelled by today's guests as they address everyday precautions citizens can take to defend their privacy online. Later, Clayton Weimers of Reporters Without Boarders joins the discussion with Mickey and Andy to address the rising incidences of violence (or threats of violence) against journalists, how they should be confronted, and the impacts they have on a free press and society at large. Notes: Heidi Boghosian is executive director of the AJ Muste Institute, and former executive director of the National Lawyers Guild. Her most recent book is I Have Nothing to Hide, And 20 Other Myths About Surveillance and Privacy. Andy Lee Roth is Associate Director of Project Censored, co-editor of the Project's annual volume of censored stories, and co-coordinator of the Project's Campus Affiliates Program. He has published widely on media issues, including most recently, The Deadly Business of Reporting Truth. Clayton Weimers directs the Washington DC bureau office of Reporters Without Borders, an international institution which works to protect journalists around the world; it also publishes the annual "Press Freedom Index" ranking of countries around the world on press freedom issues. Hosts: Mickey Huff and Eleanor Goldfield Producers: Anthony Fest and Eleanor Goldfield

Who are the “Legal Observers” in green caps and vests who appear whenever the Left is engaged in a public demonstration? They are probably members of the National Lawyers Guild, a radical-left association of attorneys, law students, legal workers, and jailhouse lawyers. Joining me to discuss the NLG is my colleague Robert Stilson, who recently wrote an in-depth history of the group for InfluenceWatch and CapitalResearch.org. Links: https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/national-lawyers-guild/ https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/national-lawyers-guild-foundation/ Follow our socials: • Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/capitalresearchcenter • Twitter: https://twitter.com/capitalresearch • Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/capitalresearchcenter • YouTube: https://bit.ly/CRCYouTube • Rumble: https://rumble.com/capitalresearch • Gettr: https://gettr.com/user/capitalresearch

This is the raw audio. It is unedited! It's like when sitcoms from the 90s would do a live recording... anything can happen! Not much happened, but I sniffled a few times, my dog had a loud, and I burped once. 212-679-6018 is the number for the National Lawyers Guild. ***I am restricted on Facebook right now. Not in jail, but I can't post anything on the Witchcraft Off the Beaten Path Facebook page. Molly Dyer can still post, so I'll do what I can. But I can't see messages or post anything on the podcast page on FB mainly because FB suck donkey balls. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/molly-dyer/message

Lydia X. Z. Brown, Policy Counsel for Privacy & Data at the Center for Democracy & Technology, joins Melinda in an enlightening discussion around the impact of surveillance tech on marginalized populations. They address the importance of understanding the threats of surveillance in our daily lives brought on by algorithmic technologies used in education, policing, healthcare, and the workplace, and they discuss how this tech can be disproportionately damaging to people of color and people with disabilities. Lydia also shares what actions are needed to protect health data following the overturning of Roe v. Wade and how individuals and organizations should approach data privacy to protect everyone's rights and advocate for marginalized communities who are harmed by surveillance technologies. About Lydia X. Z. Brown (they/them)Lydia X. Z. Brown is an advocate, organizer, attorney, strategist, and writer whose work focuses on interpersonal and state violence against disabled people at the intersections of race, class, gender, sexuality, faith, language, and nation. Lydia is Policy Counsel for Privacy & Data at the Center for Democracy & Technology, focused on algorithmic discrimination and disability; Director of Policy, Advocacy, & External Affairs at the Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network; and founding executive director of the Autistic People of Color Fund. Lydia is an adjunct lecturer in the Women's and Gender Studies Program and the Disability Studies Program at Georgetown University, as well as the Self-Advocacy Discipline Coordinator for the Leadership Education in Neurodevelopmental Disabilities Fellowship program. They are also an adjunct professorial lecturer in American Studies in the Department of Critical Race, Gender, and Cultural Studies at American University. They are co-president of the Disability Rights Bar Association, a commissioner on the American Bar Association's Commission on Disability Rights, and Disability Justice Committee representative on the National Lawyers Guild board. Lydia is currently creating the Disability Justice Wisdom Tarot. Often, their most important work has no title, job description, or funding, and probably never will.To join us for our monthly live event and find educational resources, visit ally.ccConnect With LydiaLinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/lydiaxzbrownFacebook: facebook.com/autistic.hoyaTwitter: twitter.com/autistichoyaInstagram: instagram.com/autistichoyaConnect With UsYouTube: youtube.com/c/changecatalystTwitter: twitter.com/changecatalystsFacebook: facebook.com/changecatalystsInstagram: instagram.com/techinclusionLinkedIn: linkedin.com/company/changecatalystsProduction TeamCreator & Host: Melinda Briana EplerCo-Producers: Renzo Santos & Christina Swindlehurst ChanCreative Director @ Podcast Rocket: Rob Scheerbarth[Image description: LEA promo and photos of Lydia, an East Asian person with short black and teal hair, glasses, a dark blue suit, and a diamond-pattern tie, and host Melinda Briana Epler, a White woman with red hair, glasses, and orange shirt holding a white mug behind a laptop.]Support the show

Episode Notes Episode Summary: Mo, a criminal defense/movement lawyer with the National Lawyers Guild, talks about how Grand Juries are used by the State to destabilize communities, and what your options are for resisting them if you are issued a subpoena. Margaret and them talk about the importance of not cooperating with Grand Juries and how you can be an eternal badass...i mean protect yourself and your community by resisting them. They also talk about the most important legal strategy: Hope. Guest Info: Mo, Moira Meltzer-Cohen (they/them), is a Criminal Defense Lawyer who works at the intersection of Criminal Defense and struggles for social and economic justice. They work for the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) Federal Defense Hotline. You can find them on Twitter @ProbYrLawyer. Show Links: National Lawyers Guild Federal Defense Hotline: (212) 679-2811 IF YOU RECEIVE A SUBPOENA FOR A GRAND JURY CALL THEM. (If you call you might get Mo!) NLG NYC_:_ On Instagram @NLG_NYC Civil Liberties Defense Center: CLDC.org for legal primers, brochuers and information. Grand Jury Resistance Project: GrandJuryResistance.org SparrowMedia.net: Chelsea Manning Grand Jury Resitance info. Host: The host Margaret Killjoy can be found on twitter @magpiekilljoy or instagram at @margaretkilljoy. Publisher: This show is published by Strangers in A Tangled Wilderness. We can be found at www.tangledwilderness.org, or on Twitter @TangledWild and Instagram @Tangled_Wilderness. You can support the show on Patreon at www.patreon.com/strangersinatangledwilderness. Transcript Mo on Grand Juries Margaret 00:15 Hello and welcome to Live Like the World is Dying, your podcast for what feels like the end times. I'm your host, Margaret killjoy. And this week I will be talking to my friend Mo, who is a lawyer. And not just any lawyer, but the lawyer I know who got one of my friends out of jail when he was in jail for Grand Jury resistance. "What is a Grand Jury?" you might ask, and "Why might we resist it?" Well, that's the topic of this week's episode. So if you stay tuned, you will hear all about Grand Juries and why they suck, and what we can do about them, and what you can do about them. This podcast is a proud member of the Channel Zero network of anarchists podcasts. And here's the jingle from another show on the network. Margaret 01:48 Okay, if you could introduce yourself with your name, your pronouns, and then kind of what you do for work. Mo 01:53 Hi, Margaret, I'm Mo. My name is Moira Meltzer-Cohen. My pronouns are they/them. I'm an attorney, and I work at the intersection of criminal defense and struggles for social and economic justice. So, I've probably represented a lot of your listeners. Margaret 02:13 Hurray. Yeah, for context. I've literally had nightmares, where I get rounded up by cops, and I'm just like, "I need to call Mo!" And and then Mo comes and saves me. Mo 02:26 I'll do my best. Margaret 02:27 Yeah, I appreciate it. The only other phone number I've memorized besides like my immediate family. So speaking of friends of ours that Moira has gotten out of jail, I want to talk about something that happened a number of years ago to our mutual friend, Jerry Koch, which was that one time Jerry Koch was may may or may not have once been in a bar. And people in that bar may or may not have been talking about a crime that happened. I think, before Jerry even moved to New York City, but I'm not entirely certain. And that crime was that someone may or may not Well, clearly, someone did it. No one knows who did it. Someone bicycled past recruitment center and threw a box full of black powder at it, and it destroyed the door in the middle of the night, and no one was hurt. And because it was a federal crime, it became this huge deal. And so Jerry was subpoenaed to speak before a Grand Jury, and Jerry refused to do so. And as a result, he spent nine months in jail without being accused of any crime, and basically, like all of his rights were taken away. Like all of his, you know, First, Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights were not enough to say, well, basically, they can try and make you talk even though it's not illegal to not talk to them, and they can still throw you in jail. And I wanted to have Mo on one because Mo was the one who got Jerry out of jail. But also because I think that it's useful for people to know about the Grand Jury process, kind of what it is, what it can do to social movements, and how we can prevent it from doing those things to our social movements as we fight for a better world. So do you want to tell me like, What is a Grand Jury? Mo 04:18 Right? So the Grand Jury is anomalous in the American legal system, and it's, as you will see, it's so anomalous, and it so disregards so many of the core assumptions that most people have about the Constitution and the American legal system that I have encountered many people, including many attorneys, who have a really hard time believing that Grand Juries exist and operate in the way that they do actually operate. So a federal Grand Jury is an investigation where 18 to 24 people are called together in the same way that, you know, you get called for, like jury duty. People get called for Grand Jury Duty. And they hang out and listen to prosecutors to federal prosecutors present evidence about various criminal offenses and determine whether or not a crime has actually occurred. And in doing these investigations, federal prosecutors can issue subpoenas, which say, to whoever they're issued to, you have to show up to this Grand Jury and answer my questions in front of these 18 to 24 people. And there's really...and you don't get an attorney in there with you. And there's no judge in there. There's just the prosecutor and these people who have been called to Grand Jury Duty. And they can tell you to come and give testimony and answer their questions. And they can also tell you to come and bring various kinds of documents. And this is compulsory, whereas usually, you would have the right to decline to participate in a police investigation, which is what I talked about last time I was on your show, which is that you really never have an obligation to talk to police. Unfortunately, this is sort of the opposite, where if you are issued a Grand Jury subpoena, and you declined to participate, you can be ordered by a judge to participate, sort of, in spite of all of the rights you think you have, like the First Amendment, right to Association and Speech and Belief, and your Fifth Amendment rights to remain silent. And your Sixth Amendment right to have a lawyer with you, if you're being questioned, all of those rights kind of fly out the window. And if you refuse to participate, a judge might order you to participate anyway. And if you continue to decline to participate, the judge will find you in Contempt of their Order To Participate, and they can throw you in prison. And so you can spend a pretty significant amount of time in federal prison, not because you have been accused of a crime, not because you have been convicted of a crime, but because you have declined to help the state make out their case against yourself or someone else. Margaret 07:29 One of the things that really strikes me about Grand Juries is like when you first try to describe the process of someone, it sounds like a good thing, right? It's like set up to be this thing where you're like, oh, you can't just accuse people have crimes. And you actually have to have a meeting ahead of time to make sure there's enough evidence before you can accuse someone of a crime. And it just I feel like the state is really good at taking things that like ostensibly might possibly be designed to protect us from government overreach and turn them into over government overreach. Mo 08:01 That's exactly right. So a Grand Jury is a it's a process that was invented in the 12th century. And the reason that it was invented is it was a group of sort of citizens, men, who would come together to privately investigate whether an offence had even been committed, because sometimes the Crown would just throw people in, in jail. And so this was... the Grand Jury was a step that was intended to make sure that there was some constraint on the unfettered power of the Crown. And unfortunately, the way that the Grand Jury has been adopted and used in the United States is not...it is an arm of state power, as opposed to a bulwark against it. Although, federal prosecutors get really butthurt if you say things like that, and they...they're constantly saying, we're a bulwark against unfettered power, but they're.... Margaret 09:07 And that's why we threw your friend in jail for nine months for not talking to us. Mo 09:11 I can never tell if federal prosecutors actually believe the things that they're saying. They're very defensive about... they're very defensive about the Grand Jury process. And they seem genuinely to believe that it's protective, despite the fact that there, I think, is only one other nation in the world that still uses Grand Juries, because they have come to be understood as really damaging. They're not transparent. They're secret proceedings. They're frequently compared to Star Chamber Proceedings. But one of the things that is a big difference between a federal Grand Jury and the Star Chamber is that the Star Chamber Proceedings were public. Margaret 09:54 What's a Star Chamber Proceeding? 09:57 The Star Chamber was this like, sort of secret authoritarian court. Margaret 10:03 Cool. Mo 10:04 So, yeah, so the thing about Grand Jury proceedings is the claim that's made is that they happen in secret so that they don't sort of destroy the reputations of people who the innocent accused, right? But there's actually ways of initiating a criminal prosecution that don't involve secrecy, right? You....people in countries all over the world managed to prosecute criminal offenses without using Grand Juries. And it involves sort of public cross examination and having sort of the trappings of due process that we would assume, obtain in the American legal system, and they typically do, but federal Grand Juries, you know, as I said, there, it's totally unnecessary. But, they're very useful. They're very useful for a number of reasons, because their critical attributes give tremendous power to prosecutors. Sorry, let me rephrase that they're very useful to prosecutors for a number of reasons. They're not particularly useful to anyone else? They're quite dangerous for exactly these reasons. Margaret 11:18 Because they can like...they can use them to just fish information out of scenes, right? Because you can show up and say... Mo 11:24 There's a bunch of things about them. One is that what a prosecutor can ask is almost unlimited. There's there's really... the rules of evidence that we would think about, like, you know, hearsay, being inadmissible various kinds of unlawfully collected evidence being admissible, relevance, right? If you're having a criminal trial or a civil trial, you can't just get any kind of...you can't start asking questions about unrelated things, right? Well, in a federal Grand Jury, you can, and there's...Furthermore, there's nobody there. There's no judge there, there's no defense attorney present. The only person who's present is the prosecutor. So the prosecutor gets to determine what evidence gets seen, and what evidence doesn't get seen, right? They're presenting their case to this Grand Jury, but they're not giving a complete picture, which is why we have Grand Juries where, you know, over 99%, of people accused of a federal offense get indicted by a Grand Jury. But are those people ever cops? I mean, almost never, right? And that's because the prosecutor controls how evidence is presented and what evidence is not presented, and how evidence gets placed before those grand jurors. And so they really control the narrative. And they basically determine what gets prosecuted and what doesn't. They can also use the federal Grand Jury, as you said, to go fishing, because they can basically issue as we saw with Jerry, they can issue a subpoena to just about anyone and ask them just about anything. So, you know, we have no idea whether they actually thought Jerry had any relevant information about that event, which they refer to as The Bicycle Bombing. Right? Who knows whether they actually thought that Jerry had any information about it, despite the fact that he told them publicly many times that he did not. And they don't seem to have had any real reason to think he did. But what they definitely thought he had information about was anarchist organizing in New York City. And that's clearly what they were interested in asking him about. And so maybe they weren't necessarily going to get information about the Bicycle Bombing from subpoenaing him to come and give testimony. And maybe they weren't gonna even get information about any kind of Federal offense from his testimony, but they sure we're gonna get some social mapping. They sure we're gonna get some information about, you know, potentially about like, internecine quarrels in the anarchist community. So, you know, a lot of, a lot of this is a fishing expedition. And I think that sort of brings us to the next thing that you and I were discussing, which is, Grand Juries are these really complicated, really anomalous legal proceedings. They're sort of quasi criminal. They involve a lot of different really technical elements. But at bottom, they're sort of anathema to anarchists. And there's a few reasons for that. And I think, you know, this is sort of the thing that I guess we wanted to talk about, which is that, Margaret 14:55 Yeah, why don't anarchists talk to Grand Juries? Mo 14:58 Well, this is yeah, I mean, this is the thing, right, is that there's sort of three things going on. One thing is anarchists pretty much don't talk to Grand Juries, on principle, because fuck the state. But there's also materially, it's very dangerous to give testimony to a Grand Jury, because you're essentially, even if you're not giving them information about any unlawful activity, any information that you give to the state, can and very much will be used against you and your community. And anytime you're talking to a federal Grand Jury, or a federal investigator, law enforcement of any kind, anything that you say, can be used to get more information can be used to cause trouble in your community, and can be used to prosecute, prosecute you or the people in your community. And then the third even more technical reason is that strategically, legally, there are a whole slew of reasons and legal arguments that you can bring to bear against cooperating with a federal Grand Jury. And, in fact, you know, I would say, as a legal matter, you know, I can't...whether or not to cooperate with a federal Grand Jury is not a decision that an attorney can make for another person. Margaret 16:25 Right. Mo 16:26 But there are a number of legal advantages to litigating questions around the enforceability of a Grand Jury subpoena. Margaret 16:39 Well does this tie into, like, how how you got Jerry out? Mo 16:44 Yes. Well, there's sort of there's phases, right, because the first thing that I would say, the first thing that would happen in Grand Jury litigation, is developing arguments or or seeing if there are arguments against the enforceability of the Grand Jury subpoena. And these range from things like: "Is the subpoena properly issued and enforceable?"to "Can you enforce this Grand Jury subpoena against this particular individual?" Does this Grand Jury subpoena impermissibly intrude into First Amendment protections? Does it impermissibly intrude into Fifth Amendment protections? Can you demonstrate that this particular subpoena was issued on the basis of illegally collected evidence? There's things like that, that certainly you would want to litigate before just rolling over and cooperating with a Grand Jury. Again, from the legal point of view, quite apart from the issues of principle, you know, if you don't, if there's a way to avoid incriminating yourself, you, you know, I would advise you to do it. So, there's a whole kind of litigation to...that happens sort of up front, to try to do what's called "quash the subpoena", right, to nullify the subpoena. That almost universally fails. We are not successful with that litigation that happens early on in the process. And then what what typically happens? Well, sometimes what happens is that the prosecutor gives up, but that's, that's not typical. Although it happens occasionally. Margaret 18:39 We could hope we could pin all of our hopes on that. Mo 18:43 Yes. I wouldn't expect it. Margaret 18:47 No, we should pin all of our hopes on it. That's what'll happen. You heard it here first, there's nothing to worry about. Mo 18:55 Please call my office. If you get a Grand Jury subpoena. Do not lay awake in bed hoping for the prosecutor to let it go. Margaret 19:03 Interesting. Okay. Okay. Mo 19:05 You know, we even have a hotline. Margaret 19:07 Yeah? Mo 19:08 Which I can tell you about later. But yes, we...you can call the office, you can call the hotline. You can call your local chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. Margaret 19:19 Okay. Mo 19:20 Hire a lawyer instead of hoping. Margaret 19:22 Okay. Mo 19:23 Okay. Margaret 19:24 And probably a movement lawyer rather than like one that's just looking out for... Mo 19:28 For sure. Yes. Hope is not a great legal strategy, I guess is what I'm trying to say. Margaret 19:36 It's almost like we should be prepared as individuals and communities for bad things that might happen. Mo 19:42 It's almost like that. Margaret 19:43 Yeah, but that would be crazy. Anyway. Okay. Mo 19:46 Typically, what happens is that you litigate the validity or the enforceability of the subpoena. And then the judge typically says, "The justice demands that we do unfettered investigations, and be allowed to ask whatever questions we want. And, if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't be worried, just go talk to the federal Grand Jury." And they will, the judge, will order the witness to give testimony. But of course, the judge can order you to do something all they want. That doesn't mean you actually have to do it. And so, if you continue to refuse to give testimony before the federal Grand Jury, the way the judge will enforce their order, is to say, "Well, if you won't give testimony, I'm going to hold you in Contempt of Court. And the sanction for being in Contempt of Court is that I will put you in federal prison until you agree to give testimony. And if you don't agree to give testimony, then you are going to stay in federal prison until the Grand Jury expires (Grand Jury is typically at last 18 months). So, I'll keep you in federal prison until the Grand Jury expires." And then the other way that you can sometimes get out without giving testimony is to just demonstrate that you will not be convinced by your confinement to give testimony, right, because the the only permissible reason to put somebody in prison for civil Contempt is to convince them to change their mind. Right? Margaret 21:40 Cause that's coercive instead of punitive. Is that the idea? Mo 21:42 That's right. That's right. So there's... Margaret 21:44 What a weird dumb distinction that the law wants to make. Mo 21:49 There's a distincation that...I would say it's a distinction without a difference, except it does have this very significant meaningful difference... Margaret 21:57 Right, legally. Mo 21:57 Which is as follows: Margaret 21:59 Okay, Mo 22:00 A judge cannot put you in prison to punish you in the absence of due process, in the context of Grand Jury litigation, Contempt of Court is Civil and not Criminal. And so you don't get due process in the way that you would have to, in order for the judge to punish you. And so the judge...the fiction here is that the judge is not punishing you by confining you, the judge is just putting you in an uncomfortable situation with the promise that it will stop if you agree to do the thing the judge wants you to do. So, it isn't punishment. It's coercion. Margaret 22:51 Hooray. Mo 22:52 So it's, it sounds very silly, except what follows there from is that if you can demonstrate to the judge, that it isn't coercive, and it's only punitive, then they have to release you, because it's unconstitutional to punish you. Margaret 23:13 Right. Mo 23:14 And so, being able to demonstrate that the confinement in federal prison has been transformed from a coercion into a punishment is the way that you can eventually after some, usually many months, you can get your client out of prison, which is what happened with Jerry. Margaret 23:43 Okay, I kind of love because it's like, "Look, if you're a badass, and you come from a badass movement, I'm sorry, you just can't put badass is in jail. It's just not allowed anymore", is like the kind of and like, I'm under the impression when you were talking earlier about one of the reasons why anarchists in particular, might want to refuse to speak to Grand Juries is does this build a stronger case for future anarchists basically, to be like, "Oh, it doesn't work. This won't work." Mo 24:13 Absolutely. I dont think it will prevent them from trying to exact a cost. Margaret 24:17 Right. Mo 24:19 They'll still put you in. Margaret 24:20 Right. But I was under the impression this was like part of the way of explaining to a judge like "My you know, my client cannot be coerced into testifying." Mo 24:33 Absolutely. Yes, very much. You know, there's...and it isn't just to be clear, it isn't only anarchists who do this. There's some really great case law that stems from different organized crime people and white collar crime, which is just another kind of organized crime, I guess, people refusing to cooperate. There's a really great case where a Jewish guy says that it's against, you know, It violates the tenets of his faith to to snitch, which I as a Jew, I I would say, "Yes that I would agree with this assessment." And of course the judge said, "No, you... I'm sorry you don't have a religious First Amendment right not to snatch." Morris Simpkin, I think was the was the guy. Rabbi Morris Simpkin. Margaret 25:26 That rules. Mo 25:27 Yeah, no, he's he's a hero. And then there's a guy who basically was released, because he, he said, "I'm not going to...I'm not going to talk. Because, as you know, I have several million dollars waiting for me in an offshore bank account. If I tell you about it, I won't, you know, I wont be able to access it later." Margaret 25:51 Did that work? Mo 25:53 I don't think it actually did work particularly well. I think the Court said something like, "You know, this is a little too venal even for us to deal with." But, so...it isn't just anarchists who refuse to cooperate with Grand Juries. And then there's also people who refuse to cooperate with Grand Juries, because they're in fear for their life, which is, I think, maybe even more common than people refusing on principle. Margaret 26:23 Yeah. So how does this come up in movements? Right, like, you know, the the example that we use at the beginning is a fairly like, it ties into the anarchist movement in New York City at that time, but it's a fairly isolated incident. But I'm under the impression that Grand Juries are used or end up disrupting social movements in a broader sense. Mo 26:45 Yeah, absolutely. Have you ever heard the phrase, "Nobody talks, everybody walks"? That's sort of, I think this is not a legal strategy commentary. But, I think the sort of the goal of anarchist communities is to recognize that the more people talk, the more evidence you are creating, the more information you are providing to the State that can--even if you're providing evidence that has nothing to do with unlawful conduct--providing information of any kind to the State gives the state a toehold that gives them a foot in the door, it gives them something to hang a warrant on for example. It just gives them an entree into your community in a way that makes you more vulnerable. And so, you know, when when we're saying, well, "Nobody talks, everybody walks," the less information the State has, the less effective they will be at intruding into your community, at manufacturing allegations of unlawful conduct of fabricating, you know, conspiracy charges. There's all kinds of ways that federal prosecutions can emerge. I mean, I would say, it's important to recognize the way that State repression is used against vulnerable communities generally. A few years ago, there was this really horrific conspiracy prosecution that involved over 100 people in the Bronx. And, you know, there was a guy who ended up in federal prison because the evidence that he was part of this conspiracy was that he waved to somebody at the bodega. Margaret 28:38 Oh, God. Mo 28:38 You know, so when we're talking about, is it protecting our communities? I'm not suggesting that, that there's a conspiracy to hide. It's that...or that there's even unlawful behavior to hide or to conceal. It's just that it is very disturbingly easy for federal law enforcement to sort of manufacture charges and allegations out of whole cloth that can just devastate a community, you know, with long term consequences. So, not handing over information to federal prosecutors or law enforcement of any kind even if you think the information is harmless, or even if you think the information serves to demonstrate your innocence. Any amount of information that's given to federal law enforcement is dangerous to you, and it's dangerous to your community. Margaret 29:46 So, if you get subpoenaed or you suspect you might be subpoenaed. I'm under the impression that because the subpoena is not a warrant, that It's not illegal to...to not get subpoenaed, to avoid being subpoenaed. Is this is this true? Mo 30:09 It's not...I mean, I know what you're trying to say it's not...you're not going to get like arrested for avoiding service of a subpoena, Margaret 30:19 Right? Which means you think they might come to your door, just don't answer the door or don't be there? Not saying that this is the strategy everyone should take, obviously. But, I'm curious...because this whole thing is so anonamalous, a nominal...is out of the ordinary. It...I'm under the impression that there's like, a lot of history of people...like it's a weird...I'm under the impression is a gray area where you're kind of like allowed to go on the run. Like, it's not illegal to flee a subpoena. It would be illegal to flee after you've been subpoenaed is my impression. I'm not telling people what to do. I'm just merely... it's a very interesting part of this whole thing from my point of view, Mo 30:59 It's not necessarily exactly illegal. You could be arrested on what's called a "Material Witness Order." Because you haven't, you're not being accused of a crime. Right? So running isn't exactly illegal. There are examples of people going underground to avoid subpoena. I'm not sure it's...you know, I wouldn't advise somebody to do it as a lawyer. But, you know, I would tell them what the potential consequences might be. But, largely the consequences would be a lot of discomfort and instability, I think. And if you, you know, I guess it sort of depends on what kind of resources you have, if you feel like you want to, if you want to go underground in order to avoid a subpoena, and you think that's going to be easier than getting a movement lawyer to fight the subpoena. Or, you know, I think it would be very disruptive at one way or another, you are going to get a subpoena. It's going to be disruptive. So I guess, pick your poison. Margaret 32:06 Fair enough. I just, I kind of want to go through, like, what happens if you get a subpoena? And you know, obviously, or if you believe you might get subpoenaed. And so when I imagine the flowchart, like, yeah, one of the options is if you're aware that you might be subpoenaed, and you want to disrupt your own life dramatically... Mo 32:25 Certainly. Margaret 32:26 And it's basically a way of LARPing undergrounder because you'd like on the run from the law, but you're not breaking the law to go underground. Mo 32:34 I don't know if you can LARP underground. I don't know if you can learn being underground. You...because even if you're being underground... Margaret 32:44 Legally, Mo 32:45 Because you have a delusion that you might be subpoenaed, you're still going to be really uncomfortable. Margaret 32:52 That's true. Yep. Okay, Mo 32:55 The consequences are still going to be real. Margaret 32:57 Yeah. Mo 32:58 But sure, one of the...one of your, one of the options available to you is to go underground. And then another option that's available to you is to call an attorney. I'm gonna give you the hotline number, the National Lawyers Guild, federal defense hotline is (212) 679-2811. And if you call that hotline, you will get me, and you can have a privileged, confidential, and secure conversation about your rights, risks and responsibilities. And I will do my very best to connect you with appropriate legal resources in your jurisdiction. And that's a better idea, in my opinion then going underground, but I am not the person who's looking at subpoena. So that is a choice that you get to make. Margaret 33:53 Yeah, I'm not advocating here. I'm just like, you know, laying out options to people. Mo 34:00 It is an option. Margaret 34:01 Okay. Okay. So if you get the subpoena, and you decide to fight it, and they call you, what next? Mo 34:08 I'll take a look at the subpoena, or your attorney will. Your attorney will take a look at the subpoena. They will call the prosecutor who issued the subpoena. Typically, they'll ask for some time to postpone the date of appearance so that they can put together some legal arguments and try to have the subpoena quashed, which as I said before means nullified or withdrawn. They try to look for some way in which the subpoena is unenforceable or invalid. And that can be on the grounds again of the First Amendment. Like, "This subpoena intrudes into First Amendment protected behavior. The subpoena is a Fourth Amendment violation," or "We believe that it that the subpoena was issued on the basis of evidence that was illegally obtained by the prosecution." Or, "This subpoena in some way violates the Sixth Amendment," or, very commonly, "This subpoena violates the Fifth Amendment and testifying in front of this Grand Jury would expose the witness to criminal liability." So, you make all of those arguments. If the federal prosecutor really wants you to give testimony, what they will very frequently do is approach the federal government or they'll approach the Department Of Justice and ask for what's called an "Immunity Order", which undermines your right against compelled self-incrimination, because it involves a promise not to prosecute you. And so, the idea is that they can then compel your testimony, because nothing you say could be self-incriminating, Margaret 35:55 Right. But it's still incriminates everyone else you know, and... Mo 35:59 That's right. Margaret 36:00 Which could lead to them... Mo 36:00 And probably still yourself anyway. Margaret 36:02 Right, because then if they get someone else to talk, they could talk about you, and then their testimony can be used against you. Mo 36:08 And your own testimony can be used against you, it just isn't quite as straightforward as it might otherwise be. Margaret 36:13 Oh, cool. Okay. Mo 36:14 No, Immunity Orders are not meaningful in the way that the government would like to have you believe. So, you know, honestly, testifying before a federal Grand Jury really does...I can't emphasize how dangerous it is, it really does expose you and anyone else, you know, to criminal liability, even if you haven't done anything unlawful, because this is really a situation where your innocence will not protect you. And very often, especially if we're talking about the sort of world of "conspiracy", the very fact that you might be perceived to have information in itself can be parlayed into evidence of culpability. You know, there's there's just a lot of ways in which giving testimony before a federal Grand Jury is very dangerous, and really exposes you and anyone, you know, to criminal liability. And it also perpetuates the cycle of more Grand Jury subpoenas being issued, Margaret 37:31 Right. Because they know it works. Mo 37:34 Well. Because, if one person responds and goes before the federal Grand Jury, and are asked who was at the anarchist meeting in 1998, and then says, "Oh, I think, you know, Jose, Joseph and Joe, were all there." Then Jose Joseph and Joe will get supoenas. Margaret 37:55 You know this is a public show, though, right? You just used their names... Mo 37:59 Oh. Hahah. Margaret 37:59 And I really like interrupting you with jokes, because I feel like a jerk every time I do it. Anyway, I'm sorry. Please continue. Mo 38:12 I love you very much. Margaret 38:13 Thanks. Mo 38:18 Yeah, it perpetuates a cycle of more subpoenas being issued, because anybody who says anything, the prosecutor then takes anything they've said, and you know anybody's name who comes up gets, then that that person gets a subpoena. They also, you know, the more information you give them, the more that they can figure out how to target people who feel isolated and vulnerable, and who are more likely to cooperate, right. So if you...and just to be clear, what the federal government perceives as like "vulnerabilities and weaknesses" are not necessarily things that are vulnerabilities and weaknesses. So for example, they may target people who have children, believing that, you know, someone who has a child will be more willing to cooperate with the federal government, then to potentially risk prison time for a refusal to cooperate. They might target someone who's gender non conforming, you know, on the belief that, you know, a trans person would be less likely to be able to like tolerate the idea of going to prison. They might target someone who has mental health issues, or who has a lot of friction in their community. The belief that a person who has...who's sort of fighting with other people in their community will have an incentive to, I guess, to talk shit about those people, and to give them up and to give the government information. I think the federal government thinks we're a lot less organized and a lot more petty than we are. And, I think the federal government thinks that we have a lot less courage than we have. But yeah. Margaret 40:12 I mean, it's one of the reasons that Grand Juries are scary, right, is that it's one of the things where, as you said earlier, like "Innocence will not protect you," you know, like, there is a level of risk just being socially engaged in activist movements, right, and so, you know what, whether or not you...what...whether or not you like do crimes, doesn't necessarily, like affect the degree to which this particular threat might threaten you? Mo 40:47 Yeah, I mean, I think this is the point where, you know, to return to the story of what happened to Jerry, right? Nobody ever said that Jerry knew anything about the Bicycle Bombing. Nobody ever said Jerry was involved in the Bicycle Bombing. The claim that was made is that he might have been present when a couple of other people were having a casual conversation about it. Margaret 41:11 Right. Mo 41:12 Which is, you know, one of the reasons that we say like, "Don't speculate. Don't make jokes. Don't brag," right? Like, because you're not just exposing yourself to liability. You're exposing anyone who hears you, or who is believed to have heard you to a Grand Jury subpoena, which if they're a principled person means exposing them to prison time, Margaret 41:41 Right. When when Grand Jury stuff hit closer to me, and it started affecting more my friends, and you know, when Jerry went to jail and stuff it, you know, sort of selfishly scared me. I had nothing to do with any of that stuff. I wasn't living in New York, any of that. But just that realization, my that my like, non crime-ness is not enough to keep me safe or whatever. But then, I guess I'm trying to, like, offer this, like note of courage or hope, I guess, which is my legal strategy is hope. But, that's not true. Mo 42:16 When you say it like that, it actually sounds reasonable, though. Margaret 42:19 Well, okay. But so the one of the things that I remember when we were working on on Jerry's campaign, was there's this flowchart of Grand Juries, right? And what can happen to you at each stage. And the end result of that is freedom. Mo 42:38 Yes. Margaret 42:39 Like, the degree to which it sucks before then varies. But, the the end result is that you're out and you're back with people, and everyone knows that you're fucking badass and have their backs. And, and, and I feel like that's a useful thing that like, I hold on to, and that I think other people. I mean... Mo 43:02 That's true. I think that's true. You know, there...it is finite. There's a few really unusual cases where someone has been charged with instead of Civil Contempt, Criminal Contempt. There are, you know, a few very, very specific instances where, you know, really post 9/11 people who were alleged to have been involved in, quote, "terrorism," have done very serious prison time on Criminal Contempt for refusing to cooperate with a Grand Jury. But typically, what we're looking at is a maximum of 18 months, which doesn't have no lasting consequences. Margaret 43:51 Oh, yeah. Mo 43:51 But, but it is finite. Margaret 43:54 Yeah. Mo 43:55 You know, I mean, one of the things about Grand Juries for...in terms of resisting as a community, is that federal Grand Juries are secret, right? No one can talk about what happens in the Grand Jury room, with one significant exception, which is the witness. The witness can disclose that they've been subpoenaed. The witness can say what they said or what they didn't say. They can say what they were asked. And the power of the federal Grand Jury really does very much lie in its secrecy. You know, I said, there's no judge there. There's no defense attorney there. I think even more importantly, there's no public there. Right? And so it functions to isolate the witness. It functions or it is intended to function to isolate the witness. But the fact is, you know, one of the things that, as you know, Jerry did was he stood out on the courthouse steps and he made a statement and he said, "I've been subpoenaed. This is what I think they want to ask me about. I'm not going to talk to them about it." He went into the Grand Jury room, he came out and disclosed what he had been asked very publicly, you know, he made a bunch of statements about his commitment to principle, and people really rallied around him. And that really served to undermine that terrifying power of secrecy, just by making that process more transparent. Margaret 45:34 Yeah. Well, are there any final thoughts about Grand Juries that you want to want to offer the audience? Or did we miss anything major? Mo 45:46 So, you know, we were just talking about how, you know, in Jerry's case, and in many other cases, I've, I've litigated, the witness has been very public about their experience with the Grand Jury with the subpoena with litigation. And this is socially useful and politically useful. I will, I'd like to let your audience also know, it's legally very useful, because at the end of this process, when you're trying to demonstrate to a judge that your client is in-coercible, that they, that the incarceration that has been imposed upon them in order to coerce them, isn't working, and is therefore punitive, but since they haven't been given any due process, they're not allowed to be punished and should therefore be released. The evidence that you put before the judge is evidence of the witness's articulated moral conviction, their psychological makeup, and all of these social incentives that have not wavered or changed over, you know, some not insignificant period of confinement. So, all of those sorts of public statements, and, and those acts of silence before the Grand Jury, those are, in fact, the substantive evidence that will hopefully serve to win their freedom. Margaret 47:09 Yeah. Mo 47:11 And in fact, one part of the evidence is social support. So the more you can educate your community about what a Grand Jury is, why they're dangerous to the community, and really help people to rally around, it sort of...showing that kind of community support, also functions to help the judge understand that it would truly be a loss, a moral loss for the witness at this point to disappoint all these, all these supporters. I want to reiterate sort of the consequences of cooperation with a Grand Jury, because, you know, being confined in a federal prison is terrible, and, and frightening and hugely disruptive. So, you know, I think there are a lot of incentives for people to cooperate. But I think people really need to understand that the consequences of cooperation don't just include snitching about criminal conduct. It includes disclosing information about people and movements, that is totally unrelated to illegal behavior, but can be compromising in other ways that aren't any of the State's business that can cause internal conflict in movements, can chill other people's commitment to movements, their willingness to participate in movements. And, of course, the, you know, the consequence that I keep talking about is the witness themself ending up in prison, which, you know, if you are convicted of a federal criminal offense, as opposed to being civilly confined, because you're refusing to cooperate with a Grand Jury, the sentencing guidelines for federal offenses are typically way longer than 18 months. So you know, when we're talking about going in for being a recalcitrant witness, and saying, I'm not going to cooperate with a federal Grand Jury, it is truly finite, which is may or may not be the case, if you end up incriminating yourself or somehow exposing yourself to criminal liability. And then you're looking at a much longer sentence that, you know, that is punitive. And that that is going to last a lot longer than 18 months likely. Margaret 49:38 So it's kind of a parallel to the whole like, "Shut the fuck up when you're arrested thing," where like, all right, you're going to jail and the difference is whether you're going to jail, like for a couple of days or you know, for a long ass time. Mo 49:53 Right. I mean, I again, I cannot advise someone not to cooperate with a Grand Jury. That's not my role, it would be unethical for me to do that. But what I can do and what my job is to do is to make clear what all the various consequences might be... Margaret 50:15 Okay. Mo 50:16 Of cooperation, or non cooperation. And I'm not going to, I'm not gonna lie, like, if you're subpoenaed before a federal Grand Jury, and it's at all politically motivated, you know, there is a long history of federal Grand Jury abuse in this country that goes back to, you know, prosecuting abolitionists for sedition, and continues through the labor movement, and the 19th century anarchist movement, and the Women's Rights movement and anti-war stuff, and Black Panthers and environmental stuff and the Green Scare. It's a pretty strong through line of using the federal Grand Jury to disrupt, drain, distract, and repress social movements. Margaret 51:07 Yeah. Mo 51:09 And one of the reasons that Grand Jury subpoenas are such a powerful tool is that the government's basically always going to get something that they want, right, they might not get to put all of you in prison, but you know, they're gonna get something. Either they're gonna get the information they want, which has sort of the added consequence of disrupting a whole community, because everyone's afraid. And there are indictments and convictions. Or they can get someone to cooperate and catch them in a perjury trap, and then exploit that person for more information by agreeing not to prosecute them for the perjury, or they can subpoena someone that they absolutely know, for a fact will not cooperate. And then they can do what I would call "coercing Contempt of Court", right? Because they've subpoenaed someone they know is going to...they can be held in Contempt. And then they exact a real cost from that witness, and from the whole community, and they're draining the whole community of time and energy and resources, and distracting from the actual work that that community was trying to do in the first place. Margaret 52:17 Yeah. Mo 52:17 So, you know, I think your exhortation to hope is well taken. But, I also want to be very real about the fact that a Grand Jury subpoena, in and of itself, can be extremely disruptive. That said, I mean, we have been through this a bunch of times. We know how to support each other. We know how to endure the consequences of resistance. We also know how to endure the consequences of people betraying us in cooperating with Grand Juries. Right? And there's people like me, there's lawyers and legal workers and people like you, and people like Jerry, who is now both a former Grand Jury resistor and a lawyer. Margaret 53:05 Yeah! That's cool. Mo 53:07 Yeah, I know, I couldn't yell, any harder. There's, you know, there's a lot of people out there who have already been through this crucible. Margaret 53:16 Yeah. Mo 53:18 You know, and like I said, there's ways to protect each other from subpoena by observing good security hygiene. Margaret 53:24 Yeah. It's a...it's a..it's a...it's a proud lineage to be part of, you know, if you need to hold on to something, like going through the like history of people who've been fucked over by Grand Juries. It's like, you just like listing the high points of American history, you know, like... Mo 53:43 No, I mean, you're gonna be in good company. Margaret 53:45 Yeah. Mo 53:46 I mean, to be clear, not every federal Grand Jury is...I mean, every prosecution is political. Margaret 53:52 Right. Mo 53:53 But, not every Grand Jury investigation is explicitly motivated by political animus against the person who's being investigated. Margaret 54:02 Right. Mo 54:03 But there is, you know, there is a very well documented history of the federal government just using Grand Jury subpoenas to gather information to disrupt, to, to criminalize people who haven't actually done anything unlawful to criminalize people who are doing something that is unlawful, but just. Margaret 54:28 All right. Well, if people want to know more about Grand Juries, is there any resources you could point them to? Or? Mo 54:35 No, there's no resources, sorry. Margaret 54:37 Okay. Wait...are you doing dry sarcasm back at me? I'm supposed to do the dry sarcasm. Mo 54:44 Sorry. No, there are there are resources. There are some zines out there that I think are pretty good. There's one that we put together during Standing Rock. There's...actually, oh no, that's on jury nullification. There's a really great--this is off topic so you can totally feel free to cut it--there's a really great scene on jury nullification that was written and illustrated by the guy who wrote "Go The Fuck To Sleep." Margaret 55:10 Oh, that rules. We're gonna keep that in. Okay, cool. Mo 55:13 Anyway, yeah, there's like there's good zines. There's a--I think it still exists now I gotta google it...Oh well, the CLDC, the Civil Liberties Defense Center, and Lauren Regan have a Grand Jury brochure that's good. Oh, and then here it is the Grand Jury Resistance Project. I think this is what it is. This is at GrandJuryResistance.org. And CLDC.org has a brochure about about Grand Juries. There's also some information from...there's a really great resource that is on SparrowMedia.net. That is a letter that Chelsea Manning wrote to the judge in that case when I was representing her, that goes through sort of the history of Grand Juries in the United States and internationally. And I think it's, if I say so myself, it's a really thorough and really compelling letter. And, I think it was really helpful in educating the judge about, you know, what her reasons were at least, for refusing to participate in the federal Grand Jury system, and what her objections were. So if anyone's interested in that again, that's at SparrowMedia.net. And, they have a search function. Margaret 56:33 Cool. Mo 56:33 And it was the letter that Chelsea Manning wrote to Judge Trenga at some point when we were trying to get her out. Margaret 56:42 Okay, well, thank you so much for taking time out to tell everyone about this terrible thing. Mo 56:49 My pleasure? Margaret 56:52 Do you have any anything else that you want to shout out or ways that people should or shouldn't reach you or anything you want to promote? Mo 56:57 Yeah, I would, I would just like to remind people that there's really never any reason to talk to police officers of any kind. Certainly not prior to consulting an attorney. If cops knock on your door, tell them you are represented by counsel, and to leave their name and number and your lawyer will call them back. Feel free to call me at the National Lawyers Guild Federal Defense Hotline at (212) 679-2811. And just remember, if you are arrested to say, "I am going to remain silent, and I want to speak to a lawyer," and then actually remain silent. Margaret 57:41 Sounds good. All right. Well, thank you so much. Mo 57:45 You're very welcome. Margaret 57:51 Thank you so much for listening. I hope you never need the information that was in this week's episode. But, I feel like it's worth having in your back pocket just in case, like a lot of preparedness. And see this is a preparedness episode, you all were like, "The fuck have to do preparedness?' Well, we want to be prepared for a lot of different threat models. So if you enjoyed this episode, you should tell people about it. You can tell people about it in person. And you can tell people about it on the internet. And you can tell algorithms about it by liking and subscribing and rating and reviewing and all that nonsense that tells robots what to do. And you can also support this podcast by supporting the people who helped make, which it just not just me anymore, it's a whole team of people working at a publisher that I'm part of, an anarchist collective publisher, called a Strangers In A Tangled Wilderness. And if you support us on Patreon, you'll get access to...well, you won't get access to a ton of like unique content. But, what instead is you'll support us making content. And then if you support us $10 A month you'll get a zine in the mail every month, and anywhere in the world. In particular, I would like to thank Mikki, and Nicole, David, Dana, Chelsea, Staro, Jenipher Eleanor, Natalie Kirk, Micaiah, Nora, Sam, Chris, and Hoss the dog. Your support makes this show and so many other projects possible. Alright, well that's it for now. And I will talk, I guess "at" you soon, not really "to" you because it's kind of a one way communication media, which is kind of weird, but it is what it is. I hope you all are doing as well as you can with everything that's going on. Find out more at https://live-like-the-world-is-dying.pinecast.co

* Overturning Roe v. Wade: American Women Now 2nd Class Citizens; Marjorie Cohn, prof. emerita Thomas Jefferson School of Law, past pres. National Lawyers Guild; Producer: Scott Harris. * Supreme Court's “Originalists” on path to overturn FDR New Deal & Warren Court Precedents; Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law; Producer: Melinda Tuhus. * Universal Healthcare Could Have Prevented 300,000+ US COVID Deaths; James G. Kah, MD, emeritus professor, Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies Univ Cal SF; Producer: Scott Harris.

In this episode we interview Ed Mead. Mead is a veteran of the revolutionary underground organization the George Jackson Brigade which operated in solidarity with prisoner, anti-racist, and anti-imperialist struggles. A prolific organizer and participant of prisoner struggles both inside and outside of prisons, Ed also co-founded the prisoner organization Men Against Sexism. He also worked with a number of other organizations and struggles over the years including work with the Prairie Fire Organizing Committee, the Attica Brothers Legal Defense Committee, the National Lawyers Guild, Prison Legal News, and California Prison Focus.  In this conversation we talk about some lessons along the way of Ed's political development, from social prisoner to jailhouse lawyer to organizer to revolutionary to political prisoner.  Ed offers unvarnished reflections from a life in struggle, characteristically with no holds barred for what he refers to as “the tamed left.”  Our conversation was informed by Ed Mead's autobiography Lumpen and by Daniel Burton-Rose's books on the George Jackson Brigade. We will include a full list of sources in the show notes. Links: Lumpen: The Autobiography of Ed Mead Theory and Practice of Armed Struggle in the Northwest: A Historical Analysis Creating A Movement With Teeth: A Documentary History of the George Jackson Brigade Guerilla USA: The George Jackson Brigade and the Anticapitalist Underground of the 1970's Sundiata Acoli's Support Fund Washington Prison History Project Oral Histories

As its on-going celebration of the updated sixth edition of the Jailhouse Lawyer's Handbook, Center for Constitutional Rights Co-author and Senior Legal Worker Ian Head speaks with a number of people who have influenced and been influenced by the handbook for the 41st episode: “Jailhouse Lawyer's Handbook: Exploring the legacy of inside-outside organizing.” Ian spoke with:●      Brian Glick, a lawyer, Fordham Law School professor, writer and activist, and original author of the handbook;●      Jenipher Jones Bonio, lead counsel, Jailhouse Lawyers Speak International Law Project and program manager for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Social Justice Initiatives at Sturm College of Law;●      Lisa Drapkin, director of membership for the National Lawyers Guild, which helps with the distribution of the handbook; and●       Chinyere Ezie, senior staff attorney and co-author of the updated edition of the Jailhouse Lawyer's Handbook.●      Ian wraps up the episode by playing a recording by Mumia Abu Jamal, political activist, journalist and jailhouse lawyer.In this episode, Ian goes back to 1973 with Brian, when the first Jailhouse Lawyer's Handbook which was published as a manual to demystify the complexities of the law for non-lawyers. Brian provides the history of how the manual came to be. Jenipher discusses the mission of the Jailhouse Lawyers Speak, a group of anonymous incarcerated activists working to abolish prisons and their current advocacy action, the Shut'em Down demonstrations. Lisa talks about the impact—the number of requests for the handbook and how people on the inside use the handbook. And Chinyere highlights what's new in the handbook regarding LGBTQIA+ law, including new case law about transgender healthcare, visitation, and equal protection, and an appendix that provides state-by-state policies.Ian closes with a powerful recording by Mumia, who lifts up some of the self-taught litigators who have successfully used the handbook.Hard copies of the sixth edition of the Jailhouse Lawyer's Handbook are being distributed widely to prisoners and prisoners' rights groups. The accompanying Jailhouse Lawyer's website makes a searchable version available to family and friends of prisoners that allows users to browse the lengthy resource and quickly identify the most pertinent information.

The Haitian Revolution (1791-1804)— the largest slave revolt since Spartacus' unsuccessful insurrection against the Romans in 72 BC—was one of the greatest revolutions in world history, and the only successful slave uprising leading to the establishment of a free state governed by non-whites and formerly captive workers. Led by Toussaint Louverture, formerly enslaved himself, the Haitian Revolution struck fear and rage among the slavers, white supremacists, and imperial masters, even as it heartened and inspired freedom-loving peoples everywhere. The counter revolution continues, and we are  honored to be joined in a wide-ranging conversation by Walter Riley, a civil rights attorney in Oakland California, winner of the National Lawyers Guild's Champion of Justice Award, and a founder of  Haiti Emergency Relief.

No episode this week. Instead here are some places you can donate to support Black Lives Matter, the families of victims of police brutality and murder, and resources on how to educate yourself/friends/family and ways you can get involved. Black Lives Matter. Donate to Black Lives Matter: You can find the main donation page here. Get involved with your local BLM chapter: The full list is here. Or start your own: More info here. Donate to a bail fund: This crowd-sourced Google Doc of bail funds keeps getting bigger. Support the National Police Accountability Project: This group, a project of the National Lawyers Guild, helps people find legal counsel. More info here. Support Campaign Zero, a police reform group that has been working on policy solutions “informed by data and human rights principles. More info here. Sign a petition: Civil rights group Color of Change launched a petition asking that all the officers involved in Floyd's death are brought to justice. Find it here. Or another petition: The “Justice for George Floyd” petition on Change.org already has 8.5 million supporters. That sends a big message. Find it here. A Reading List White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard For White People To Talk About Racism by Robin DiAngelo  Citizen: An American Lyric by Claudia Rankine The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration In The Age Of Colorblindness by Michelle Alexander The Condemnation Of Blackness: Race, Crime And The Making Of Modern Urban America by Khalil Gibran Muhammad Dying Of Whiteness: How The Politics Of Racial Resentment Is Killing The American Heartland by Johnathan M. Metzl Between The World And Me by Ta-Nehisi Coates White Like Me: Reflections On Race From A Privileged Son by Tim Wise The History Of White People by Nell Irvin Painter The Autobiography Of Malcolm X by Malcolm X as told to Alex Haley