POPULARITY
91 episodes with Northern District
25 episodes with Northern District
32 episodes with Northern District
10 episodes with Northern District
15 episodes with Northern District
15 episodes with Northern District
28 episodes with Northern District
12 episodes with Northern District
7 episodes with Northern District
7 episodes with Northern District
15 episodes with Northern District
9 episodes with Northern District
6 episodes with Northern District
10 episodes with Northern District
13 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
11 episodes with Northern District
6 episodes with Northern District
3 episodes with Northern District
5 episodes with Northern District
5 episodes with Northern District
3 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
5 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
3 episodes with Northern District
5 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
2 episodes with Northern District
5 episodes with Northern District
5 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
2 episodes with Northern District
2 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
3 episodes with Northern District
4 episodes with Northern District
2 episodes with Northern District
5 episodes with Northern District
3 episodes with Northern District
3 episodes with Northern District
13 episodes with Northern District
On this episode of Conduct Detrimental: THE Sports Law Podcast, Dan Lust (@SportsLawLust) and Mike Kravchenko (Watch on YouTube) are back after a three-week hiatus — a quick, programming note on why — and there was no shortage of news waiting for them.They lead with the one that had the bat-signal going up in Dan's group chats: Steve Ballmer and the Clippers. On September 2nd the NBA closed its year-long investigation and dropped the hammer — a $30M fine, five forfeited first-round picks, a one-year suspension for Ballmer, six months for Lawrence Frank, a year for Gillian Zucker, and a $700K fine for Kawhi Leonard — over a $28M "endorsement" with the now-bankrupt Aspiration that the league deemed a no-show job. Mike and Dan dig into the scathing Wachtell report (this wasn't just the Clippers — Kawhi's camp shopped similar deals to other teams), and the real legal-ease answer to the question everyone's asking: why did Kawhi get a slap on the wrist while the Clippers got decimated? Then, the saga that "90% resolved itself" — SEC v. LSU. The conference passed its ex-pro eligibility rule 16–0 (LSU included), then Lane Kiffin went and recruited former NFL players anyway. The crew maps the chaos: a Louisiana state court clearing Dae'Quan Wright and Zxavien Harris to play, the SEC's now-mooted federal suit in the Northern District of Alabama, and the nuclear threat that ended it — a vote to expel LSU from the conference. LSU's RJ Lewis is teed up to test it all over again come basketball season.In the back half: Josh Jacobs pleads no contest to two misdemeanors the morning of the record — Mike explains the plea terms, the Commissioner Exempt List, and why the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy runs independent of the courts (the Diggs timeline is the cautionary tale for anyone counting on a quick return). Dan closes it out with his best bets and UFC futures.Let us know your thoughts!***Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ConductDetrimental.com. Let us know if you want to join the team.As always, this episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review: https://www.themisbarsocial.com/conductdetrimental Host: Dan Lust (@SportsLawLust) Featuring: Mike Kravchenko (Watch on YouTube)Produced by: Mike Kravchenko (Watch on YouTube)Twitter | Instagram | TikTok | YouTube | Website | Email
On this episode of Conduct Detrimental: THE Sports Law Podcast, Dan Lust (@SportsLawLust) and Mike Kravchenko (Watch on YouTube) are back after a three-week hiatus — a quick, programming note on why — and there was no shortage of news waiting for them.They lead with the one that had the bat-signal going up in Dan's group chats: Steve Ballmer and the Clippers. On September 2nd the NBA closed its year-long investigation and dropped the hammer — a $30M fine, five forfeited first-round picks, a one-year suspension for Ballmer, six months for Lawrence Frank, a year for Gillian Zucker, and a $700K fine for Kawhi Leonard — over a $28M "endorsement" with the now-bankrupt Aspiration that the league deemed a no-show job. Mike and Dan dig into the scathing Wachtell report (this wasn't just the Clippers — Kawhi's camp shopped similar deals to other teams), and the real legal-ease answer to the question everyone's asking: why did Kawhi get a slap on the wrist while the Clippers got decimated? Then, the saga that "90% resolved itself" — SEC v. LSU. The conference passed its ex-pro eligibility rule 16–0 (LSU included), then Lane Kiffin went and recruited former NFL players anyway. The crew maps the chaos: a Louisiana state court clearing Dae'Quan Wright and Zxavien Harris to play, the SEC's now-mooted federal suit in the Northern District of Alabama, and the nuclear threat that ended it — a vote to expel LSU from the conference. LSU's RJ Lewis is teed up to test it all over again come basketball season.In the back half: Josh Jacobs pleads no contest to two misdemeanors the morning of the record — Mike explains the plea terms, the Commissioner Exempt List, and why the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy runs independent of the courts (the Diggs timeline is the cautionary tale for anyone counting on a quick return). Dan closes it out with his best bets and UFC futures.Let us know your thoughts!***Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ConductDetrimental.com. Let us know if you want to join the team.As always, this episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review: https://www.themisbarsocial.com/conductdetrimental Host: Dan Lust (@SportsLawLust) Featuring: Mike Kravchenko (Watch on YouTube)Produced by: Mike Kravchenko (Watch on YouTube)Twitter | Instagram | TikTok | YouTube | Website | Email
Today, I'm sitting down with our good friend, the Armchair Attorney Matt Leffler, to tackle the massive $604 million Lupus Superior case against C.H. Robinson and what it actually means for freight broker liability moving forward! We discuss the reality of vicarious liability in logistics, especially how using third-party driver tracking apps can legally blur the lines between an independent motor carrier and a direct employee. We also take a hard look at the FMCSA's role in highway safety, the desperately needed updates to the outdated 1985 minimum trucking insurance requirements, and why the transportation industry must demand genuine accountability from government regulators instead of just throwing more money at broken systems. It's a straightforward breakdown of the biggest precedent-setting case in the brokerage industry right now, giving you exactly what you need to know without the fluff. How do you think this massive court ruling will ultimately impact your daily freight operations? About Matthew Leffler Matthew is a 3rd generation supply chain executive with over fifteen years of experience in safety, law, & maintenance. Matthew currently serves as Vice President of Strategic Accounts at Contract Leasing Corp. He is also an attorney that provides legal commentary on various supply chain issues & operates a popular podcast. In addition, Matthew has served as a senior leader with some of the nation's most admired maintenance, repair, & fleet management firms. Matthew entered the industry as an attorney defending trucking companies in civil litigation in 2010, but cut his teeth helping build & later selling his family's maintenance firm, Outsource Fleet Services, Inc. Matthew earned his J.D. from Michigan State University College of Law, Magna Cum Laude, and his B.A. from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. He is licensed to practice law in the State of Illinois; U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois; & 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. Matthew is the proud father of Michael, Rowan, Elise, & Elijah & has been happily married to his wife, Holly, since 2008.
Jeff Palermo of the Louisiana Radio Network joins the show from Baton Rouge to react to an eventful day for LSU, as The Southeastern Conference has filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama against the university and head coach Lane Kiffin.
Army Ranger. Two combat tours. Youth pastor. State senator. Talk radio host. CNN contributor. And now the top federal prosecutor in Alabama's largest federal district. Bryan Dawson sits down with Phil Williams, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, for the full story: the troubled kid who got shipped overseas to live with his father and met Christ in a youth choir in London; the reserve officer who was among the first Alabamians on the ground in Afghanistan after 9/11; the law student who came home from war and had to sue the Alabama State Bar to sit for the bar exam; and the day a lieutenant changed the convoy route for no reason he could explain and a car bomb went off on the road they were supposed to be on. Five years ago, Phil and Bryan were launching Rightside Radio and 1819 News out of the same building, betting that Alabama could become an outpost of freedom. This is the story of what God did with that bet. “Personnel is policy.” When the nomination came, Phil said no. Here's what happened next. Watch the full conversation with Bryan Dawson and U.S. Attorney Phil Williams. Subscribe to 1819 News, like the video, and share this episode with someone who needs to hear what God can do with a life. Topics Tackled • Fitting square pegs in round holes: an army kid, a broken home, and the structure that saved him • Afghanistan and Baghdad including the route change that stopped a convoy from driving into a car bomb • Ranger School and the lesson: “When you want to quit, that's your mind, not your body” • Suing the Alabama State Bar after a combat deployment cost him his ethics exam score • The 2010 Senate class, 136 years of one-party rule, and voting to cut their own pay • From Rightside Radio to CNN, making the conservative case in hostile rooms • Turning down the U.S. Attorney nomination, and the phone call that changed his mind Connect With Phil Williams • U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of Alabama: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndal • X / Twitter (personal, from his Rightside era): https://x.com/SenPhilWilliams • Rightside Radio archive (Rumble): https://rumble.com/c/c-1625445 • His years of work at 1819 News: https://1819news.com/author/PhilWilliams #PhilWilliams #USAttorney #Alabama #NorthernDistrictOfAlabama #ArmyRanger #RuleOfLaw #Veterans #RightsideRadio #AlabamaPolitics #1819News
Army Ranger. Two combat tours. Youth pastor. State senator. Talk radio host. CNN contributor. And now the top federal prosecutor in Alabama's largest federal district. Bryan Dawson sits down with Phil Williams, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, for the full story: the troubled kid who got shipped overseas to live with his father and met Christ in a youth choir in London; the reserve officer who was among the first Alabamians on the ground in Afghanistan after 9/11; the law student who came home from war and had to sue the Alabama State Bar to sit for the bar exam; and the day a lieutenant changed the convoy route for no reason he could explain and a car bomb went off on the road they were supposed to be on. Five years ago, Phil and Bryan were launching Rightside Radio and 1819 News out of the same building, betting that Alabama could become an outpost of freedom. This is the story of what God did with that bet. “Personnel is policy.” When the nomination came, Phil said no. Here's what happened next. Watch the full conversation with Bryan Dawson and U.S. Attorney Phil Williams. Subscribe to 1819 News, like the video, and share this episode with someone who needs to hear what God can do with a life. Topics Tackled • Fitting square pegs in round holes: an army kid, a broken home, and the structure that saved him • Afghanistan and Baghdad including the route change that stopped a convoy from driving into a car bomb • Ranger School and the lesson: “When you want to quit, that's your mind, not your body” • Suing the Alabama State Bar after a combat deployment cost him his ethics exam score • The 2010 Senate class, 136 years of one-party rule, and voting to cut their own pay • From Rightside Radio to CNN, making the conservative case in hostile rooms • Turning down the U.S. Attorney nomination, and the phone call that changed his mind Connect With Phil Williams • U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of Alabama: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndal • X / Twitter (personal, from his Rightside era): https://x.com/SenPhilWilliams • Rightside Radio archive (Rumble): https://rumble.com/c/c-1625445 • His years of work at 1819 News: https://1819news.com/author/PhilWilliams #PhilWilliams #USAttorney #Alabama #NorthernDistrictOfAlabama #ArmyRanger #RuleOfLaw #Veterans #RightsideRadio #AlabamaPolitics #1819News
In an effort to spark more artificial intelligence use in federal hiring, the Office of Personnel Management is advising agencies that several common HR use cases generally aren't considered “high impact” for the purposes of a federal policy governing the technology. The Thursday memo to department heads from OPM Director Scott Kupor argues that failure to adopt AI in federal hiring may be compromising “efficiency and quality” of that process. It shares OPM's own assessment of how federal AI governance policy applies to the human capital space to provide agencies with a roadmap for use. Specifically, OPM concludes AI used for creating job announcements, evaluating applicants, reviewing files before an offer, and evaluation of hiring metrics isn't considered high-impact in most instances. That means those uses wouldn't be required to follow corresponding minimum risk management practices, such as conducting pre-deployment testing, conducting an impact assessment, and monitoring the tool for potential adverse impacts. In an accompanying blog post, OPM Chief Information Officer Adam Starr explained the memo is an attempt to aid “overly cautious” agencies that felt AI applications in hiring are considered high impact. “Too often, agencies were defaulting to the view that any use of AI in hiring was subject to the high-impact standard. In reality, that is not the case,” Starr wrote. “Instead, the inclusion of AI as a complement to human judgement is not only acceptable but leads to better outcomes.” A U.S. district court judge mostly sided with Anthropic in its challenge against the Pentagon's designation of the company as a supply chain risk and attempt by the Trump administration to ban use of its products across the government. In a 59-page order, Judge Rita Lin of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in favor of the Claude maker on its claims that the administration's actions violated the First Amendment, the due process clause, and federal administrative procedure statute. “Though the Department of War is undisputedly free to select the AI vendor of its choice, the evidence demonstrates that the broad measures imposed on Anthropic were illegal and baseless,” Lin said. Lin's ruling comes after months of strife between Anthropic and the Trump administration. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.
On this week's episode we talk about:Woman describes how women treat her brother Father and son are accused of attacking a landscaper with a bat acted in self-defense during an ongoing neighborhood disputeU.S. District Judge Eleanor Ross of the Northern District of Georgia had an extramarital affair involving at least five sexual encounters with Atlanta Police Department Deputy Chief Kelley Collier inside her courthouse chambers during work hoursLeBron James has officially signed with the Philadelphia 76ers on a two-year deal, joining a loaded roster alongside Joel Embiid, Tyrese Maxey, and Jaylen BrownTwitter: https://twitter.com/PnLJudgementalsTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@pnljudgementalsFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/PnLJudgementalsInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/the__judgementalsEmail: pnljudgementals@gmail.comMusic: Bread Crumbs - Successful
Bob is joined by John A Sarcone III, First Assistant United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York, discussing the thwarted terrorist plot in Albany earlier this week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Naturalized citizens have served as federal judges, including as Justices of our Supreme Court, for more than two centuries, many with great distinction. Recently Representative Nancy Mace introduced a joint resolution calling for an amendment to our Constitution that would require that federal judges, alongside members of Congress, be born in the United States. Previously, Representative Pete Stauber proposed legislation requiring that all American judges be “natural born citizens” and require sitting judges with dual citizenship to renounce foreign ties. On this Lawyer 2 Lawyer episode, Craig welcomes Judge Jeremy D. Fogel, formerly of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, as they discuss these proposals that would require federal judges to be born in the United States or qualify as “natural born citizens, and the opposition by a group of bipartisan judges, Keep Our Republic's Article III Coalition, who are leading the charge against these proposals which create hateful rhetoric and go against the framers of our Constitution's ideals. Mentioned in this Episode: Keep Our Republic's Article III Coalition Subscribe to Lawyer 2 Lawyer: https://play.megaphone.fm/6kyeqlhety25kgmgqdr7cw
Senior Legal Fellow Hans von Spakovsky joins the broadcast to analyze the landmark Northern District of Texas federal court decision (Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF) striking down National Firearms Act (NFA) registration requirements for zero-taxed suppressors. Von Spakovsky also evaluates public policy contract defenses in interstate surrogacy disputes, federal law enforcement actions targeting $100,000 birthright tourism ring operations, and administrative enforcement mechanisms addressing visa overstays. Hashtags: #HansVonSpakovsky #NFA #SecondAmendment #SilencerShop #BirthrightCitizenship
Naturalized citizens have served as federal judges, including as Justices of our Supreme Court, for more than two centuries, many with great distinction. Recently Representative Nancy Mace introduced a joint resolution calling for an amendment to our Constitution that would require that federal judges, alongside members of Congress, be born in the United States. Previously, Representative Pete Stauber proposed legislation requiring that all American judges be “natural born citizens” and require sitting judges with dual citizenship to renounce foreign ties. On this Lawyer 2 Lawyer episode, Craig welcomes Judge Jeremy D. Fogel, formerly of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, as they discuss these proposals that would require federal judges to be born in the United States or qualify as “natural born citizens, and the opposition by a group of bipartisan judges, Keep Our Republic's Article III Coalition, who are leading the charge against these proposals which create hateful rhetoric and go against the framers of our Constitution's ideals. Mentioned in this Episode: Keep Our Republic's Article III Coalition
What is the history of religious liberty—and what happens when a society loses sight of the principles that made religious freedom possible?In this conversation Greg is joined by Alabama Supreme Court Associate Justice Will Sellers to discuss his latest historical article on the evolution of religious liberty. Justice Sellers traces the development of freedom of conscience from the Reformation 500 years ago to the First Amendment and the American founding.The conversation explores why government cannot dictate what people believe, how religious liberty shaped the American experiment, and why the founders viewed faith and morality as essential to a free society. Greg and Justice Sellers also discuss the role of the Ten Commandments in public life, the limits of religious liberty, the importance of assimilation, and the relationship between Christian principles, law, and civic virtue.They also discuss Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook's nomination to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama and what his judicial experience could mean for Alabama's legal and business communities.
In Segment 1's 2A Tuesday, Gun Owners of America (GOA) Florida State Director Luis Valdes joins the broadcast during primary election campaign travel to discuss a landmark ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF). Valdes outlines the legal challenge following budget reconciliation legislation that reduced National Firearms Act (NFA) transfer and manufacturing taxes on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns to zero dollars. The court ruled that without an active tax revenue collection mechanism under Article I, the federal government lacks constitutional authority to mandate NFA Form 1/Form 4 registration, fingerprinting, background checks, and registry filings for zero-taxed items. Valdes details the Department of Justice appeal window, federal agency oversight, and upcoming U.S. Supreme Court Second Amendment litigation regarding state-level semi-automatic firearm and magazine capacity bans. Hashtags: #2ATuesday #LuisValdes #GunOwnersOfAmerica #NationalFirearmsAct #NFA #SecondAmendment #ATF #Suppressors
Hour 4 opens with Segment 1's 2A Tuesday, featuring Gun Owners of America Florida State Director Luis Valdes analyzing a federal court ruling from the Northern District of Texas (Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF) that struck down National Firearms Act (NFA) registration requirements for zero-taxed suppressors and short-barreled firearms. In Segment 2, RNC Regional Director Zack Kraft joins the broadcast to evaluate 2026 primary election dynamics, field strategy, campaign finance contrasts with the DNC, and domestic manufacturing job growth. In Segment 3, guest Ryan Wiggins analyzes Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) national platform proposals—including defense spending, law enforcement, and judicial restructuring—alongside a published essay on non-profit homeless shelter governance. Hour 4 concludes with Segment 4 as Ryan Wiggins discusses family vacation planning, Disney resort operations, and cruise hospitality. Hour Hashtags #2ATuesday #LuisValdes #ZackKraft #RyanWiggins #NationalFirearmsAct #GOA #RNC #Midterms2026 #DemocraticSocialists Hour Guest List Luis Valdes — Florida State Director, Gun Owners of America (Hour 4, Segment 1) Zack Kraft — Regional Director, Republican National Committee (Hour 4, Segment 2) Ryan Wiggins — Commentator & Guest Host (Hour 4, Segments 3 & 4)
Judge Bernice B. Donald and Judge Jeremy D. Fogel are two individuals whose experience as federal judges brings context to the history and ongoing role of the courts in safeguarding civil rights, protecting constitutional freedoms, and preserving the rule of law. Judge Donald broke multiple historic barriers as an African American woman jurist—first in the Tennessee state court, the federal bankruptcy court, the federal district court, and ultimately the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Judge Fogel served as a district judge in the Northern District of California and later as Director of the Federal Judicial Center. They examine civil rights issues through the lens of the law.
Former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama Jay Town joins Marc Cox and Kim St. Onge to evaluate federal legislative bottlenecks and high-profile Department of Justice developments. Town addresses Senate Majority Leader John Thune's reluctance to alter filibuster rules to pass the SAVE America Act, arguing that proof-of-citizenship voting requirements command broad public support. He reviews the Senate Judiciary Committee advancing Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche for full floor confirmation and provides a legal analysis of Dr. Anthony Fauci invoking the Fifth Amendment during congressional testimony, explaining how federal pardons complicate self-incrimination protections. Hashtags: #JayTown #SAVEAct #ToddBlanche #SenateFilibuster #AnthonyFauci #ElectionIntegrity
【欢迎订阅】 每天早上5:30，准时更新。 【阅读原文】 标题：Apple Sues OpenAI, Accusing It of Stealing Company SecretsThe two companies struck a deal in 2024 to offer A.I. services on Apple devices, but their partnership has soured.正文：Apple accused OpenAI on Friday of stealing secrets about products still in development, setting up a legal face-off between two of the world's biggest tech companies. In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the consumer tech giant said OpenAI, a leader in artificial intelligence that has a new hardware business, had asked job candidates from Apple to share details about secret projects and to bring device components and prototypes to their interviews.知识点：setting up（原形 set up）/ˈsetɪŋ ʌp/ 动词短语 本义为 “搭建；设立；安排”，商业法律领域语境核心义为 引发、拉开（争端、对峙的序幕），正式促成某种对抗局面的形成（本文指苹果提起诉讼的行为，直接拉开了两家全球顶级科技公司之间法律对决的序幕） 核心搭配：set up a legal face-off、set up a high-stakes lawsuit、set up a commercial confrontation、set up a court battle・The patent infringement ruling set up a years-long legal war between the two semiconductor giants.这项专利侵权裁决拉开了两大半导体巨头之间长达数年的法律战序幕。・The brand's withdrawal from the partnership set up a bitter dispute over breach of contract.该品牌退出合作，引发了一场激烈的合同违约纠纷。【节目介绍】 《早安英文-每日外刊精读》，带你精读最新外刊，了解国际最热事件：分析语法结构，拆解长难句，最接地气的翻译，还有重点词汇讲解。 所有选题均来自于《经济学人》《纽约时报》《华尔街日报》《华盛顿邮报》《大西洋月刊》《科学杂志》《国家地理》等国际一线外刊。 【适合谁听】 1、关注时事热点新闻，想要学习最新最潮流英文表达的英文学习者 2、任何想通过地道英文提高听、说、读、写能力的英文学习者 3、想快速掌握表达，有出国学习和旅游计划的英语爱好者 4、参加各类英语考试的应试者（如大学英语四六级、托福雅思、考研等） 【你将获得】 1、超过1000篇外刊精读课程，拓展丰富语言表达和文化背景 2、逐词、逐句精确讲解，系统掌握英语词汇、听力、阅读和语法 3、每期内附学习笔记，包含全文注释、长难句解析、疑难语法点等，帮助扫除阅读障碍。
This week's episode of The MacRumors Show covers OpenAI's move into hardware and the trade secret lawsuit Apple filed against the company earlier this month.Apple sued OpenAI in the Northern District of California on July 10, alleging a months-long scheme to obtain confidential information about unreleased products. The complaint centers on OpenAI chief hardware officer Tang Tan, a 24-year Apple veteran who previously led iPhone product design, and former Apple electrical engineer Chang Liu. Apple claims Tan coached recruits on evading its exit-interview security procedures and told at least one employee to bring hardware components to an interview, and that OpenAI persuaded a supplier to apply a proprietary metal-finishing technique to an OpenAI device by falsely stating it had Apple's permission. The filing describes OpenAI's hardware business as "rotten to its core."The suit follows a souring of the 2024 partnership that brought ChatGPT to Siri, with OpenAI itself weighing legal options against Apple in May. More than 400 former Apple employees now work at OpenAI, including Vision Products Group leader Paul Meade, and former design chief Jony Ive leads design on the hardware lineup through LoveFrom after OpenAI's $6.5 billion acquisition of his startup io Products. Apple has countered with retention bonuses of up to $400,000and has now sent legal preservation letters to around 40 former employees, suggesting it believes the alleged misappropriation goes beyond those named. OpenAI says it has "no interest in other companies' trade secrets."Bloomberg's Mark Gurman argues the case is already causing damage ahead of any ruling, deterring Apple engineers from interviewing at OpenAI and making Asian suppliers wary of deepening ties with the company. Ive is not named in the complaint, which Gurman believes was deliberate given Apple's relationship with io Products investor Laurene Powell Jobs.OpenAI's first device, teased for months by Ive and CEO Sam Altman, is believed to be portable, screenless smart speakerthat is now expected in early 2027 at $200 to $300. Powered by ChatGPT and GPT-Live, it has a rechargeable battery so it can be carried between rooms, a camera for understanding its surroundings, and motorized elements that move on their own to give a sense that the device is alive. OpenAI reportedly does not regard the HomePod or HomePod mini as comparable, and people familiar with the project told Bloomberg the device is unlike anything Apple sells, making infringement unlikely. Apple's own smart home hub is the closest analogue.Further out, supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo reported that OpenAI is developing an "AI agent phone" built around a continuous, context-aware interface rather than individual apps, with the company controlling both the operating system and the hardware. Kuo has since revised his mass production expectation from 2028 to the first half of 2027, projecting combined 2027 and 2028 shipments of around 30 million units. The device is rumored to be a direct iPhone rival.Visit https://www.storyblocks.com/mac for 15% off annual plans.
It's often the moments that don't seem remarkable at the time that change everything. For Leigha Simonton, those moments included a move across state lines, a mock trial competition, and a mother who never stopped believing in her.In this episode of Counsel Brew, Leigha reflects on the experiences that shaped her long before she stepped into leadership. She shares what it was like growing up in a rural Louisiana community, moving to Dallas as a teenager, discovering mock trial, and learning that success comes from adapting, asking questions, and putting in the work. Along the way, she talks about the influence of her mother, a former NASA mathematician, the mentors who helped shape her career, and the unexpected way a mock trial competition introduced her to her future husband. The conversation also explores building high-performing teams, mentoring younger lawyers, and why she hopes to see the legal profession place an even greater emphasis on developing its next generation of leaders. Mixed in with stories about appellate arguments, Secret Service training, and a favorite morning coffee ritual, the episode offers a thoughtful look at a career built through curiosity and a commitment to continuous learning. In This EpisodeGrowing up in rural Louisiana and adapting to life in DallasHow mock trial shaped both a legal career and a lifelong partnershipThe influence of mentors, family, and the people who opened doors Lessons from a career in public service, including time as U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of TexasBuilding high-performing teams and investing in the next generation of lawyersBalancing a demanding legal career with family lifeSecret Service driving school, appellate advocacy, and a few memorable stories from the Department of JusticeWhy curiosity and lifelong learning continue to guide her careerAbout Leigha SimontonLeigha Simonton is Co-Chair of Dykema's White Collar & Government Investigations Section. Before joining Dykema, she served as the Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas after an 18-year career as an Assistant U.S. Attorney. A graduate of Yale Law School, Leigha now represents clients in complex investigations, white collar matters, commercial litigation, and regulatory matters while leading one of the Southwest's premier teams of former Department of Justice attorneys.Listen now: Find Leigha at https://www.linkedin.com/in/leigha-simonton-506b3a6/Message us at hello@counselbrew.com Visit us at http://www.counselbrew.com And Follow us @counselbrewhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/counsel-brew/Send us Fan Mail Explicit Rating is for the occasional use of colorful language.
THE TIM JONES AND CHRIS ARPS SHOW 0:00 SEG 1: Scott Faughn, Publisher of The Missouri Times and host of This Week in Missouri Politics || TOPIC: Missouri legislative headlines of the day || August 4th ballot questions || F150 campaign tour || Cori Bush VS Wesley Bell || Amendments 4 and 5x.com/scottfaughn 17:57 SEGMENT 2: Jay Town, legal analyst for NewsMax || TOPIC: The SAVE America Act, citizenship, and election fraud || Senate Judiciary Committee prepares to vote on Todd Blanche's nomination for Attorney General || Former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama || Currently Chief Compliance Officer at Radiance Technologies, a large defense and aerospace contractor headquartered in Huntsville, Alabama || Served in the Marine Corps for twelve years as a judge advocatehttps://x.com/JayTownAlabama 34:16 SEGMENT 3: White House Correspondents' Dinner redo | Willing lottery tickets to events https://newstalkstl.com/ FOLLOW TIM - https://twitter.com/SpeakerTimJones FOLLOW CHRIS - https://twitter.com/chris_arps 24/7 LIVESTREAM - http://bit.ly/NEWSTALKSTLSTREAMS RUMBLE - https://rumble.com/NewsTalkSTL See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
THE TIM JONES AND CHRIS ARPS SHOW 0:00 SEG 1: Scott Faughn, Publisher of The Missouri Times and host of This Week in Missouri Politics || TOPIC: Missouri legislative headlines of the day || August 4th ballot questions || F150 campaign tour || Cori Bush VS Wesley Bell || Amendments 4 and 5x.com/scottfaughn 17:57 SEGMENT 2: Jay Town, legal analyst for NewsMax || TOPIC: The SAVE America Act, citizenship, and election fraud || Senate Judiciary Committee prepares to vote on Todd Blanche's nomination for Attorney General || Former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama || Currently Chief Compliance Officer at Radiance Technologies, a large defense and aerospace contractor headquartered in Huntsville, Alabama || Served in the Marine Corps for twelve years as a judge advocatehttps://x.com/JayTownAlabama 34:16 SEGMENT 3: White House Correspondents' Dinner redo | Willing lottery tickets to events https://newstalkstl.com/ FOLLOW TIM - https://twitter.com/SpeakerTimJones FOLLOW CHRIS - https://twitter.com/chris_arps 24/7 LIVESTREAM - http://bit.ly/NEWSTALKSTLSTREAMS RUMBLE - https://rumble.com/NewsTalkSTL See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
The Supreme Court just closed out its most consequential term in a generation — gutting the Voting Rights Act, ending 90 years of independent agency precedent and testing the limits of presidential power.Democracy Docket founder Marc Elias hosted a panel of legal experts to break down the key decisions shaping democracy: Janai Nelson, president and director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, who argued Louisiana v. Callais before the Supreme Court; Joyce Vance, former U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Alabama; and Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, who was lead attorney in the lower courts on Trump v. Barbara and part of the team that defended it before the Supreme Court.
Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Leonard of Leonard Trial Lawyers joins Jon Hansen to discuss trending news in the legal landscape. Mike also shares his experience attending the hearing of the US Attorney for the Northern District of illinois for a complaint that was filed. For more information about Michael Leonard, visit leonardtriallawyers.com
It's been 30 years since a back pack bomb rocked the Summer Olympics in Atlanta killing one person and injuring over 100 others. The bomb had been left under a bench in the middle of Centennial Olympic Park on the eighth day of the games. Security Guard Richard Jewell discovered the bomb and helped to start clear the area before it went off. Jewel was hailed a hero until he became the number one suspect.In this previously aired episode of History of the 90s, host Kathy Kenzora looks back at the tragedy that struck the 100th games and the police investigation that followed. Show Contact: Instagram: @that90spodcastEmail: 1995podcast@gmail.comGuests:Kent Alexander, former US Attorney for the Northern District of GeorgiaTwitter: @KentbaleKevin Salwen, JournalistTwitter: @KevinSalwenThey co-authored: The Suspect: An Olympic Bombing, The FBI, The Media and Richard Jewell, The Man Caught in the Middle.www.TheSuspectbook.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In this week's Legal Speak episode, Law.com reporter Alex Anteau and Chicago-Kent College of Law professor Sarah Fackrell examine a recent federal appeals court decision that could reshape how intellectual property lawsuits are served on defendants in China. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit joined the Second Circuit in holding that service by email is not permitted under the Hague Service Convention. The May 29, 2026 ruling is expected to have significant implications for the high-volume Schedule A trademark and copyright infringement cases frequently filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. As one of the earliest scholars to study Schedule A litigation, Fackrell breaks down what the decision means for IP practitioners, international service of process, and the future of cross-border enforcement actions in this episode. Hosts: Cedra Mayfield & Patrick Smith Reporter: Alex Anteau Guest: Sarah Fackrell Producer: Charles Garnar
AlabamaState leaders applaud SCOTUS ruling that maintains state law prohibiting transgender athletes from competing against biological femalesState leaders criticize SCOTUS for ruling that continues the very loose interpretation of birthright citizenshipMontgomery County judge had hearing from both sides on residency challenges of Tommy Tuberville as he runs for governorWoman removed from her seat on the Montgomery City Council is now suing city leadersPresident Trump nominate AL Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook to be federal judge for Northern District of AlabamaMobile's Archbishop Rivituso was in Rome to receive a blessing from the popeNationalMore statements from Republicans about the SCOTUS ruling on birthright citizenship, President Trump calls for immediate action from CongressCO election clerk Tina Peters was at WH on Tuesday after her early release from prison at start of JunePresident Trump and RNC announces the first of its kind midterm convention to be held in TexasWatchdog group files complaint against Biden appointed judge in DC for her politicized prosecutions while in the DOJLiberty Counsel Action submits petition to EPA to have abortion drug listed as a water contaminant and no longer mailed to women in various states.Two medical groups release guidance saying no child under the age of 2 years should be given an electronic screen to use.
In episode 185, we sit down with Judge Myron Duhart to break down what an appellate court actually does and why those down-ballot judicial races deserve more than a passing glance.Judge Duhart is a native of Toledo, Ohio. He is the proud father of three and has been married to wife Nicole for 29 years. Myron grew up in the central city. He graduated from St. Francis De Sales High School and after graduation, he enlisted in the U.S. Army and was later commissioned as a lieutenant in the Army Judge Advocate General Corps (JAG).While serving his country he earned a B.A. in Political Science from Wright State University Dayton, Ohio and went on to receive his J.D. from the University of Toledo College of Law. Judge Duhart received a L.L.M. in judicial studies from Duke University School of Law and he attended the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. Also Judge Duhart has been a long time adjunct lecturer in law at the University of Toledo College of Law where he teaches trial practice.Throughout his legal career, he litigated a number of high profile criminal cases all over northwest Ohio and was one of a select cadre of attorneys certified by the State of Ohio to handle death penalty cases. He has been admitted to practice in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and the United States Supreme Court.In January 2011, Judge Duhart was appointed by former Governor Ted Strickland as one of ten (10) judges who serve on the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas bench. In addition to hearing serious felony criminal cases and large civil cases, Judge Duhart has served as a commercial docket judge hearing cases dealing with business-related disputes. In 2020, Judge Duhart was elected to the Court of Appeals where he served as Presiding judge.As an Army veteran, Judge Duhart served this country with distinction. As an attorney he worked tirelessly to protect the rights afforded to citizens both rich and poor. As a volunteer, he has unselfishly devoted his time and talent to a wide variety of causes. As a judge on the 6th District Court of Appeals he will continue to act with fairness and integrity.Resources: * Re-elect Judge Myron Duhart* Social Media:* Facebook* Instagram* Article about the Capital Care Network/Reproductive Rights case Judge Duhart worked on in 2016We're bringing together digital creators from across the state to build a powerful digital organizing network called Ohio Creators for Progress. Support and donate to this effort below! ⬇️Connect with United SHE Stands:* Substack* Instagram* TikTok* YouTube* Threads* Buy us a coffee ☕️This episode was edited by Kevin Tanner. Learn more about him and his services here:* Website* Instagram This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.unitedshestands.com/subscribe
OA1273 - On June 23, 2026, eight people were sentenced in DOJ's first so-called “Antifa” terrorism prosecution by federal judge Reed O'Connor in the Northern District of Texas to a combined 450 years in federal prison for their participation in a protest held at the Prarieland ICE detention facility on July 4th, 2025. Six of these defendants were charged with what amounted to being present at (or in the vicinity of) the protest, and one who wasn't even there received 30 years for moving a box of First Amendment-protected publications. In this continuing coverage of one of the most unjust criminal prosecutions of the second Trump administration, Matt goes deep on the government's case to show just how shoddy the “material support for terrorism” charges really were, and how DOJ used a few text messages, some consumer fireworks shot off on the 4th of July far from any people or property, and $4805.95 in property damage to engineer sentencing enhancements which virtually guaranteed that these protesters would receive harsher punishments than many defendants in the federal system charged with far more serious offenses. What does all of this mean for the future of dissent in the U.S., especially given the national security memo which promised heightened investigation and prosecution of “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, [ ]anti-Christianity… and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality” after the assassination of Charlie Kirk? Then in today's footnote: An Arizona appeals court takes on one man's truly contemptible email address. OA 1252: “Peaceful Protestors Are Facing Decades in Prison - Inside the Prairieland Trial” (OA interview with Defense Committee member and attorney Xavier de Janon) 18 U.S.C. § 2339A (“Material support” statute) Full docket in U.S. v. Arnold et al — CourtListener Meet the Defendants (Prairieland Support Committee website) First Superseding Indictment Second Superseding Indictment Jury Verdict Benjamin Song — Rule 29 Motion Maricela Rueda — Rule 29/33 Motion Benjamin “Champagne” Song's statement at sentencing (6/23/2026) Defense court-documents hub Commans v. Dunbar, Arizona Court of Appeals #CA-CV 25-0256 (2/6/2026) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!
What does faith look like in a time of rising Islamophobia, Christian nationalism, and division? In this episode of Tiny Pulpit Talks, Rev. T. J. FitzGerald sits down with Rev. Mara Richards Bim and immigration attorney Zainab Khan for an honest conversation about what's happening in North Texas and across the country. Together, they explore how fear and misinformation are fueling anti-Muslim hate, why Christian nationalism is growing, and what people of faith can do to build stronger communities. They talk about: Islamophobia in Texas Christian nationalism and its impact on faith communities Immigration, belonging, and religious freedom How Christians, Muslims, and people of all faiths can stand together Simple ways to support your neighbors and make a difference in your community About Rev. Mara Richards Bim: Rev. Mara Richards Bim is a pastor, writer and spiritual director. Mara graduated from SMU's Perkins School of Theology in 2024 with a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree and a Certificate in Spiritual Direction. After graduation, she served as the Program Director at Faith Commons. Mara was ordained to the Gospel Ministry by Royal Lane in 2025. Previously, Mara had a 20-year career as an award-winning theatre artist. She founded the nationally acclaimed Cry Havoc Theater Company which operated in Dallas from 2014-2023. In 2020 Mara received the Holloway Family Foundation's Visionary Leadership Award and in 2021 she was named one of D Magazine's "78 Women Changing the Face of Dallas." Mara is a Clemons Fellow at Baptist News Global where she regularly writes about the intersection of religion and politics, focusing on the threats posed by Christian fascism. She serves on the Leadership Council of Texas Impact and is also an active volunteer with Christians Against Christian Nationalism. She is the first Justice & Advocacy Fellow in the newly-launched Prophetic Leadership Program at Royal Lane. Mara and her family reside in Plano, Texas. About Zainab Khan: Zainab Khan serves as the Managing Attorney for the Immigration Detention Project that is funded by Dallas Area Interfaith and housed in the Texas A&M University School of Law Legal Clinic. The Immigration Detention Project helps eligible detainees seek release form immigration detention, whether through bond hearings in immigration court or habeas petitions in federal court. Prior to joining Texas A&M Law, Ms. Khan was a federal public defender, first in the Southern District of California, and most recently in the Northern District of Texas, defending the rights of the accused. Before that, she was a fellow at the Muslim Legal Fund of America, where she worked on criminal cases and civil rights cases affecting Muslim Americans. Ms. Khan is a graduate of the Southern Methodist University School of Law and the University of Texas at Dallas.
This Day in Legal History: The End of Roosevelt's Hundred DaysOn this day in 1933, Franklin Roosevelt signed three pieces of legislation that closed out what the country has been calling the Hundred Days ever since: the Banking Act of 1933, the National Industrial Recovery Act, and the Farm Credit Act, with the Home Owners' Loan Act having been signed three days earlier. The Banking Act of 1933 is the one most lawyers know, because the popular name attached to it — Glass-Steagall — has been doing rhetorical work in financial-regulation debates for ninety-three years.Carter Glass of Virginia and Henry Steagall of Alabama, the Senate Banking chair and the House Banking chair respectively, built the statute around two structural propositions: that commercial banks should be separated from investment banking and the speculative securities business that had helped pull the country into the Great Depression, and that depositors at member banks should be protected by a federal deposit insurance scheme so that a panic at one bank did not become a panic everywhere.The deposit insurance piece became the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The separation piece was the part that got partially repealed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 and then revisited in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. The National Industrial Recovery Act, signed the same day, set up the National Recovery Administration and the Public Works Administration and was meant to coordinate industry-wide codes of fair competition; the Supreme Court struck the centerpiece codes provision down two years later in A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States in 1935 on nondelegation and Commerce Clause grounds, an opinion that nearly killed the early New Deal and prompted Roosevelt's court-packing plan two years after that. The Farm Credit Act consolidated and refinanced the agricultural lending system that the Great Depression had taken to the brink.The legal point worth remembering is that this last day of the Hundred Days was, in retrospect, the moment the federal regulatory state of the twentieth century stopped being a collection of post-Civil-War commissions and started being the integrated structure of agencies, deposit-insurance funds, securities oversight, labor regulation, and welfare administration that the country has lived inside ever since. The fact that the Schechter Court was waiting in the wings to strike down the most ambitious piece of that day's work is part of the lesson. The constitutional question of how much economic ordering a Congress and a President can do at once was not answered on June 16, 1933 — it was framed.The Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up E.D. v. Noblesville School District, a free-speech challenge brought by the parents of an Indiana high-school student whose school district had refused to let her post flyers for her student-run anti-abortion club on classroom and hallway walls. The student, identified in court papers by initials because she was a minor when the case was filed, had been the founder of Noblesville High School's Students for Life chapter. The flyers she wanted posted featured images of demonstrators holding “Defund Planned Parenthood” signs. Noblesville Schools removed the flyers under a district policy giving administrators content-based authority over student materials displayed on school property, and the parents sued under the First Amendment.The Southern District of Indiana sided with the district in 2024, and the Seventh Circuit affirmed in 2025, both applying Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the 1988 case that lets public schools regulate the content of school-sponsored expressive activities if the regulation is reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns. The cert denial leaves Hazelwood intact in the Seventh Circuit and everywhere else.The piece worth flagging is Justice Alito's dissent from denial, joined by Justice Thomas, which urged the Court to grant review and use the case to revisit Hazelwood's framework. The dissent argues that Hazelwood was wrongly decided to the extent that it lets schools draw viewpoint-based lines under the cover of pedagogical-concern review, and that the doctrinal distinction Hazelwood draws between school-sponsored speech and Tinker-style independent student speech has become unworkable in the age of student clubs, distributed school messaging, and post-Mahanoy off-campus speech. Two votes are not five votes. But two votes naming a case as the vehicle they wanted are how the next decade of student-speech cases gets queued up. The Court has now told litigants what kind of vehicle it might be looking for. Expect a steady drumbeat of cert petitions teeing up the Hazelwood revisit over the next several terms.US Supreme Court turns away free speech claim by anti-abortion student | Reuters via Maryland Daily RecordThe Supreme Court also turned away on Monday the National Shooting Sports Foundation's challenge to New York's General Business Law § 898, the public-nuisance statute the New York legislature passed in 2021 to let the state and certain private plaintiffs sue firearms manufacturers, distributors, and dealers for endangering the public through the marketing and distribution of their products.The challenge was supported by Smith & Wesson, Sturm, Ruger, Beretta, Glock, and Sig Sauer, and went up on appeal from a 2024 Second Circuit decision that held the New York statute is not preempted by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the 2005 federal statute that broadly immunizes the gun industry from civil liability arising from the criminal misuse of firearms.The Second Circuit reasoned that the PLCAA's “predicate exception” — which preserves state-law claims when the firearms industry has violated a state or federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of firearms — covers a state public-nuisance statute that, by its terms, regulates the sale and marketing of firearms. The cert denial leaves the Second Circuit's reading in place, leaves New York's statute on the books and enforceable, and leaves the industry with a litigation exposure it had hoped to neutralize.The strategic part of the case is going to be the copycat statutes. California, New Jersey, Washington, Delaware, Illinois, and Hawaii have all enacted versions of the New York approach since 2021, and other states have similar bills in committee. Each of those statutes is going to invite its own PLCAA-preemption fight in its own circuit, and the cumulative jurisprudence is going to get built case by case until either Congress amends PLCAA or the Court decides one of these cases is the right vehicle to step in. Today's denial was not that vehicle.SCOTUS Upholds NY Law Allowing Lawsuits Against Gunmakers | The Daily SignalThe third notable cert denial on Monday was the end of the road for Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. in its long-running trade-secret fight with DXC Technology — the successor in interest to Computer Sciences Corporation. TCS had asked the Court to review a Fifth Circuit decision that affirmed a $168 million judgment against it for misappropriating CSC's life-insurance-administration software trade secrets and using them to build TCS's own BaNCS platform, which TCS then used to win a $2.6 billion contract with the insurer Transamerica.The Northern District of Texas verdict, returned in 2022, had been $56 million in compensatory damages and $112 million in punitives, and the Fifth Circuit upheld the punitives ratio in 2025 over TCS's BMW v. Gore and State Farm v. Campbell challenge to the proportionality of the punitive award and over its Defend Trade Secrets Act extraterritoriality arguments. The cert petition pressed both points and pressed a circuit split on the standard for proving misappropriation by an independent contractor that had been given access to source code under a nondisclosure agreement, but the Court declined.The practical immediate effect is that TCS will recognize a roughly $70 million one-time exceptional charge in Q1 of its 2027 fiscal year and the total exposure on the matter — combining the affirmed judgment with previously taken provisions — settles in around $220 million. The broader effect is doctrinal stability. The Fifth Circuit's analysis on cross-border trade-secret damages and on the extraterritoriality limits of the DTSA stand. Both questions are going to recur, and the next vehicle that brings them up may catch the Court in a different mood, but for now the law is what the Fifth Circuit said it was.US Supreme Court rejects TCS challenge in $168 million trade secrets case | Business Standard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
This week: the grand jury transcripts from the Broadview Six case show an array of embarrassing misconduct by AUSAs from the office of the US Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois. As Ken describes, these are things that AUSAs are very clearly taught not to do. And yet.Also this week: a couple of new flavors of AI hallucination trouble in the courts; Donald Trump's legal team that's suing the BBC for him isn't doing such a good job; Matt Taibbi filed another dumb lawsuit and lost; Ken Paxton's old lawyer endorses against him (unethical or just imprudent?); the Trump-Kennedy Center lost a lawsuit against a performer who canceled a scheduled performance; two ways being a mess can sometimes help you in court; and Judge Richard! Leon! says there's no Trump slush fund to enjoin, for now! But he will keep watching! So don't try any funny business!No paywall in this episode; it is available to all subscribers. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe
This Day in Legal History: Loving v. Virginia DecidedOn this day in 1967, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous opinion in Loving v. Virginia striking down Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924 and, with it, the anti-miscegenation statutes that sixteen states still had on the books. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the Court. The case had come up from a county courthouse in Caroline County, Virginia, where Richard Loving, a white bricklayer, and Mildred Jeter, a Black and Native American woman, had been arrested in their bedroom in the middle of the night in 1958 by a sheriff acting on an anonymous tip — they had been married in the District of Columbia and returned home to Virginia, where their marriage was a felony. The Lovings pleaded guilty, accepted suspended sentences on the condition that they leave the state for twenty-five years, and lived in exile in Washington until Mildred wrote a letter to Attorney General Robert Kennedy that landed eventually with the ACLU, which took the case.The Supreme Court's opinion did two things at once. It held that Virginia's statute violated the Equal Protection Clause because it drew an explicit racial classification with no legitimate state purpose beyond preserving “White Supremacy” — the Court used the phrase the Virginia statute itself had used — and it held that the statute violated the Due Process Clause because the freedom to marry is “one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.” That second holding, the marriage-as-fundamental-right strand, is the through-line that runs from Loving to Zablocki v. Redhail in 1978, to Turner v. Safley in 1987, to Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015 — every one of those decisions cites Loving and treats it as the foundational case. Whether the Court's substantive due process marriage doctrine survives the next decade is, as we discussed earlier this week, one of the open questions in American constitutional law. But Loving itself remains intact, and on June 12, 1967, the Court said something it had not said cleanly before: that the right to marry is the kind of liberty interest the Constitution actually protects.The Supreme Court on Thursday reversed the Second Circuit in FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd., holding 6-3 that the Investment Company Act of 1940 does not give private parties a cause of action to seek rescission of fund bylaws or other contractual terms. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the majority. The dispute came out of a campaign by Boaz Weinstein's Saba Capital against eleven closed-end funds — funds that, under Maryland's Control Share Acquisition Act, had adopted bylaws limiting the voting power of any shareholder who accumulated a disproportionate stake without the consent of other shareholders. Saba sued under Section 47(b) of the ICA, which makes contracts that violate the Act unenforceable, and the Second Circuit held that Section 47(b) implied a private right to rescind the bylaws.The Court told the Second Circuit to look harder at the modern implied-cause-of-action doctrine, which since Alexander v. Sandoval in 2001 has been hostile to inferring private rights of action that Congress did not write into the statute. The opinion reads as a continuation of that line: the ICA's enforcement structure is committed to the SEC, not to private plaintiffs, and Section 47(b) is a defense against contracts the SEC has already determined to be unlawful, not an offensive cause of action. The dissent, by Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson, argued that this is a misreading of Section 47(b)'s text and that the majority is gratuitously narrowing the enforcement of the federal securities laws. The practical impact is significant. Activist investors who had been pushing closed-end funds to convert to open-end form, or to alter investment strategies, lose a federal-court tool they had been using; the funds themselves and their independent directors gain a meaningful structural defense. Expect the next round of activist campaigns to move to state-court fiduciary-duty theories instead.US Supreme Court rules against private suits brought under key securities law | US NewsThe Court on Thursday also decided Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc., vacating the Fifth Circuit 9-0 in an opinion by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. The case is small in its facts and large in its doctrine. Thomas Keathley filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy in 2019 and failed to disclose, on his schedule of assets, a personal-injury claim he later brought against a construction company over a truck accident. The Fifth Circuit barred the personal-injury suit on judicial-estoppel grounds — the longstanding equitable doctrine that prevents a party from taking one position in one proceeding and a contradictory position in another — using a three-factor test under which a debtor's mere knowledge of the facts plus a motive to conceal was enough to bar the later claim.The Supreme Court said no.To determine whether the omission was inadvertent or mistaken for judicial-estoppel purposes, the Court held, the lower courts must look to the totality of the circumstances, not just to whether the debtor knew of the facts and had a motive. The doctrinal interest of the case lies in two concurrences. Justice Sotomayor, concurring, wrote that judicial estoppel should likely never apply in an open bankruptcy case at all — the trustee can simply amend the schedule and pursue the claim for the estate, which solves the problem judicial estoppel was invented to address. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Gorsuch, went further and questioned whether federal courts have any inherent authority to apply judicial estoppel as a freestanding doctrine, period — a position that, if it ever gets five votes, would unwind a doctrine that has been part of American practice since the 1850s. None of that is the holding. But the votes to revisit one of the duller corners of equitable estoppel are now visibly on the table.Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc. | SCOTUSblogThe third unanimous decision of the day was Abouammo v. United States, in which the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and vacated the obstruction-of-an-FBI-investigation conviction of Ahmad Abouammo, a former Twitter employee whose underlying case was one of the more striking Saudi-Arabia infiltration prosecutions of the last decade. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion. The facts are simple and the constitutional point cleaner than the facts. Abouammo, while working at Twitter's San Francisco office in 2014 and 2015, accessed and passed on confidential user information about Saudi dissidents to a Saudi official, in exchange for a $42,000 watch and $200,000 in wire transfers. The FBI eventually came to interview him at his home in Seattle, where he had moved by 2018, and during those interviews he created and emailed agents a fake invoice intended to make the wire transfers look like a legitimate consulting fee. The Justice Department charged the obstruction count along with foreign-agent and wire-fraud counts in the Northern District of California, and a San Francisco jury convicted him on all of them.The Supreme Court held that the obstruction count belonged in the Western District of Washington, not California, because the act of creating and sending the false invoice — the only act that supported the obstruction charge — happened entirely in Seattle. Article III's venue clause and the Sixth Amendment's vicinage requirement together do not let the government try a defendant in a state where no element of the charged offense occurred, no matter how convenient the prosecution. The obstruction conviction is vacated. The foreign-agent and wire-fraud convictions, which had different venue facts and were not before the Court, stand. Abouammo will not walk free. But the prosecution will need to decide whether to retry the obstruction count in Seattle, and the case is now a clean precedent that the venue clause has real teeth in a multi-district federal investigation.US Supreme Court overturns ex-Twitter employee's obstruction conviction in Saudi spy case | US News This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
A federal judge carried on a two-year affair with a high-ranking law enforcement officer by having sex in chambers and lying about it to investigators. The Eleventh Circuit responded with a private reprimand, concealing the judge's identity. But the judges didn't think through their anonymization strategy nearly well enough and AI cracked the case in minutes, revealing Judge Eleanor Ross of the Northern District of Georgia. Meanwhile, in lawyer ethics, a bar complaint in New York focuses on Todd Blanche, citing the ruling out of Tennessee finding a presumptively vindictive prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. And down in Florida, the scores of former judges and other professionals behind the complaint against Pam Bondi -- that Florida previously punted, claiming that it couldn't investigate a sitting Attorney General -- renewed the call, noting that Bondi may be many things, but she's definitely not the Attorney General anymore. Subscribe to Above the Law - Thinking Like a Lawyer: https://play.megaphone.fm/lpff6i7nq9wlb-pkdudwtw Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
DOCKET ALERTS: Joe Dye begins a series on the second phase of the redistricting wars at his Substack. Multiple states are threatening to tax payouts from Trump's slush fund at 100 percent. The Trump Administration is suing Massachusetts for failing to give "confidential," hard to trace license plates to ICE and CBP. A panel of federal judges in Alabama once again rejected the state's congressional map as an illegal racial gerrymander. The state has appealed to SCOTUS. Don Lemon moved to unseal the grand jury transcript in the Cities Church protest prosecution. He cited the recently unsealed magistrate's docket, showing the government's wild overreach — not to mention incompetence — in its warrant applications, along with the many cases where courts have said the DOJ is currently lawless and entitled to no presumption of regularity. The New York Times had a wild story this week about the Justice Department's total loss of credibility with grand juries, including in Wyoming, where the US Attorney's total violation of grand jury rules led to the dismissal of nine indictments. MAIN SHOW: The US Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois is reportedly investigating E. Jean Carroll for perjury. In a deposition in 2022, Carroll misspoke and said that her litigation was not being funded by anyone else. She later corrected the record to say that some of her fees were being paid by a nonprofit associated with LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman. The government is trying to do to that nonprofit what it's done to the Southern Poverty Law Center, alleging that it somehow conspired to hide its activities by getting Carroll to lie under oath. Meanwhile, the SPLC is moving to dismiss its case based on vindictive prosecution. Luckily it has eleventy-seven clips of Trump officials declaring that they're on a revenge mission to take out the civil rights organization. In non-political news, a drag queen named Pattie Gonia is in a trademark dispute with the brand Patagonia. SUBSCRIBER BONUS: Trump is making NDAs great again. How Democrats Can Take Back the Redistricting Wars Pt. 1 https://josephdye.substack.com/p/how-democrats-can-take-back-the-redistricting US v. Massachusetts [Confidential License Plates] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73400637/united-states-v-the-commonwealth-of-massachusetts/ Milligan v. Allen https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/61494291/milligan-v-allen US v. Levy-Armstrong [Cities Church/Don Lemon] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72212459/united-states-v-levy-armstrong/ In re Search Warrant [Cities Church/Don Lemon magistrate docket] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72323660/in-re-search-warrant/ As Trump Politicizes Justice Dept., Prosecutors Struggle With Grand Juries https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/26/us/politics/trump-justice-department-grand-juries.html DOJ probes Democratic-allied nonprofit that helped fund E. Jean Carroll's legal bills https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/05/28/doj-probes-reid-hoffmans-nonprofit-funding-e-jean-carrolls-legal-bills/ US v. Southern Poverty Law Center [docket via CourtListener] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73223865/united-states-v-southern-poverty-law-center-inc/ Patagonia, Inc. v. Entrepreneur Enterprises, Inc. ("Patty Gonia") [docket via CourtListener] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72169060/patagonia-inc-v-entrepreneur-enterprises-inc/ Pattie Gonia Instagram responding to lawsuit https://www.instagram.com/p/DY2L725tVow/ Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod
DOCKET ALERTS: The Supreme Court stayed a lower court decision out of Texas banning doctors from dispensing the abortion drug mifepristone. The Colorado Supreme Court barred Children's Hospital from cutting gender-affirming care, calling it a denial of treatment on the basis of sex and gender identity. The DOJ is suing the DC Bar to stop it disciplining upstanding government lawyers like Ed Martin and Jeff Clark. The case has been assigned to Judge Richard Leon!!! Elon Musk lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI. MAIN SHOW: The DOJ's effort to harass trans kids and their medical providers is escalating into a judicial crisis as Judge Reed O'Connor in the Northern District of Texas purports to bar Rhode Island Hospital from seeking redress in any other court or from "aiding and abetting" anyone else in seeking redress. Meanwhile in Rhode Island, Judge Mary McElroy says the Hospital does not have to comply. Trump purports to "settle" his lawsuit against the IRS over the 2020 disclosure of his tax returns by establishing a $1.8 billion slush fund for the "victims of weaponization" of the DOJ under Biden. Is that legal? (No.) Danco Labs v. Louisiana [US Supreme Court - mifepristone] https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25a1207_21p3.pdf Boe v. Children's Hospital Colorado [Colorado Supreme Court - gender affirming care] https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/system/files/opinions-2026-05/26SA66.pdf US v. Fox [DOJ sues DC Bar] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73338949/united-states-v-fox/?order_by=desc In Re: Administrative Subpoena 25-1431-032 [Texas action] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73276712/in-re-administrative-subpoena-25-1431-032/ In Re: Motion to Quash Administrative Subpoena to Rhode Island Hospital [Rhode Island action] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73290254/in-re-motion-to-quash-administrative-subpoena-to-rhode-island-hospital/ Trump v. IRS [docket via CourtListener] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72207870/trump-v-internal-revenue-service/ DOJ Notice of Settlement - administration of "Anti-Weaponization Fund" https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1441086/dl OLC Memorandum, "Availability of Judgement Fund in Cases Not Involving a Money Judgment Claim" https://www.justice.gov/file/151086/dl?inline Show Links: https://www.lawandchaospod.com/ BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod Threads: @LawAndChaosPod Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod
A federal judge carried on a two-year affair with a high-ranking law enforcement officer by having sex in chambers and lying about it to investigators. The Eleventh Circuit responded with a private reprimand, concealing the judge's identity. But the judges didn't think through their anonymization strategy nearly well enough and AI cracked the case in minutes, revealing Judge Eleanor Ross of the Northern District of Georgia. Meanwhile, in lawyer ethics, a bar complaint in New York focuses on Todd Blanche, citing the ruling out of Tennessee finding a presumptively vindictive prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. And down in Florida, the scores of former judges and other professionals behind the complaint against Pam Bondi -- that Florida previously punted, claiming that it couldn't investigate a sitting Attorney General -- renewed the call, noting that Bondi may be many things, but she's definitely not the Attorney General anymore.
Does your office have a blank 170.6 form ready to go for a certain judge? Stop doing that. A 170.6 peremptory challenge is no longer automatic: the California Supreme Court now authorizes courts to look behind your 170.6. The touchstone is whether your 170.6 is based on a genuine belief of prejudice—or mere grievance.But first, a $3 million sanctions order against Quinn Emanuel in a big‑pharma advertising case, where an expert obtained key clinical data before it was disclosed and the firm failed to correct the record. The Northern District of California called out firm culture, and ordering the attorneys to prepare and lead an eight‑hour ethics MCLE.How a three‑million‑dollar sanctions order against Quinn Emanuel grew out of failures to correct prior statements about expert discovery.The court's criticism of a “culture of bad ethics decisions” and the requirement for a bespoke eight‑hour ethics course.The facts in J.O. v. Superior Court, including 325 peremptory challenges aimed at removing a single judge from conservatorship matters.The new three‑step framework for challenging bad‑faith, blanket 170.6 practices and what counts as a prima facie showing.Strategic implications for lawyers who rely on peremptory challenges in small counties and specialized calendars.What is your firm's 170.6 practice like? Expect any changes after J.O.?
The Department of Justice has launched a criminal perjury investigation into E. Jean Carroll. In this hard-hitting episode of The Right Side, Doug Billings breaks down the explosive new development that could mark the beginning of the end for the radical left's lawfare machine.In her 2022 deposition, E. Jean Carroll swore under oath that no one else was paying her legal fees in the two civil cases against the America First side. Now federal prosecutors are investigating whether that statement was false after it was revealed that billionaire Reid Hoffman secretly funneled money through a nonprofit to cover her substantial legal expenses. Doug lays out the facts, the timeline, the coordinated pattern behind the scenes, and what this means for the rule of law in America.You'll hear unique, can't-be-found-anywhere-else analysis on how this probe exposes years of weaponized justice, why the venue in the Northern District of Illinois matters, the role of Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's recusal, and the real hope this brings for restoring accountability and trust in our institutions heading into the 2026 midterms.If you want straight talk, honest conservative analysis, and grounded optimism that the American people are finally seeing the system work the way it was intended, this episode is a must-listen.✅ Hit “Subscribe” or “Follow” right now so you never miss an episode.✅ Leave a 5-star rating and review — it helps us reach more listeners.✅ Share this episode with every friend who values truth over narrative.This is The Right Side with Doug Billings — proud conservatism that delivers.Prayerfully consider contribg to the show at: www.DougBillings.us#EJeanCarroll #DOJProbe #PerjuryInvestigation #LawfareExposed #ReidHoffman #TrumpAccuser #RuleOfLaw #2026Midterms #ConservativePodcast #AmericaFirst #fyp #theRightSide #DougBillings #Trump Support the show
DOCKET ALERTS:Joe Dye begins a series on the second phase of the redistricting wars at his Substack. Multiple states are threatening to tax payouts from Trump's slush fund at 100 percent. The Trump Administration is suing Massachusetts for failing to give “confidential,” hard to trace license plates to ICE and CBP.A panel of federal judges in Alabama once again rejected the state's congressional map as an illegal racial gerrymander. The state has appealed to SCOTUS.Don Lemon moved to unseal the grand jury transcript in the Cities Church protest prosecution. He cited the recently unsealed magistrate's docket, showing the government's wild overreach — not to mention incompetence — in its warrant applications, along with the many cases where courts have said the DOJ is currently lawless and entitled to no presumption of regularity.The New York Times had a wild story this week about the Justice Department's total loss of credibility with grand juries, including in Wyoming, where the US Attorney's total violation of grand jury rules led to the dismissal of nine indictments.MAIN SHOW:The US Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois is reportedly investigating E. Jean Carroll for perjury. In a deposition in 2022, Carroll misspoke and said that her litigation was not being funded by anyone else. She later corrected the record to say that some of her fees were being paid by a nonprofit associated with LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman. The government is trying to do to that nonprofit what it's done to the Southern Poverty Law Center, alleging that it somehow conspired to hide its activities by getting Carroll to lie under oath.Meanwhile, the SPLC is moving to dismiss its case based on vindictive prosecution. Luckily it has eleventy-seven clips of Trump officials declaring that they're on a revenge mission to take out the civil rights organization.In non-political news, a drag queen named Pattie Gonia is in a trademark dispute with the brand Patagonia. SUBSCRIBER BONUS:Trump is making NDAs great again.How Democrats Can Take Back the Redistricting Wars Pt. 1https://josephdye.substack.com/p/how-democrats-can-take-back-the-redistrictingUS v. Massachusetts [Confidential License Plates]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73400637/united-states-v-the-commonwealth-of-massachusetts/Milligan v. Allenhttps://www.courtlistener.com/docket/61494291/milligan-v-allenUS v. Levy-Armstrong [Cities Church/Don Lemon]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72212459/united-states-v-levy-armstrong/In re Search Warrant [Cities Church/Don Lemon magistrate docket]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72323660/in-re-search-warrant/As Trump Politicizes Justice Dept., Prosecutors Struggle With Grand Jurieshttps://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/26/us/politics/trump-justice-department-grand-juries.htmlDOJ probes Democratic-allied nonprofit that helped fund E. Jean Carroll's legal billshttps://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/05/28/doj-probes-reid-hoffmans-nonprofit-funding-e-jean-carrolls-legal-bills/US v. Southern Poverty Law Center [docket via CourtListener]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73223865/united-states-v-southern-poverty-law-center-inc/Patagonia, Inc. v. Entrepreneur Enterprises, Inc. (“Patty Gonia”) [docket via CourtListener]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72169060/patagonia-inc-v-entrepreneur-enterprises-inc/Pattie Gonia Instagram responding to lawsuithttps://www.instagram.com/p/DY2L725tVow/Show Links:https://www.lawandchaospod.com/BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPodThreads: @LawAndChaosPodTwitter: @LawAndChaosPodSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
On this week's Insider podcast, Doug Jones, former Senator from Alabama and current candidate for the state's governor, joins Preet Bharara and Joyce Vance to break down redistricting efforts across the country, and the major recent Supreme Court decisions on gerrymandering and the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act. Doug also served as the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama. In the full episode, they discuss a federal judge's decision to dismiss the criminal charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia on grounds of vindictive prosecution and what it means for similar cases involving famous defendants like former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. This segment is available for free to listeners of Stay Tuned. To hear the full episode, become a member at cafe.com/insider or staytuned.substack.com/subscribe. You'll also get access to other exclusive content. CAFE Insiders click HERE to listen to the full analysis. Join Preet Bharara and Barb McQuade live at the 92NY on May 31st: cafe.com/barb Subscribe to our YouTube channel. This podcast is brought to you by CAFE and Vox Media Podcast Network. Executive Producer: Tamara Sepper; Supervising Producer: Jake Kaplan; Associate Producer: Claudia Hernández; Senior Audio Producer: Matthew Billy; CAFE Team: Celine Rohr, Nat Weiner, Jennifer Indig, and Liana Greenway. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Monday, May 19th, 2025 The supreme court extends its temporary block on the removal of detainees in the Northern District of Texas under the Alien Enemies Act proclamation; the Republican bill for billionaires is killed in committee; Trump's FEMA admits it has no plan for hurricane season; DHS asks for 20K National Guard troops to assist ICE; HHS reinstates hundreds of health care workers; an appeals court has lifted the block on Trump's executive order targeting federal worker unions; the DoJ is going to permit the sale of a device that turns guns into automatic weapons; a car bomb explodes at a Palm Springs fertility clinic; Georgia is forcing a brain dead woman to carry her pregnancy to term; Kegseth tricks transgender troops into health checks that will get them kicked out of the military; the government is planning on moving a million Gazans to Libya; Moody's downgrades the US credit rating for the first time; a freshman at Yarmouth High School pens a letter in support of trans athletes; and Allison delivers your Good News. MSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlue Guest: Leah Litman Lawless | Book by Leah Litman | Official Publisher Page | Simon & Schuster Strict Scrutiny Podcast | Crooked Media @leahlitman.bsky.social on Bluesky Stories: Republican hard-liners defy Trump, Johnson as megabill fails to advance | ABC News Moody's downgrades U.S. credit as Congress considers bill that could add to deficits | The Washington Post Trump admin permits sale of device that allows standard firearms to fire like machine guns | NBC News Appeals court lifts block on Trump executive order targeting federal worker unions | POLITICO FEMA Head Admits in Internal Meetings He Doesn't Yet Have a Plan for Hurricane Season | WSJ Georgia Is Forcing a Brain-Dead Woman to Complete Her Pregnancy | The New Republic DHS asks for 20,000 National Guard troops to assist in deportations | NPR Suspect identified in deadly blast outside Palm Springs fertility clinic, per FBI | ABC News HHS backtracks on firing hundreds of federal health workers | NBC News Charlotte Clymer | Well done, Miss Feldman. | Instagram Good Trouble: The USFWS and the NMFS are accepting public comments on these ESA changes. If people are able, please leave a response! These comments are public, so be aware names may be displayed with each comment. Rescinding the Definition of Harm under the Endangered Species Act Write a Comment Federal Register :: Rescinding the Definition of “Harm” Under the Endangered Species Act Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://patreon.com/thedailybeanshttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/https://apple.co/3UKzKt0 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
The Supreme Court stayed a lower court decision out of Texas banning doctors from dispensing the abortion drug mifepristone.The Colorado Supreme Court barred Children's Hospital from cutting gender-affirming care, calling it a denial of treatment on the basis of sex and gender identity.The DOJ is suing the DC Bar to stop it disciplining upstanding government lawyers like Ed Martin and Jeff Clark. The case has been assigned to Judge Richard Leon!!!Elon Musk lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI.MAIN SHOW:The DOJ's effort to harass trans kids and their medical providers is escalating into a judicial crisis as Judge Reed O'Connor in the Northern District of Texas purports to bar Rhode Island Hospital from seeking redress in any other court or from “aiding and abetting” anyone else in seeking redress. Meanwhile in Rhode Island, Judge Mary McElroy says the Hospital does not have to comply.Trump purports to “settle” his lawsuit against the IRS over the 2020 disclosure of his tax returns by establishing a $1.8 billion slush fund for the “victims of weaponization” of the DOJ under Biden. Is that legal? (No.)Danco Labs v. Louisiana [US Supreme Court - mifepristone]https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25a1207_21p3.pdfBoe v. Children's Hospital Colorado [Colorado Supreme Court - gender affirming care]https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/system/files/opinions-2026-05/26SA66.pdfUS v. Fox [DOJ sues DC Bar]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73338949/united-states-v-fox/?order_by=descIn Re: Administrative Subpoena 25-1431-032 [Texas action]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73276712/in-re-administrative-subpoena-25-1431-032/In Re: Motion to Quash Administrative Subpoena to Rhode Island Hospital [Rhode Island action]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73290254/in-re-motion-to-quash-administrative-subpoena-to-rhode-island-hospital/Trump v. IRS [docket via CourtListener]https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72207870/trump-v-internal-revenue-service/DOJ Notice of Settlement - administration of “Anti-Weaponization Fund”https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1441086/dlOLC Memorandum, “Availability of Judgement Fund in Cases Not Involving a Money Judgment Claim”https://www.justice.gov/file/151086/dl?inlineShow Links:https://www.lawandchaospod.com/BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPodThreads: @LawAndChaosPodTwitter: @LawAndChaosPodSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Over the last few years, there's been an undeniable uptick in threats against American judges and their families: they've been doxxed, swatted, even killed. Many jurists are not all that comfortable having conversations around these threats. This reluctance to respond publicly is understandable, but it's also depriving us of a critical perspective from the very people this affects. This week on Amicus, that changes: Two judges sat down with us to talk openly about what often goes unsaid. Host Dahlia Lithwick speaks with sitting U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Washington Judge Robert S. Lasnik, and Judge Jeremy Fogel, a former U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of California and current Executive Director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute. They acknowledge that there's a long history of judges being threatened, but point out that it's usually not coming from the President and his Department of Justice. We're in uncharted territory, and Judges Lasnik and Fogel are bravely opening up about what this volatility means for an independent judiciary, and what we should do about it. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Over the last few years, there's been an undeniable uptick in threats against American judges and their families: they've been doxxed, swatted, even killed. Many jurists are not all that comfortable having conversations around these threats. This reluctance to respond publicly is understandable, but it's also depriving us of a critical perspective from the very people this affects. This week on Amicus, that changes: Two judges sat down with us to talk openly about what often goes unsaid. Host Dahlia Lithwick speaks with sitting U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Washington Judge Robert S. Lasnik, and Judge Jeremy Fogel, a former U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of California and current Executive Director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute. They acknowledge that there's a long history of judges being threatened, but point out that it's usually not coming from the President and his Department of Justice. We're in uncharted territory, and Judges Lasnik and Fogel are bravely opening up about what this volatility means for an independent judiciary, and what we should do about it. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Over the last few years, there's been an undeniable uptick in threats against American judges and their families: they've been doxxed, swatted, even killed. Many jurists are not all that comfortable having conversations around these threats. This reluctance to respond publicly is understandable, but it's also depriving us of a critical perspective from the very people this affects. This week on Amicus, that changes: Two judges sat down with us to talk openly about what often goes unsaid. Host Dahlia Lithwick speaks with sitting U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Washington Judge Robert S. Lasnik, and Judge Jeremy Fogel, a former U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of California and current Executive Director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute. They acknowledge that there's a long history of judges being threatened, but point out that it's usually not coming from the President and his Department of Justice. We're in uncharted territory, and Judges Lasnik and Fogel are bravely opening up about what this volatility means for an independent judiciary, and what we should do about it. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Back in 2015, Elon Musk and Sam Altman got the idea to start a nonprofit AI lab to develop artificial general intelligence that benefits all humanity. The lab would also make its technology open source, calling it OpenAI.All that is according to a complaint filed by Elon Musk, who has since parted ways with the organization. And now he is suing OpenAI, its CEO Sam Altman and its president Greg Brockman, saying they have abandoned the founding principles of the organization in pursuit of profits.They are currently facing off in federal court in the Northern District of California. Paresh Dave at Wired has been in the courtroom. He explains more on what the core of Musk's case is.
Back in 2015, Elon Musk and Sam Altman got the idea to start a nonprofit AI lab to develop artificial general intelligence that benefits all humanity. The lab would also make its technology open source, calling it OpenAI.All that is according to a complaint filed by Elon Musk, who has since parted ways with the organization. And now he is suing OpenAI, its CEO Sam Altman and its president Greg Brockman, saying they have abandoned the founding principles of the organization in pursuit of profits.They are currently facing off in federal court in the Northern District of California. Paresh Dave at Wired has been in the courtroom. He explains more on what the core of Musk's case is.
In a landmark ruling, a federal court in the Northern District of California struck down four of six challenged Trump administration regulations that had significantly weakened the Endangered Species Act’s core enforcement mechanisms. Host Mariann Sullivan speaks with Noah Greenwald, Endangered Species Program Director at the Center for Biological Diversity, about the case — what was challenged, what the court decided,…
This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Kate Klonick, Molly Roberts, and Troy Edwards to talk through the week's big national security news stories, including:“MisAnthropic.” On Monday, Anthropic filed a civil complaint in the Northern District of California and a petition for hearing at the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit over the Department of Defense's designation of the frontier artificial intelligence company as a “supply chain risk.” The litigation capped off weeks of building tensions between Anthropic and Pentagon officials over the firm's two ethical red lines for the Defense Department and its use of its AI model, Claude, specifically around widespread surveillance of Americans and the use of AI and autonomous weapons. What exactly are the Pentagon's grounds for designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk, and how does Anthropic argue that doing so is inconsistent with the law? And what might the implications be for the AI industry as a whole?“The Mashhadian Candidate.” Fears that Iran would respond to the ongoing Israeli-U.S. military campaign through overseas terrorism have come to a head this week, as reports emerged that U.S. intelligence had detected an encrypted message being transmitted from Iran that may serve as “an operational trigger” for assets sitting outside of the country. What do we know about Iran's involvement in past clandestine operations, including terrorism? And what does it mean that this is all happening at a moment when the Justice Department and FBI have lost so many of their experienced national security personnel?“Maricopa-calypse Now.” Federal investigators have ramped up several inquiries that appear to be aimed at longstanding—and, thus far, unsubstantiated—allegations of fraud in the 2020 election that are particularly popular with President Trump and his closest supporters. Last month, FBI agents executed a search warrant on Fulton County's election office and confiscated ballots and voting equipment used in 2020. Last week, the FBI reportedly subpoenaed records from a conservative Arizona legislator over the state senate's audit of the 2020 election results in Maricopa County. And days later, the Department of Homeland Security's Homeland Security Investigations office (or HSI) requested records from Arizona state officials regarding their own investigations into alleged 2020 malfeasance. What should we make of these developments? And at what point should we be concerned about the federal government's engagement in these sorts of matters in advance of the upcoming 2026 midterms?This week's object lessons are all-consuming. Kate is celebrating online legal analysis by drinking from her Balkinization mug. Troy is lamenting yet another slate of firings at the FBI by drinking from his EX FED mug. Scott, finding himself with unexpected free time at Union Station, devoured Barbara Tuchman's “A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century.” And Molly introduces us to the texturally triggering cherimoya. To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
© 2020-2026 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
