Podcasts about nyu law school

November 1st marks the beginning of Native American Heritage Month. It's a time to celebrate the traditions, languages, and stories of Native American and Indigenous communities. The NYU community has many incredible Native American and Indigenous members, and in this episode, we highlight one of those members – Justice Shawn Baker. In this episode, producer Ahmed Ashour speaks with Justice Baker about her journey finding the law through trial and error, her time on the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court, and her advice for current and prospective members of the NYU community, especially those of Native American and Indigenous descent.Justice Shawna Baker is a former Cherokee Nation Supreme Court Justice recognized internationally for her empowering representation of women and minorities. She is the first 2SLGBTQ+ person and only the third woman ever confirmed to the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court. Justice Baker's first written opinion was In re: Nash - a groundbreaking decision that granted full rights of citizenship to Cherokee Freedman descendants. In addition to her service on the Supreme Court, Justice Baker serves on Chief Hoskin's Domestic Violence Task Force and Cherokee Nation Health Services' Ending the HIV Epidemic Committee. Other roles include being a distinguished alumna in residence at the University of Tulsa College of Law, managing attorney of Family Legacy and Wealth Counsel, and a trustee of Oklahomans for Equality in Tulsa. She is an alum of NYU Law School, having earned her L.L.M in Taxation in 2015.  In addition to being Cherokee Nation citizen, Shawna is also of Muscogee Creek descent and resides on the Creek Reservation in Tulsa, Oklahoma. For a full transcript of this episode, please email career.communications@nyu.edu. 

Welcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking here.Yesterday, Southern California Edison (SCE), the utility whose power lines may have started the devastating Eaton Fire, announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program. Under the program, people affected by the fire can receive hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in compensation, in a matter of months rather than years—but in exchange, they must give up their right to sue.It should come as no surprise that SCE, in designing the program, sought the help of Kenneth Feinberg. For more than 40 years, often in the wake of tragedy or disaster, Feinberg has helped mediate and resolve seemingly intractable crises. He's most well-known for how he and his colleague Camille Biros designed and administered the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. But he has worked on many other headline-making matters over the years, including the Agent Orange product liability litigation, the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Trust, the multidistrict litigation involving Monsanto's Roundup weed killer—and now, of course, the Eaton Fire.How did Ken develop such a fascinating and unique practice? What is the most difficult aspect of administering these giant compensation funds? Do these funds represent the wave of the future, as an alternative to (increasingly expensive) litigation? Having just turned 80, does he have any plans to retire?Last week, I had the pleasure of interviewing Ken—the day after his 80th birthday—and we covered all these topics. The result is what I found to be one of the most moving conversations I've ever had on this podcast.Thanks to Ken Feinberg for joining me—and, of course, for his many years of service as America's go-to mediator in times of crisis.Show Notes:* Kenneth Feinberg bio, Wikipedia* Kenneth Feinberg profile, Chambers and Partners* L.A. Fire Victims Face a Choice, by Jill Cowan for The New York TimesPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fourth episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, October 24.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.I like to think that I've produced some good podcast episodes over the past three-plus years, but I feel that this latest one is a standout. I'm hard-pressed to think of an interview that was more emotionally affecting to me than what you're about to hear.Kenneth Feinberg is a leading figure in the world of mediation and alternative dispute resolution. He is most well-known for having served as special master of the U.S. government's September 11th Victim Compensation Fund—and for me, as someone who was in New York City on September 11, I found his discussion of that work profoundly moving. But he has handled many major matters over the years, such as the Agent Orange product liability litigation to the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster Victim Compensation Fund. And he's working right now on a matter that's in the headlines: the California wildfires. Ken has been hired by Southern California Edison to help design a compensation program for victims of the 2025 Eaton fire. Ken has written about his fascinating work in two books: What Is Life Worth?: The Unprecedented Effort to Compensate the Victims of 9/11 and Who Gets What: Fair Compensation after Tragedy and Financial Upheaval. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Ken Feinberg.Ken, thank you so much for joining me.Ken Feinberg: Thank you very much; it's an honor to be here.DL: We are recording this shortly after your 80th birthday, so happy birthday!KF: Thank you very much.DL: Let's go back to your birth; let's start at the beginning. You grew up in Massachusetts, I believe.KF: That's right: Brockton, Massachusetts, about 20 miles south of Boston.DL: Your parents weren't lawyers. Tell us about what they did.KF: My parents were blue-collar workers from Massachusetts, second-generation immigrants. My father ran a wholesale tire distributorship, my mother was a bookkeeper, and we grew up in the 1940s and ‘50s, even the early ‘60s, in a town where there was great optimism, a very vibrant Jewish community, three different synagogues, a very optimistic time in American history—post-World War II, pre-Vietnam, and a time when communitarianism, working together to advance the collective good, was a prominent characteristic of Brockton, and most of the country, during the time that I was in elementary school and high school in Brockton.DL: Did the time in which you grow up shape or influence your decision to go into law?KF: Yes. More than law—the time growing up had a great impact on my decision to give back to the community from which I came. You've got to remember, when I was a teenager, the president of the United States was John F. Kennedy, and I'll never forget because it had a tremendous impact on me—President Kennedy reminding everybody that public service is a noble undertaking, government is not a dirty word, and especially his famous quote (or one of his many quotes), “Every individual can make a difference.” I never forgot that, and it had a personal impact on me and has had an impact on me throughout my life. [Ed. note: The quotation generally attributed to JFK is, “One person can make a difference, and everyone should try.” Whether he actually said these exact words is unclear, but it's certainly consistent with many other sentiments he expressed throughout his life.]DL: When you went to college at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, what did you study?KF: I studied history and political science. I was very interested in how individuals over the centuries change history, the theory of historians that great individuals articulate history and drive it in a certain direction—for good, like President Kennedy or Abraham Lincoln or George Washington, or for ill, like Adolf Hitler or Mussolini. And so it was history that I really delved into in my undergraduate years.DL: What led you then to turn to law school?KF: I always enjoyed acting on the stage—theater, comedies, musicals, dramas—and at the University of Massachusetts, I did quite a bit of that. In my senior year, I anticipated going to drama school at Yale, or some other academic master's program in theater. My father gave me very good advice. He said, “Ken, most actors end up waiting on restaurant tables in Manhattan, waiting for a big break that never comes. Why don't you turn your skills on the stage to a career in the courtroom, in litigation, talking to juries and convincing judges?” That was very sound advice from my father, and I ended up attending NYU Law School and having a career in the law.DL: Yes—and you recount that story in your book, and I just love that. It's really interesting to hear what parents think of our careers. But anyway, you did very well in law school, you were on the law review, and then your first job out of law school was something that we might expect out of someone who did well in law school.KF: Yes. I was a law clerk to the chief judge of New York State, Stanley Fuld, a very famous state jurist, and he had his chambers in New York City. For one week, every six or seven weeks, we would go to the state capitol in Albany to hear cases, and it was Judge Fuld who was my transition from law school to the practice of law.DL: I view clerking as a form of government service—and then you continued in service after that.KF: That's right. Remembering what my father had suggested, I then turned my attention to the courtroom and became an assistant United States attorney, a federal prosecutor, in New York City. I served as a prosecutor and as a trial lawyer for a little over three years. And then I had a wonderful opportunity to go to work for Senator Ted Kennedy on the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington and stayed with him for about five years.DL: You talk about this also in your books—you worked on a pretty diverse range of issues for the senator, right?KF: That's right. For the first three years I worked on his staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee, with some excellent colleagues—soon-to-be Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer was with me, noted litigator David Boies was in the office—and for the first three years, it was law-related issues. Then in 1978, Senator Kennedy asked me to be his chief of staff, and once I went over and became his chief of staff, the issues of course mushroomed. He was running for president, so there were issues of education, health, international relations—a wide diversity of issues, very broad-based.DL: I recall that you didn't love the chief of staff's duties.KF: No. Operations or administration was not my priority. I loved substance, issues—whatever the issues were, trying to work out legislative compromises, trying to give back something in the way of legislation to the people. And internal operations and administration, I quickly discovered, was not my forte. It was not something that excited me.DL: Although it's interesting: what you are most well-known for is overseeing and administering these large funds and compensating victims of these horrific tragedies, and there's a huge amount of administration involved in that.KF: Yes, but I'm a very good delegator. In fact, if you look at the track record of my career in designing and administering these programs—9/11 or the Deepwater Horizon oil spill or the Patriots' Day Marathon bombings in Boston—I was indeed fortunate in all of those matters to have at my side, for over 40 years, Camille Biros. She's not a lawyer, but she's the nation's expert on designing, administering, and operating these programs, and as you delve into what I've done and haven't done, her expertise has been invaluable.DL: I would call Camille your secret weapon, except she's not secret. She's been profiled in The New York Times, and she's a well-known figure in her own right.KF: That is correct. She was just in the last few months named one of the 50 Women Over 50 that have had such an impact in the country—that list by Forbes that comes out every year. She's prominently featured in that magazine.DL: Shifting back to your career, where did you go after your time in the Senate?KF: I opened up a Washington office for a prominent New York law firm, and for the next decade or more, that was the center of my professional activity.DL: So that was Kaye Scholer, now Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer. What led you to go from your career in the public sector, where you spent a number of your years right out of law school, into so-called Biglaw?KF: Practicality and financial considerations. I had worked for over a decade in public service. I now had a wife, I had three young children, and it was time to give them financial security. And “Biglaw,” as you put it—Biglaw in Washington was lucrative, and it was something that gave me a financial base from which I could try and expand my different interests professionally. And that was the reason that for about 12 years I was in private practice for a major firm, Kaye Scholer.DL: And then tell us what happened next.KF: A great lesson in not planning too far ahead. In 1984, I got a call from a former clerk of Judge Fuld whom I knew from the clerk network: Judge Jack Weinstein, a nationally recognized jurist from Brooklyn, the Eastern District, and a federal judge. He had on his docket the Vietnam veterans' Agent Orange class action.You may recall that there were about 250,000 Vietnam veterans who came home claiming illness or injury or death due to the herbicide Agent Orange, which had been dropped by the U.S. Air Force in Vietnam to burn the foliage and vegetation where the Viet Cong enemy might be hiding. Those Vietnam veterans came home suffering terrible diseases, including cancer and chloracne (a sort of acne on the skin), and they brought a lawsuit. Judge Weinstein had the case. Weinstein realized that if that case went to trial, it could be 10 years before there'd be a result, with appeals and all of that.So he appointed me as mediator, called the “special master,” whose job it was to try and settle the case, all as a mediator. Well, after eight weeks of trying, we were successful. There was a master settlement totaling about $250 million—at the time, one of the largest tort verdicts in history. And that one case, front-page news around the nation, set me on a different track. Instead of remaining a Washington lawyer involved in regulatory and legislative matters, I became a mediator, an individual retained by the courts or by the parties to help resolve a case. And that was the beginning. That one Agent Orange case transformed my entire professional career and moved me in a different direction completely.DL: So you knew the late Judge Weinstein through Fuld alumni circles. What background did you have in mediation already, before you handled this gigantic case?KF: None. I told Judge Weinstein, “Judge, I never took a course in mediation at law school (there wasn't one then), and I don't know anything about bringing the parties together, trying to get them to settle.” He said, “I know you. I know your background. I've followed your career. You worked for Senator Kennedy. You are the perfect person.” And until the day I die, I'm beholden to Judge Weinstein for having faith in me to take this on.DL: And over the years, you actually worked on a number of matters at the request of Judge Weinstein.KF: A dozen. I worked on tobacco cases, on asbestos cases, on drug and medical device cases. I even worked for Judge Weinstein mediating the closing of the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long Island. I handled a wide range of cases where he called on me to act as his court-appointed mediator to resolve cases on his docket.DL: You've carved out a very unique and fascinating niche within the law, and I'm guessing that most people who meet you nowadays know who you are. But say you're in a foreign country or something, and some total stranger is chatting with you and asks what you do for a living. What would you say?KF: I would say I'm a lawyer, and I specialize in dispute resolution. It might be mediation, it might be arbitration, or it might even be negotiation, where somebody asks me to negotiate on their behalf. So I just tell people there is a growing field of law in the United States called ADR—alternative dispute resolution—and that it is, as you say, David, my niche, my focus when called upon.DL: And I think it's fair to say that you're one of the founding people in this field or early pioneers—or I don't know how you would describe it.KF: I think that's right. When I began with Agent Orange, there was no mediation to speak of. It certainly wasn't institutionalized; it wasn't streamlined. Today, in 2025, the American Bar Association has a special section on alternative dispute resolution, it's taught in every law school in the United States, there are thousands of mediators and arbitrators, and it's become a major leg in law school of different disciplines and specialties.DL: One question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter you are most proud of?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the hardest matter you've ever had to deal with?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter that you're most well-known for?” And I feel in your case, the same matter is responsive to all three of those questions.KF: That's correct. The most difficult, the most challenging, the most rewarding matter, the one that's given me the most exposure, was the federal September 11 Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, when I was appointed by President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft to implement, design, and administer a very unique federal law that had been enacted right after 9/11.DL: I got chills as you were just even stating that, very factually, because I was in New York on 9/11, and a lot of us remember the trauma and difficulty of that time. And you basically had to live with that and talk to hundreds, even thousands, of people—survivors, family members—for almost three years. And you did it pro bono. So let me ask you this: what were you thinking?KF: What triggered my interest was the law itself. Thirteen days after the attacks, Congress passed this law, unique in American history, setting up a no-fault administrator compensation system. Don't go to court. Those who volunteer—families of the dead, those who were physically injured at the World Trade Center or the Pentagon—you can voluntarily seek compensation from a taxpayer-funded law. Now, if you don't want it, you don't have to go. It's a voluntary program.The key will be whether the special master or the administrator will be able to convince people that it is a better avenue to pursue than a long, delayed, uncertain lawsuit. And based on my previous experience for the last 15 years, starting with Agent Orange and asbestos and these other tragedies, I volunteered. I went to Senator Kennedy and said, “What about this?” He said, “Leave it to me.” He called President Bush. He knew Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was his former colleague in the U.S. Senate, and he had great admiration for Senator Ashcroft. And so I was invited by the attorney general for an interview, and I told him I was interested. I told him I would only do it pro bono. You can't get paid for a job like this; it's patriotism. And he said, “Go for it.” And he turned out to be my biggest, strongest ally during the 33 months of the program.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.You talk about this in your books: you were recommended by a very prominent Democratic politician, and the administration at the time was Republican. George W. Bush was president, and John Ashcroft was the attorney general. Why wouldn't they have picked a Republican for this project?KF: Very good question. Senator Kennedy told both of them, “You better be careful here. This is a very, very uncertain program, with taxpayer money used to pay only certain victims. This could be a disaster. And you would be well-advised to pick someone who is not a prominent friend of yours, who is not perceived as just a Republican arm of the Justice Department or the White House. And I've got the perfect person. You couldn't pick a more opposite politician than my former chief of staff, Ken Feinberg. But look at what he's done.” And I think to Senator Kennedy's credit, and certainly to President Bush and to John Ashcroft's, they selected me.DL: As you would expect with a program of this size and complexity, there was controversy and certainly criticism over the years. But overall, looking back, I think people regard it widely as a huge success. Do you have a sense or an estimate of what percentage of people in the position to accept settlements through the program did that, rather than litigate? Because in accepting funds from the program, they did waive their right to bring all sorts of lawsuits.KF: That's correct. If you look at the statistics, if the statistics are a barometer of success, 5,300 applicants were eligible, because of death—about 2,950, somewhere in there—and the remaining claims were for physical injury. Of the 5,300, 97 percent voluntarily accepted the compensation. Only 94 people, 3 percent, opted out, and they all settled their cases five years later. There was never a trial on who was responsible in the law for 9/11. So if statistics are an indication—and I think they are a good indication—the program was a stunning success in accomplishing Congress's objective, which was diverting people voluntarily out of the court system.DL: Absolutely. And that's just a striking statistic. It was really successful in getting funds to families that needed it. They had lost breadwinners; they had lost loved ones. It was hugely successful, and it did not take a decade, as some of these cases involving just thousands of victims often do.I was struck by one thing you just said. You mentioned there was really no trial. And in reading your accounts of your work on this, it seemed almost like people viewed talking to you and your colleagues, Camille and others on this—I think they almost viewed that as their opportunity to be heard, since there wasn't a trial where they would get to testify.KF: That's correct. The primary reason for the success of the 9/11 Fund, and a valuable lesson for me thereafter, was this: give victims the opportunity to be heard, not only in public town-hall meetings where collectively people can vent, but in private, with doors closed. It's just the victim and Feinberg or his designee, Camille. We were the face of the government here. You can't get a meeting with the secretary of defense or the attorney general, the head of the Department of Justice. What you can get is an opportunity behind closed doors to express your anger, your frustration, your disappointment, your sense of uncertainty, with the government official responsible for cutting the checks. And that had an enormous difference in assuring the success of the program.DL: What would you say was the hardest aspect of your work on the Fund?KF: The hardest part of the 9/11 Fund, which I'll never recover from, was not calculating the value of a life. Judges and juries do that every day, David, in every court, in New Jersey and 49 other states. That is not a difficult assignment. What would the victim have earned over a work life? Add something for pain and suffering and emotional distress, and there's your check.The hardest part in any of these funds, starting with 9/11—the most difficult aspect, the challenge—is empathy, and your willingness to sit for over 900 separate hearings, me alone with family members or victims, to hear what they want to tell you, and to make that meeting, from their perspective, worthwhile and constructive. That's the hard part.DL: Did you find it sometimes difficult to remain emotionally composed? Or did you, after a while, develop a sort of thick skin?KF: You remain composed. You are a professional. You have a job to do, for the president of the United States. You can't start wailing and crying in the presence of somebody who was also wailing and crying, so you have to compose yourself. But I tell people who say, “Could I do what you did?” I say, “Sure. There are plenty of people in this country that can do what I did—if you can brace yourself for the emotional trauma that comes with meeting with victim after victim after victim and hearing their stories, which are...” You can't make them up. They're so heart-wrenching and so tragic.I'll give you one example. A lady came to see me, 26 years old, sobbing—one of hundreds of people I met with. “Mr. Feinberg, I lost my husband. He was a fireman at the World Trade Center. He died on 9/11. And he left me with our two children, six and four. Now, Mr. Feinberg, you've calculated and told me I'm going to receive $2.4 million, tax-free, from this 9/11 Fund. I want it in 30 days.”I said to Mrs. Jones, “This is public, taxpayer money. We have to go down to the U.S. Treasury. They've got to cut the checks; they've got to dot all the i's and cross all the t's. It may be 60 days or 90 days, but you'll get your money.”“No. Thirty days.”I said, “Mrs. Jones, why do you need the money in 30 days?”She said, “Why? I'll tell you why, Mr. Feinberg. I have terminal cancer. I have 10 weeks to live. My husband was going to survive me and take care of our two children. Now they're going to be orphans. I have got to get this money, find a guardian, make sure the money's safe, prepare for the kids' schooling. I don't have a lot of time. I need your help.”Well, we ran down to the U.S. Treasury and helped process the check in record time. We got her the money in 30 days—and eight weeks later, she died. Now when you hear story after story like this, you get some indication of the emotional pressure that builds and is debilitating, frankly. And we managed to get through it.DL: Wow. I got a little choked up just even hearing you tell that. Wow—I really don't know what to say.When you were working on the 9/11 Fund, did you have time for any other matters, or was this pretty much exclusively what you were working on for the 33 months?KF: Professionally, it was exclusive. Now what I did was, I stayed in my law firm, so I had a living. Other people in the firm were generating income for the firm; I wasn't on the dole. But it was exclusive. During the day, you are swamped with these individual requests, decisions that have to be made, checks that have to be cut. At night, I escaped: opera, orchestral concerts, chamber music, art museums—the height of civilization. During the day, in the depths of horror of civilization; at night, an escape, an opportunity to just enjoy the benefits of civilization. You better have a loving family, as I did, that stands behind you—because you never get over it, really.DL: That's such an important lesson, to actually have that time—because if you wanted to, you could have worked on this 24/7. But it is important to have some time to just clear your head or spend time with your family, especially just given what you were dealing with day-to-day.KF: That's right. And of course, during the day, we made a point of that as well. If we were holding hearings like the one I just explained, we'd take a one-hour break, go for a walk, go into Central Park or into downtown Washington, buy an ice cream cone, see the kids playing in playgrounds and laughing. You've got to let the steam out of the pressure cooker, or it'll kill you. And that was the most difficult part of the whole program. In all of these programs, that's the common denominator: emotional stress and unhappiness on the part of the victims.DL: One last question, before we turn to some other matters. There was also a very large logistical apparatus associated with this, right? For example, PricewaterhouseCoopers. It wasn't just you and Camille trying to deal with these thousands of survivors and claimants; you did have support.KF: That's right. Pricewaterhouse won the bid at the Justice Department. This is public: Pricewaterhouse, for something like around $100 million, put 450 people to work with us to help us process claims, appraise values, do the research. Pricewaterhouse was a tremendous ally and has gone on, since 9/11, to handle claims design and claims administration, as one of its many specialties. Emily Kent, Chuck Hacker, people like that we worked with for years, very much experts in these areas.DL: So after your work on the 9/11 Fund, you've worked on a number of these types of matters. Is there one that you would say ranks second in terms of complexity or difficulty or meaningfulness to you?KF: Yes. Deepwater Horizon in 2011, 2012—that oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico blew up and killed about, I don't know, 15 to 20 people in the explosion. But the real challenge in that program was how we received, in 16 months, about 1,250,000 claims for business interruption, business losses, property damage. We received over a million claims from 50 states. I think we got probably a dozen claims from New Jersey; I didn't know the oil had gotten to New Jersey. We received claims from 35 foreign countries. And the sheer volume of the disaster overwhelmed us. We had, at one point, something like 40,000 people—vendors—working for us. We had 35 offices throughout the Gulf of Mexico, from Galveston, Texas, all the way to Mobile Bay, Alabama. Nevertheless, in 16 months, on behalf of BP, Deepwater Horizon, we paid out all BP money, a little over $7 billion, to 550,000 eligible claimants. And that, I would say, other than 9/11, had the greatest impact and was the most satisfying.DL: You mentioned some claims coming from some pretty far-flung jurisdictions. In these programs, how much of a problem is fraud?KF: Not much. First of all, with death claims like 9/11 or the Boston Marathon bombings or the 20 first-graders who died in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, at the hands of a deranged gunmen—most of the time, in traumatic death and injury, you've got records. No one can beat the system; you have to have a death certificate. In 9/11, where are your military records, if you were at the Pentagon? Where are the airplane manifests? You've got to be on the manifest if you were flying on that plane.Now, the problem becomes more pronounced in something like BP, where you've got over a million claims, and you wonder, how many people can claim injury from this explosion? There we had an anti-fraud unit—Guidepost, Bart Schwartz's company—and they did a tremendous job of spot-checking claims. I think that out of over a million claims, there may have been 25,000 that were suspicious. And we sent those claims to the Justice Department, and they prosecuted a fair number of people. But it wasn't a huge problem. I think the fraud rate was something like 3 percent; that's nothing. So overall, we haven't found—and we have to be ever-vigilant, you're right—but we haven't found much in the way of fraud.DL: I'm glad to hear that, because it would really be very depressing to think that there were people trying to profiteer off these terrible disasters and tragedies. Speaking of continuing disasters and tragedies, turning to current events, you are now working with Southern California Edison in dealing with claims related to the Eaton Fire. And this is a pending matter, so of course you may have some limits in terms of what you can discuss, but what can you say in a general sense about this undertaking?KF: This is the Los Angeles wildfires that everybody knows about, from the last nine or ten months—the tremendous fire damage in Los Angeles. One of the fires, or one of the selected hubs of the fire, was the Eaton Fire. Southern California Edison, the utility involved in the litigation and finger-pointing, decided to set up, à la 9/11, a voluntary claims program. Not so much to deal with death—there were about 19 deaths, and a handful of physical injuries—but terrible fire damage, destroyed homes, damaged businesses, smoke and ash and soot, for miles in every direction. And the utility decided, its executive decided, “We want to do the right thing here. We may be held liable or we may not be held liable for the fire, but we think the right thing to do is nip in the bud this idea of extended litigation. Look at 9/11: only 94 people ended up suing. We want to set up a program.”They came to Camille and me. Over the last eight weeks, we've designed the program, and I think in the last week of October or the first week of November, you will see publicly, “Here is the protocol; here is the claim form. Please submit your claims, and we'll get them paid within 90 days.” And if history is an indicator, Camille and I think that the Eaton Fire Protocol will be a success, and the great bulk of the thousands of victims will voluntarily decide to come into the program. We'll see. [Ed. note: On Wednesday, a few days after Ken and I recorded this episode, Southern California Edison announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program.]DL: That raises a question that I'm curious about. How would you describe the relationship between the work that you and Camille and your colleagues do and the traditional work of the courts, in terms of in-the-trenches litigation? Because I do wonder whether the growth in your field is perhaps related to some developments in litigation, in terms of litigation becoming more expensive over the decades (in a way that far outstrips inflation), more complicated, or more protracted. How would you characterize that relationship?KF: I would say that the programs that we design and administer—like 9/11, like BP, plus the Eaton wildfires—are an exception to the rule. Nobody should think that these programs that we have worked on are the wave of the future. They are not the wave of the future; they are isolated, unique examples, where a company—or in 9/11, the U.S. government—decides, “We ought to set up a special program where the courts aren't involved, certainly not directly.” In 9/11, they were prohibited to be involved, by statute; in some of these other programs, like BP, the courts have a relationship, but they don't interfere with the day-to-day administration of the program.And I think the American people have a lot of faith in the litigation system that you correctly point out can be uncertain, very inefficient, and very costly. But the American people, since the founding of the country, think, “You pick your lawyer, I'll pick my lawyer, and we'll have a judge and jury decide.” That's the American rule of law; I don't think it's going to change. But occasionally there is a groundswell of public pressure to come up with a program, or there'll be a company—like the utility, like BP—that decides to have a program.And I'll give you one other example: the Catholic Church confronted thousands of claims of sexual abuse by priests. It came to us, and we set up a program—just like 9/11, just like BP—where we invited, voluntarily, any minor—any minor from decades ago, now an adult—who had been abused by the church to come into this voluntary program. We paid out, I think, $700 million to $800 million, to victims in dioceses around the country. So there's another example—Camille did most of that—but these programs are all relatively rare. There are thousands of litigations every day, and nothing's going to change that.DL: I had a guest on a few weeks ago, Chris Seeger of Seeger Weiss, who does a lot of work in the mass-tort space. It's interesting: I feel that that space has evolved, and maybe in some ways it's more efficient than it used to be. They have these multi-district litigation panels, they have these bellwether trials, and then things often get settled, once people have a sense of the values. That system and your approach seem to have some similarities, in the sense that you're not individually trying each one of these cases, and you're having somebody with liability come forward and voluntarily pay out money, after some kind of negotiation.KF: Well, there's certainly negotiation in what Chris Seeger does; I'm not sure we have much negotiation. We say, “Here's the amount under the administrative scheme.” It's like in workers' compensation: here's the amount. You don't have to take it. There's nothing to really talk about, unless you have new evidence that we're not aware of. And those programs, when we do design them, seem to work very efficiently.Again, if you ask Camille Biros what was the toughest part of valuing individual claims of sexual-abuse directed at minors, she would say, “These hearings: we gave every person who wanted an opportunity to be heard.” And when they come to see Camille, they don't come to talk about money; they want validation for what they went through. “Believe me, will you? Ken, Camille, believe me.” And when Camille says, “We do believe you,” they immediately, or almost immediately, accept the compensation and sign a release: “I will not sue the Catholic diocese.”DL: So you mentioned there isn't really much negotiation, but you did talk in the book about these sort of “appeals.” You had these two tracks, “Appeals A” and “Appeals B.” Can you talk about that? Did you ever revisit what you had set as the award for a particular victim's family, after hearing from them in person?KF: Sure. Now, remember, those appeals came back to us, not to a court; there's no court involvement. But in 9/11, in BP, if somebody said, “You made a mistake—you didn't account for these profits or this revenue, or you didn't take into account this contract that my dead firefighter husband had that would've given him a lot more money”—of course, we'll revisit that. We invited that. But that's an internal appeals process. The people who calculated the value of the claim are the same people that are going to be looking at revisiting the claim. But again, that's due process, and that's something that we thought was important.DL: You and Camille have been doing this really important work for decades. Since this is, of course, shortly after your 80th birthday, I should ask: do you have future plans? You're tackling some of the most complicated matters, headline-making matters. Would you ever want to retire at some point?KF: I have no intention of retiring. I do agree that when you reach a certain pinnacle in what you've done, you do slow down. We are much more selective in what we do. I used to have maybe 15 mediations going on at once; now, we have one or two matters, like the Los Angeles wildfires. As long as I'm capable, as long as Camille's willing, we'll continue to do it, but we'll be very careful about what we select to do. We don't travel much. The Los Angeles wildfires was largely Zooms, going back and forth. And we're not going to administer that program. We had administered 9/11 and BP; we're trying to move away from that. It's very time-consuming and stressful. So we've accomplished a great deal over the last 50 years—but as long as we can do it, we'll continue to do it.DL: Do you have any junior colleagues who would take over what you and Camille have built?KF: We don't have junior colleagues. There's just the two of us and Cindy Sanzotta, our receptionist. But it's an interesting question: “Who's after Feinberg? Who's next in doing this?” I think there are thousands of people in this country who could do what we do. It is not rocket science. It really isn't. I'll tell you what's difficult: the emotion. If somebody wants to do what we do, you better brace yourself for the emotion, the anger, the frustration, the finger pointing. It goes with the territory. And if you don't have the psychological ability to handle this type of stress, stay away. But I'm sure somebody will be there, and no one's irreplaceable.DL: Well, I know I personally could not handle it. I worked when I was at a law firm on civil litigation over insurance proceeds related to the World Trade Center, and that was a very draining case, and I was very glad to no longer be on it. So I could not do what you and Camille do. But let me ask you, to end this section on a positive note: what would you say is the most rewarding or meaningful or satisfying aspect of the work that you do on these programs?KF: Giving back to the community. Public service. Helping the community heal. Not so much the individuals; the individuals are part of the community. “Every individual can make a difference.” I remember that every day, what John F. Kennedy said: government service is a noble undertaking. So what's most rewarding for me is that although I'm a private practitioner—I am no longer in government service, since my days with Senator Kennedy—I'd like to think that I performed a valuable service for the community, the resilience of the community, the charity exhibited by the community. And that gives me a great sense of self-satisfaction.DL: You absolutely have. It's been amazing, and I'm so grateful for you taking the time to join me.So now, onto our speed round. These are four questions that are standardized. My first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law in a more abstract sense.KF: Uncertainty. What I don't like about the law is—and I guess maybe it's the flip side of the best way to get to a result—I don't like the uncertainty of the law. I don't like the fact that until the very end of the process, you don't know if your view and opinion will prevail. And I think losing control over your destiny in that regard is problematic.DL: My second question—and maybe we touched on this a little bit, when we talked about your father's opinions—what would you be if you were not a lawyer?KF: Probably an actor. As I say, I almost became an actor. And I still love theater and the movies and Broadway shows. If my father hadn't given me that advice, I was on the cusp of pursuing a career in the theater.DL: Have you dabbled in anything in your (probably limited) spare time—community theater, anything like that?KF: No, but I certainly have prioritized in my spare time classical music and the peace and optimism it brings to the listener. It's been an important part of my life.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?KF: Well, it varies from program to program. I'd like to get seven hours. That's what my doctors tell me: “Ken, very important—more important than pills and exercise and diet—is sleep. Your body needs a minimum of seven hours.” Well, for me, seven hours is rare—it's more like six or even five, and during 9/11 or during Eaton wildfires, it might be more like four or five. And that's not enough, and that is a problem.DL: My last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?KF: Yes, I'll give you some career and life advice. It's very simple: don't plan too far ahead. People have this view—you may think you know what you want to do with your career. You may think you know what life holds for you. You don't know. If I've learned anything over the last decades, life has a way of changing the best-laid plans. These 9/11 husbands and wives said goodbye to their children, “we'll see you for dinner,” a perfunctory wave—and they never saw them again. Dust, not even a body. And the idea I tell law students—who say, ”I'm going to be a corporate lawyer,” or “I'm going to be a litigator”—I tell them, “You have no idea what your legal career will look like. Look at Feinberg; he never planned on this. He never thought, in his wildest dreams, that this would be his chosen avenue of the law.”My advice: enjoy the moment. Do what you like now. Don't worry too much about what you'll be doing two years, five years, 10 years, a lifetime ahead of you. It doesn't work that way. Everybody gets thrown curveballs, and that's advice I give to everybody.DL: Well, you did not plan out your career, but it has turned out wonderfully, and the country is better for it. Thank you, Ken, both for your work on all these matters over the years and for joining me today.KF: A privilege and an honor. Thanks, David.DL: Thanks so much to Ken for joining me—and, of course, for his decades of work resolving some of the thorniest disputes in the country, which is truly a form of public service.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 12. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects.Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; (3) transcripts of podcast interviews; and (4) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

This is a rebroadcast. The episode originally ran in May 2019. Tad R. Callister served as Sunday School general president, in the Presidency of the Seventy, as a member of the Second Quorum of the Seventy, an Area Seventy, president of the Canada Toronto East mission, regional representative, stake president, bishop, and as a full-time missionary in the Eastern Atlantic States Mission. Brother Callister held an accounting degree from BYU, a Juris Doctorate degree from UCLA, and a master's degree in tax law from NYU Law School. He is the grandson of apostle LeGrand Richards and the author of several books, including The Infinite Atonement and A Case for the Book of Mormon. He and his wife, Kathryn Louise Saporiti, are the parents of six children. Links A Case for the Book of Mormon God's Compelling Witness: The Book of Mormon Transcript available with the video in the Zion Lab community Highlights 2:30 Moving on from being released as General Sunday School president 4:20 Which came first, the book or the talk? 5:15 How his law practice helped him crystallize thoughts when writing 5:50 His approach to personal study 6:10 Lesson to seek and ponder his own insight first before turning to doctrinal commentary 8:00 Studying first thing in the morning, and writing along with reading has helped him summarize his thoughts while studying the scriptures 8:50 Questioning and discussing with others is part of pondering 10:00 Reason can strengthen faith, and logic and the Spirit can go hand-in-hand 11:40 The audience for the book is first people who have testimonies that can be strengthened and who can help strengthen the testimonies of others, as well as those who may have questions, and finally critics 12:40 A partial truth, when presented as a whole truth, is an untruth 13:00 Less than 2% of the archeological finds in ancient America have been unearthed 16:00 An intellectual witness of scripture does not come from archeological findings, whether regarding the Bible or the Book of Mormon 16:40 His grandfather LeGrand Richards was a common-man leader, related to everyone, and simply loved people 19:15 Ward Sunday School presidents are not merely bell-ringers because they are in charge of the teacher councils, and they have the responsibility to help improve the teaching of every teacher in every organization, and to see that the individual and family curriculum is being implemented in every home 21:50 One purpose of the Come Follow Me curriculum is to take us from reading the scriptures to pondering the scriptures and discussing them. In the homes, it is the catalyst for discussion and learning the gospel together. 23:30 There has been a substantial increase in individual and family study, and class members from children to adults are better prepared for Sunday meetings 24:10 He and his counselors traveled internationally and were able to get a good idea of what was happening with teacher council meetings 25:10 Practicing through role play at the end of teacher council meetings was one thing they observed and recognized as an effective implementation in those meetings 25:45 Another effective implementation is the change to Christ-centered Easter Sunday and Christmas services so that members can invite others to come worship with them 27:30 Surprised at his call as the General Sunday School president 28:20 They were given a lot of latitude but there was a clear expectation to improve teaching in the home and at church 30:20 Traveling and visiting as a Sunday School general auxiliary president was to teach in general how to teach more like the Savior, to help teachers make teacher counsels more effective, and to discuss in focus groups what was working or not working in areas around the world 31:40 In the presidency of a Quorum of Seventy, they were given responsibility for a specific area, and were to train area seventies,

Since early September, President Trump has ordered the U.S. military to conduct multiple lethal strikes on boats in the Caribbean Sea suspected of drug trafficking, resulting in at least 21 deaths. These unprecedented military actions raise critical questions about the identity of those targeted, the Administration's legal justification, and the scope of presidential power to designate “terrorists” and authorize lethal force. What checks exist from Congress, courts, or the executive branch to limit such authority?On this episode of the Just Security Podcast, cross-hosted with the Reiss Center on Law and Security, host Tess Bridgeman and co-host Rachel Goldbrenner are joined by experts Rebecca Ingber and Brian Finucane to analyze the facts, the law, and the broader implications of this military campaign in the Caribbean.They examine an important new chapter in the use of force against drug cartels and explores how far presidential powers extend in such contexts.Show Notes: This is a joint podcast of Just Security and NYU Law School's Reiss Center on Law and Security.Executive branch reporting on the vessel strikes, on Tren de Aragua, and related resources:48-Hour Report pursuant to the War Powers Resolution (September 4, 2025) (Note: For a living resource containing this and all other publicly available reports submitted pursuant to the War Powers Resolution since its enactment in 1973, see NYU Law's Reiss Center on Law and Security's War Powers Resolution Reporting Project)Notice to Congress Under 50 U.S.C. §1543a (Section 1230 of the FY 2024 National Defense Authorization Act) (undated, made public October 2, 2025)National Intelligence Council, Venezuela: Examining Regime Ties to Tren de Aragua (April 7, 2025)Listeners may also be interested in Just Security‘s Collection: U.S. Lethal Strikes on Suspected Drug Traffickers (updated, Oct. 3, 2025), including:Mary B. McCord and Tess Bridgeman, What the Senate Judiciary Committee Should Ask A.G. Bondi on Drug Cartel Strikes (Oct. 3, 2025)Marty Lederman, Legal Flaws in the Trump Administration's Notice to Congress on “Armed Conflict” with Drug Cartels (Oct. 3, 2025)Daniel Maurer, US Servicemembers' Exposure to Criminal Liability for Lethal Strikes on Narcoterrorists (September 24, 2025)Ben Saul, The United States' Dirty War on “Narco Terrorism” (September 22, 2025)Annie Shiel, John Ramming Chappell, Priyanka Motaparthy, Wells Dixon and Daphne Eviatar, Murder by Drone: The Legal and Moral Stakes of the Caribbean Strikes (September 17, 2025)Brian Finucane, Asserting a License to Kill: Why the Caribbean Strike is a Dangerous Departure from the “War on Terror (September 15, 2025)Marty Lederman, The Many Ways

In this episode of Ruled by Reason, guest host John B. “Jack” Kirkwood, Professor of Law and the William C. Oltman Professor of Teaching Excellence at Seattle University School of Law, sits down with Daniel Francis, Assistant Professor of Law at NYU Law School. The two discuss Francis's award-winning article, Monopolizing by Conditioning, 124 Colum. L. Rev. 1917 (2024). Professor Francis's article won the 23rd Annual Jerry S. Cohen Memorial Fund Writing Award, presented on May 29 at AAI's 2025 Annual Policy Conference, The State of the Antitrust Technocracy. The article demonstrates that conditional dealing should be recognized as its own, separate form of monopolistic conduct rather than squeezed into ill-fitting categories in existing monopolization law. It provides a new analytical framework for evaluating conditional dealing, including a definition of conditioning and standards for gauging its exclusionary impact, contribution to power, and procompetitive justifications. It also explains why courts' current criteria for evaluating claims based on conditional dealing should be jettisoned.

My guest for this episode is the beautiful and compelling Busayo Olupona. She is the founder of the womenswear brand Busayo, NYU Law School graduate and former high powered corporate lawyer. We discuss the interesting transition from attorney to fashion designer and entrepreneur, the Busayo brand and it use of the Adire dyeing technique native to Nigeria, how capitalism is a tool, Madonna, Diane von Furstenberg and the joy of working directly with artisans in Africa. Listen in! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today at 11:11 am CST, on the Flyover Conservatives show we are tackling the most important things going on RIGHT NOW from a Conservative Christian perspective!Today at 11:11 am CST, on the Flyover Conservatives show we are tackling the most important things going on RIGHT NOW from a Conservative Christian perspective!TO WATCH ALL FLYOVER CONSERVATIVES SHOWS - https://flyover.live/show/flyoverTO WATCH ALL FLYOVER CONSERVATIVES SHOWS - https://flyover.live/show/flyoverTO WATCH ALL FLYOVER CONTENT: www.flyover.liveTO WATCH ALL FLYOVER CONTENT: www.flyover.liveTo Schedule A Time To Talk To Dr. Dr. Kirk Elliott Go ToTo Schedule A Time To Talk To Dr. Dr. Kirk Elliott Go To▶ https://flyovergold.com▶ https://flyovergold.comOr Call 720-605-3900Or Call 720-605-3900► Receive your FREE 52 Date Night Ideas Playbook to make date night more exciting, go to www.prosperousmarriage.com► Receive your FREE 52 Date Night Ideas Playbook to make date night more exciting, go to www.prosperousmarriage.comSalvador LitvakSalvador LitvakWEBSITE: https://www.salvadorlitvak.comWEBSITE: https://www.salvadorlitvak.comTWITTER: https://x.com/yourpalsalTWITTER: https://x.com/yourpalsalINSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/accidentaltalmudistINSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/accidentaltalmudistMOVIE: https://www.gunsandmosesmovie.com/MOVIE: https://www.gunsandmosesmovie.com/Salvador Litvak, author of Let My People Laugh: Greatest Jewish Jokes of All Time!, was born in Santiago, Chile, and moved to New York at age five. He is a graduate of Harvard College, NYU Law School, and the School of Theater, Film and Television at UCLA. Litvak wrote, produced, and directed Saving Lincoln, the true story of Abraham Lincoln leading the nation through the Civil War, as recounted by his close friend & bodyguard, U.S. Marshal Ward Hill Lamon. The film was made by capturing the actors' performances on a green screen stage and creating all sets and locations out of vintage Civil War photographs from the Library of Congress. Litvak named this visual style CineCollage. His first film was the Passover comedy and cult hit When Do We Eat? Litvak wrote both films with his wife, Nina Davidovich Litvak. He also blogs as the Accidental Talmudist for the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles.Salvador Litvak, author of Let My People Laugh: Greatest Jewish Jokes of All Time!, was born in Santiago, Chile, and moved to New York at age five. He is a graduate of Harvard College, NYU Law School, and the School of Theater, Film and Television at UCLA. Litvak wrote, produced, and directed Saving Lincoln, the true story of Abraham Lincoln leadingSend us a message... we can't reply, but we read them all!Support the show► ReAwaken America- text the word FLYOVER to 918-851-0102 (Message and data rates may apply. Terms/privacy: 40509-info.com) ► Kirk Elliott PHD - http://FlyoverGold.com ► My Pillow - https://MyPillow.com/Flyover ► ALL LINKS: https://sociatap.com/FlyoverConservatives

Sandra Cohen is the Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Cohen & Buckmann, which specializes in executive compensation, employee benefits and pensions. Her firm is nearly ten years old and is highly ranked in Chambers USA Guide and The Legal 500, no small achievement for a young, small boutique firm. She is a frequent author and speaker and is a former adjunct professor at NYU Law School, where she taught pension law to the next generation of employee benefits lawyers. She's a big believer that although her business has a bench of deep expertise and scholarship, it's really relationships and referrals that built her firm. WHAT'S COVERED IN THIS EPISODE ABOUT BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT THAT ACTUALLY WORKS Starting your own law firm takes much more than being a good lawyer, including the willingness and ability to master business development skills that many lawyers find intimidating or distasteful. But what if effective business development isn't about sales pitches or aggressive marketing? What if it's really about making friends and building genuine relationships over time? In this episode of The Lawyer's Edge podcast, Elise Holtzman sits down with Sandra Cohen, Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Cohen & Buckmann. Sandra shares how she built her practice through relationships rather than traditional sales tactics, the power of content marketing for credibility-building, and why business development is like "watering a tree," slow, steady, and requiring patience for long-term growth. Sandra also discusses practical strategies for thought leadership (even for younger lawyers who think they don't have anything original to say), the importance of peer networking groups, and how giving away business can actually strengthen your referral network. 2:23 - Sandra's transition from large law firms to starting her own boutique practice 5:21 - How to track referrals and understand where your clients really come from 6:19 - The role of content marketing and thought leadership in building credibility 8:39 - Why lawyers need to show what they know, not just know it 11:41 - Advice for younger lawyers intimidated by "thought leadership" 15:04 - Getting started with writing: "Two big mistakes" instead of treatises 16:16 - How Sandra got involved in speaking opportunities through bar associations 18:01 - The power of repurposing content and LinkedIn for visibility 19:17 - Sandra's advice for senior lawyers: "Don't stumble over something that's behind you" 23:19 - The "know, like, trust, and remember" framework for relationship building 25:47 - Building peer groups that turn into 22-year referral relationships 27:21 - The power of giving away business to build your network 29:16 - How social media creates "top-of-mind awareness" for referrals 32:26 - Why business development for sophisticated practices is a long game 34:34 - Finding your audience: being in rooms full of people with problems you can solve MENTIONED IN THE LONG GAME OF BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT THAT ACTUALLY WORKS Cohen & Buckmann | LinkedIn Get connected with the coaching team: hello@thelawyersedge.com The Lawyer's Edge SPONSOR FOR THIS EPISODE... Today's episode is brought to you by the coaching team at The Lawyer's Edge, a training and coaching firm that has been focused exclusively on lawyers and law firms since 2008. Each member of The Lawyer's Edge coaching team is a trained, certified, and experienced professional coach—and either a former practicing attorney or a former law firm marketing and business development professional. Whatever your professional objectives, our coaches can help you achieve your goals more quickly, more easily, and with significantly less stress. To get connected with your coach, just email the team at hello@thelawyersedge.com.

Jacqueline Friedland unpacks her process and discusses why she chooses societally relevant challenges for her characters. Jacqueline graduated Magna Cum Laude from both the University of Pennsylvania and NYU Law School. She practiced as a commercial litigator for New York law firms before determining that office life did not suit her. Jacqueline began teaching Legal Writing and Lawyering Skills at the Benjamin Cardozo School of Law in Manhattan and working on her first book in her limited spare time. Finally deciding to embrace her passion and pursue writing full time, Jacqueline returned to school and earned her MFA from Sarah Lawrence College. When not writing, Jacqueline is an avid reader of all things fiction. She loves to exercise, watch movies with her family, listen to music, make lists, and dream about exotic vacations. She lives in Westchester, New York with her husband, four children and two very bossy canines. Her latest novel is Counting Backwards. Learn more at jacquelinefriedland.com Special thanks to NetGalley for advance copies. Intro reel, Writing Table Podcast 2024 Outro RecordingFollow the Writing Table:On Twitter/X: @writingtablepcEverywhere else: @writingtablepodcastEmail questions or tell us who you'd like us to invite to the Writing Table: writingtablepodcast@gmail.com.

For those who delight in discovering boutique hotels worth coveting and returning to, this episode is a must-listen. We're joined by hotelier Sylvia Wong, founder of the award-winning The Roundtree Hotel in Amagansett, NY.A graduate of NYU Law School, Sylvia's journey from corporate law to hospitality was both organic and inevitable.   Sylvia's discovery of The Roundtree's serene location sparked a vision that would evolve into a beautiful reflection of quiet luxury. The property blends modern furnishings and commissioned artwork with natural materials and bespoke amenities—creating a space that feels like a sophisticated extension of home.The Roundtree Hotel is rich in history. Tucked away in a charming hamlet in East Hampton, it features the oldest house in Amagansett, originally built by one of the first four families to settle the area in the 1600s. In fact, one of the two-bedroom cottages on the property is over 250 years old.As a guest, you'll enjoy a mix of experiences—from art museums and chic boutiques to wellness offerings and the vibrant Hamptons culinary scene. All of this is set within a gorgeous environment—whether you're staying in a barn room, cottage, or the exclusive beach house, it's no surprise the hotel has earned accolades like Travel + Leisure's World's Best Award. In this episode Anne and Sylvia discuss:Sylvia's career path and how she transitioned into hospitalityThe story behind discovering The Roundtree and its historic rootsThe attributes she chose for the hotel and the Meaningful moments uncovered through her journeyHer new project in Las Vegas:  Ariva – official luxury apartments of the Las vegas Raiders and LA AcesIt is clear why The Roundtree is a favorite stay. This home away from home is a true reflection of who Sylvia is—elegant, authentic, and humble. That spirit is reflected in every detail, especially in the hotel's unparalleled service, always seeking new ways to delight each guest.Connect with The Roundtree @theroundtreeamagansett and Book your stay on theroundtreehotels.comYou can find Anne @styledbyark.com

Could the Trump administration suspend habeas corpus? On this week's Insider episode, Preet is joined by Rachel Barkow, CAFE Contributor and professor at NYU Law School, while Joyce is out. In an excerpt from the show, Preet and Rachel discuss Trump advisor Stephen Miller's comments about suspending the constitutional right to habeas corpus.  Also on the Insider docket: –  Reflections on the legacy of Supreme Court Justice David Souter, who passed away last week at age 85; and – The Justice Department's court filing asking a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit that seeks to restrict access to the abortion pill mifepristone. CAFE Insiders click HERE to listen to the full analysis. Not an Insider? Now more than ever, it's critical to stay tuned. To join a community of reasoned voices in unreasonable times, become an Insider today. You'll get access to full episodes of the podcast and other exclusive content. Head to cafe.com/insider or staytuned.substack.com. Subscribe to our Substack. 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; Audio Producer: Nat Weiner; Deputy Editor: Celine Rohr; CAFE Team: David Tatasciore, Matthew Billy, Noa Azulai, and Liana Greenway. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NYC best-selling author Jacqueline Friedland talks about her latest release “Counting Backwards” as a legal thriller that tackles timely, yet timeless issues such as reproductive rights, incarceration, and society's expectations of women based on true stories from the 1920's and 2020 involving a woman's quest for justice into an immigrant's case turning into a conspiracy and how they parallel! Jacqueline graduated Magna Cum Laude from Univ. of Penn & NYU Law School before pursuing commercial litigation, later became a teacher at Benjamin Cardozo School of Law teaching legal writing & lawyering skills and returned to get her Master's of Fine Arts from Sarah Lawrence College, plus her 4 books featured in USA Today and Amazon Best-Seller list! Check out the amazing Jacqueline Friedland and her latest release on all major platforms and www.jacquelinefriedland.com today! #podmatch #jacquelinefriedland #bestsellingauthor #newyorkcity #legalthriller #countingbackwards #reproductiverights #incarceration #women #immigration #conspiracy #universityofpenn #nyulawschool #sarahlawrencecollege #spreaker #iheartradio #spotify #applemusic #youtube #anchorfm #bitchute #rumble #mikewagner #themikewagnershow #mikewagnerjacquelinefriedland #themikewagnershowjacquelinefriedland

NYC best-selling author Jacqueline Friedland talks about her latest release “Counting Backwards” as a legal thriller that tackles timely, yet timeless issues such as reproductive rights, incarceration, and society's expectations of women based on true stories from the 1920's and 2020 involving a woman's quest for justice into an immigrant's case turning into a conspiracy and how they parallel! Jacqueline graduated Magna Cum Laude from Univ. of Penn & NYU Law School before pursuing commercial litigation, later became a teacher at Benjamin Cardozo School of Law teaching legal writing & lawyering skills and returned to get her Master's of Fine Arts from Sarah Lawrence College, plus her 4 books featured in USA Today and Amazon Best-Seller list! Check out the amazing Jacqueline Friedland and her latest release on all major platforms and www.jacquelinefriedland.com today! #podmatch #jacquelinefriedland #bestsellingauthor #newyorkcity #legalthriller #countingbackwards #reproductiverights #incarceration #women #immigration #conspiracy #universityofpenn #nyulawschool #sarahlawrencecollege #spreaker #iheartradio #spotify #applemusic #youtube #anchorfm #bitchute #rumble #mikewagner #themikewagnershow #mikewagnerjacquelinefriedland #themikewagnershowjacquelinefriedland

NYC best-selling author Jacqueline Friedland talks about her latest release “Counting Backwards” as a legal thriller that tackles timely, yet timeless issues such as reproductive rights, incarceration, and society's expectations of women based on true stories from the 1920's and 2020 involving a woman's quest for justice into an immigrant's case turning into a conspiracy and how they parallel! Jacqueline graduated Magna Cum Laude from Univ. of Penn & NYU Law School before pursuing commercial litigation, later became a teacher at Benjamin Cardozo School of Law teaching legal writing & lawyering skills and returned to get her Master's of Fine Arts from Sarah Lawrence College, plus her 4 books featured in USA Today and Amazon Best-Seller list! Check out the amazing Jacqueline Friedland and her latest release on all major platforms and www.jacquelinefriedland.com today! #podmatch #jacquelinefriedland #bestsellingauthor #newyorkcity #legalthriller #countingbackwards #reproductiverights #incarceration #women #immigration #conspiracy #universityofpenn #nyulawschool #sarahlawrencecollege #spreaker #iheartradio #spotify #applemusic #youtube #anchorfm #bitchute #rumble #mikewagner #themikewagnershow #mikewagnerjacquelinefriedland #themikewagnershowjacquelinefriedlandBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-mike-wagner-show--3140147/support.

Have you ever wondered how the physical act of speaking can improve your communication? Kevin sits down with Michael Chad Hoeppner to discuss the physical nature of communication and exercises we can do to get better. Michael challenges our common assumptions about speaking, such as believing it's purely a mental activity. Instead, he introduces the concept of embodied cognition, explaining how communication is a physical activity involving over 100 muscles and should be approached like athletic training. Michael shares the science behind thought suppression and why focusing on "not saying um" is counterproductive. He also talks about the Five Ps of vocal variety (Pace, Pitch, Pause, Power, Placement) and how they impact your message. Listen For 00:00 Introduction and Episode Overview 02:00 Meet Michael Hoeppner 04:00 The Journey to Communication Coaching 08:00 The Physical Side of Communication 12:00 Why Thought Suppression Doesn't Work 16:00 Tips for Reducing Filler Words 20:00 Exercises for Clear Communication 24:00 The Five P's of Vocal Variety 28:00 Managing Nerves When Speaking 32:00 Final Thoughts and Book Information 35:00 Closing Remarks Michael's Story: Michael Chad Hoeppner is the author of Don't Say Um: How to Communicate Effectively to Live a Better Life. He is an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School and the CEO and president of GK Training, a firm dedicated to giving individuals, companies, and organizations the communication skills necessary to reach their highest goals in work and life. As an individual speaking coach, his clients include Andrew Yang, Swiss Re, Xerox, The Boston Consulting Group, Pfizer, Columbia University Business School, NYU Law School, Macy's, Special Olympics chairman Tim Shriver, and others. His expertise lies in every aspect of communication: public speaking, business development, executive presence, interpersonal agility, email skills, and speech writing. Hoeppner is one among the growing chorus of voices identifying the link between the physical aspects of spoken communication and broader issues of health and wellness. https://dontsayum.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelchadhoeppner/ http://www.gktraining.com/ This Episode is brought to you by... Flexible Leadership is every leader's guide to greater success in a world of increasing complexity and chaos.  Book Recommendations Don't Say Um: How to Communicate Effectively to Live a Better Life by Michael Chad Hoeppner Moby Dick by Herman Melville  Like this? Mastering the Art of Public Speaking with John Bowe Join Our Community If you want to view our live podcast episodes, hear about new releases, or chat with others who enjoy this podcast join one of our communities below. Join the Facebook Group Join the LinkedIn Group   Leave a Review If you liked this conversation, we'd be thrilled if you'd let others know by leaving a review on Apple Podcasts. Here's a quick guide for posting a review. Review on Apple: https://remarkablepodcast.com/itunes    Podcast Better! Sign up with Libsyn and get up to 2 months free! Use promo code: RLP  

The Trumpian inversion of reality was threaded into so many areas of the law and active litigation this week. Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern joins Dahlia Lithwick to discuss the apparent evaporation of judicial patience for Trump lawyers simultaneously claiming that a signal chat was not classified or subject to record preservation rules, AND the flights to El Salvador that were  filmed for posterity on arrival at a prison were in fact state secrets. Together, they also think through the likelihood of the Supreme Court stepping into the Alien Enemies Act case at this early stage by just taking the Trump administration at its word that those summary renditions were totally legal and constitutionally correct.  Next, Dahlia Lithwick talks to Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, about another Trumpian inversion of reality: his executive order titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”, which in fact is not about election integrity, but instead an extension of the Big Lie election theory that could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Trumpian inversion of reality was threaded into so many areas of the law and active litigation this week. Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern joins Dahlia Lithwick to discuss the apparent evaporation of judicial patience for Trump lawyers simultaneously claiming that a signal chat was not classified or subject to record preservation rules, AND the flights to El Salvador that were  filmed for posterity on arrival at a prison were in fact state secrets. Together, they also think through the likelihood of the Supreme Court stepping into the Alien Enemies Act case at this early stage by just taking the Trump administration at its word that those summary renditions were totally legal and constitutionally correct.  Next, Dahlia Lithwick talks to Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, about another Trumpian inversion of reality: his executive order titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”, which in fact is not about election integrity, but instead an extension of the Big Lie election theory that could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Trumpian inversion of reality was threaded into so many areas of the law and active litigation this week. Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern joins Dahlia Lithwick to discuss the apparent evaporation of judicial patience for Trump lawyers simultaneously claiming that a signal chat was not classified or subject to record preservation rules, AND the flights to El Salvador that were  filmed for posterity on arrival at a prison were in fact state secrets. Together, they also think through the likelihood of the Supreme Court stepping into the Alien Enemies Act case at this early stage by just taking the Trump administration at its word that those summary renditions were totally legal and constitutionally correct.  Next, Dahlia Lithwick talks to Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, about another Trumpian inversion of reality: his executive order titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”, which in fact is not about election integrity, but instead an extension of the Big Lie election theory that could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Meryl chats with Jacqueline Friedland about her new novel, Counting Backwards (March 2025), a dual-timeline novel which explores fertility, inequality, reproductive rights, and bodily autonomy. It's told from the perspectives of Jessa Gidney, a modern-day lawyer fighting for her immigrant client, and also Carrie Buck who is the plaintiff in the actual 1927 Supreme Court Case, Buck v. Bell. In the 1927 case, the Court upheld the right of the state to sterilize women deemed feebleminded Jacqueline, the author of five novels, is a USA Today and Amazon best-selling author. Her brand new novel is Counting Backwards. She holds a BA from the University of Pennsylvania, a JD from NYU Law School, and an MFA from Sarah Lawrence College. She lives in Westchester, New York with her husband and four children. Website: www.jacquelinefriedland.com/ Facebook: www.facebook.com/JacquelineFriedlandAuthor Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jackiefriedland/ Host Website: merylain.com/ People of the Book: https://www.facebook.com/PeopleOfTheBookWithMerylAin Jews Love To Read! https://www.facebook.com/groups/455865462463744 facebook.com/MerylAinAuthor/ Copyright by Authors on the Air Global Radio Network #AuthorsOnTheAir #AuthorsOnTheAirGlobalRadioNetwork #AOTA #Jacqueline Friedland #CountingBackwards #HeGetsThatFromMe #BodilyAutonomy #Eugenics #BuckvBell #ReproductiveRights #CarrieBuck #JessaGidney #Vance #JewishCharacter #Feeblemindedness #RightToHaveAChild #PeopleoftheBook #Sterilization #IncarceratedInmates #OriginsofTheHolocaust #WomensRights #Immigration #GenreHopper #WomensFiction #MerylAin #JewsLoveToRead #TheTakeawayMen #ShadowsWeCarry #RememberToEat

  William (“Bill”) Jhaveri-Weeks is the founder of The Jhaveri-Weeks Firm, P.C., a law firm in San Francisco that focuses on representing employees in employment disputes.  The firm handles both individual cases and class actions, including harassment and discrimination.  Bill is a member of the Executive Committee of the Bar Association of San Francisco's Labor & Employment Section, was a partner at a class action firm, practiced in Big Law, and clerked for a federal Court of Appeals judge.  Bill graduated with honors from Yale College and NYU Law School.   In this podcast, Bill and Samorn share advice for professionals navigating today's challenging job market.  They dive deep into: Employment law: understanding your legal rights during layoffs, firings, and severance negotiations. Career advice: strategies for career change and job satisfaction and fulfillment. Job market: navigating the current tough job market.   Lawyer happiness: aligning with your personal values, striving for well-being, and achieving work-life harmony. Networking: building essential connections leading to mentorship and job opportunities.   Legal advice: practical guidance for employees facing job insecurity and legal remedies to employers wrongly accusing you of poor performance.   Connect with us: Connect with Bill on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/jhaveri-weeks/ and https://www.jhaveriweeks.com/attorneys-jhaveri-weeks.html.   Follow Samorn on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/samornselim/. Get a copy of Samorn's book, “Belonging: Self Love Lessons From A Workaholic Depressed Insomniac Lawyer” at https://tinyurl.com/2dk5hr2f.  Get weekly career tips by signing up for our advice column at www.careerunicorns.com.  Schedule a free 30-minute build your dream career consult by sending a message at www.careerunicorns.com.   

COUNTING BACKWARDS is a legal thriller by Jacqueline Friedland following the timelines of two women—one in 1927 and the other in the present day—inspired by the true stories of medical abuse, and women's struggles for their civil and reproductive rights. Jacqueline Friedland is the author of four other titles, including HE GETS THAT FROM ME and TROUBLE THE WATER. She graduated Magna cum Laude from both the University of Pennsylvania and NYU Law School before going on to briefly pursue commercial litigation.

In today's episode, renowned academic and legal scholar Professor Joseph H.H. Weiler speaks with Matt about The Trial of Jesus – connecting the historical event as a lens for understanding justice, religious pluralism, and democracy. The examination leads us through the limits of state neutrality in matters of faith, the balance between freedom of and from religion, and the evolving role of digital platforms. Professor Weiler shares perspectives from his extensive legal scholarship while reflecting on the intersection of theology, democracy, and technological change in our modern world. An incredibly poignant episode that is a must-listen.Note: This episode was recorded in Dec 2024.Links & References: References:The Trial of Jesus - First Things | By J.H.H. WeilerSanhedrin trial of Jesus - WikipediaThe Christian Europe by J.H.H. Weiler | Una Europa cristiana - Ediciones Encuentro“La Rochefoucauld voice in our ear” | François de La Rochefoucauld (writer) - WikipediaNostra aetate [EN]Second Vatican Council - Wikipedia“imitatio Dei” | Imitation of God - WikipediaLautsi v. Italy - Wikipedia"Laïque” (FR) = “secular”European Convention on Human RightsStatement of Micah | Why Micah 6:8? | Westmont CollegeGuarini Colloquium on Legal Controls of Digital Platforms | NYU School of LawSALVIFIC | English meaning - Cambridge DictionaryVoltairean - Wiktionary, the free dictionaryOlga Tokarczuk - WikipediaThe Books of Jacob by Olga Tokarczuk - WikipediaThe Books of Jacob by Olga Tokarczuk: 9780593087503 | PenguinRandomHouse.comTelos - Wikipedia “goal” Bios:J.H.H. Weiler is University Professor at the NYU Law School and a Senior Fellow at the Center for European Studies at Harvard. He served previously as President of the European University Institute, Florence.  Prof. Weiler is Co-Editor-in-Chief of the European Journal of International Law (EJIL) and the International Journal of Constitutional Law (ICON). Among his Honorary Doctorates there is one in Theology awarded by the Catholic University of America. In 2022, he received the Ratzinger Prize awarded by Pope Francis.J.H.H.'s Links:J.H.H. Weiler - Biography | NYU School of LawFreedom Of and From Religion in Democracies by J.H.H. Weiler | Combinations Magazine by RxCMatt Prewitt (he/him) is a lawyer, technologist, and writer. He is the President of the RadicalxChange Foundation.Matt's Social Links:ᴍᴀᴛᴛ ᴘʀᴇᴡɪᴛᴛ (@m_t_prewitt) / X Connect with RadicalxChange Foundation:RadicalxChange Website@RadxChange | TwitterRxC | YouTubeRxC | InstagramRxC | LinkedInJoin the conversation on Discord.Credits:Produced by G. Angela Corpus.Co-Produced, Edited, and Audio Engineered by Aaron Benavides.Executive Produced by G. Angela Corpus and Matt Prewitt.Intro/Outro music by MagnusMoone, “Wind in the Willows,” is licensed under an Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

First up, Ralph welcomes former FBI agent Mike German to discuss his new book (co-written with Beth Zasloff), Policing White Supremacy: The Enemy Within. Then, Ralph speaks to Dr. Bandy Lee about her psychological analysis of the second Trump presidency. Finally, Ralph talks about Trump's latest Congressional address.Mike German is a fellow with the Liberty and National Security program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School. He has worked at the ACLU and served sixteen years as an FBI special agent. He left the FBI in 2004 after reporting continuing deficiencies in the bureau's counterterrorism operations to Congress. He is the author of Thinking Like a Terrorist, Disrupt, Discredit, and Divide: How the New FBI Damages Our Democracy, and his latest book (co-authored with Beth Zasloff) is Policing White Supremacy: The Enemy Within.It's important to understand that the white supremacist movement is quite fractured and I refer to it in the book as the white supremacist and far right militant movement because it does have a number of different factions that have specific goals that in many cases differ from one another. But as a movement, essentially what they're looking for is a return to a legally-supported racial caste system where white people dominate without question and impunity to act violently towards anyone who would challenge that racial hierarchy.Mike GermanIt's fascinating because I think there's an assumption that many have that these white supremacists or far-right militant groups are Trump supporters, but I don't believe many of them are. They understand that right-wing populism, that those racist (I would have said “dog whistles” of previous administrations, but racist) rhetoric helps promote them and gives them media attention that allows them to recruit and expand their ranks. But they don't support Donald Trump. They don't support the Republican Party.Mike GermanYou have a situation now where these people that led the movement into a ditch on January 6th (and they had to scramble and all go underground and then slowly restore these groups) all of a sudden these people who led them into the ditch come out ofprison and want to be the leaders again.Mike GermanThere comes a time when the flattering of the citizens by rogue criminal politicians has got to be exposed for what it is. First, they flatter the citizenry, then they flummox the citizenry, then they fool the citizenry into supporting them. And the reaction to that has got to be: you'd better start doing your homework, voters, regardless who you vote for. You've got to spend more time on the records of these politicians, not their rhetoric.Ralph NaderDr. Bandy Lee is a medical doctor, a forensic psychiatrist, and a world expert on violence who taught at Yale School of Medicine and Yale Law School for 17 years before joining the Harvard Program in Psychiatry and the Law. She is currently president of the World Mental Health Coalition, an educational organization that assembles mental health experts to collaborate with other disciplines for the betterment of public mental health and public safety. She is the editor of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 37 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President and Profile of a Nation: Trump's Mind, America's Soul.This is a problem of mental pathology. That is why [Trump] has to place mental health labels on his opponents, why he has to call himself a stable genius, and why he has to take on the most powerful position on the planet (the US presidency). It is to hide his unfitness and his mental pathology. That's what it comes down to.Dr. Bandy Lee[Trump's] been in the public arena and influential positions for a decade now, but we have to address it in mental health terms. His goal is to alter reality and through threats, intimidation and co-optation, he has not only taken over the press and is in the process of buying it out, but he has also subdued…corrupted the Supreme Court and the Congress, and he has figured out that with the speed with which he is wreaking his havoc, by the time courts can respond, the agencies that held our society together will be gutted, closed, and changed forever.Dr. Bandy Lee Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

From legal aid attorney to legal tech innovator, Sateesh Nori brings a unique perspective to the intersection of artificial intelligence and access to justice.  After spending two decades in the trenches as a housing lawyer at legal aid offices in New York City, Nori now bridges multiple worlds – continuing his legal aid work at the Legal Aid Society of NYC while also serving as an adjunct clinical professor at NYU Law School in its eviction defense clinic and working as a senior legal innovation strategist at Just-Tech LLC, a technology consulting firm that focuses on legal services providers.   He recently partnered with Housing Court Answers, a nonprofit tenants' rights organization in NYC, and Josef, the legal automation company, to develop and launch Roxanne, an AI-powered tool to help tenants understand their repair rights, and he believes artificial intelligence could be the key to finally making meaningful progress in closing the justice gap.  As if all that were not enough to keep Nori busy, he recently published a memoir, Sheltered: Twenty Years in Housing Court, and gave a TEDx talk, How A Chatbot Can Save Someone From Homelessness.  Today, in a conversation recorded live at the Legal Services Corporation's Innovations in Technology conference in Phoenix last week, Nori and host Bob Ambrogi discuss why he believes that AI is as transformative as electricity, how he is using it in his own work, and why he believes law schools are failing to prepare students for the AI revolution. Thank You To Our Sponsors This episode of LawNext is generously made possible by our sponsors. We appreciate their support and hope you will check them out. Paradigm, home to the practice management platforms PracticePanther, Bill4Time, MerusCase and LollyLaw; the e-payments platform Headnote; and the legal accounting software TrustBooks. Briefpoint, eliminating routine discovery response and request drafting tasks so you can focus on drafting what matters (or just make it home for dinner).   If you enjoy listening to LawNext, please leave us a review wherever you listen to podcasts.  

Donald Trump is already up to his oldtricks, according to co-hosts AndyLevy and Danielle Moodie on thelatest episode of The New Abnormal.Then, Melissa Murray, professor oflaw at NYU Law School, joins theprogram to break down DonaldTrump's recent statements on endingbirthright citizenship. Plus! AdamSerwer, staff writer at The Atlantic,joins us to talk about his new article,“Trump Fans Are Suffering From TonySoprano Syndrome.” Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Walt Pavlo went to work at MCI at a time when telecoms were hungry for go-getters. It was the early 2000s, and Walt enjoyed the freedom and aggressive nature of a recently deregulated industry. But soon he realized that MCI's most lucrative customers were also its flakiest, and the pressure was on to manage millions of bad debt that accumulated on the books. In this episode, Walt explains how he concocted a fake-loan scheme that netted him money far beyond his dreams — and yet how hollow it felt, right up until the moment it all came crashing down.  Walt Pavlo is a nationally recognized speaker who writes for Forbes and NYU Law School on white-collar crime and criminal justice. He founded the firm Prisonology in 2014 as a consulting firm to support federal criminal defense attorneys by providing experts who have retired from the Federal Bureau of Prisons. He is the co-author of “Stolen Without a Gun: Confessions from Inside History's Biggest Accounting Fraud, the Collapse of MCI WorldCom,” which covers his stint working in the company's billing department and committing fraud.

Tammy Caputi Tammy began her first term on the Scottsdale City Council in January 2021 and is currently seeking a second term. She has lived and worked in Scottsdale for almost 25 years, and is the president and owner of Yale Electric West, Inc, a Scottsdale company.  Married for over 21 years with 3 daughters who all attend our local schools. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Wellesley College in Wellesley, MA and a Master's in Business Administration from Simmons University in Boston, MA. Tammy is passionate about keeping Scottsdale the Gold Standard of the Valley, and is always running! Tammy Caputi website   Tom Durham Tom grew up in a small town in Iowa and attended Cornell College where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude in 1977 with majors in Philosophy and History. Some of my earliest memories are of visiting my grandfather in Mesa where he had a pasture behind his house and rode horses. After graduating from Cornell, he attended NYU Law School in New York City, graduating in 1980. After graduating from NYU, Tom joined the Mayer Brown law firm in Chicago, an international law firm that specialized in tax controversy. He argued several appeals in the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which is generally regarded as the second most important court in the United States.Tom's ability to analyze complex legal and factual situations and to "cut through" to the heart of the matter are essential to the City Council. During his time at Mayer Brown, I was recognized by Chambers USA as one of the top 25 tax controversy lawyers in the US. Tom retired from Mayer Brown in April 2015. Tom Durham 2024 website   MaryAnne McAllen Maryann McAllen is a 59 year resident of Scottsdale, she is a small business owner, a community leader and activist. Maryann met her husband Sam while being a summer recreation leader for the City of Scottsdale, they have four young adult children and a fun fact about Maryann she is an avid Antique Button Collector.MaryAnn McAllen website   Adam Kwasman Born and raised in Tucson, Arizona, Adam Kwasman developed a deep appreciation for community values and civic responsibility from an early age. His formative years instilled in him a commitment to service and a passion for making a positive impact on the lives of those around him. Adam earned his B.A. from Tulane University, his M.A. in economics from George Mason University, and his J.D. from Arizona State University's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law. His academic journey not only equipped him with a strong foundation of knowledge but also fueled his desire to contribute meaningfully to society. He is a husband and father of 4 too. Adam Kwasman website   Lisa Borowsky Scottsdale native Lisa Borowsky is a lawyer, mother and community advocate. She previously served on the Scottsdale City Council from 2008 to 2012. She led the charge pushing for meaningful structural changes to the budget process, including a City Charter amendment, which moved the City Treasurer to the position of Charter Officer, reporting directly to the Council and the citizens. Lisa served on numerous boards & committees including Experience Scottsdale Board of Directors, the City's Audit Committee, the Water Subcommittee,  Scottsdale Westworld Subcommittee, Charros Foundation Board and many more. As mayor of Scottsdale, Lisa will leverage her experience as an attorney, councilwoman, and volunteer to protect Scottsdale's future, bring transparency to city government, and improve the lives of Scottsdale residents. https://lisaformayor.com/   Dave Ortega Mayor Dave Ortega is running for re-election as Scottsdale Mayor. A resident of Scottsdale for over 40 years, he owns an architecture firm in Old Town. During his current term of Mayor, Dave Ortega  supports  public safety, protecting family-friendly neighborhoods, defending Scottsdale Water from dry-lot 'wildcat" houses in the county, reinvesting in our vibrant Western legacy in Old Town, and promoting citywide economic vitality. https://www.electdaveortegamayor.com/   SUBSCRIBE on your Favorite podcast listening app. Find us on IG & FB at Scottsdale Vibes Podcast or check us out on scottsdale vibes dot media. And don't forget that we are now the proud owners of Scottsdale City Lifestyle magazine where you can read about even more of your favorite community.  

Tammy Caputi Tammy began her first term on the Scottsdale City Council in January 2021 and is currently seeking a second term. She has lived and worked in Scottsdale for almost 25 years, and is the president and owner of Yale Electric West, Inc, a Scottsdale company.  Married for over 21 years with 3 daughters who all attend our local schools. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Wellesley College in Wellesley, MA and a Master's in Business Administration from Simmons University in Boston, MA. Tammy is passionate about keeping Scottsdale the Gold Standard of the Valley, and is always running! Tammy Caputi website   Tom Durham Tom grew up in a small town in Iowa and attended Cornell College where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude in 1977 with majors in Philosophy and History. Some of my earliest memories are of visiting my grandfather in Mesa where he had a pasture behind his house and rode horses. After graduating from Cornell, he attended NYU Law School in New York City, graduating in 1980. After graduating from NYU, Tom joined the Mayer Brown law firm in Chicago, an international law firm that specialized in tax controversy. He argued several appeals in the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which is generally regarded as the second most important court in the United States.Tom's ability to analyze complex legal and factual situations and to "cut through" to the heart of the matter are essential to the City Council. During his time at Mayer Brown, I was recognized by Chambers USA as one of the top 25 tax controversy lawyers in the US. Tom retired from Mayer Brown in April 2015. Tom Durham 2024 website   MaryAnne McAllen Maryann McAllen is a 59 year resident of Scottsdale, she is a small business owner, a community leader and activist. Maryann met her husband Sam while being a summer recreation leader for the City of Scottsdale, they have four young adult children and a fun fact about Maryann she is an avid Antique Button Collector.MaryAnn McAllen website   Adam Kwasman Born and raised in Tucson, Arizona, Adam Kwasman developed a deep appreciation for community values and civic responsibility from an early age. His formative years instilled in him a commitment to service and a passion for making a positive impact on the lives of those around him. Adam earned his B.A. from Tulane University, his M.A. in economics from George Mason University, and his J.D. from Arizona State University's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law. His academic journey not only equipped him with a strong foundation of knowledge but also fueled his desire to contribute meaningfully to society. He is a husband and father of 4 too. Adam Kwasman website   Lisa Borowsky Scottsdale native Lisa Borowsky is a lawyer, mother and community advocate. She previously served on the Scottsdale City Council from 2008 to 2012. She led the charge pushing for meaningful structural changes to the budget process, including a City Charter amendment, which moved the City Treasurer to the position of Charter Officer, reporting directly to the Council and the citizens. Lisa served on numerous boards & committees including Experience Scottsdale Board of Directors, the City's Audit Committee, the Water Subcommittee,  Scottsdale Westworld Subcommittee, Charros Foundation Board and many more. As mayor of Scottsdale, Lisa will leverage her experience as an attorney, councilwoman, and volunteer to protect Scottsdale's future, bring transparency to city government, and improve the lives of Scottsdale residents. https://lisaformayor.com/   Dave Ortega Mayor Dave Ortega is running for re-election as Scottsdale Mayor. A resident of Scottsdale for over 40 years, he owns an architecture firm in Old Town. During his current term of Mayor, Dave Ortega  supports  public safety, protecting family-friendly neighborhoods, defending Scottsdale Water from dry-lot 'wildcat" houses in the county, reinvesting in our vibrant Western legacy in Old Town, and promoting citywide economic vitality. https://www.electdaveortegamayor.com/   SUBSCRIBE on your Favorite podcast listening app. Find us on IG & FB at Scottsdale Vibes Podcast or check us out on scottsdale vibes dot media. And don't forget that we are now the proud owners of Scottsdale City Lifestyle magazine where you can read about even more of your favorite community.  

What threatens American democracy and the rule of law? In her new book, Corporatocracy: How to Protect Democracy from Dark Money and Corrupt Politicians (NYU Press, 2024), legal scholar and campaign spending expert Ciara Torres-Spelliscy argues that the USA's privately-funded campaign finance system – combined with corporate greed and antidemocratic strains in the modern Republican Party – endangers American democracy. As she sees it, unseen political actors and untraceable dark money influence our elections, while anti-democratic rhetoric threatens a tilt towards authoritarianism. Drawing on key Supreme Court cases such as Citizens United, Professor Torres-Spelliscy explores how corporations have undermined democratic norms, practices, and laws. From bankrolling regressive politicians to funding ghost candidates with dark money, the book exposes how corporations subvert the will of the American people – yet courts struggle to hold corporate interests and corrupt politicians accountable. If American democracy is going to survive in the long term, then the deep pockets of the largest corporations cannot be allowed to join focus with the anti-democratic fringe. Professor Torres-Spelliscy fears a repeat of the January 6th insurrection – but with expansive corporate sponsorship. Professor Torres Spelliscy outlines the ways in which Corporate forces might be held accountable by the courts, their shareholders, and citizens themselves. Along with other reforms, she proposes a democracy litmus test that requires loyalty to democracy in politics and the economy. The end of the podcast features her insights on how oil interests crypto “techno bros” have invested in the outcome of the November 2024 election. Ciara Torres-Spelliscy is a Professor of Law at Stetson Law. She is also a Brennan Center Fellow at NYU Law School who has testified before Congress as an expert on campaign finance and has helped draft Supreme Court briefs. Previously, she authored Corporate Citizen (Carolina 2016) and Political Brands (Elgar 2019). She has recently written about public financing and the Eric Adams indictments and crypto spending in the 2024 election. Mentioned in the podcast: Judd Legum's work on corporate PACs in his Substack, Popular Information Photo with Barack Obama for which Jho Low paid $20 million can be seen here Example of 2022 media attempts to identify “sedition caucus” and election deniers for voters Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

What threatens American democracy and the rule of law? In her new book, Corporatocracy: How to Protect Democracy from Dark Money and Corrupt Politicians (NYU Press, 2024), legal scholar and campaign spending expert Ciara Torres-Spelliscy argues that the USA's privately-funded campaign finance system – combined with corporate greed and antidemocratic strains in the modern Republican Party – endangers American democracy. As she sees it, unseen political actors and untraceable dark money influence our elections, while anti-democratic rhetoric threatens a tilt towards authoritarianism. Drawing on key Supreme Court cases such as Citizens United, Professor Torres-Spelliscy explores how corporations have undermined democratic norms, practices, and laws. From bankrolling regressive politicians to funding ghost candidates with dark money, the book exposes how corporations subvert the will of the American people – yet courts struggle to hold corporate interests and corrupt politicians accountable. If American democracy is going to survive in the long term, then the deep pockets of the largest corporations cannot be allowed to join focus with the anti-democratic fringe. Professor Torres-Spelliscy fears a repeat of the January 6th insurrection – but with expansive corporate sponsorship. Professor Torres Spelliscy outlines the ways in which Corporate forces might be held accountable by the courts, their shareholders, and citizens themselves. Along with other reforms, she proposes a democracy litmus test that requires loyalty to democracy in politics and the economy. The end of the podcast features her insights on how oil interests crypto “techno bros” have invested in the outcome of the November 2024 election. Ciara Torres-Spelliscy is a Professor of Law at Stetson Law. She is also a Brennan Center Fellow at NYU Law School who has testified before Congress as an expert on campaign finance and has helped draft Supreme Court briefs. Previously, she authored Corporate Citizen (Carolina 2016) and Political Brands (Elgar 2019). She has recently written about public financing and the Eric Adams indictments and crypto spending in the 2024 election. Mentioned in the podcast: Judd Legum's work on corporate PACs in his Substack, Popular Information Photo with Barack Obama for which Jho Low paid $20 million can be seen here Example of 2022 media attempts to identify “sedition caucus” and election deniers for voters Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

What threatens American democracy and the rule of law? In her new book, Corporatocracy: How to Protect Democracy from Dark Money and Corrupt Politicians (NYU Press, 2024), legal scholar and campaign spending expert Ciara Torres-Spelliscy argues that the USA's privately-funded campaign finance system – combined with corporate greed and antidemocratic strains in the modern Republican Party – endangers American democracy. As she sees it, unseen political actors and untraceable dark money influence our elections, while anti-democratic rhetoric threatens a tilt towards authoritarianism. Drawing on key Supreme Court cases such as Citizens United, Professor Torres-Spelliscy explores how corporations have undermined democratic norms, practices, and laws. From bankrolling regressive politicians to funding ghost candidates with dark money, the book exposes how corporations subvert the will of the American people – yet courts struggle to hold corporate interests and corrupt politicians accountable. If American democracy is going to survive in the long term, then the deep pockets of the largest corporations cannot be allowed to join focus with the anti-democratic fringe. Professor Torres-Spelliscy fears a repeat of the January 6th insurrection – but with expansive corporate sponsorship. Professor Torres Spelliscy outlines the ways in which Corporate forces might be held accountable by the courts, their shareholders, and citizens themselves. Along with other reforms, she proposes a democracy litmus test that requires loyalty to democracy in politics and the economy. The end of the podcast features her insights on how oil interests crypto “techno bros” have invested in the outcome of the November 2024 election. Ciara Torres-Spelliscy is a Professor of Law at Stetson Law. She is also a Brennan Center Fellow at NYU Law School who has testified before Congress as an expert on campaign finance and has helped draft Supreme Court briefs. Previously, she authored Corporate Citizen (Carolina 2016) and Political Brands (Elgar 2019). She has recently written about public financing and the Eric Adams indictments and crypto spending in the 2024 election. Mentioned in the podcast: Judd Legum's work on corporate PACs in his Substack, Popular Information Photo with Barack Obama for which Jho Low paid $20 million can be seen here Example of 2022 media attempts to identify “sedition caucus” and election deniers for voters Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

What threatens American democracy and the rule of law? In her new book, Corporatocracy: How to Protect Democracy from Dark Money and Corrupt Politicians (NYU Press, 2024), legal scholar and campaign spending expert Ciara Torres-Spelliscy argues that the USA's privately-funded campaign finance system – combined with corporate greed and antidemocratic strains in the modern Republican Party – endangers American democracy. As she sees it, unseen political actors and untraceable dark money influence our elections, while anti-democratic rhetoric threatens a tilt towards authoritarianism. Drawing on key Supreme Court cases such as Citizens United, Professor Torres-Spelliscy explores how corporations have undermined democratic norms, practices, and laws. From bankrolling regressive politicians to funding ghost candidates with dark money, the book exposes how corporations subvert the will of the American people – yet courts struggle to hold corporate interests and corrupt politicians accountable. If American democracy is going to survive in the long term, then the deep pockets of the largest corporations cannot be allowed to join focus with the anti-democratic fringe. Professor Torres-Spelliscy fears a repeat of the January 6th insurrection – but with expansive corporate sponsorship. Professor Torres Spelliscy outlines the ways in which Corporate forces might be held accountable by the courts, their shareholders, and citizens themselves. Along with other reforms, she proposes a democracy litmus test that requires loyalty to democracy in politics and the economy. The end of the podcast features her insights on how oil interests crypto “techno bros” have invested in the outcome of the November 2024 election. Ciara Torres-Spelliscy is a Professor of Law at Stetson Law. She is also a Brennan Center Fellow at NYU Law School who has testified before Congress as an expert on campaign finance and has helped draft Supreme Court briefs. Previously, she authored Corporate Citizen (Carolina 2016) and Political Brands (Elgar 2019). She has recently written about public financing and the Eric Adams indictments and crypto spending in the 2024 election. Mentioned in the podcast: Judd Legum's work on corporate PACs in his Substack, Popular Information Photo with Barack Obama for which Jho Low paid $20 million can be seen here Example of 2022 media attempts to identify “sedition caucus” and election deniers for voters Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

What threatens American democracy and the rule of law? In her new book, Corporatocracy: How to Protect Democracy from Dark Money and Corrupt Politicians (NYU Press, 2024), legal scholar and campaign spending expert Ciara Torres-Spelliscy argues that the USA's privately-funded campaign finance system – combined with corporate greed and antidemocratic strains in the modern Republican Party – endangers American democracy. As she sees it, unseen political actors and untraceable dark money influence our elections, while anti-democratic rhetoric threatens a tilt towards authoritarianism. Drawing on key Supreme Court cases such as Citizens United, Professor Torres-Spelliscy explores how corporations have undermined democratic norms, practices, and laws. From bankrolling regressive politicians to funding ghost candidates with dark money, the book exposes how corporations subvert the will of the American people – yet courts struggle to hold corporate interests and corrupt politicians accountable. If American democracy is going to survive in the long term, then the deep pockets of the largest corporations cannot be allowed to join focus with the anti-democratic fringe. Professor Torres-Spelliscy fears a repeat of the January 6th insurrection – but with expansive corporate sponsorship. Professor Torres Spelliscy outlines the ways in which Corporate forces might be held accountable by the courts, their shareholders, and citizens themselves. Along with other reforms, she proposes a democracy litmus test that requires loyalty to democracy in politics and the economy. The end of the podcast features her insights on how oil interests crypto “techno bros” have invested in the outcome of the November 2024 election. Ciara Torres-Spelliscy is a Professor of Law at Stetson Law. She is also a Brennan Center Fellow at NYU Law School who has testified before Congress as an expert on campaign finance and has helped draft Supreme Court briefs. Previously, she authored Corporate Citizen (Carolina 2016) and Political Brands (Elgar 2019). She has recently written about public financing and the Eric Adams indictments and crypto spending in the 2024 election. Mentioned in the podcast: Judd Legum's work on corporate PACs in his Substack, Popular Information Photo with Barack Obama for which Jho Low paid $20 million can be seen here Example of 2022 media attempts to identify “sedition caucus” and election deniers for voters Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

What threatens American democracy and the rule of law? In her new book, Corporatocracy: How to Protect Democracy from Dark Money and Corrupt Politicians (NYU Press, 2024), legal scholar and campaign spending expert Ciara Torres-Spelliscy argues that the USA's privately-funded campaign finance system – combined with corporate greed and antidemocratic strains in the modern Republican Party – endangers American democracy. As she sees it, unseen political actors and untraceable dark money influence our elections, while anti-democratic rhetoric threatens a tilt towards authoritarianism. Drawing on key Supreme Court cases such as Citizens United, Professor Torres-Spelliscy explores how corporations have undermined democratic norms, practices, and laws. From bankrolling regressive politicians to funding ghost candidates with dark money, the book exposes how corporations subvert the will of the American people – yet courts struggle to hold corporate interests and corrupt politicians accountable. If American democracy is going to survive in the long term, then the deep pockets of the largest corporations cannot be allowed to join focus with the anti-democratic fringe. Professor Torres-Spelliscy fears a repeat of the January 6th insurrection – but with expansive corporate sponsorship. Professor Torres Spelliscy outlines the ways in which Corporate forces might be held accountable by the courts, their shareholders, and citizens themselves. Along with other reforms, she proposes a democracy litmus test that requires loyalty to democracy in politics and the economy. The end of the podcast features her insights on how oil interests crypto “techno bros” have invested in the outcome of the November 2024 election. Ciara Torres-Spelliscy is a Professor of Law at Stetson Law. She is also a Brennan Center Fellow at NYU Law School who has testified before Congress as an expert on campaign finance and has helped draft Supreme Court briefs. Previously, she authored Corporate Citizen (Carolina 2016) and Political Brands (Elgar 2019). She has recently written about public financing and the Eric Adams indictments and crypto spending in the 2024 election. Mentioned in the podcast: Judd Legum's work on corporate PACs in his Substack, Popular Information Photo with Barack Obama for which Jho Low paid $20 million can be seen here Example of 2022 media attempts to identify “sedition caucus” and election deniers for voters Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Bob Bauer is a professor at NYU Law School, President Biden's personal attorney, and former White House Counsel to President Obama. He joins Preet to discuss the dangers of unchecked presidential power, the true potential of SCOTUS reforms, and his book, The Unraveling: Reflections on Politics without Ethics and Democracy in Crisis.  And in lieu of the typical Q&A, Preet speaks with Mark Leibovich, a staff writer at The Atlantic and an expert on national politics, about Kamala Harris's decision to name Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate.  For show notes and a transcript of the episode head to: https://cafe.com/stay-tuned/tim-walz-kamala-harris-leibovich-bauer/  Have a question for Preet? Ask @PreetBharara on Threads, or Twitter with the hashtag #AskPreet. Email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 669-247-7338 to leave a voicemail. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Thom Francis welcomes poets Frank Robinson & Therese Broderick who have been a part of the local literary community for decades. They have led workshops, featured at regional events, and written many books over the years. Frank S. Robinson is a 1970 graduate of NYU Law School and served at the New York Public Service Commission as staff counsel and then administrative law judge until retiring in 1997. He is the author of eight books including Albany's O'Connell Machine (1973), Children of the Dragon (a novel), and The Case for Rational Optimism (2009). Robinson is a professional coin dealer and is married to the poet Therese Broderick. Together they have a daughter, Elizabeth. Frank's wife, Therese L. Broderick, MFA, has lived the sweet life of a poet for more than two decades. Her poems have been published widely in several formats and have won awards both locally and beyond. She lives in Albany, New York with her optimistic husband, two fat cats, and a disheveled garden. Frank and Therese both took the stage at the 2024 Word Fest Open Mic at the Sand Lake Center for the Arts.

It's Apple vs. the world right now, as they face antitrust battles across the globe—the US & the EU are suing the iPhone maker over alleged anti-competitive behavior. In March, the Department of Justice presented their case in a press conference, explaining all of the ways Apple products and services are designed to keep you in the “Apple ecosystem”: from the iPhone to the Apple Watch to the App Store, and more. The Big Money Show's co-anchor, Taylor Riggs, is joined by antitrust expert, author, and professor at NYU Law School, Harry First, to break down the monopoly allegations facing Apple and how to maintain fair competition in the business world while still allowing capitalism to choose winners and losers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tammy Caputi Tammy began her first term on the Scottsdale City Council in January 2021 and is currently seeking a second term. She has lived and worked in Scottsdale for almost 25 years, and is the president and owner of Yale Electric West, Inc, a Scottsdale company.  Married for over 21 years with 3 daughters who all attend our local schools. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Wellesley College in Wellesley, MA and a Master's in Business Administration from Simmons University in Boston, MA. Tammy is passionate about Tom Durham Tom grew up in a small town in Iowa and attended Cornell College where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude in 1977 with majors in Philosophy and History. Some of my earliest memories are of visiting my grandfather in Mesa where he had a pasture behind his house and rode horses. After graduating from Cornell, he attended NYU Law School in New York City, graduating in 1980. After graduating from NYU, Tom joined the Mayer Brown law firm in Chicago, an international law firm that specialized in tax controversy. He argued several appeals in the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which is generally regarded as the second most important court in the United States.Tom's ability to analyze complex legal and factual situations and to "cut through" to the heart of the matter are essential to the City Council. During his time at Mayer Brown, I was recognized by Chambers USA as one of the top 25 tax controversy lawyers in the US. Tom retired from Mayer Brown in April 2015. Tom Durham 2024 website MaryAnne McAllen Maryann McAllen is a 59 year resident of Scottsdale, she is a small business owner, a community leader and activist. Maryann met her husband Sam while being a summer recreation leader for the City of Scottsdale, they have four young adult children and a fun fact about Maryann she is an avid Antique Button Collector. MaryAnn McAllen website

It's Apple vs. the world right now, as they face antitrust battles across the globe—the US & the EU are suing the iPhone maker over alleged anti-competitive behavior. In March, the Department of Justice presented their case in a press conference, explaining all of the ways Apple products and services are designed to keep you in the “Apple ecosystem”: from the iPhone to the Apple Watch to the App Store, and more. The Big Money Show's co-anchor, Taylor Riggs, is joined by antitrust expert, author, and professor at NYU Law School, Harry First, to break down the monopoly allegations facing Apple and how to maintain fair competition in the business world while still allowing capitalism to choose winners and losers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hey there Lemon Heads! The SCOTUS Presidential Immunity Ruling is in...Trump has been granted partial presidential immunity. Don is joined by Melissa Murray, Stokes Professor of Law at NYU Law School, co-host of the Strict Scrutiny podcast, MSNBC Contributor, and former clerk for Sonia Sotomayor. They will break down the ruling and dive into the implications for our political landscape. Tune in for an important breaking news discussion you won't want to miss! WATCH & Subscribe on YouTube @TheDonLemonShow! Listen on Apple, Spotify and iHeart Radio! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Scientific Sense ® by Gill Eapen: Prof. Burt Neuborne is Professor of Civil Liberties and founding Legal Director of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School. He was the National Legal Director of the ACLU , special Counsel to the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund and a member of the New York City Human Rights Commission. Please subscribe to this channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/ScientificSense?sub_confirmation=1 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scientificsense/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scientificsense/support

Tammy Caputi Tammy began her first term on the Scottsdale City Council in January 2021 and is currently seeking a second term. She has lived and worked in Scottsdale for almost 25 years, and is the president and owner of Yale Electric West, Inc, a Scottsdale company.  Married for over 21 years with 3 daughters who all attend our local schools. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Wellesley College in Wellesley, MA and a Master's in Business Administration from Simmons University in Boston, MA. Tammy is passionate about Tom Durham Tom grew up in a small town in Iowa and attended Cornell College where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude in 1977 with majors in Philosophy and History. Some of my earliest memories are of visiting my grandfather in Mesa where he had a pasture behind his house and rode horses. After graduating from Cornell, he attended NYU Law School in New York City, graduating in 1980. After graduating from NYU, Tom joined the Mayer Brown law firm in Chicago, an international law firm that specialized in tax controversy. He argued several appeals in the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which is generally regarded as the second most important court in the United States.Tom's ability to analyze complex legal and factual situations and to "cut through" to the heart of the matter are essential to the City Council. During his time at Mayer Brown, I was recognized by Chambers USA as one of the top 25 tax controversy lawyers in the US. Tom retired from Mayer Brown in April 2015. Tom Durham 2024 website MaryAnne McAllen Maryann McAllen is a 59 year resident of Scottsdale, she is a small business owner, a community leader and activist. Maryann met her husband Sam while being a summer recreation leader for the City of Scottsdale, they have four young adult children and a fun fact about Maryann she is an avid Antique Button Collector. MaryAnn McAllen website  

In this episode, Naomi Sunshine, a director in the Public Interest Law Center and Supervising Attorney in the Immigrants Right Clinic at NYU Law School, discusses the process of reclaiming German citizenship under Article 116 Paragraph 2 of the Basic Law, which provides for the restoration of German citizenship to former German citizens deprived of their German citizenship due to “political, racial, or religious grounds” in the time period from January 30, 1933 to May 8, 1945, and their descendants. One of the primary purposes of Article 116 was to restore the German citizenship of denaturalized German Jews. Sunshine describes her family story and explains the process of applying for German citizenship under section 116. She also describes the experience of becoming a German citizen. Here is a link to the application for German citizenship under Article 116.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Many international law scholars are skeptical about the efficacy of international law to shape state behavior—and even international law's reality as law—because it lacks a centralized hierarchical legislature, executive branch, or judiciary. In his new book, “Law for Leviathan: Constitutional Law, International Law, and the State,” Daryl Levinson of NYU Law School challenges this conception of international law by arguing that it is structurally similar to domestic constitutional law in its ability to constrain states and in its strategies for doing so. Jack Goldsmith sat down with Levinson to discuss the challenge of regulating the state through both international law and constitutional law and what constitutional law theory can learn from international relations theory about how this happens. They also discussed how IR balance of power theory is like Madison's conception of constitutionalism, the implications for his theory for understanding how to hold states accountable for illegal action, and how to think about these ideas in light of the ostensible waning of state power in the modern era.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Between now and the spring, the Supreme Court will rule on at least three cases involving Donald Trump. Two questions: What should the Court's rulings be? What will they be? To answer those questions and more, we turn to our in-house legal experts: NYU Law School's Richard Epstein and Berkeley Law School's John Yoo.

In this special episode of the CAFE Insider podcast, Joyce Vance interviews Rachel Barkow, while Preet is out. Barkow, who recently became a CAFE contributor, is a professor at NYU Law School and author of Prisoners of Politics: Breaking the Cycle of Mass Incarceration. She also served on the U.S. Sentencing Commission from 2013 to 2019. In this excerpt from the show, Barkow discusses the high stakes of the forthcoming oral arguments in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, a case that asks the Supreme Court justices to overturn the long-standing Chevron doctrine that says courts should defer to federal agencies' interpretation of ambiguous laws. In the full episode, Barkow further discusses other consequential administrative law cases before the Supreme Court:  – CFPB v. Community Financial Services Association of America, which could invalidate the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; and – SEC v. Jarkesy, which asks whether SEC enforcement actions are consistent with the 7th Amendment's right to a jury trial. Preet will be back next week. Stay informed. For analysis of the most important legal and political issues of our time, become a member of CAFE Insider: www.cafe.com/insider. You'll get access to full episodes of the podcast, and other exclusive content. This podcast is brought to you by CAFE Studios and Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

11.20.2023 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: Roland Talks to a Black Trump Supporter, Voting Rights Act Under Attack, AL Riverboat Captain Speaks He says Donald Trump has done more for black people than any other president. Mark Fisher is in the studio to explain why he's endorsing Trump in 2024.  The 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals says private entities cannot bring lawsuits under a provision of the law, known as Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Kareem Crayton, from the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, and Damon Hewitt, the President and Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, will help us break down the real implications of this ruling.  The Black Alabama riverboat co-captain who was attacked is facing assault charges. He's on the show tonight to tell his side of what happened on  August 5. An HBCU will be the site of a 2024 presidential debate.  And it's Diabetes Awareness Month. In our Fit, Live, Win segment, I'll talk to a young woman who "beat" diabetes. Download the #BlackStarNetwork app on iOS, AppleTV, Android, Android TV, Roku, FireTV, SamsungTV and XBox  http://www.blackstarnetwork.com The #BlackStarNetwork is a news reporting platform covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A hugely consequential week ahead for Donald Trump as a trial in CO begins to determine if he's eligible to be president again after Jan. 6th. Plus, he and his 3 oldest kids get set to testify over the next week in the NY fraud trial that threatens their business empire. Plus, the former dean of NYU Law School, Trevor Morrison, joins Andrew & Mary for an in-depth look at Trump's attempt to dismiss the DC election interference case against him over claims of presidential immunity.

We're live at NYU Law School! MSNBC legal analysts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord are joined by special guest and former dean of NYU Law Trevor Morrison. They discuss Trump's new gag order, presidential immunity and take questions from the audience.

Get your tickets for Amicus Live on May 24th.  On this week's Amicus, we head to Seattle for a live taping of the show at the Cross Cut Festival with guest Michael Waldman, President of NYU Law School's Brennan Center. Dahlia Lithwick asks him about his new book, THE SUPERMAJORITY: How the Supreme Court Divided America, and what the ongoing ethics scandals and plummeting public approval for the court mean for our democracy. They also look ahead to next month when the court's legitimacy may be stretched even further by major decisions that fly in the face of the majority of public opinion. In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Slate's Mark Joseph Stern to talk about the decisions that came out this week concerning pork producers and public corruption, which delivered some surprising and depressingly unsurprising opinions. They also try to figure out how many more times E Jean Carroll might have to sue Donald Trump to halt his defamation demolition derby. Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show.  Dahlia's book Lady Justice: Women, the Law and the Battle to Save America, is also available as an audiobook, and Amicus listeners can get a 25 percent discount by entering the code “AMICUS” at checkout. https://books.supportingcast.fm/lady-justice Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices