Podcasts about Oregon Supreme Court

Dave Hunnicutt is President of Oregon Property Owners Association. OPOA is active in the legislature and courts to protect Oregon property owners, urban and rural, from excessive state and federal regulations that limit Oregonians' rights to own and use private property. Dave has been at the forefront of nearly every one of these battles.For nearly 25 years, Dave has represented Oregon property owners in the Capitol and in courts throughout Oregon. As a registered Oregon lobbyist, Dave has successfully advocated for the passage of legislation to protect Oregon property owners in all areas of real property law, including land use/zoning, environmental law, eminent domain law, resolving government/private title disputes, and natural resources law. Since 1996, over 60 OPOA/OIA bills have been enacted into law.An active member of the Oregon State Bar, Dave represents Oregon property owners in litigation in courts and agencies throughout Oregon. Dave has appeared and argued before the Oregon Supreme Court, the Oregon Court of Appeals, the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals, multiple Oregon agencies, and in circuit courts throughout Oregon. Dave received his Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Oregon and his Juris Doctorate from the Northwestern School of Law at Lewis and Clark College. This is the link we discussed about building permits in Oregon over the last 30 years. https://oregoneconomicanalysis.com/2023/01/26/new-housing-under-construction/ This a great map to see all the Urban Growth Boundaries that exist in Oregon. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.crosstabs.studio

Economist Christian Briggs, CEO of Hard Assets Mgt, a discussion on the dollar, gold, BRICS, Pres. Trump and Tariffs. Jo County Commissioner Chris Barnett tells his side of the Oregon Supreme Court reversal on is real estate lawsuit.

Albert Mohler discusses the normalization of gambling in American culture, particularly highlighted by the recent Super Bowl in Las Vegas.  Bob Burney criticizes the "He Gets Us" advertisements that aird during the Super Bowl for misrepresenting Jesus by emphasizing His humanity over His divinity. Georgene Rice and Louis Anderson of Oregon Right to Life discuss the recent Oregon Supreme Court ruling that rendered 10 pro-life senators ineligible for reelection, examining its impact on the ongoing legislative session. Greg Seltz talks with John Stonestreet of The Colson Center about the prominence of abortion in the Democratic platform, noting its strategic importance despite its ethical implications.  Greg Seltz and Jay Richards of the Heritage Foundation discuss the consequences of gender ideology. They highlight the dangers of disregarding biological reality, emphasizing the vulnerability of young girls and the need to uphold fundamental distinctions between male and female in sports, society and law.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Michael talks about politics, including the Oregon Supreme Court’s ruling to allow Donald Trump on the 2024 state primary ballot. The show ends, at Michael’s request, with a musical piece performed by Paul Robeson.

House Republicans failed to muster enough support to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over his handling of a border crisis. Joe Biden demanded that the illegal aliens already in the United States, with millions having entered during his administration, be given a pathway to citizenship so they can become Americans (and vote of course). A group called the Regional Refugee and Migrant Response Plan, led by the United Nations, is using U.S. tax dollars to facilitate the crisis at the Southern Border. The Oregon Supreme Court has upheld a decision from Democrat Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade that 10 Republican state senators cannot run for re-election after they participated in legislative walkouts over radical Democrat-backed bills on abortion, transgenderism, and guns. Be ready when things go sideways. Visit 4Patriots and prepare for whatever life sends your way.Diversify and protect your hard-earned wealth, add physical gold to your holdings. Get your gold from America's Premiere Conservative Gold Company, Harvard Gold Group. Use promo code TAPP when asked how you heard about themVNSH holster fits 99% of all semi-auto handguns, works without a tactical belt, & carries 2 fully loaded magazines. Go to http://vnsh.com/tapp to automatically activate your discount. Visit before Feb. 9th, 2024.My Pillow is giving you the lowest prices in history. Mike has been attacked by the left for standing with Donald Trump. Is that any reason to destroy an American company and American jobs? Support American jobs! Stand with Mike! Go to My Pillow and use promo code: TAPP to save!Tapp into the Truth at LocalsIs there more to Democrat support of Iranian theocracy than bad policy?A Very Convenient WarmingHero Soap - RoseHero Soap - Love HurtsHero SoapPatriot DepotBlue CoolersKoa CoffeeBrainMDDiamond CBDSauce Bae2nd SkullEinstokBeanstoxBelle IsleMomento AIHoneyFund"Homegrown" Boone's BourbonIsland BrandsBlackout Coffee Co.Full Circle Brewing Co.Pasmosa Sangria

House Republicans failed to muster enough support to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over his handling of a border crisis. Joe Biden demanded that the illegal aliens already in the United States, with millions having entered during his administration, be given a pathway to citizenship so they can become Americans (and vote of course). A group called the Regional Refugee and Migrant Response Plan, led by the United Nations, is using U.S. tax dollars to facilitate the crisis at the Southern Border. The Oregon Supreme Court has upheld a decision from Democrat Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade that 10 Republican state senators cannot run for re-election after they participated in legislative walkouts over radical Democrat-backed bills on abortion, transgenderism, and guns. Be ready when things go sideways. Visit 4Patriots and prepare for whatever life sends your way. Diversify and protect your hard-earned wealth with physical gold. Use America's Premiere Conservative Gold Company, Harvard Gold Group. Use promo code TAPP. VNSH holster fits 99% of all semi-auto handguns, works without a tactical belt, & carries 2 fully loaded magazines. Go to http://vnsh.com/tapp to automatically activate your discount. Visit before Feb. 9th, 2024. Support American jobs! Stand with Mike! Go to My Pillow and use promo code TAPP to save!

The Oregon Supreme Court has just ruled that almost all of the Republican senators in the state are banned from running for reelection. This ruling means that 90 percent of Oregon's Republican senators are essentially being kicked out of the chamber.

Today's West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy Podcast for our especially special Daily Special, Blue Moon Spirits Fridays, is now available on the Spreaker Player!​​​​​​​​​​​​​Starting off in the Bistro Cafe, you really can't blame a bunch of FBI agents who didn't want to search Mar a Lago in the first place, to miss important hiding places for the stolen secret documents.Then, on the rest of the menu, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that eight Republican lawmakers will be blocked from running for reelection after refusing to attend Senate floor sessions for six weeks last year; a year after scaring away Hispanic Americans and immigrants from the state, the Florida house passed a bill to loosen child labor laws; and, once a self-proclaimed leader in criminal justice reform, Georgia is sliding a little further toward its old lock-'em-up ways.After the break, we move to the Chef's Table where the two key farmers unions have suspended their nationwide protests after the French government offered new measures; and, tens of thousands rallied across Slovakia against the government's plan to close the special prosecutor's office.All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!The Netroots Radio Live Player​Keep Your Resistance Radio Beaming 24/7/365!“Structural linguistics is a bitterly divided and unhappy profession, and a large number of its practitioners spend many nights drowning their sorrows in Ouisghian Zodahs.”― Douglas Adams"The Restaurant at the End of the Universe"Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/west-coast-cookbook-speakeasy--2802999/support.

Friday, February 2nd, 2024Today,  Trump Org CFO Allen Weisselberg is in negotiations to plead guilty to a perjury charge; President Biden hits violent Israeli settlers in the West Bank with sanctions; the House votes to expand the child tax credit; Trump spent $50M dollars on legal fees in 2023; the European Union secures $54B in funding for Ukraine; the 10 Oregon Republicans that walked out in 2022 have been found ineligible to run for reelection; the GOP has its worst fundraising year in a decade; a teenager is accused of orchestrating hundreds of swatting instances; and MAGA world is planning on fighting the Taylor Swift Phenomenon with Kid Rock. Plus Allison and Dana deliver your good news.More from our Guest:John Fugelsanghttps://www.johnfugelsang.com/tmehttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-john-fugelsang-podcast/id1464094232Trump's Former Finance Chief in Negotiations to Plead Guilty to Perjuryhttps://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/01/nyregion/weisselberg-perjury-trump-fraud.htmlHouse passes bill to enhance child tax credit, revive key tax breaks for businesseshttps://apnews.com/article/child-tax-credit-house-republicans-speaker-johnson-4da25a4188ad27693e9d8755e7481b76Oregon high court says 10 GOP state senators who staged long walkout can't run forreelectionhttps://apnews.com/article/oregon-republican-walkout-reelection-f1d270db9e9a72935c13b973d79a4bb7Biden issues executive order targeting violent Israeli settlers in the West Bankhttps://www.cnn.com/2024/02/01/politics/west-bank-settlers-executive-order/index.htmlSubscribe to Lawyers, Guns, And MoneyAd-free premium feed: https://lawyersgunsandmoney.supercast.comSubscribe for free everywhere else:https://lawyersgunsandmoney.simplecast.com/episodes/1-miami-1985Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Follow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Follow Mueller, She Wrote on Posthttps://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote?utm_source=TwitterAG&utm_medium=creator_organic&utm_campaign=muellershewrote&utm_content=FollowMehttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://www.threads.net/@muellershewrotehttps://www.tiktok.com/@muellershewrotehttps://instagram.com/muellershewroteDana Goldberghttps://twitter.com/DGComedyhttps://www.instagram.com/dgcomedyhttps://www.facebook.com/dgcomedyhttps://danagoldberg.comHave some good news; a confession; or a correction?Good News & Confessions - The Daily BeansFrom the Good NewsTransgender Day of Visibilityhttps://glaad.org/tdovAsian American Center of Frederickwww.aacfmd.orgOperation Second Chancewww.operationsecondchance.orgThe Frederick Children's Choruswww.fredcc.orgHealth Betterment Initiativewww.hbi-dc.orgMission of Mercywww.amissionofmercy.orgCrossed Bridgeswww.crossedbridges.comCommunity Ministry of Prince George's Countywww.cmpgc.comJoin the private Facebook GroupBehind The Beans | Facebook Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercast https://dailybeans.supercast.com/OrPatreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Oregon lawmakers return to the Capitol on Monday for a frenetic 35-day session. On the latest episode of OPB Politics Now, reporters Lauren Dake and Dirk VanderHart talk about the major issues, the key Oregon Supreme Court ruling and much more. Find the show anywhere you get your podcasts.

President Biden addresses National Prayer Breakfast...Oregon Supreme Court rules on Republican Senate walkout...and pro-life demonstators convicted of blocking a Tennessee abortion clinic entrance.

Real News Now The Oregon Supreme Court decided not to entertain a lawsuit on Friday, aimed at barring ex-President Donald Trump from the state's primary and general elections in 2024. A group of five citiens from Oregon had initiated the legal action, with the intention of seeing Trump ruled ineligible for inclusion on the state's ballot. Their legal argument was founded on the provisions of the 14th Amendment's insurrection clause. These actions in Oregon were reflective of a broader climate of similar challenges confronting Trump's potential candidacy across several states. Parallel events unfolded in Colorado, with the state's top court ruling last month to exclude Trump from the electoral list. Unsurprisingly, this judgement was rapidly countered with an appeal from Trump's side. In recent developments, the US Supreme Court demonstrated willingness to take up the appeal against Colorado's decision. The ruling from the country's highest court could have fascinating domestic implications. In refusing the Oregon lawsuit, Chief Justice Meagan Flynn hinted at the unfolding events in Colorado. The Statesman Journal reported that Flynn had left an opportunity for the case against Trump's eligibility in the Oregon election to be reintroduced, the outcome hinging on the verdict from the U.S Supreme Court concerning the Colorado situation. The connection between these respective legal battles could form a decisive narrative in the lead up to the 2024 elections. Novemeber bore witness to comments from Oregon's Secretary of State, LaVonne Griffin-Valade. As a member of the Democratic party, she offered interesting insight into the autonomous powers of her role, stating that she lacked the authority to dismiss Trump's name from the ballot. Contrarily, this view was not shared by Maine's Secretary of State, Shenna Bellows. Bellows, another Democrat, reached a different conclusion in the parallel examination within her state. In her announcement last month, she declared Trump ineligible for position on the state's ballot. The divergent conclusions from these two state officials provide an excellent case study, illuminating the varying interpretations and applications of law across different regions. An interesting factor to consider is that the Supreme Court's final ruling on the Colorado case could substantially impact other states and shape the overall political landscape ahead of the 2024 elections. As it is clear, the court's decision won't just affect Colorado; other constituencies are watching closely as well. Particularly, certain groups in Illinois and Massachusetts have expressed similar intentions to prevent Trump's name from appearing on their ballots. According to the timeline, oral proceedings in the Supreme Court are set to commence on February 8th. This date arrives not long before the presidential primaries commence in several states, including Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, and Illinois. These developments seem to be converging into a major watershed moment for American politics, where the potential inclusion or exclusion of a high-profile candidate could significantly shape voter perceptions. To close, it seems certain that for now Trump will remain an eligible candidate within Colorado, barring any adverse ruling from the Supreme Court. Collectively, these events could have sweeping implications not only for Trump's political future but also for the practical application of constitutional clauses throughout the country. So while the legal offensives and defensives continue, the 2024 contest is unequivocally becoming a hotbed of fascinating narratives. Visit https://www.realnewsnow.com for more breaking news Video: https://youtu.be/W57bEhC2fE8 Follow RNN on Social Media Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RealNewsNowApp/ X Twitter: https://twitter.com/realnewsapp Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/realnews/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@realnewsnowapp TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@realnewsnowapp Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@RealNews Real News Now Podcast  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Violation of Statute Allows Suit for Negligent Failure to Resolve Insurance Claim Post 4706 Christine Moody, individually, and in her capacity as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Steven "Troy" Moody, Deceased v. Oregon Community Credit Union, aka OCCU, an Oregon entity, association, union, or corporation et al., Defendants, and Federal Insurance Company, an Indiana corporation, 371 Or. 772, SC S069409, Supreme Court of Oregon (December 29, 2023) Plaintiff, whose husband was accidentally shot and killed during a camping trip, brought this action against defendant, a first-party life insurer, claiming, among other things, that defendant had negligently failed to investigate and pay her claim for policy benefits, causing her to have fewer financial resources to navigate the loss of a bread-winning spouse and, consequently, to suffer economic harm and emotional distress. FACTS In the case now before the Supreme Court it must consider whether plaintiff has alleged a legally protected interest sufficient to subject defendant to liability for emotional distress damages. To decide whether that alleged interest is a legally protected interest sufficient to subject defendant to liability for emotional distress damages. Plaintiff has alleged a viable common-law negligence claim against defendant for emotional distress damages. Therefore, the trial court erred in granting defendant's motions to dismiss plaintiffs negligence claim and in striking her claim for emotional distress damages. ZALMA OPINION The state of Oregon, like many states, has enacted statutes punishing insurers for bad faith claims handling. The insurer, after a change in allegations, paid the plaintiff the $3,000 life insurance limit, only to find itself sued for negligent claims handling. The suit was dismissed by the trial court and reversed by the Court of Appeals and the Oregon Supreme Court. Since the statute requires fair claims handling the plaintiffs allegations allowed it to sue the insurer for emotional distress damages when it initially refused to pay because of an exclusion.  This is a limited decision and stretches the obligations of an insurer beyond fairness and even with a clear and unambiguous exclusion it can be sued for emotional distress. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Insurance Claims Library – http://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support

Efforts to remove former president Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot are under way in multiple states, including in Oregon. The challenges rest on an obscure clause of the 14th Amendment that prohibits anyone who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” from holding federal office. It’s unclear whether the clause applies to the presidency, but groups in Colorado and Maine successfully argued that Trump’s actions after the 2020 election disqualify him from running for office. Oregon Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade has said she doesn’t have the authority to bar Trump from the primary ballot. But the Oregon Supreme Court is expected to rule in the coming weeks on a suit that seeks to oust him from the 2024 contest. Norman Williams is a professor at Willamette University who teaches election and constitutional law. He’s been following the litigation in Oregon and elsewhere, and joins us to talk about the details. 

A major Trump legal ruling could come at any moment as the former president just filed court documents. Will he be thrown off the ballot in another state? Plus, Russia launches the most massive aerial attack on Ukraine since the invasion began. President Zelensky says Russia used nearly every type of weapon in its arsenal. Also, Dolly Parton grants a bucket list wish, surprising a special fan with a personal phone call and making his dreams come true. You'll hear it for yourself.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Trump urges the Oregon Supreme Court to dismiss the 14th Amendment case against him, as the Republican presidential frontrunner faces being removed from the 2024 ballot in a third state. Plus, Ukraine reels from the largest Russian bombardment since the early days of the war, with more than 150 missiles fired in total across the country. And, Trump's former fixer Michael Cohen says he didn't realize he sent AI-generated fake citations to his lawyer, that were then submitted in a court filing as a part Cohen's request to end his supervised release from jail. Also, prisoners sue Alabama for forced Labor, alleging they are being subjected to a “Modern day form of slavery”. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of Animal Amicus, hosts Senior Policy Program Manager Nicole Pallotta and Managing Attorney David Rosengard discuss sentience, the legal status of nonhumans, the “Oregon trilogy” (State v. Nix, State v. Fessenden, and State v. Newcomb), and animal rights victories across the United States and globally.    Resources referenced in this episode along with additional relevant articles are listed below:    Animal Legal Defense Fund: Critical Caselaw: Judicial Recognition of Animal Sentience (webinar featuring Jamie Contreras & David Rosengard)   Animal Legal Defense Fund: Animals' Legal Status   Animal Legal Defense Fund: How Animals Differ from Other Types of “Property” Under the Law   Animal Legal & Historical Center: State v. Nix , 334 P.3d 437 (2014), vacated, 356 Or. 768, 345 P.3d 416 (2015)   Casetext: State of Oregon v. Hess, 273 Or. App. 26 (2015)   Casetext: People v. Harris, 405 P.3d 361, 2016 COA 159 (Colo. App. 2016)   Animal Legal Defense Fund: Charging Considerations in Criminal Animal Abuse Cases   Oregon Live: Animals Can Be Victims of Crime, Oregon Court of Appeals Says   FBI: Tracking Animal Cruelty: FBI Collecting Data on Crimes Against Animals   FBI: 2019 National Incident Reporting System   Animal Legal & Historical Center: State of Oregon v. Fessenden, 310 P.3d 1163 (Or. App., 2013), review allowed, 354 Or. 597, 318 P.3d 749 (2013) and aff'd, 355 Or. 759 (2014)   Animal Legal Defense Fund: Two Great Legal Victories for Animals in Oregon   Oregon Live: Oregon Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Deputy Who Entered Private Property to Rescue Starving Horse   Animal Legal & Historical Center: State of Oregon v. Newcomb, 359 Or 756 (2016)   Oregon Live: Pets not ‘mere' property: Oregon Supreme Court upholds dog-starvation conviction   FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin: The Emergency Aid Exception to the Fourth Amendment's Warrant Requirement   Animal Legal & Historical Center: State v. Davidson, Slip Copy, 2006 WL 763082 (Ohio App. 11 Dist.), 2006-Ohio-1458   Animal Legal Defense Fund: 34 Horses in Limbo: Pre-Trial Forfeiture   Animal Legal Defense Fund: Delhi High Court Rules that Community Dogs Have the Right to Food by Nicole Pallotta   Animal Legal Defense Fund: Islamabad High Court Holds that Animals Have Legal Rights by Nicole Pallotta  

Today's West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy Podcast for our especially special Daily Special, Metro Shrimp & Grits Thursdays, is now available on the Spreaker Player!Starting off in the Bistro Cafe, Trump wanted his “Legally Blonde” moment, but he didn't get it.Then, on the rest of the menu, the Oregon Supreme Court will decide if Republican state senators who carried out a record-breaking walkout during this year's legislative session, can run for reelection; Scholastic will drop the highly criticized policy that makes it easier for school fairs to exclude diverse books; and, the White House wants fifty-six billion dollars from Congress for disaster relief, child care and high-speed Internet.After the break, we move to the Chef's Table where the World Bank approved a one billion dollar loan to help blackout-hit South Africa's energy sector; and, Slovakia's president is ready to swear in a new Cabinet after a coalition partner agreed to replace a climate change-denying ministry nominee.All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!The Netroots Radio Live Player​Keep Your Resistance Radio Beaming 24/7/365!“Everyone in this good city enjoys the full right to pursue his own inclinations in all reasonable and, unreasonable ways.”-- The Daily Picayune,New Orleans, March 5, 1851

This day in legal history, September 6, is a dark one – but one that should not be ignored just because it is difficult to talk about. On September 6, 1941, German authorities announced the adoption of a regulation requiring all Jewish people in German territories to wear the Star of David. For our purposes here on a legal news website, we'll talk about how it highlights and exemplifies the Nazi regime's obsession with committing their atrocities under the color of law.From 1935, the Nazi regime utilized the law as a tool for the systemic persecution of the Jewish people, initiating this with the enactment of the Nuremberg Laws. These laws, officially signed by Hitler and other Nazi leaders, stripped German Jews of their citizenship, prohibited marriages between Jews and other Germans, and barred Jews from displaying the German flag, now represented by the swastika. This legal framework, which was further intensified in the subsequent years, facilitated the marginalization, segregation, and eventual extermination of the Jewish community in Germany.The Nazis had begun their legal assault on the Jewish population as early as 1933, using official decrees to progressively strip Jews of various rights, including holding public office, working in certain professions, and participating in economic activities. This legal strategy was part of a broader effort to segregate Jews from the social, political, and economic life of Germany, with the ultimate aim of appeasing radical elements within the Nazi party who were clamoring for more drastic measures against the Jews.During the Nuremberg Trials that followed World War II, these laws served as critical evidence in the prosecution of prominent Nazi leaders, highlighting the extent to which the Nazi regime had manipulated the law to facilitate their campaign of persecution and genocide. In the ongoing California ethics case, attorney John Eastman, who had previously advised that the vice president could overturn the 2020 election results, was compelled to testify, despite his efforts to invoke Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination. State Bar Court Judge Yvette D. Roland dismissed Eastman's defense that testifying would infringe on his Fifth Amendment rights, a stance she had maintained even as criminal cases were underway. Eastman, along with Donald Trump and 17 others, faces racketeering charges in Georgia, linked to attempts to declare Trump the winner of the 2020 election.Eastman's lawyer, Randall Miller, emphasized that the demand for Eastman's testimony in the bar case, which could potentially lead to the revocation of his law license, places him in a precarious position. Miller highlighted the dilemma Eastman faces: remaining silent might undermine his defense, while full testimony could jeopardize the ongoing Georgia case. Despite these arguments, Judge Roland noted that Eastman had already waived his right to self-incrimination by testifying extensively in the case and in previous instances, including before the January 6 congressional committee and the Fulton County grand jury.The judge underscored that Eastman was well aware of the gravity of the committee's questions, which were closely tied to the allegations presented in the disciplinary charges. Although the court allowed a brief postponement for Eastman to attend to criminal indictment procedures in Fulton County, it rejected the defense's plea to halt or postpone the case further, citing no alternative reasons were provided. Efforts by Eastman to prevent the state bar prosecutors from presenting evidence concerning his alleged involvement in devising alternative elector slates were also dismissed.As the trial continues, with additional sessions scheduled from September 12-15, Eastman faces 11 counts of ethical and legal violations pertaining to his post-election actions, culminating in the January 6 Capitol raid. During his testimony, he began addressing questions about the memos he had dispatched to presidential advisors, discussing potential strategies to invalidate or delay the vote counting process. The trial is set to feature testimonies from several individuals, including accountant Joseph Fried, who lacks formal training in election audits but conducted a study on the 2020 election "anomalies", and former Michigan Supreme Court Justice Michael Gabelman. The case, represented by Miller Law Associates for Eastman and the Office of Chief Trial Counsel for the bar, continues to unfold.Trump Lawyer Eastman Forced to Testify in California Ethics CaseElliott Broidy, a former prominent fundraiser for ex-President Donald Trump, has issued a subpoena to the law firm Covington & Burling, seeking documents in a lawsuit where he alleges a conspiracy backed by Qatar to hack and defame him. The law firm, which represented Qatar in various US legal cases, objected to the subpoena, citing privilege and sovereign immunity. This move is seen as an assertive approach by Broidy's legal team to involve a US law firm in the case, a rare occurrence due to the attorney-client privilege that usually protects such communications.Broidy, who resigned from his position as the deputy finance chairman of the Republican National Committee in 2018 following a scandal and was later pardoned by Trump for illegal lobbying charges, initiated this lawsuit four years ago. He accused Qatar of orchestrating a campaign to tarnish his reputation, alleging that they disseminated hacked information about him to journalists. The lawsuit specifically targets consulting firm Stonington Strategies and several individuals who have worked for Qatar, although the nation itself is not officially named in the suit.Broidy contends that both Qatar and Covington have worked to conceal evidence pertinent to the case and has requested the US District Court to mandate a forensic examination to uncover any hidden data. The defendants are expected to respond to these allegations by September 8. Covington has dismissed Broidy's accusations as baseless, emphasizing that the documents in question actually support Qatar's claims of privilege. Trump Ex-Fundraiser Targets Qatar's US Law Firm in Hack LawsuitThe U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina has given preliminary approval to a revised $12.5 billion settlement between 3M and water utilities concerning the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination issue. This settlement includes a unique "Protection Against Claims-Over" provision, which prevents 3M from reclaiming settlement money from water utilities in case of future lawsuits related to drinking water harm. This change enhances the value of the settlement for the participating water systems, as it eliminates the possibility of them being held liable for damages exceeding their recovery from the settlement.The final decision on the settlement will be made by Judge Richard Mark Gergel after a hearing scheduled for February 2, 2024, with 3M's payouts extending until 2036. Despite this, several attorneys general have criticized the settlement amount as insufficient to scover the damages caused by 3M's products to public water systems, burdening ratepayers and taxpayers. They also warned that the ongoing litigation could potentially bankrupt 3M by the end of the 12-year payout period. The settlement might pave the way for a larger agreement resembling the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement with tobacco companies, although the science on the diseases resulting from PFAS exposure remains unclear.3M's Revised PFAS Settlement Includes Atypical Liability TermsThree high-ranking Apple executives, Eddy Cue, John Giannandrea, and Adrian Perica, have failed in their attempt to prevent the U.S. Justice Department from summoning them as witnesses in the forthcoming trial against Google, where the latter is accused of misusing its search dominance. The executives had contended that being called to testify would be "duplicative" and "unduly burdensome," given their participation in earlier stages of the case. Despite not being a defendant, Apple claims to have been subjected to "overbroad" demands, having already shared over 125,000 documents from its senior executives.U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta rejected Apple's plea to nullify the subpoenas on Monday. The Justice Department's case is focused on Google's practice of sharing substantial annual advertising revenues with business allies like Apple, to ensure Google's search engine is the default on their devices. The trial, which is expected to scrutinize Google's information-services agreement with Apple closely, is scheduled to commence on September 12 in Judge Mehta's court. Apple has expressed concerns that the trial could inadvertently reveal its highly sensitive competitive information.Apple execs lose bid to block testimony at Google antitrust trial | ReutersThe Oregon Supreme Court is set to vote on a groundbreaking alternative to the bar exam for licensing attorneys in the state. This initiative, which has been in development since 2020 by the Oregon State Board of Bar Examiners, proposes that law school graduates can become licensed after completing 675 hours of supervised legal work, equivalent to the typical study time for the bar exam. The program, named the Supervised Practice Portfolio Examination, also requires candidates to submit eight pieces of legal writing, lead two client interviews or counseling sessions, and spearhead two negotiations, among other prerequisites.Participants' portfolios will be assessed by Oregon bar examiners, and those achieving the necessary scores will be inducted into the state bar, with compensation provided for their efforts. The proposal, which aims to be a model for other states considering similar pathways, would significantly expand the scale of bar exam alternatives, accommodating law students both within and outside Oregon. A second pathway, focusing on practice-based coursework during the last two years of law school, is also under development. Currently, only Wisconsin and New Hampshire offer limited alternatives to the bar exam.Oregon Supreme Court to vote on bar exam alternative | ReutersGoogle has tentatively settled a class-action lawsuit in the U.S., where it was accused of violating federal antitrust laws through its Play Store by allegedly overcharging customers, as per a recent court document. The lawsuit, initiated by over 30 U.S. states representing 21 million consumers, argued that Google's supposed monopoly might have led to increased app prices and limited options for consumers. The specific terms of the settlement remain undisclosed.The parties involved in the settlement have requested the cancellation of the trial that was slated for November 6. While Google has not admitted to any wrongdoing and declined to comment on the settlement, the court's approval is pending. This case is one among several where Google is accused of maintaining monopolies in the Android app and in-app goods markets, often requiring apps to use Google's payment tools and surrender up to 30% of digital goods sales. Notably, Epic Games and Match Group, who have raised similar claims against Google, are not part of this proposed settlement.Google reaches tentative settlement in US Play Store lawsuit | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

It's Hump Day! First, Emma speaks with attorney Stephen Bright and James Kwak, law professor at the University of Connecticut, to discuss their recent book The Fear of Too Much Justice: Race, Poverty, and the Insistence of Inequality in the Criminal Courts. Then, she's joined by writer Katherine Stewart to discuss her recent piece in The New Republic entitled "The Claremont Institute: The Anti-Democracy Think Tank".  First, Emma runs through updates on tonight's GOP Presidential Debate, Trump's various legal battles, the UPS-Teamsters agreement, Hollywood's anti-labor action, child labor in the US, Ed Bloom's new anti-education lawsuit, a potential Oregon Supreme Court case on homelessness, and various geopolitical discourses, before admiring Climate Defiance's recent action in front of a Maura Healey fundraiser. Stephen Bright and James Kwak then join, first diving into Bright's history with capital punishment in the US over the last four decades, making him ever so intimate with the criminal-legal system's myriad injustices, blatant race discrimination, and severe power imbalance in favor of the prosecution, before stepping back to analyze why the conversation of the role of race and poverty in capital punishment is so centered on the southern US, despite racism, poverty, and death sentences all existing in the north as well. Next, Bright and Kwak parse through the drastic power imbalance that comes from the simultaneous hyper-politicization of the legal system through prosecutors alongside the deprioritization and underfunding of public defense, walking countless examples of prosecutorial injustice and the malpractice of certain supposed public defenders. Bright and Kwak then focus on the Supreme Court case of McCleskey v. Kemp, and the eventual decision that, despite overwhelming evidence of racist bias in the endorsement, sentencing, and execution of the death sentence, said bias cannot be used as an argument in individual cases, in “fear of too much justice, before wrapping up by walking through the compiling and countless injustices of the criminal legal system and its death penalty. Katherine Stewart then walks Emma through the greater history of the Claremont Institute, and its evolution from a standard conservative think tank to the far-right, anti-democratic, neo-confederate thought leader that it is today – playing host to multiple Trump co-conspirators. Stewart begins by tackling the basis for the institution's radicalization, including who the major players were, and the bigoted arguments they were able to put forth, from gender and race segregation to citing public Nazis as inspiration, before wrapping up with its culmination in the battle against “woke,” the right's attacks on education, and their ultimate goal of affirmative action for conservative men. And in the Fun Half: Emma tackles the renters' nightmare that is the modern-day United States, Dave from Jamaica critiques recent “male loneliness discourse,” Tim Pool and Moonlord eviscerate the non-existent authoritarian hygiene and total-lockdown policies of the COVID-19 pandemic, and Noel from Queens tackles the Democrats' need to be aggressive about literally anything. Newsmax goes all-in on homophobia, a Televangelist comes for Barbie's Dreamhouse, and Bailey from NC expands on the hell of economic life in America, plus, your calls and IMs! Check out Stephen & James's book here: https://thenewpress.com/books/fear-of-too-much-justice Check out Katherine's piece here: https://newrepublic.com/article/174656/claremont-institute-think-tank-trump Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: http://majority.fm/app Check out today's sponsors: Tushy: Go to https://hellotushy.com/MAJORITY HELLO TUSHY and use promo code MAJORITY to get 10% off plus FREE shipping on your first bidet order. That's https://hellotushy.com/MAJORITY for 10% OFF. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattBinder @MattLech @BF1nn @BradKAlsop Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Subscribe to Discourse Blog, a newsletter and website for progressive essays and related fun partly run by AM Quickie writer Jack Crosbie. https://discourseblog.com/ Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

The Oregon Supreme Court has labeled the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) as a light rail project searching for a bridge, as concerns arise over the inclusion of a TriMet Ruby Junction maintenance facility and the funding of a three-mile MAX Yellow Line extension into Vancouver, which Washington taxpayers are being asked to contribute $150 million towards, raising questions about cost allocation and the necessity of 19 new light rail vehicles for a relatively short extension. https://tinyurl.com/4schcjh2 #InterstateBridgeReplacement #CRC #ColumbiaRiverCrossing #TriMet #Vancouver #Portland #HighCapacityTransit #TiffanyCouch #RubyJunction #Siemens #Beaverton #Hillsboro #ClarkCounty #ODOT #WSDOT #LightRail #ClarkCountyNews #ClarkCountyToday

Host Zach Urness wraps up the latest outdoors news before heading out on the state's best snowy waterfall trips. In the first half of the episode, Urness hits on the end of timed entry permits for the Columbia Gorge's waterfall corridor, Oregon's snowpack jumping to 108% of normal with more on the way and the future of outdoor recreation business in light of lawsuits, an Oregon Supreme Court decision and new legislation. In the second half, Urness talks about his favorite trips to snow-covered waterfalls.

Nautilus will fire 15 percent of its workforce. Portland police remove boards on Central Precinct windows. Blazers have new look as the season turns a corner Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Oregon Supreme Court upholds reversal of Portland murder conviction after Black jurors excluded from trial. Portland church destroyed in fire was touchpoint for generations of Korean Americans. Backwoods Brewing will expand with brewpub in Ridgefield. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Oregon Supreme Court has ruled that people convicted by nonunanimous juries have the right to a new trial. Before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the practice of convicting defendants with less than a unanimous jury, Oregon and Louisiana were the only states that allowed it. The justices left it to those states to decide whether or not the ruling applied retroactively to those already convicted. OPB reporter Conrad Wilson covers criminal justice and legal affairs and joins us to tell us more about the ruling and what happens next.

In this episode Jim Garrity tackles the propriety of a question often heard in depositions when the deponent has just contradicted the testimony of another witness: "Are you calling them a liar?" Is this objectionable? If so, what's the objection? If it's objectionable and you don't object, is it per se reversible error? Is there a better way to ask the question? So many questions, so little time. But Jim answers them all and more, in just 13 1/2 minutes. (And speaking of time, do you have time to leave a 5-star rating for our podcast wherever you listen to our show? It takes no more than ten seconds, and our entire team will be forever grateful. Those 5-star ratings are like Kobe beef to the crew. Thanks!)SHOW NOTESMerritt v. Arizona, No. 21-15833, 2022 WL 3369529, at *2 (9th Cir. Aug. 16, 2022)g. “[T]he prohibition on improper vouching based on evidence outside the record extends to civil trials")Easter v. Mills, 239 Or. App. 209, 213, 243 P.3d 1212, 1214 (2010) (“The Oregon Supreme Court has recently reviewed and elaborated on its decisions on this subject. In State v. Lupoli, 348 Or. 346, 357, 234 P.3d 117 (2010), the court stated:“This court has long held that one witness may not give an opinion on whether he or she believes another witness is telling the truth. * * * Applying that principle is a straightforward matter when one witness states directly that he or she believes another witness, or that the other witness is honest or truthful. However, statements that fall short of such overt vouching also may be impermissible”)United States v. Pereira, 848 F.3d 17, 22 (1st Cir. 2017) (“In United States v. DeSimone, 699 F.3d 113 (1st Cir. 2012), this court clarified that although [i]t is improper for an attorney to ask a witness whether another witness lied on the stand[,] ... [i]t is not improper to ask one witness whether another was “wrong” or “mistaken,” since such questions do not force a witness to choose between conceding the point or branding another witness as a liar. There is no error in simply asking a witness if he agreed with or disputed another witness's testimony”)Broyles v. Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., No. CV 3:10-857 JJB-CBW, 2017 WL 3946261, at *3 (M.D. La. Aug. 21, 2017), report and recommendation adopted, No. CV 10-857-JJB-CBW, 2017 WL 3928939 (M.D. La. Sept. 7, 2017) (order adopting magistrate's report recommending the granting of motion in limine to exclude testimony as to one witnesse' opinion of another's testimony); see also Defendants' Motion In Limine To Exclude Evidence As To One Witness' Opinion Of Another Witness' Testimony (CM/ECF Doc. 588), Defendants' Memorandum In Support Of Motion In Limine To Exclude Evidence As To One Witness' Opinion Of Another Witness' Testimony (Doc. 588-1), Joseph N. Broyles, et al. v. Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al., Civil Action No.: Case 3:10-cv-00854-SDD-CBW Document 588 (M. D. La. filed May 13, 2016), Consolidated With: Civil Action No. 3-10-Cv-00857-JJB-SCR; CM/ECF Doc. 672 (Plaintiff's Memorandum In Opposition To S&Y Parties' Motion In Limine To Exclude Evidence As To One Witness' Opinion Of Another Witness' Testimony)United States v. Rivera, 780 F.3d 1084, 1096–97 (11th Cir. 2015) (“As to the propriety of questions by a prosecutor that prod a defendant to accuse another witness of lying, we have held that such questions are not proper. United States v. Schmitz, 634 F.3d 1247, 1268 (11th Cir.2011). . . .Of course, the fact that a prosecutor should not ask a testifying defendant whether another witness was lying does not mean that the prosecutor will be prohibited from pinning down a defendant's testimony by focusing the latter on conflicts between his account of a certain event and another witness's testimony on that point. Indeed, in Schmitz, we cited with approval the Third Circuit's observation that “it is often necessary on cross-examination to focus a witness on the differences and similarities between his testimony and that of another witness. This is permissible provided he is not asked to testify as to the veracity of the other witness”)United States v. Schmitz, 634 F.3d 1247, 1268–70 (11th Cir. 2011) (“We hold that it is improper to ask a testifying defendant whether another witness is lying”)Southern Union Co. v. Sw. Gas Corp., 281 F. Supp. 2d 1117, 1127 (D. Ariz. 2003) (propriety of such a question may depend on the context in which the question is asked, citing cases for proposition that ‘were they lying' questions may not always be improper, and that the balance may shift in favor of admitting lay opinion as the distance increases between the opinion and the ultimate issues)Easter v. Mills, 239 Or. App. 209, 214–15, 243 P.3d 1212, 1215 (2010) The question at issue here, and the answer it elicited, were not of the same sort found to be objectionable in those cases. Here, A.H.'s mother was not asked whether she believed that A.H. was telling the truth (nor did her answer reveal whether she believed that A.H. was telling the truth). Rather, she was asked if she knew of any motive A.H. would have to lie. Admittedly, this line of questioning may skate close to the edge of what is permissible, given the real danger that it might elicit a response that includes a comment on the credibility of a witness, even if the question does not specifically call for such a response. Here, however, the response did not contain the mother's opinion as to whether A.H. was telling the truth. Moreover, as the state notes, the defense theory of the case was that A.H. had a motive to lie about the abuse, because she was angry with petitioner and petitioner's daughter. In that circumstance, questions of A.H.'s mother concerning whether she knew if her daughter had such a motive were permissible. Her response to the challenged question merely was that she did not know of any motive that her daughter had to fabricate the allegation of abuse. We conclude that the post-conviction court correctly determined that the question and answer at issue here were permissible”)Com. v. Baran, No. 1804251, 2006 WL 2560317, at *16 (Mass. Super. June 16, 2006), aff'd, 74 Mass. App. Ct. 256, 905 N.E.2d 1122 (2009) (vacating criminal convictions in part based on prejudicial vouching; “Moreover, the issue concerning the vouching of credibility is not limited to experts: “[I]t is a fundamental principle that ‘a witness cannot be asked to assess the credibility of his testimony or that of other witnesses.' Commonwealth v. Montanino, 409 Mass. 500, 504, 567 N.E.2d 1212 (1991). To violate this principle, testimony supporting a witness's credibility “need not be direct. The question is whether the witness's testimony had the same effect as if [the witness] had directed his comments specifically to [another witness's] credibility”)Schmitz v. City of Wilsonville, No. CV-96-1306-ST, 1999 WL 778586, at *4–6 (D. Or. Sept. 17, 1999) (declining to extend vouching to civil cases; but finding no plain error from comments and denying motion for new trial)Sneed v. Burress, 500 S.W.3d 791, 795 (Ky. 2016) “(It is equally impermissible for an attorney to phrase her remarks so as to indicate that a witness is lying based on the evidence presented. Of course, pointing out inconsistencies in a witness's statements and other evidence—and drawing reasonable inferences therefrom—is entirely permissible to the extent that it otherwise comports with our rules of practice and procedure. However, counsel is not permitted to make affirmative conclusions as to the credibility of a witness. Determining witness credibility “is within the exclusive province of the jury.” Id. (citation omitted).”) Also held can be considered harmless error based on circumstsances, but remanded for retrial)State v. Bell, 283 Conn. 748, 779–80, 931 A.2d 198, 218 (2007) The other claimed improprieties in the present case, however, involve a variation on the classic type of Singh violation in which a defendant is asked whether another witness is lying, instead asking the defendant whether a witness' testimony was “true,” “right” or “accurate” and whether the defendant agreed with certain statements of other witnesses. Although these questions did not ask the defendant overtly to say whether a witness was wrong or mistaken, effectively, they essentially asked the same improper question, only phrased in the positive rather than in the negative. See United States v. Freitag, 230 F.3d 1019, 1024 (7th Cir.2000) (asking defendant if testimony of other witnesses is true is improper because it “invades the province of the jury; indeed asking if testimony is true implies that if it is not, it is a lie, which is a credibility question for the jury to decide”); see also United States v. Sanchez–Lima, 161 F.3d 545, 548 (9th Cir.1998) (reversible error when one government witness permitted to testify, over defense objection, that another government witness was telling truth, because determination of witness credibility is for jury and such testimony constituted bolstering by inadmissible evidence)Hunter v. State, 397 Md. 580, 591, 919 A.2d 63, 69 (2007) (“We agreed with the trial court that this line of questioning was impermissible because the attorney was effectively asking the witness to say “whether the witness who gave [the statement] [ ] testified falsely.... [O]ne witness cannot be asked to characterize the testimony of another Missouri, K. & T.R. Co. v. Lycan, 57 Kan. 635, 47 P. 526, 528 [ (1897) ] ), since that is exclusively the function of the jury.” Id. at 314–15, 171 A. at 55. Thus, as early as 1934, we held that “were-they-lying” questions are impermissible in civil cases.”; reversing judgment and ordering new trial)Eggleston v. Com., No. 2010-CA-002291-MR, 2012 WL 6061711, at *2 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 7, 2012)In Moss, our Supreme Court reaffirmed the longstanding rule that it is improper to require a witness to comment upon the credibility of another witness: With few exceptions, it is improper to require a witness to comment on the credibility of another witness. A witness's opinion about the truth of the testimony of another witness is not permitted. Neither expert nor lay witnesses may testify that another witness or a defendant is lying or faking. That determination is within the exclusive province of the jury")State v. Airhart-Bryon, 13 Wash. App. 2d 1003, review denied, 196 Wash. 2d 1018, 474 P.3d 1052 (2020) (“Airhart also cites Boehning to argue prosecutors commit flagrant misconduct as a matter of law whenever they ask one witness if another is lying. Boehning generally supports this proposition. 127 Wn. App. at 525, 111 P.3d 899. However, our Supreme Court's longstanding requirement is that allegations of prosecutorial misconduct be evaluated “ ‘in the context of the entire record and the circumstances at trial.' ” See, e.g., Thorgerson, 172 Wn.2d at 442, 258 P.3d 43 (quoting Magers, 164 Wn.2d at 191, 189 P.3d 126). Here, we look to the context of the entire record to conclude there was no incurable misconduct”)Montgomery Cnty. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs. v. P.F, 137 Md. App. 243, 268, 768 A.2d 112, 126 (2001) (“The second reason assigned by the Bohnert Court was that a social worker's opinion regarding the credibility of the child invades the fact finder's role in assessing credibility and resolving disputed facts. Citing well-established limitations on the role of witnesses, the Bohnert Court held that the social worker's opinion constituted an improper “vouching” for the credibility of the alleged victim. In a criminal case tried before a jury, a fundamental principle is that the credibility of a witness and the weight to be accorded the witness' testimony are solely within the province of the jury.... It is also error [in civil cases] for the court to permit to go to the jury a statement, belief, or opinion of another person to the effect that a witness is telling the truth or lying....”, (citing Bohnert v. State, 312 Md. 266, 277, 539 A.2d 657, 662 (1988)It is also error for the court to permit to go to the jury a statement, belief, or opinion of another person to the effect that a witness is telling the truth or lying. Thompson v. Phosphate Works, 178 Md. 305, 317-319, 13 A.2d 328 (1940); American Stores v. Herman, 166 Md. 312, 314-315, 171 A. 54 (1934). The Court of Special Appeals said in Mutyambizi v. State, 33 Md.App. 55, 61, 363 A.2d 511 (1976), cert. denied, 279 Md. 684 (1977): Whether a witness on the stand personally believes or disbelieves testimony of a previous witness is irrelevant, and questions to that effect are improper, either on direct or cross-examination.”)Draper v. Rosario, 836 F.3d 1072, 1084 (9th Cir. 2016) (“The current version of the Model Rules similarly states that, in both civil and criminal trials, a lawyer shall not “state a personal opinion as to ... the credibility of a witness, the culpability of a civil litigant or the guilt or innocence of an accused.” Model Rules of Prof'l Conduct R. 3.4(e) (2015). In sum, our prior case law indicates that attorneys may not rely on evidence outside the record during closing argument and that prosecutors may not vouch for witnesses' credibility. We now make clear that the prohibition on improper vouching based on evidence outside the record extends to civil trials”)Shuang Ying Nancy Zhang v. A-Z Realty & Inv. Corp., et al., No. EDCV 19-887-KK, 2022 WL 17361983, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2022) (“In addition, “counsel in a civil trial may not rely on evidence outside the record during closing argument")Fed. R. Evid. 608. A Witness's Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness.Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons (The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence)Rule 602. Need for Personal Knowledge. (A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may consist of the witness's own testimony. This rule does not apply to a witness's expert testimony under Rule 703.Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses (If a witness is not testifying as an expert, testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to one that is: (a) rationally based on the witness's perception; (b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness's testimony or to determining a fact in issue; and (c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702)

Oregon's gun-control ballot initiative has put it at the center of the fight over guns in America. As the political battle ended with victory for Measure 114 and the deadline to implement a non-existent permit-to-purchase system closed in, a new front opened in the courts. Sam Paredes, a Gun Owners of America (GOA) board member and treasurer of the Gun Owners Foundation, was on the frontline of that legal battle. While multiple federal suits were unable to secure a Temporary Restraining Order against the law, GOA was able to convince a state judge the measure violated the Oregon Constitution's protections for the right to keep and bear arms. That decision has held thus far, despite an attempt by the state to get the Oregon Supreme Court to throw it out. Paredes joined the show this week to talk about where things stand now, and what's coming down the line. He said gun sales in Oregon will go on as usual for the time being, and the ban on magazines that hold more than ten rounds won't go into effect. But the fight isn't over as the state scrambles to create the permitting process and take the biggest practical issues with Measure 114 off the table. However, Paredes said GOA is encouraged by the Oregon Supreme Court's decision not to immediately intervene in the case. He said they may be hesitant to overturn the lower court's pro-gun ruling in the wake of the United States Supreme Court's ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. He argued they may not want to run afoul of Bruen and be overturned themselves. But the federal judge overseeing challenges to Measure 114 disagreed. She ruled the permit-to-purchase requirement and magazine ban likely don't violate the Second Amendment even under Bruen's text and tradition standard. Paredes said that judge did the analysis wrong. He argued the targeted magazines are in common use and protected, given SCOTUS's rulings in Heller and Caetano, and the permit-to-purchase law has no historical analogue. Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss the surprising shift in the U.S. Senate's balance of power this week. Special Guest: Sam Paredes.

A new, strict gun law in Oregon remains on hold after the state's high court said it would not grant an emergency motion to overturn a lower court's ruling.   Pardon My American podcast (PMA) is an opinion-based podcast that explores politics, entertainment, paranormal, and culture all while having a good laugh. They keep things lighthearted as they dive into subjects that inspire you to think and ask questions.   Support Our Sponsors ► Aura ► Ghostbed ► Fum   Support Our Show ► Website ► Buy Merch ► Patreon   Watch & Follow Our Show ► YouTube ► Rumble ► Rokfin ► Instagram ► Telegram

Oregonians passed Measure 114 in November. It would ban the manufacture, purchase or sale of high capacity magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. It would also require people to take a safety course and pass a background check to get a permit allowing them to purchase a firearm. But that was just the beginning of a story that may well not be complete for years, as as the law is challenged in state and federal courts and the Oregon Department of Justice defends it. On Wednesday a federal court allowed the law to move forward as written, with a 30-day hold on the permitting process that the attorney general had asked for to get the system ready. On the same day a state court in Harney county put the law on hold. Now the DOJ is asking the Oregon Supreme Court to lift that hold and let the law go into effect Thursday. Michael Kron, special counsel to the state attorney general, joins us to give us the latest.

It's another unfortunate name and in this case we have mixed feelings. You decide... selfish land pirate or a man protecting his property? Join the ONUC gals this week as they discuss the first official recorded homicide case before the Oregon Supreme Court. Trigger Warning Level: LowVisit our website www.onenationundercrime.com for all of the ways to contact and follow us. We are on Twitter @onucpod, Instagram @onenationundercrime, and on both YouTube and Facebook by searching 'One Nation Under Crime'.Follow One Nation Under Crime on your favorite podcast platform and you will get the shows as soon as they come out!Remember, there isn't always liberty and justice for all.Sources: Oregon Encyclopedia, Tillamook Headlight Herald, and the Oregon State Bar Support the show

Linda Odermott, NFPA certified paralegal and Oregon Certified Paralegal, discusses the process that she and a team of others went through in Oregon related to the paralegal licensing program that has been in the works in Oregon for over ten years. Linda also enlightens us on how paralegal licensing can benefit paralegals, the paralegal profession, and the community. Several states (including Washington, Utah, Arizona, and Minnesota) already have some level of paralegal licensing, and that list now includes Oregon thanks to the decision that recently came in from the Oregon Supreme Court. Are you a paralegal who wants to skip the learning curve and kickstart your career? The Paralegal Boot Camp offers online courses to fast-track your paralegal career, including a course on how to master your attention to detail. View our course offerings.   https://paralegal-bootcamp.thinkific.com. For more resources, visit our podcast page and blog. The debate has been going on for some time on whether paralegal licensing (or regulation) would be a good thing or a bad thing for the paralegal profession. But what about whether or not it's a good thing for the community? Here are just a few statistics: Did you know that over seventy percent (70%) of small civil and family law cases don't have legal representation because they can't afford it? A majority of the general public does not trust lawyers and the court system. 84% of the people surveyed in Oregon as part of the research into this licensing program said that if they needed a lawyer, they either would not know where to find one or couldn't afford one. We all think legal aid and pro bono should resolve the access to justice issue. But, in order to meet the current needs, every attorney licensed in this country would need to put in 150 hours of pro bono time every year. This episode will inform you AND inspire you!

West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy is Now Open! 8am-9am PT/ 11am-Noon ET for our especially special Daily Specials, Metro Shrimp & Grits Thursdays!Starting off in the Bistro Cafe, you can tell how partisan the January 6 Committee is by the way hardcore arch-conservative Liz Cheney is a baby eating representative democracy commie.Then, on the rest of the menu, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that private companies in Oregon jails must abide by federal laws and serve inmates equally; Brittney Griner's case is tangled up with that of a lesser-known American also imprisoned in Russia, Paul Whelan; and, a rebel golf league, backed by Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund, has made sportswashing stooges out of Phil Mickelson, Dennis Johnson and forty-six other golfers turning a blind eye to the kingdom's notorious record on human rights.After the break, we move to the Chef's Table where Angela Merkel said she won't apologize for her failed efforts in engaging Russia; and, a Fiji court has finally ruled the US can seize a Russian oligarch's $300 million dollar superyacht.All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~“Everyone in this good city enjoys the full right to pursue his own inclinations in all reasonable and, unreasonable ways.” -- The Daily Picayune, New Orleans, March 5, 1851~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Show Notes & Links:https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/6/9/2103090/-West-Coast-Cookbook-amp-Speakeasy-Daily-Special-Metro-Shrimp-amp-Grits-Thursdays

Nick Kristof is officially out of the race for Oregon governor and will not appear on the May primary ballot as a candidate in that race. The former New York Times columnist quit his job to run for Oregon's top job. On Thursday, the Oregon Supreme Court issued an opinion affirming Oregon Secretary of State Shemia Fagan's determination that Kristof cannot legally vie for the governorship because he does not meet the state's three-year residency requirement. Kristof joins us to talk about what's next for him.

Nick Kristof is officially out of the race for Oregon governor and will not appear on the May primary ballot as a candidate in that race. The former New York Times columnist quit his job to run for Oregon's top job. On Thursday, the Oregon Supreme Court issued an opinion affirming Oregon Secretary of State Shemia Fagan's determination that Kristof cannot legally vie for the governorship because he does not meet the state's three-year residency requirement. Kristof joins us to talk about what's next for him.

Nick Kristof is officially out of the race for Oregon governor and will not appear on the May primary ballot as a candidate in that race. The former New York Times columnist quit his job to run for Oregon's top job. On Thursday, the Oregon Supreme Court issued an opinion affirming Oregon Secretary of State Shemia Fagan's determination that Kristof cannot legally vie for the governorship because he does not meet the state's three-year residency requirement. Kristof joins us to talk about what's next for him.

WA will lift it's indoor mask mandate March 21st including schools, King County board of health has repealed the bicycle helmet law, man who attacked Seattle bar tender is released by judge on no bail, Oregon DHS employee indicted for kidnapping and sexually abusing a female under his care, Oregon Supreme Court has ruled New Yorker Nick Kristoff can't run for Oregon governor, Los Angeles and two other cities will keep mask mandate in place even though the rest of the state has dropped the mandate. #headlines #headlinenews #news #breaking #breakingnews #pacificnorthwest #washingtonnews #oregonnews #californianews #behindtheline #seattlenews #maskmandate #inslee --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/behindtheline/support

Nick Kristof says he's been a resident of Oregon his entire life. State election officials say: No he hasn't. Now it's up to the Oregon Supreme Court to decide whether he can run for governor. I'm Dirk VanderHart. On this week's “OPB Politics Now,” we'll break down the legal arguments for and against Kristof's candidacy. And we'll tell you what happens next.

Andrew interviews Deb Fant. Deb is a retired nurse and 30 year Oregon resident. She is a leader at Lincoln County Community Rights and was actively engaged in the work to enact the Lincoln County Aerial Spray Ban in 2017.We discuss the history of this local aerial spray ban, the work of Lincoln County Community Rights, the challenge to the overturned ban in the Oregon Supreme Court in 2021, and her work to build a broad network in Oregon to protect community rights and the rights of nature.Support the show (https://coastrange.org/donate/)

Portland's Roosevelt High School moves classes online. 75% of unsheltered Portlanders contacted by a housing worker never heard back. Democrat Nick Kristof asks Oregon Supreme Court to overturn ruling saying he isn't eligible to run for governor See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Oregon Supreme Court is considering a proposal that would allow trained, licensed paralegals to provide limited legal services in family law and landlord/tenant cases. The proposal has been compared to the distinction between nurse practitioners and doctors. We hear details on the proposal from Kirsten Thompson, the chair of the Paraprofessional Licensing Implementation Committee and senior judge and mediator Christy Carpenter, a limited license legal technician in Washington.

Several states opted to temporarily suspend their bar exams when the pandemic broke out last year. This led many in the legal community to question why the exam exists in the first place. Now at least one state is seriously considering alternative ways to certify new law school grads. The Oregon Supreme Court is currently weighing a proposal that would make the bar exam just one of several options aspiring attorneys there can choose to earn their license. On today's episode of our weekly legal news podcast, On The Merits, we hear from Brian Gallini, one of the people who drafted that proposal. Gallini, the dean of the Willamette University College of Law, talks about why he thinks the bar exam should be scrapped altogether but why replacing it with so-called "diploma privilege" isn't a good option either.audio embed goes here Have feedback on this episode of On The Merits? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Oregon lawmakers have been battling Secretary of State Shemia Fagan in court over who gets to draw political boundaries based on the latest census data, a process known as redistricting. It might sound arcane, but this process has big implications for the state's political future, including the possibility of a sixth congressional district. The Oregon Supreme Court sided with lawmakers in a ruling Friday. OPB political reporter Dirk VanderHart fills us in.

Portland federal judge places restrictions on officers in policing post-election protests. PDX air travel picking up after pandemic slump. Oregon Supreme Court throws 19-year-old's conviction in sledgehammer death. Oregon oronavirus infections continue to set records. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Justice Adrienne Nelson talks with Jefferson Smith about seeing her name on a building, leading racial justice, and addressing implicit bias. For more information: https://www.justiceadriennenelson.com/ (Recorded on 6/25/20.)

Education is the main pillar of a thriving society and is at the forefront of our evolution as leaders and game-changers. It expands our minds and opens up our world to infinite possibilities, and it helps us grow into anything we want.My guest, Justice Adrienne Nelson, is a pioneer and a trailblazer who believes in the power of education and how it can truly transform our lives and the communities we engage in – and her actions truly mirror her judgment. Today, she joins me to talk about her journey to becoming the first African American to sit on Oregon State Supreme Court and about her passion for ensuring that the system works for everyone.Judge Nelson earned her Doctor of Jurisprudence degree from the University of Texas at Austin, and her Bachelor of Arts degree in English and Criminal Justice Summa Cum Laude from the University of Arkansas. In 2006, she was appointed as a trial judge on the Multnomah County Circuit Court in Portland, Oregon - making her the second African American female judge in the state of Oregon – and in 2018 she was appointed to the Oregon Supreme Court - becoming the first African American to sit on the state’s highest court and on any appellate state court.Over the years, Adrienne has been very active in the legal community and she is a frequent speaker on several topics, including diversity, inclusion, equity, leadership, and professional development. She serves as a mentor to many people, especially to students, helping them realize that they have the power to become whoever they want in life, regardless of their status, race, gender, or the place they come from. I feel truly honored to have Judge Nelson in my show and to learn from her the ins and outs of our judicial system. Listen to Episode 12 of Roar, to discover the actions she takes to bridge the gap and bring justice to us all.Some questions I ask:Tell us a little bit about your background: where are you from? And who were your biggest influences growing up? (02:57)When you think about your early experiences, which one stands out as a defining moment that really helped you find your roar? (08:44)What led you to pursue a career in law? (14:40)Did you ever have any problems or challenges that you’ve encountered along the way, simply because people were a little bit surprised to see you sitting on the bench in the State’s highest court? (24:24)How diverse is the judiciary system, and what role do you think diversity plays in the court’s mission? (30:20)How can individuals help people like you, to create a judicial system that lives up to the idea of equal justice for all? (39:06)What are some of the ideas and programs that you’ve implemented as a judge, that focus on bringing the voices together for good? (44:28)In this episode, you will learn:The importance of understanding that our zip code should not limit our ambitions. (05:02)The racial injustice Adrienne experienced in her teenage years & How that influenced her future. (09:52)The power of human support, mentorship, and a strong community in someone’s life. (17:01)Adrienne’s recipe on how to deal with tough or important situations, without feeling overwhelmed. (21:54)The reasons Adrienne loves being in the Supreme Court & How she manages to bring value through the position she holds. (27:39)What Adrienne does to serve as a role model for young, diverse students that aspire to be part of the law environment. (34:55)The three words that can help change our country into a better place & the actions we can take do drive that change. (40:54)The honor Adrienne has received of having a high school named after her & what this means for her. (51:20)Connect with Adrienne:LinkedIn See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week, the Oregon Supreme Court granted 2020 law school graduates the ability to practice law without passing the bar exam. In June, law students and law school deans sent letters to the Oregon Supreme Court asking the justices to waive the Bar exam requirement due to coronavirus health hazards, and stress from the pandemic. We hear from 2020 University of Oregon law graduate Andi Pla and Lewis and Clark graduate Peter Raptis about the Supreme Court’s decision, and how institutional white supremacy shows up in law school.

New Oregon Shakespeare Festival faces critical challenge in coronavirus season cancellation. Portland Public Schools weighs smaller bond measure. Oregon governor's office says pandemic won't put college athletes at "competitive disadvantage." Reliable local journalism matters now more than ever. Please support our work for just $10 a month. Subscribe now. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

As the Oregon Supreme Court reinstates restrictions on gatherings during the coronavirus pandemic, an Assemblies of God church is standing for its right to hold services. Find out all the details in this episode with host Taylor Berglund.

West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy is Now Open! 8am-9am PT/ 11am-Noon ET for our especially special Daily Specials, Smothered Benedict Wednesdays!Starting off in the Bistro Cafe, Trump called a hydroxychloroquine study that was partly funded by his administration, was phony and totally made up by Trump haters because it showed higher death rates of patients who took the drug.Then, on the rest of the menu, The Lancet said Trump lied and made up a report the leading medical journal never published in his attack on the World Health Organization; the Trump campaign cited a fake science group to justify his use of hydroxychloroquine; and, the Oregon Supreme Court overturned a lower court order and ruled to keep virus restrictions in place.After the break, we move to the Chef's Table where NASA's human spaceflight chief resigned just a week before the agency is scheduled to launch two astronauts into space from US soil for the first time since 2011; and, Democratic senators want the Trump administration to “answer serious questions” about security concerns and undisclosed subsidies in its deal with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company's plan to build a US-based $12 billion plant.All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"To those of us who believe that all of life is sacred every crumb of bread and sip of wine is a Eucharist, a remembrance, a call to awareness of holiness right where we are. I want all of the holiness of the Eucharist to spill out beyond church walls, out of the hands of priests and into the regular streets and sidewalks, into the hands of regular, grubby people like you and me, onto our tables, in our kitchens and dining rooms and backyards.” -- Shauna Niequist "Bread and Wine: A Love Letter to Life Around the Table with Recipes"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Show Notes & Links: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/5/20/1946325/-West-Coast-Cookbook-amp-Speakeasy-Daily-Special-Smothered-Benedict-Wednesdays

On Monday, a Baker County judge issued a preliminary injunction to 10 churches that sued the state of Oregon over restrictions on religious gatherings due to the coronavirus pandemic. The judge ruled that the Governor’s orders exceeded the 28-day limit for a state of emergency. Hours later, the Oregon Supreme Court granted an emergency stay to keep the Governor’s orders in place while they take up the case. Jayson Jacoby, editor of the Baker City Herald, tells us about the case.

Join Jim and Greg as they celebrate courts in Wisconsin and Oregon siding with freedom over heavy-handed governors, although Oregon Supreme Court just overruled the lower court and sided with the governor. They're also exasperated as President Trump takes hydroxychloroquine, despite testing negative for coronavirus, in the latest salvo in this bizarre battle over whether the drug helps treat COVID-19. They also hammer House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for making the fight even more juvenile. And they respond to a liberal opinion writer in the New York Times pathetically changing what they really meant by #BelieveWomen so it doesn't apply to Joe Biden and Tara Reade.

Today’s show features: Marsha Blackburn, U.S. Senator for Tennessee, on President Trump threatening to keep the WHO funding freeze in place after the White House investigation confirmed the health body’s multiple failures in the early stages of the coronavirus outbreak. Brad Dacus, President of the Pacific Justice Institute, on the Oregon Supreme Court putting a hold on a county judge’s ruling that declared Governor Brown’s restrictions on church gatherings “null and void.” Mike Johnson, U.S. Representative for the 4th district of Louisiana, on FBI Director Christopher Wray stonewalling the investigation into the Michael Flynn case. Steve Scalise, U.S. Representative for the 1st district of Louisiana and House Minority Whip, with an update on the discharge petition for the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. Cathy Ruse, FRC’s Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Human Dignity, on her new publication: “Sex Education in Public Schools: Sexualization of Children and LGBT Indoctrination.” --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/loving-liberty/support

Licensing is best understood as the method by which government takes away a right and then sells it back to you. We're already seeing this tactic used as leverage to force compliance with state-mandated government shutdowns. Lawrence Vance says, let's rethink government licensing altogether. A fascinating battle is shaping up in Oregon where a judge has declared Governor Kate Brown's draconian pandemic executive orders null and void. That's encouraging, although the Oregon Supreme Court came back with a temporary injunction reinstating them until May 22. The plot thickens. After walking back a surprisingly open attack on homeschooling families, Harvard University publications have taken a deep breath and decided to double down on their demonizing of homeschooling families. Kerry McDonald has a brilliant response to their distortions. Lawrence W. Reed's new book "Was Jesus a Socialist?" is now available. Among the many questions examined in his book is this one: Did Jesus despise money? --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/loving-liberty/support

Sarah comments on the KATU debate from earlier this week, and the rare rebuke of the incumbent by the city auditor’s office that followed. Then she and democracy activist James Ofsink discuss this week’s momentous decision by the Oregon Supreme Court that campaign contribution caps are constitutional after all.

Oregon governor plans to lift ban on elective medical procedures, Oregon hopes to start paying unemployment to freelancers and gig workers, Oregon Zoo seeks $1 million in donations, essential workers speak about their work.Reliable local journalism matters now more than ever. Please support our work for just $10 a month. Subscribe now. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

I talk an Illinois shooting Oregon Supreme Court  ruling.I also talk about reporting UFO's and a Fitbit that busted a cheating boyfriend. As always please subscribe and tell others about the podcast 

Seattle Police Captain Caught in Prostitution Sting, Oregon Supreme Court Bans Random Questions during traffic stops plus much more.Support the show via Cash App - https://cash.app/$sgtdorseyspeaksSgt Dorsey’s Autobiography available ~ http://bit.ly/2AGhYmQ This podcast is sponsored by the book "SURVIVING THE ORAL INTERVIEW: BOOT CAMP FOR THE MIND" authored by Zimmie Williams retired L.A.P.D. sergeant, and former member of the United States Navy.We are also pleased to add Ursula Image Consulting as our second sponsor. Contact Ursula for an appointment now at 626 4940355 or on Instagram @ursulaimageconsulting. Mention SDS and receive 15% of your 1st salon visit at Headtrip Salon 16 East Bellevue Drive Pasadena CAFor over two decades, Retired Los Angeles Police Department(LAPD) Sergeant Cheryl Dorsey worked exclusively in patrol and specialized units in all four Bureaus within the City of Los Angeles; South, Central, West and Valley. In addition to various patrol division assignments, Sgt. Dorsey was assigned to the infamous gang unit in Operations South Bureau; known as Community Resources Against Street Hoodlums (C.R.A.S.H.) under the command of Police Chief Daryl F. GatesSgt. Dorsey is a highly sought police expert on significant criminal justice issues making national headlines. She has been a frequent commentator on CNN, Fox News, OWN, CNN International, HLNTV, Law and Crime Network, Inside Edition, MSNBC as well as appearing on KPCC, Democracy Now, Tom Joyner Morning Show and KABC Talk Radio w/ Dr. Drew.Sgt. Dorsey has also been seen on Brazilian TVGlobo, Tavis Smiley, Dr. Drew, Dr. Phil and TD Jakes Shows, BET Network’s docu-series “Finding Justice” as well as TV Crime Series; “It Takes A Killer”, “Corrupt Crimes” and “Dead Files”.Cheryl Dorsey has written an autobiography entitled, “Black and Blue, The Creation of A Social Advocate" which chronicles her 20- year LAPD journey.“Black and Blue, The Creation of A Social Advocate" is available on Amazon.com https://www.amazon.com/Black-Blue-Creation-Social-Advocate/dp/1725511819

Seattle Police Captain Caught in Prostitution Sting, Oregon Supreme Court Bans Random Questions during traffic stops plus much more. Support the show via Cash App - https://cash.app/$sgtdorseyspeaks Sgt Dorsey’s Autobiography available ~ http://bit.ly/2AGhYmQ This podcast is sponsored by the book "SURVIVING THE ORAL INTERVIEW: BOOT CAMP FOR THE MIND" authored by Zimmie Williams retired L.A.P.D. sergeant, and former member of the United States Navy. We are also pleased to add Ursula Image Consulting as our second sponsor. Contact Ursula for an appointment now at 626 4940355 or on Instagram @ursulaimageconsulting. Mention SDS and receive 15% of your 1st salon visit at Headtrip Salon 16 East Bellevue Drive Pasadena CA For over two decades, Retired Los Angeles Police Department(LAPD) Sergeant Cheryl Dorsey worked exclusively in patrol and specialized units in all four Bureaus within the City of Los Angeles; South, Central, West and Valley. In addition to various patrol division assignments, Sgt. Dorsey was assigned to the infamous gang unit in Operations South Bureau; known as Community Resources Against Street Hoodlums (C.R.A.S.H.) under the command of Police Chief Daryl F. Gates Sgt. Dorsey is a highly sought police expert on significant criminal justice issues making national headlines. She has been a frequent commentator on CNN, Fox News, OWN, CNN International, HLNTV, Law and Crime Network, Inside Edition, MSNBC as well as appearing on KPCC, Democracy Now, Tom Joyner Morning Show and KABC Talk Radio w/ Dr. Drew. Sgt. Dorsey has also been seen on Brazilian TVGlobo, Tavis Smiley, Dr. Drew, Dr. Phil and TD Jakes Shows, BET Network’s docu-series “Finding Justice” as well as TV Crime Series; “It Takes A Killer”, “Corrupt Crimes” and “Dead Files”. Cheryl Dorsey has written an autobiography entitled, “Black and Blue, The Creation of A Social Advocate" which chronicles her 20- year LAPD journey. “Black and Blue, The Creation of A Social Advocate" is available on Amazon.com https://www.amazon.com/Black-Blue-Creation-Social-Advocate/dp/1725511819

We get high school senior Annabelle Sukin’s take on the arguments made Wednesday before the Oregon Supreme Court, which took place at David Douglas High School.

We keep it candid with employment law professionals Rich Meneghello and Alex Wheatley of Fisher Phillips as we discuss recent must-know developments for employers. Hear a national check-in on Trump's administration and about the new version of the overtime rule under U.S. Secretary of Labor, Alexander Acosta. Take note on why you should be prepared with two years of data for the renewed Equal Employment demographic form, EEO1. We also examine off-duty consumption issues, your ability to enforce, and what the recent Oregon Supreme Court ruling surrounding the social host statute means for all employers and those who serve alcohol. Guests: Rich Meneghello, Partner, and Alex Wheatley, Associate, Fisher Phillips Advocacy Watch: Hood River sales tax is defeated Portland short-term rental crackdown Albany lodging facilities under six units no longer exempt from TLT

Many know about Aaron and Melissa Klein, the bakers in Oregon who lost their bakery and were fined $135,000 because they politely refused to bake a cake that conflicted with their religious convictions. But the media doesn’t show the attacks the Kleins have faced from those in their community. Learn more at FirstLiberty.org/Briefing. You probably know the story of Aaron and Melissa Klein, the bakers in Oregon forced out of business and fined $135,000 by the state when they politely declined business that would have forced them to violate their religious convictions. What you may not know is that, after the State of Oregon pronounced them guilty of discrimination, private citizens were eager to show their contempt for the Kleins. Many of the comments they received are so vulgar that I cannot repeat them here.  But, here is a tame sampling.  One person, writing on Facebook said to the Kleins, “I hope your shop burns.”  Another chimed in, noting that she hoped Aaron and Melissa would “burn in Hell.” One man sent a message that said, “I hope you lose your house and have to live on the streets.” One woman even said, “We hope your children get cancer and die.” When the government declares that citizens like Aaron and Melissa are not entitled to the Constitution’s promises of religious liberty and free speech, its people push aside any goodwill that allows people to coexist peacefully with beliefs with which they may disagree.  Aaron and Melissa have asked the Oregon Supreme Court to review their case.  We hope the court will accept the appeal, if only to remind everyone that it is possible to live peacefully as neighbors even when we disagree. To learn how First Liberty is protecting religious liberty for all Americans, visit FirstLiberty.org.

On this episode of XRAY In The Morning: ( 1) Dan Meek joins us to break the news on the Oregon Supreme Court agreeing to expedite the hearing of a campaign finance reform case, (2) XRAY On The Nation, with Bob Ney of Talk Media News, (3) Oregon Senator Shemia Fagan joins us on the show, (4) News With My Dad, with Joe and Jefferson Smith

ALDF seeks justice for an abused horse On this week's program, we'll talk about the  #NotProperty movement in animal welfare, focusing on a lawsuit filed on behalf of an abused horse. In most (all?) states animals are treated as property, not as sentient creatures with feelings, emotions, and the ability to communicate. That limits humans' ability to protect animals and seek redress for the horrible things that are sometimes done to them. But what if animals could sue their abusers in court? ALDF Attorney Sarah Hanneken That's what the Animal Legal Defense Fund is doing. My guest this Sunday at 1:08 PM PT will be Sarah Hanneken ALDF litigation fellow. She has an impressive record working to defend animals and it will be interesting to hear about this case and others, including efforts to improve the legal standing of all animals. Here's the background: Hillsboro, Oregon – Justice, an eight-year-old horse, is a party to a lawsuit filed today against his former abuser to recover the costs of his ongoing medical care and his pain and suffering. Justice is represented by the Animal Legal Defense Fund, the nation’s preeminent legal advocacy organization for animals. If successful, this groundbreaking lawsuit would be the first to establish that animals have a legal right to sue their abusers in court. “Horses, like Justice, are intelligent animals with the capacity for rich emotional lives,” says Animal Legal Defense Fund Executive Director Stephen Wells. “Oregon law already recognizes Justice’s right to be free from cruelty – this lawsuit simply expands the remedies available when abusers violate animals’ legal rights.” Click the image to donate and support ALDF's #NotProperty campaign. Justice was cruelly neglected for months and endured tremendous pain and suffering. At the time of his rescue, he was emaciated and suffered from frostbite, lice, and rain rot. As a result of his neglect, Justice endured permanent physical and psychological injuries that will require specialized medical care for the rest of his life. Justice’s abuser pled guilty to criminal animal neglect in 2017. In the criminal plea agreement, she agreed to pay restitution only for the cost of Justice’s care prior to July 6, 2017. The lawsuit seeks damages for Justice’s care since this date and going forward. Any funds awarded to Justice through the lawsuit would be placed in a legal trust established to pay for his care. Justice was relinquished to Sound Equine Options, an Oregon nonprofit horse rescue and rehabilitation organization. His complicated medical needs are a barrier to finding a permanent home for him, a problem exacerbated by the significant costs of his care. The Oregon legislature and courts have been a leader in recognizing that animals are sentient beings that occupy a unique position in the law. The Oregon Supreme Court, for example, has already recognized that animals should be considered individual “victims” in criminal animal cruelty cases. However, existing laws still lag far behind our current understanding of animal sentience by classifying animals as property. The Animal Legal Defense Fund thanks the law firm Lane Powell and the Law Office of Matt Hamity for their assistance on this case. The complaint is available upon request.

Jeremy Dys, Esq., Deputy General Counsel for First Liberty Institute and host of the First Liberty Briefing, discusses the case of Sweet Cakes by Melissa. As with Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Sweet Cakes owners, Aaron and Melissa Klein, balked at creating a special wedding cake for a lesbian couple. Because of their stand, the state of Oregon put them out of business and fined them $135,000. The case has been appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court, and Dys says if necessary, the case will go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Learn more about First Liberty at firstliberty.org.

Six candidates are vying for the open seat on the Portland City Council. Reporter Amelia Templeton summarizes the field, and where they stand on the issues. Also, Conrad Wilson previews a case being argued before the Oregon Supreme Court about the eponymous lake in Lake Oswego. The city limits access to the lake, and the plaintiffs say that violates long-established Oregon law.

PLF's Harold Johnson interviews PLF Staff Attorney Anastasia Boden about a brief that was filed in the Oregon Supreme Court on behalf of her client David Hansen. Hansen, an architectural designer working on getting his architecture license in Oregon, created some marketing drawings that were meant to help a property development company attract retailers to developments. The drawings were not "plans" and couldn't be used for construction. However, Hansen and his partner were fined $10,000 each for purportedly practicing architecture without a license.

DUSTING OFF THE DEGREE - Mary THIS DAY IN HISTORY - April 14* 1775 – The first abolition society in North America is established* 1828 – Noah Webster copyrights the first edition of his dictionary* 1846 – The Donner Party of pioneers departs* 1865 – U.S. President Abraham Lincoln is shot in Ford's Theatre* 1912 – The British passenger liner RMS Titanic hits an iceberg* 2005 – The Oregon Supreme Court nullifies marriage licenses issued to gay couples SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY* Ribose and related sugars from uv irradiation of interstellar ice pieces created the base for RNA, ribose sugar!* Newton dabbled in alchemy, searching for the recipe for the Philosopher’s Stone. Recently Chemical Heritage Foundation acquired his recipe for sophick mercury, a key ingredient or the Stone.* Yeast infection caused a blockage of blood supply, so only four days after the surgery the uterus was removed. POLITICS AND RELIGION * Gov Butch Otter has vetoed the Bible in schools bill* Tennessee has passed a bill to make the Bible the official state book* Mississippi passes “Protecting Freedom of Conscience from the Government” bill* Mississippi Church Protection Act* Bangladeshi secular activist hacked to death* Canada closed its Office of Religious Freedom | Via Friendly Atheist FEEDBACK * Tonya Gibbs via YouTube* @Goldrushcomic via Twitter* Katie Dotson via YouTube* Tripin' Fool via YouTube* @XshinhonSoma via Twitter* @RandyLaMonda via Twitter* Ralf via email* The Recovering Gringo via email Email us at contact@atheistnomads.com or call us at (541) 203-0666. This episode is brought to you by: Dark Matter Sponsor - US$36+* Travis MegeeNuclear Sponsor - US$20.00 - US$35.00 per month* Russ from the Kitsap Atheists & Agnostics* Frank* Darryl GoossenPlatinum Sponsor - US$8.00 - US$19.00 per month* Virginia Dawn* Paul Burkey* BT Motley* George* Hugh Mann* Robert Ray from the Humanists of the North Puget Sound* AlexGold Sponsor - US$4.00 - US$7.00 per month* Mark* The Flying Skeptic* Renee Davis-Pelt* Mike Price* LaTonya* Duncan* Jaded Zappa* Will* Henry* AlanBronze Sponsor - < US$4.00 per month* Mark* Peter* Heather* Shawn* Al from South Carolina * Archway Hosting provides full featured web hosting for a fraction of the cost of traditional shared hosting. You get all the benefits of shared hosting, without the sticker shock or extra fees. Check them out at archwayhosting.com. You can find us online at www.atheistnomads.com, follow us on Twitter @AtheistNomads, like us on Facebook, email us at contact@atheistnomads.com, and leave us a voice mail message at (541) 203-0666. Theme music is provided by Sturdy Fred.

DUSTING OFF THE DEGREE - Mary THIS DAY IN HISTORY - April 14* 1775 – The first abolition society in North America is established* 1828 – Noah Webster copyrights the first edition of his dictionary* 1846 – The Donner Party of pioneers departs* 1865 – U.S. President Abraham Lincoln is shot in Ford's Theatre* 1912 – The British passenger liner RMS Titanic hits an iceberg* 2005 – The Oregon Supreme Court nullifies marriage licenses issued to gay couples SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY* Ribose and related sugars from uv irradiation of interstellar ice pieces created the base for RNA, ribose sugar!* Newton dabbled in alchemy, searching for the recipe for the Philosopher's Stone. Recently Chemical Heritage Foundation acquired his recipe for sophick mercury, a key ingredient or the Stone.* Yeast infection caused a blockage of blood supply, so only four days after the surgery the uterus was removed. POLITICS AND RELIGION * Gov Butch Otter has vetoed the Bible in schools bill* Tennessee has passed a bill to make the Bible the official state book* Mississippi passes “Protecting Freedom of Conscience from the Government” bill* Mississippi Church Protection Act* Bangladeshi secular activist hacked to death* Canada closed its Office of Religious Freedom | Via Friendly Atheist FEEDBACK * Tonya Gibbs via YouTube* @Goldrushcomic via Twitter* Katie Dotson via YouTube* Tripin' Fool via YouTube* @XshinhonSoma via Twitter* @RandyLaMonda via Twitter* Ralf via email* The Recovering Gringo via email Email us at contact@atheistnomads.com or call us at (541) 203-0666. This episode is brought to you by: Dark Matter Sponsor - US$36+* Travis MegeeNuclear Sponsor - US$20.00 - US$35.00 per month* Russ from the Kitsap Atheists & Agnostics* Frank* Darryl GoossenPlatinum Sponsor - US$8.00 - US$19.00 per month* Virginia Dawn* Paul Burkey* BT Motley* George* Hugh Mann* Robert Ray from the Humanists of the North Puget Sound* AlexGold Sponsor - US$4.00 - US$7.00 per month* Mark* The Flying Skeptic* Renee Davis-Pelt* Mike Price* LaTonya* Duncan* Jaded Zappa* Will* Henry* AlanBronze Sponsor - < US$4.00 per month* Mark* Peter* Heather* Shawn* Al from South Carolina * Archway Hosting provides full featured web hosting for a fraction of the cost of traditional shared hosting. You get all the benefits of shared hosting, without the sticker shock or extra fees. Check them out at archwayhosting.com. You can find us online at www.atheistnomads.com, follow us on Twitter @AtheistNomads, like us on Facebook, email us at contact@atheistnomads.com, and leave us a voice mail message at (541) 203-0666. Theme music is provided by Sturdy Fred.

Sunday, December 7, 8 pm ET The Halli Casser-Jayne Show brings you a conversation with New York Times bestselling author Phillip Margolin, whose brand new mystery WOMEN WITH A GUN has just been released. Phillip Margolin's rise to become one of America's most respected mystery writers was a circuitous root. Margolin, raised in New York City and Levittown, New York graduated from The American University in Washington, D.C. with a Bachelor's Degree in Government. From 1965 to 1967, he was a Peace Corps volunteer in Liberia, West Africa. Following his service in Africa, Margolin attended New York University School of Law. From 1972 until 1996, Margolin was in private practice in Portland, Oregon, specializing in criminal defense at the trial and appellate levels. As an appellate attorney he appeared before the United States Supreme Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the Oregon Supreme Court and the Oregon Court of Appeals. As a trial attorney, he handled all sorts of criminal cases in state and federal court and represented approximately 30 people charged with homicide, including several who faced the death penalty. He was also the first Oregon attorney to use the Battered Women's Syndrome to defend a battered woman accused of murdering her spouse. Then to our great fortune, Phillip Margolin started writing. Eighteen novels later, many of them New York Times bestsellers, winner of the Distinguished Northwest Writer Award, Margolin outdoes himself with his newest contribution to fiction, his haunting WOMEN WITH A GUN.A conversation with bestselling author Phillip Margolin about his new book WOMEN WITH A GUN on The Halli Casser-Jayne Show, Talk Radio for Fine Minds, Sunday, 8 pm ET. For more information on The Halli Casser-Jayne Show visit Halli Casser-Jayne dot com.

Can non-human animals be “victims” of a crime? The Oregon Supreme Court recently decided they could be. We talk with Matthew Liebman, senior attorney with the Animal Legal Defense Fund, about the law of animals. Why and how do we prohibit animal cruelty? Is it to protect our own feelings, the inherent rights of animals themselves, a little of both? Does prohibiting cruelty protect us from hurting one another? Does a housefly have a right to an education? We discuss the difficulties of being perfect, the omnipresence of trade-offs, whaling by native peoples, whether a chimpanzee can sue in habeas corpus. And, come to think of it, why does Joe pronounce chimpanzee incorrectly, and how did he get Christian to start doing the same? This is the one about the role of animals in a system of human cooperation, and it features an all to brief return of the monkey selfie. (And we finally get to some of the excellent listener feedback we’ve gotten. Keep it coming: oralargumentpodcast@gmail.com.) This show’s links: About Matthew Liebman, senior attorney for the Animal Legal Defense Fund Bruce Wagman and Matthew Liebman, A Worldview of Animal Law Oregon v. Nix, the case about animals as “victims” David Favre and Vivien Tsang, The Development of Anti-Cruelty Laws During the 1800s (PDF and HTML) About Henry Bergh, founder of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals The Moral Status of Animals, an overview that includes a description of Immanuel Kant’s views on the moral status of animals Andrew Ireland Moore, Defining Animals as Crime Victims (note, Joe referred to this article, but the one by my classmate, Adam Kolber, is here) Current cases in which ALDF is involved Leanne Louie, Toothed Whales: Are They People Too Thomas Martin, Whaling Rights of the Makah (see also, via HeinOnline, Lawrence Watters and Connie Dugger, Hunt for Gray Whales: The Dilemma of Native American Treaty Rights and the International Moratorium on Whaling Maneesha Deckha, Animal Justice, Cultural Justice: A Posthumanist Response to Cultural Rights in Animals (Hein only) and Initiating a Non-Anthropocentric Jurisprudence Steven Wise’s Nonhuman Rights Project Michael Mountain, Appeals Court Sets Date for First Chimpanzee Lawsuit Sierra Club v. Morton, in which Justice Douglas would find legal standing in the natural world itself (and citing Christopher Stone, Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects) Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights (also see an overview by the authors) About the other mind problem About cognitive ethology and animal cognition Ben Beaumont-Thomas, SeaWorld shares tumble 33% following Blackfish documentary Tilikum v. Sea World Parks and Entertainment, the 13th Amendment case brought on behalf of Sea World’s orcas American Meat Institute v. USDA Special Guest: Matthew Liebman.

Oregon Update -- Oregon State lawmakers are considering the option of amending the Constitution [House bill 3133] in order to allow the reinstatement of police Sobriety checkpoints in 1987, the Oregon Supreme Court barred police from conducting sobriety checkpoints claiming that the act was unconstitutional as you are detaining motorists without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. I personally have mixed feelings on the subject as I have participated in assisting with accidents caused by drunk drivers and I've also had the humiliation of going through a checkpoint.- Robin so the question is... how much are you willing to be inconvenienced or detained for the sake of Highway safety? it should be quite an interesting debate of the pros and cons of police checkpoints. so take a deep breath as Clif and I battle it out this Wednesday morning 10 a.m. Pacific Time and you can support me with your opinion by dialing 646-721-9887. e-mail talk@KRBNradio.com

NATIONAL SPOTLIGHT Supreme Court gives police more leeway in home searches Group sues feds over marijuana rescheduling petition delay Willie Nelson endorses Gary Johnson for President, then backpedals POT IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST Oregon Supreme Court decides med-pot patients still have gun rights Oregon faces tough changes with new legislation DEA back to their no-good in Spokane Local officials ask Washington legislators to fix MMJ regulations QUESTIONS/COMMENTS FROM LISTENERS: Sponge Billyboi lets us know where Tasco, FL is. Chubba from Albany, NY wants to know about recent Supreme Court decisions that are destroying Fourth Amendment rights. CALIFORNIA UPDATE California AB 1017 aims to reduce sentencing guidelines Taxing Medical Marijuana Reaps Benefits in San Jose ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIGH - COLORADO/MONTANA/IDAHO NEWS Coloradans aim for legalization vote in 2012 INTERNATIONAL INSANITY Military police attack pot protesters in Brazil TOPICS BARELY WORTH ANY OF OUR TIME Random pot packages popping up [clip] WOMEN AND WEED Rape opponents push for pot to replace alcohol DEATHS AT THE HANDS OF DRUG LAW ENFORCEMENT IN 2011 Marine Survives Two Tours in Iraq, SWAT Kills Him EAST COAST SCOOP Connecticut legislators moving forward with MMJ bill Rhode Island judge rules in favor of gun rights in med-pot case YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME Fear, uncertainty and doubt spread about first east cost dispensary [clip] CANNABIS IN SPORTS Coach Tony Dungy discusses marijuana use in the NFL [clip] SENSI STOCKS MARKET UPDATE (MAYBE PUSH) Tech company uses novel approach to identifying cannabis strains FROM THE RESEARCH BIN Cannabis legalization, are we at a tipping point? CLIP FOR END OF SHOW Christopher Fichtner on his book: Cannabinomics: The Marijuana Policy Tipping Point [clip]