Podcasts about Oyez

MP3 from the Oyez websitehttps://www.oyez.org/cases/2008/08-205

MP3 from the Oyez websitehttps://www.oyez.org/cases/2008/08-205

MP3 from the Oyez websitehttps://www.oyez.org/cases/2008/08-205

Kréyòl - English - Français - Español Nou paka kwè adan ayen, nou ni tèlman kòd ki ka maré nou, chenn an tèt an nou, nou ni zyé é nou avèg ! Nou ka pèd tan paka enmé nou. Nou ka vann sa nou yé pou dé éro. Nou ka kouyonné sé é frè an nou, kon di pon moun paka vwè sa nou yé. Nou ka promèt sa nou pani ! Nou ka vansé é nou ka touné an won. Méchansté, fann ren, sé fòs an nou ! Nou tout ka gloryé mové mès é mové labitid ! Pyé-la sé tan nou! Jòd-la nou anmèwdé, nou paré pou tchouyé! Nou ka fè sa nou vlé! Jennéw tibren ! Bondyé la! Tousa sé konbin é konmès avè satan ! An nou arété-sa ! Chwazi Jézi ! Chwazi saki vérité é lavi. On sèl chimen avè Lesprisen, lapé é lajwa avè lafwa ! An nou wouvè é li Bib-la. An nou mèt lanmou an pratik avè Jézi ! Priyé toultan ! Konfyans ! Nou fò, nou Bèl, nou byen avè Jézi !   In the face of our incredulity, our inconsistent commitments, confirmation bias, fear of the unknown, investments already made, wasted time, blindness, even the loss of all bearings and the value of "oneself," ego and self-love that says it all, social pressure and all those to whom we have made promises, our optimism detached from all reality, the absence of inspiring perspective, and finally our identity: our culture, our customs and traditions and everything that makes sense to say no to the evil one and Yes to Jesus. Put My God to the test! Read your Bible! Pray without cessing! To you, Confiance (Trust Obey) and strength in Jesus!   Devant notre incrédulité, nos engagements sans cohérence, le biais de confirmation, la peur de l'inconnu, les investissements déjà consentis, le temps perdu, l'aveuglement, voire la perte de tout repère et la valeur de « sa personne », l'égo et cet amour propre qui dit tout, la pression sociale et toutes celles et ceux à qui on a fait des promesses, notre optimisme détachée de toute réalité, l'absence de perspective inspirante et pour finir notre identité : notre culture, nos coutumes et traditions et tout ce qui fait sens pour dire non au malin et Oui à Jésus. Mettez Mon Dieu à l'épreuve ! Lis ta Bible ! Prie sans cesse! À toi, Confiance et force en Jésus !   Ante nuestra incredulidad, nuestros compromisos sin coherencia, el sesgo de confirmación, el miedo a lo desconocido, las inversiones ya consentidas, el tiempo perdido, la ceguera, incluso la pérdida de toda referencia y el valor de "su persona", el ego y ese amor propio que lo dice todo, la presión social y todos aquellos a quienes hemos hecho promesas, nuestro optimismo desconectado de toda realidad, la ausencia de perspectiva inspiradora y finalmente nuestra identidad: nuestra cultura, nuestras costumbres y tradiciones y todo lo que tiene sentido para decir no al maligno y Sí a Jesús. ¡Pon a prueba a Mi Dios! ¡Lee tu Biblia! ¡Ora! ¡A ti, Confianza y fuerza en Jesús!

In 2017 our sister show, More Perfect aired an episode all about RBG, In September of 2020, we lost Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the annals of history. She was 87. Given the atmosphere around reproductive rights, gender and law, we decided to re-air this More Perfect episode dedicated to one of her cases. Because it offers a unique portrait of how one person can make change in the world. This is the story of how Ginsburg, as a young lawyer at the ACLU, convinced an all-male Supreme Court to take discrimination against women seriously - using a case on discrimination against men. Special thanks to Stephen Wiesenfeld, Alison Keith, and Bob Darcy.Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project in collaboration with the Legal Information Institute at Cornell.EPISODE CREDITS: Reported by - Julia LongoriaProduced by - Julia LongoriaOriginal music and sound design contributed by - Alex OveringtonOur newsletter comes out every Wednesday. It includes short essays, recommendations, and details about other ways to interact with the show. Sign up (https://radiolab.org/newsletter)!Radiolab is supported by listeners like you. Support Radiolab by becoming a member of The Lab (https://members.radiolab.org/) today.Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @radiolab, and share your thoughts with us by emailing radiolab@wnyc.org.Leadership support for Radiolab's science programming is provided by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Science Sandbox, a Simons Foundation Initiative, and the John Templeton Foundation. Foundational support for Radiolab was provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Oyez, oyez, oyez (yes, that's how you spell it)- court is now in very focused and not-at-all-tangential session as we conduct our very first debate. The topic is this: Dumbledore is a Good Guy- Yes or No? We're making up words to sound smart, potentially getting our 45th divorce, and quoting a whole lotta court movies. Support the showSupport FFH on Patreon: patreon.com/thefoxandthefoxhoundFollow us!IG: @thefoxandthefoxhoundTikTok: @thefoxandthefoxhound

~Co-presented with Bolinas Museum~ Kevin Opstedal, author of Dreaming as One: Poetry, Poets and Community in Bolinas, California, from 1967-1980, in conversation with editor, critic, and ethicist (and New School Host) Steve Heilig at the Bolinas Museum. Bolinas has a long and vibrant history as a haven for poets and writers seeking an alternative lifestyle and creative environment away from urban centers. In Dreaming as One, Kevin Opstedal tells the story of the unique poetic community that lived and worked in Bolinas from 1967 to 1980. Kevin's narrative, enriched with photos of and interviews with many of those featured, captures the spirit of rebellion, experimentation, and communal living that characterized their ethos, activism, and artistic commitment. The book features Joanne Kyger, Lew Welch, Philip Whalen, Robert Creeley, Tom Clark, Bill Berkson, and Robert Duncan, among many others. Kevin Opstedal Born and raised in Venice, California, and currently residing in Santa Cruz, Kevin Opstedal is a poet whose line leaves three decades of roadcuts across the entire imaginary West. His twenty-five books and chapbooks include two full-length collections, Like Rain (Angry Dog Press, 1999) and California Redemption Value (UNO Press, 2011). Blue Books Press, one of many of his “sub-radar” editorships, belongs in the same breath as the great California poetry houses (Auerhahn, Big Sky, Oyez...) that his own poems seem to conjure like airbrushed flames on a murdered-out junker carrying Ed Dorn, Joanne Kyger, Ted Berrigan, and some wide-eyed poetry neophyte to a latenite card game in Bolinas. “His poems,” writes Lewis MacAdams, “are hard-nosed without being hard-hearted.” As identity and ideas duke it out in the back-alley of academia, Opstedal surfs an oil slick off Malibu into the apocalypse of style. Host Steve Heilig Steve Heilig is an editor, epidemiologist, ethicist, environmentalist, educator, and ethnomusicologist trained at five University of California campuses. He is co-editor of the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics and of San Francisco Marin Medicine at the medical society he has long been part of. A former volunteer and director of the Zen Hospice Project, AIDS Foundation, and Planned Parenthood, he has helped improve laws and practices in reproductive and end-of-life care, drug policy, and environmental health. He is a longtime book critic and music journalist and emcee of the Sierra Nevada World Music Festival. He's been part of Commonweal for 30 years now. Find out more about The New School at Commonweal on our website: tns.commonweal.org. And like/follow our Soundcloud channel for more great podcasts.

durée : 00:03:54 - La faute aux jeux vidéo - par : Olivier Bénis - Oyez, oyez, enfants amateurs de jeux vidéo : cette semaine on part à l'aventure avec un vaillant petit page, un jeune héros qui se retrouve éjecté du livre d'images dans lequel il vit. Va-t-il survivre à l'impitoyable monde réel ?

Oyez, oyez braves gens, ici votre tournesol en chef. Si je prends la parole solennellement sur Radio Mama c'est pour énoncer une vérité indétrônable. Vous pensez faire partie de la commu tournesol, mais en connaissez vous les 10 règles d'or ? Je vais vous les énumérer et vous pourrez ainsi choisir si oui ou non vous êtes partants pour une année de plus à nos côté. Ici Mathilde de Dance With Him, et vous écoutez Radio Mama. Instagram : @dance_with_him Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

OYEZ, OYEZ, Part 2: Jack gets a break. First Street is a Realm production created by Catherine McKenzie and written by Catherine McKenzie, Jasmine Guillory, Elyssa Friedland, Shawn Klomparens, Randy Susan Meyers, and Kermit Roosevelt II. Looking for more Realm shows? Check out OUTLIERS voiced by Rory Culkin, IF I GO MISSING THE WITCHES DID IT starring Oscar-nominated actress Gabourey Sidibe; ORPHAN BLACK: THE NEXT CHAPTER and POWER TRIP starring Emmy-winner Tatiana Maslany; MARIGOLD BREACH starring Jameela Jamil and Manny Jacinto; and ECHO PARK starring Harry Shum Jr. Realm subscribers get early, ad-free access to new episodes. Subscribe at realm.fm. Follow us: Instagram: @RealmMedia Twitter: @RealmMedia And don't forget to support our sponsors! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

OYEZ, OYEZ, Part 1: The first day of oral arguments at the Supreme Court. First Street is a Realm production created by Catherine McKenzie and written by Catherine McKenzie, Jasmine Guillory, Elyssa Friedland, Shawn Klomparens, Randy Susan Meyers, and Kermit Roosevelt II. Looking for more Realm shows? Check out OUTLIERS voiced by Rory Culkin, IF I GO MISSING THE WITCHES DID IT starring Oscar-nominated actress Gabourey Sidibe; ORPHAN BLACK: THE NEXT CHAPTER and POWER TRIP starring Emmy-winner Tatiana Maslany; MARIGOLD BREACH starring Jameela Jamil and Manny Jacinto; and ECHO PARK starring Harry Shum Jr. Realm subscribers get early, ad-free access to new episodes. Subscribe at realm.fm. Follow us: Instagram: @RealmMedia Twitter: @RealmMedia And don't forget to support our sponsors! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

‘The life of man upon the earth is warfare, and he is born to trouble, as surely as the sparks fly upward.' — Job 5,7 We live in a fallen world. We can speak of a perfect world — and that is assuredly our goal and our destination, as Christians —, but the realities of this world cannot be ignored — Christians are not exempt from living in the world. From the very beginning of our species — when wicked Cain rose up and slew righteous Able —, violence has never left our shadow. Although it was most certainly not part of God's original or intended design for Creation, violence is just as certainly part of its fallen state. It is not that violence is itself a good; rather, it is that violence is sometimes required to protect the good. When a man enacts violence upon a home intruder to defend himself, his wife, his children, and his goods, he is using violence toward a righteous and morally praiseworthy end. Throughout the pages of Scripture, God Himself uses violence against His enemies — from the genocide of Canaan to the Final Judgement, God employs violence consistently and constantly. Although violence will be absent from the new Creation, it will never be absent from this fallen one. As Christians, we must not condemn violence qua violence for to do so would be to condemn God, which is apostasy; rather, we must know how to apply wisdom to these matters so that we align our actions and our beliefs with what God has commanded — and He both proscribes and prescribes violence, depending on the circumstances. It is also necessary for the Christian, in order that he might act in wisdom, to understand the law — to understand the differences between and among things like advocacy, incitement, and fighting words. These are not trivial, unimportant, or tangential matters, for the life of man upon the Earth is one of conflict; even times of peace are seldom entirely free from violence, and they are often ephemera. A man must always do his duty, and at times that duty may demand violence — the police officer who protects his city, the soldier who defends his nation, the housefather who defends his home. We are not and cannot be more moral than God, and of Himself He says: “The Lord is a man of war; the Lord is His name.” Show Notes Brandenburg v. Ohio Wikipedia, Justia, Oyez, LII (Cornell) See Also Further Reading Joshua Judges Parental Warnings The word “ass” is used once at ~01:39. The term “pissed off” is used once around the same time.

Here's what's happening today: This episode is all about the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling.-via Washington Post, Oyez, SCOTUS Blog, NY Times, and Twitter-via AP News, Oyez, Vox, and JacobinWatch this episode as a video at www.kimmoffat.com/thenewsRegister to vote, or check your registration at wearevoters.turbovote.orgTake the pledge to be a voter at raisingvoters.org/beavoterdecember. - on AmazonSubscribe to the Substack: kimmoffat.substack.comA full transcript (with links) is available at kimmoffat.com/hwh-transcriptsAs always, you can find me on Instagram/Twitter @kimmoffat and TikTok @kimmoffatishere

Here's what's happening today: This episode is all about the Supreme Court's Chevron ruling.-via AP News, Oyez, Vox, and JacobinWatch this episode as a video at www.kimmoffat.com/thenewsRegister to vote, or check your registration at wearevoters.turbovote.orgTake the pledge to be a voter at raisingvoters.org/beavoterdecember. - on AmazonSubscribe to the Substack: kimmoffat.substack.comA full transcript (with links) is available at kimmoffat.com/hwh-transcriptsAs always, you can find me on Instagram/Twitter @kimmoffat and TikTok @kimmoffatishere

OYEZ! OYEZ! SCOTUS has dropped the EMTALA decision… Which should have been front and center in last night's “Grumpy Old Men” reboot, but never fear, YOUR BUZZKILLS ARE HERE! The Supreme Court FINALLY made up its mind on the fate of the Emergency Medical and Labor Act (EMTALA) yesterday and your Feminist Buzzkills HAVE FACTS AND FEELINGS ABOUT IT! What in the abobo hell even was the Idaho v. United States case? Why is this NOT a win and NOT enough? How did the clown justices react? How does this affect other places, like Texas? And WTF happens next?! WE CALLED IN FOR BACKUP TO ANSWER ALL YOUR QUESTIONS!  Your Buzzkills rallied together a dope lineup of EXPERTS to break it all down with us and dissect this nondecision-decision from all angles. GUEST ROLL CALL: Attorney Stephanie Toti, who successfully argued the Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt case before the Supreme Court; Idaho reproductive rights activist Jen Jackson Quintano; Idaho OB-GYN and abortion provider Dr. Caitlin Gustafson; and Ryan Hamilton, a Texas activist who has been vocal about his and his wife's experience in accessing emergency abortion care. You don't wanna miss this one. Times are heavy, but knowledge is power, y'all. We gotchu.  OPERATION SAVE ABORTION: You can still join the 10,000+ womb warriors fighting the patriarchy by listening to our five-part OpSave pod series and Mifepristone Panel by clicking HERE for episodes, your toolkit, marching orders, and more. HOSTS:Lizz Winstead @LizzWinsteadMoji Alawode-El @MojiLocks SPECIAL GUESTS: Stephanie Toti TW: @LawyeringProjJen Jackson Quintano IG: @TheProVoiceProjectDr. Caitlin Gustafson TW: @CatitlinGustaf15 IG/TW: @Idaho_CSHRyan Hamilton IG/TW: @TheRyanHamilton GUEST LINKS: The Lawyering ProjectThe Pro-Voice ProjectIdaho Coalition for Safe Healthcare EPISODE LINKS:SCOTUS Ruling Restores Emergency Abortion Rights in Idaho, Leaves Texas Case HangingI'm Staying in Idaho to Practice Medicine After the u.s. Supreme Court's Emtala Decision‘Not a Victory,' but ‘A Delay': With the Supreme Court's Emtala Ruling, u.s. Women Are Still at RiskSIGN: Repeal the Comstock ActBUY: Reproductive Rights Wall Art!EMAIL your abobo questions to The Feminist BuzzkillsAAF's Abortion-Themed Rage Playlist FOLLOW US:Listen to us ~ FBK Podcast Instagram ~ @AbortionFrontTwitter ~ @AbortionFrontTikTok ~ @AbortionFrontFacebook ~ @AbortionFrontYouTube ~ @AbortionAccessFront TALK TO THE CHARLEY BOT FOR ABOBO OPTIONS & RESOURCES HERE!PATREON HERE! Support our work, get exclusive merch and more! DONATE TO AAF HERE!ACTIVIST CALENDAR HERE!VOLUNTEER WITH US HERE!ADOPT-A-CLINIC HERE!EXPOSE FAKE CLINICS HERE!GET ABOBO PILLS FROM PLAN C PILLS HERE!

Oyez! Oyez! A bit of a post-Memorial Day Weekend lull on reviews, but there is news a-plenty on the subject of Netflix's various nefariousness, among other things. John and El'Ahrai provide reviews of "Ezra" and "The First Omen", among all the other stuff...and things. Plus! Do you notice an upgrade in sound quality? Let us know! I move around a lot, not because I'm looking for anything really, but 'cause I'm getting away from things that get bad if I stay.

durée : 00:03:26 - Les bonnes ondes - par : Sandrine Oudin - Hier on se serait crus dans Games of Thrones ou dans la peau de Godefroy de Montmirail et Jacquouille la Fripouille. Retour au moyen âge avec ce sport en plein essor, le Béhourd. Du combat médiéval en armure. Les clubs fleurissent partout, en campagne et en ville. J'ai testé une séance à Paris

durée : 00:03:26 - Les bonnes ondes - par : Sandrine Oudin - Hier on se serait crus dans Games of Thrones ou dans la peau de Godefroy de Montmirail et Jacquouille la Fripouille. Retour au moyen âge avec ce sport en plein essor, le Béhourd. Du combat médiéval en armure. Les clubs fleurissent partout, en campagne et en ville. J'ai testé une séance à Paris

Jill Lepore returns to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the ruling in Brown v. Board of Education with a special episode of The Last Archive. She and Ben Naddaff-Hafrey explore the amazing new AI-powered recreation of the Brown v. Board cases over at the Oyez project. Then, Kenneth W. Mack, the Lawrence D. Biele Professor of Law at Harvard University, stops by to discuss the enduring significance of the case.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

AP correspondent Jennifer King reports on Election 2024 Trump Insurrection Amendment-Listener's Guide

Our annual first Monday in October episode, marking the Supreme Court's new Term. With the consolidation of power of the hard-right super-majority, the stakes of the Court's work have grown vastly greater. At the same time, a series of unpopular–and legally controversial–decisions and ethical black eyes have deeply eroded the Court's public standing. A great trio of Court commentators – Dahlia Lithwick, Mark Stern, and Steve Vladeck – join Harry to discuss the Court's position and trajectory.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Christina Severin, ASTHO's Director of Public Health Law, outlines upcoming Supreme Court cases that will impact public health; Susan Donnelly, Workforce Director at the Oklahoma State Department of Health, shares the work her team is doing to support the public health workforce; applications are open to join the STRETCH 2.0 project; and sign up for ASTHO's Public Health Weekly email newsletter.   ASTHO Webpage: Oyez! Oyez! Oyez! Public Health in the Courts Careers in Public Health ASTHO Webpage: Empowering Connection Through STRETCH ASTHO Webpage: STRETCH 2.0 Community Collaborative Cohort Opportunity ASTHO Webpage: Public Health Weekly email newsletters  

Richard Epstein takes us behind the scenes on the Amicus Brief he wrote with John Yoo about a Supreme Court case that has important implications for what kind of income is allowed to be taxed.

Richard Epstein takes us behind the scenes on the Amicus Brief he wrote with John Yoo about a Supreme Court case that has important implications for what kind of income is allowed to be taxed.

The opinion for a unanimous Supreme Court in Groff v. DeJoy (June 29, 2023) In this case, the Court was asked whether inconvenience to coworkers is an “undue burden” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 such that it excuses an employer from providing accommodations for religious exercise as requested by employees. Find additional resources about this case here on Oyez.org Follow What SCOTUS Wrote Us for audio of Supreme Court opinions. Anywhere you listen to podcasts.

The opinion for a unanimous Supreme Court in Groff v. DeJoy (June 29, 2023) In this case, the Court was asked whether inconvenience to coworkers is an “undue burden” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 such that it excuses an employer from providing accommodations for religious exercise as requested by employees. Find additional resources about this case here on Oyez.org Follow What SCOTUS Wrote Us for audio of Supreme Court opinions. Anywhere you listen to podcasts.

In this episode, we discuss the fall of affirmative action and our predictions of what will happen to college applications next. We simultaneously explored the role of Asian Americans and the model minority myth in both upholding and ending the practice. By no means do we have all the answers to the effect that the end of the policy will have on institutions and opportunities for underrepresented minorities and those in the majority. This episode is a contentious one but we didn't want to shy away from our thoughts and opinions so please be respectful when engaging in discourse. At the end of the day, people are sacred and ideas are not. Here are the references we used: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26316/w26316.pdf https://www.bu.edu/ciss/2023/07/03/college-are-already-unequal-will-ending-affirmative-action-make-it-worse/ https://www.axios.com/local/san-francisco/2023/07/03/affirmative-action-supreme-court-california# https://www.npr.org/2023/07/02/1183981097/affirmative-action-asian-americans-poc http://care.gseis.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/care-brief-raceblind.pdf https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2004.00284.x http://www.jstor.org/stable/42956064 http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7rqbv Fisher v. University of Texas. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved July 7, 2023, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2012/11-345 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/15/legacy-colleges-universities-black-brown/ https://www.law.com/almID/1202676210690/ https://calmatters.org/education/2018/07/californias-gone-without-higher-ed-affirmative-action-since-1996-blackenrollment-at-top-ucs-never-recovered/ https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/1062947?show=full%20own%20original%20research. Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved July 7, 2023, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2022/20-1199 https://thespearheadmagazine.com/how-the-model-minority-myth-affects-us-all/ https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjrl/vol11/iss2/7 https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/06/29/affirmative-action-banned-what-happens/

The law protects creators' original work against copycats, but it also leaves the door open for some kinds of copying. When a photographer sues the Andy Warhol Foundation for using her work without permission, the justices struggle not to play art critics as they decide the case. More Perfect explores how this star-studded case offers a look at how this Court actually makes decisions. Voices in the episode include: • David Hobbs — known as Mr. Mixx, co-founder of the hip-hop group 2 Live Crew • Jerry Saltz — senior art critic and columnist for New York magazine • Pierre Leval — judge on U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit • Jeannie Suk Gersen — More Perfect legal advisor, Harvard Law professor, New Yorker writer • Lynn Goldsmith — photographer • Andy Warhol — as himself Learn more: • 1994: Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. • 2023: Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith • "Toward A Fair Use Standard" by Pierre Leval • The Andy Warhol Foundation   Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Click here to donate to More Perfect. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and X (Twitter) @moreperfect.

In 1902, a Swedish-American pastor named Henning Jacobson refused to get the smallpox vaccine. This launched a chain of events leading to two landmark Supreme Court cases, in which the Court considered the balancing act between individual liberty over our bodies and the collective good. A version of this story originally ran on The Experiment on March 21, 2021. Voices in the episode include: • Rev. Robin Lutjohann — pastor of Faith Lutheran Church in Cambridge, Massachusetts • Michael Willrich — Brandeis University history professor • Wendy Parmet — Northeastern University School of Law professor Learn more: • 1905: Jacobson v. Massachusetts • 1927: Buck v. Bell • 2022: National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration • 2022: Biden v. Missouri • "Pox: An American History" by Michael Willrich • "Constitutional Contagion: COVID, the Courts, and Public Health" by Wendy Parmet   Music by Ob (“Wold”), Parish Council (“Leaving the TV on at Night,” “Museum Weather,” “P Lachaise”), Alecs Pierce (“Harbour Music, Parts I & II”), Laundry (“Lawn Feeling”), water feature (“richard iii (duke of gloucester)”), Keyboard (“Mu”), and naran ratan (“Forevertime Journeys”), provided by Tasty Morsels. Additional music by Dieterich Buxtehude (“Prelude and Fugue in D Major”), Johannes Brahms (“Quintet for Clarinet, Two Violins, Viola, and Cello in B Minor”), and Andrew Eric Halford and Aidan Mark Laverty (“Edge of a Dream”).  Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and X (Twitter) @moreperfect.

Dred Scott v. Sandford is one of the most infamous cases in Supreme Court history: in 1857, an enslaved person named Dred Scott filed a suit for his freedom and lost. In his decision, Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney wrote that Black men “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” One Civil War and more than a century later, the Taneys and the Scotts reunite at a Hilton in Missouri to figure out what reconciliation looks like in the 21st century. Voices in the episode include: • Lynne Jackson — great-great-granddaughter of Dred and Harriet Scott, and president and founder of the Dred Scott Heritage Foundation • Dred Scott Madison — great-great-grandson of Dred Scott • Barbara McGregory — great-great-granddaughter of Dred Scott • Charlie Taney — great-great-grandnephew of Roger Brooke Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who wrote the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision • Richard Josey — Manager of Programs at the Minnesota Historical Society Learn more: • 1857: Dred Scott v. Sandford • The Dred Scott Heritage Foundation   Special thanks to Kate Taney Billingsley, whose play, "A Man of His Time," inspired the episode; and to Soren Shade for production help. Additional music for this episode by Gyan Riley. Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

David Souter is one the most private, low-profile justices ever to have served on the Supreme Court. He rarely gives interviews or speeches. Yet his tenure was anything but low profile. Deemed a “home run” nominee by Republicans, Souter defied partisan expectations on the bench and ultimately ceded his seat to a Democratic president. In this episode, the story of how “No More Souters” became a rallying cry for Republicans and inspired a backlash that would change the Court forever. Voices in the episode include: • Ashley Lopez — NPR political correspondent • Anna Sale — host of WNYC Studios' Death Sex & Money podcast • Tinsley Yarbrough — author and former political science professor at East Carolina University • Heather Gerken — Dean of Yale Law School and former Justice Souter clerk • Kermit Roosevelt III — professor at University of Pennsylvania School of Law and former Justice Souter clerk • Judge Peter Rubin — Associate Justice on Massachusetts Appeals Court and former Justice Souter clerk • Governor John H. Sununu — former governor of New Hampshire and President George H.W. Bush's Chief of Staff Learn more: • 1992: Planned Parenthood v. Casey • 1992: Lee v. Weisman • 2000: Bush v. Gore • 2009: Citizens United v. FEC   Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

Here's what we're talking about today: SCOTUS Ends Affirmative Action-via SCOTUS Blog, Oyez, & SlateOther Supreme Court Rulings-via PoliticoParkland Cop Acquitted-via AP NewsParisian Riots-via CNNA full transcript (with links) is available at kimmoffat.com/hwh-transcriptsAs always, you can find me on Instagram/Twitter @kimmoffat and TikTok @kimmoffatishere

Recently, On the Media's Micah Loewinger was called to testify in court. He had reported on militia groups who'd helped lead the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Now the government was using his work as evidence in a case against them. Micah wanted nothing to do with it — he worried that participating in the trial would signal to sources that he couldn't be trusted, which would compromise his work. As he considered his options, he uncovered a 1972 case called Branzburg v. Hayes. It involved New York Times reporter Earl Caldwell, who was approached multiple times by the FBI to testify against sources in the Black Panther Party. His case — and its decision — transformed the relationship between journalists and the government. Voices in the episode include: • Micah Loewinger — correspondent for On the Media • Earl Caldwell — former New York Times reporter • Lee Levine — attorney and media law expert • Congressman Jamie Raskin — representing Maryland's 8th District Learn more: • 1972: Branzburg v. Hayes • Listen to On the Media's "Seditious Conspiracy" episode. Subscribe to On the Media here. Special thanks to the Maynard Institute For Journalism Education for allowing the use of its Earl Caldwell oral history.  Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

Last week, the Supreme Court upheld the Indian Child Welfare Act in a case called Haaland v. Brackeen. The decision comes almost exactly 10 years after the Supreme Court ruled in Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, which planted the seed for last week's big ruling. To mark the new landmark decision, More Perfect re-airs the Radiolab episode that tells the story of two families, a painful history, and a young girl caught in the middle. Voices in the episode include: • Allison Herrera — KOSU Indigenous Affairs reporter • Matt and Melanie Capobianco — Veronica's adoptive parents • Dusten Brown — Veronica's biological father • Mark Fiddler — attorney for the Capobiancos • Marcia Zug — University of South Carolina School of Law professor • Bert Hirsch — attorney formerly of the Association on American Indian Affairs • Chrissi Nimmo — Deputy Attorney General for Cherokee Nation • Terry Cross — founding executive director of the National Indian Child Welfare Association (now serving as senior advisor) • Lori Alvino McGill — attorney for Christy Maldonado, Veronica's biological mother Learn more: • 2013: Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl • 2023: Haaland v. Brackeen • "Baby Veronica belongs with her adoptive parents" by Christy Maldonado • "Doing What's Best for the Tribe" by Marcia Zug • "The Court Got Baby Veronica Wrong" by Marcia Zug • "A Wrenching Adoption Case" by The New York Times Editorial Board • National Indian Child Welfare Association • In Trust podcast, reported by Allison Herrera   Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

Welcome back to the Law School Toolbox podcast! Today, we're excited to have John Passmore - a practicing attorney and one of our Law School Toolbox writers - with us to talk about some ways that law students can get involved in the legal profession. In this episode we discuss: A quick overview of John's professional background How to make the most of internships and summer legal jobs What are some ways to get involved outside of class, beyond working? What we found most helpful in law school towards building a legal career Networking tips for law students Resources: CareerDicta (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/careerdicta/) Building Your Legal Career (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/law-school-toolbox-podcast-archive/careers/) Law School Career Tips (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/law-school-career-tips/) John Passmore, Author at Law School Toolbox (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/author/john-passmore/) ABA Law Student Division (https://www.americanbar.org/groups/law_students/) Oyez (https://www.oyez.org/) Stitcher (https://www.stitcher.com/) Podcast Episode 5: Maintaining Authenticity in the Legal Profession (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-5-maintaining-authenticity-legal-profession/) Podcast Episode 114: Law School Networking 101 (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-114-law-school-networking-101/) Podcast Episode 162: Professional Development Strategies for Young Lawyers (w/Sadie Jones) (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-162-professional-development-strategies-for-young-lawyers-w-sadie-jones/) Join Now! Getting Involved in the Legal Profession (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/join-now-getting-involved-in-the-legal-profession/) Download the Transcript  (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/episode-397-how-to-get-involved-in-the-legal-profession-while-still-in-law-school/) If you enjoy the podcast, we'd love a nice review and/or rating on Apple Podcasts (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/law-school-toolbox-podcast/id1027603976) or your favorite listening app. And feel free to reach out to us directly. You can always reach us via the contact form on the Law School Toolbox website (http://lawschooltoolbox.com/contact). If you're concerned about the bar exam, check out our sister site, the Bar Exam Toolbox (http://barexamtoolbox.com/). You can also sign up for our weekly podcast newsletter (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/get-law-school-podcast-updates/) to make sure you never miss an episode! Thanks for listening! Alison & Lee

Now that the “viability line” in pregnancy — as defined by Roe v. Wade — is no longer federal law, lawmakers and lawyers are coming up with new frameworks for abortion access at a dizzying rate. In this second part of our series, More Perfect asks: what if abortion law wasn't shaped by men at the Supreme Court, but instead by people who know what it's like to be pregnant, to have abortions, and to lose pregnancies? We hear from women on the front lines of the next legal battle over abortion in America. Voices in the episode include: • Mary J. Browning — pro bono lawyer for The Justice Foundation • Dr. Shelley Sella — OBGYN (retired) • Greer Donley — University of Pittsburgh School of Law professor • Jill Wieber Lens — University of Arkansas School of Law professor Learn more: • 1973: Roe v. Wade • 2022: Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization • Listen to Part 1: The Viability Line   Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

Nix v. Hedden was the U.S. supreme court decision that made tomatoes a vegetable, at least for tariff purposes. This case involved a lot of dictionaries being read aloud. Research:   Baron, Dennis. “Look It Up in Your Funk & Wagnalls : How Courts Define the Words of the Law.” Dictionaries: Journal of the Dictionary Society of North America, Volume 43, Issue 2, 2022, pp. 95-144 (Article). https://doi.org/10.1353/dic.2022.0015   Dewey, Caitlin. “The obscure Supreme Court case that decided tomatoes are vegetables.” Washington Post. 10/18/2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/10/18/the-obscure-supreme-court-case-that-decided-tomatoes-are-vegetables/   Hendrickson, Scott and Jason M. Roberts. “Short-Term Goals and Long-Term Effects: The Mongrel Tariff and the Creation of the Special Rule in the U.S. House.” Journal of Policy History. Vol. 28, No. 2. 2016. doi:10.1017/S0898030616000087   Hollender v. Magone, 149 U.S. 586 (1893). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/149/586/   New York Times. “100TH YEAR MARKED BY PRODUCE HOUSE.” 2/22/1939. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1939/02/22/96020572.html?pageNumber=40   Nix, John W. “1795-1895. One hundred years of American commerce ... history of American commerce by one hundred Americans, with a chronological table of the important events of American commerce and invention within the past one hundred years.” Chauncey Mitchell Depew, editor. New York, D.O. Haynes, 1895. https://archive.org/details/17951895onehundr02depeuoft/page/n377/   ROBERTS, JASON M. “The Development of Special Orders and Special Rules in the U.S. House, 1881–1937.” Legislative Studies Quarterly, vol. 35, no. 3, 2010, pp. 307–36. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25750388. Accessed 31 May 2023.   Schafer, Matthew. “The Curious Case of the Green Tomato and the Tax Collector.” Medium. 9/1/2020. https://matthewschafer.medium.com/the-curious-case-of-the-green-tomato-and-the-tax-collector-56ff0a72dc74   Smith, Andrew F. "Tomato." Encyclopedia of Food and Culture, edited by Solomon H. Katz, vol. 3, Charles Scribner's Sons, 2003, pp. 402-407. Gale In Context: U.S. History, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3403400575/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=6909ec78. Accessed 25 May 2023.   Supreme Court of the United States. Nix v. Hedden, 149 U.S. 304 (1893). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/149/304/   "Tomato." Britannica Library, Encyclopædia Britannica, 29 Jul. 2018. libraries.state.ma.us/login?eburl=https%3A%2F%2Flibrary.eb.com&ebtarget=%2Flevels%2Freferencecenter%2Farticle%2Ftomato%2F72825&ebboatid=9265652. Accessed 25 May. 2023.   United States Congress. “An act to reduce internal-revenue taxation, and for other purposes.” March 3, 1883.   United States v. Petix. https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-petix-1   “Virginia Truck Farms.” From the Portsmouth Star. Fruit Trade Journal and Produce Record. Volume 56. https://books.google.com/books?id=xtlKAQAAMAAJ   "Yates v. United States." Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/2014/13-7451. Accessed 25 May. 2023. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When the justices heard oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the landmark abortion case, one word came up more than any other: viability. The viability line was at the core of Roe v. Wade, and it's been entrenched in the abortion rights movement ever since. But no one seems to remember how this idea made its way into the abortion debate in the first place. This week on More Perfect, we trace it back to the source and discover how a clerk and a couple of judges turned a fuzzy medical concept into a hard legal line. Voices in the episode include: • George Frampton — former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun • Judge Jon Newman — Second Circuit Court of Appeals • Khiara Bridges — UC Berkeley School of Law professor • Alex J. Harris — lawyer, former member of the Joshua Generation Learn more: • 1973: Roe v. Wade • 2022: Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization   Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

This week, we revisit one of the most important Supreme Court cases you've probably never heard of: Baker v. Carr, a redistricting case from the 1960s, which challenged the justices to consider what might happen if they stepped into the world of electoral politics. It's a case so stressful that it pushed one justice to a nervous breakdown, put another justice in the hospital, brought a boiling feud to a head, and changed the course of the Supreme Court — and the nation — forever. Voices in the episode include: • Tara Grove — More Perfect legal advisor, University of Texas at Austin law professor • Guy-Uriel Charles — Harvard law professor • Louis Michael Seidman — Georgetown law school professor • Sam Issacharoff — NYU law school professor • Craig A. Smith — PennWest California humanities professor and Charles Whittaker's biographer • J. Douglas Smith — Author of "On Democracy's Doorstep" • Alan Kohn — Former Supreme Court clerk for Charles Whittaker (1957 term) • Kent Whittaker — Charles Whittaker's son • Kate Whittaker — Charles Whittaker's granddaughter Learn more: • 1962: Baker v. Carr • 2000: Bush v. Gore • 2016: Evenwel v. Abbott Music in this episode by Gyan Riley, Alex Overington, David Herman, Tobin Low and Jad Abumrad.   Archival interviews with Justice William O. Douglas come from the Department of Rare Books and Special Collections at Princeton University Library. Special thanks to Jerry Goldman and to Whittaker's clerks: Heywood Davis, Jerry Libin and James Adler. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

Unlike other branches of government, the Supreme Court operates with almost no oversight. No cameras are allowed in the courtroom, no binding code of ethics, and records of their activities are incredibly hard to get. So how do reporters uncover the activities of the nine most powerful judges in the country? Live from the Logan Symposium on Investigative Reporting at UC Berkeley's Graduate School of Journalism, host Julia Longoria talks to journalists behind bombshell investigations of the Court and its justices and how Clarence Thomas' personal relationships intersect with his professional life. Voices in the episode include: • Jo Becker — New York Times reporter in the investigative unit • Justin Elliott — ProPublica reporter Learn more: • "The Long Crusade of Clarence and Ginni Thomas" by Danny Hakim and Jo Becker • "Clarence Thomas and the Billionaire" by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski • "Billionaire Harlan Crow bought property from Clarence Thomas. The Justice didn't disclose the deal" by by Justin Elliott, Joshua Kaplan and Alex Mierjeski  Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

To many Americans, Clarence Thomas makes no sense. For more than 30 years on the Court, he seems to have been on a mission — to take away rights that benefit Black people. As a young man, though, Thomas listened to records of Malcolm X speeches on a loop and strongly identified with the tenets of Black Nationalism. This week on More Perfect, we dig into his writings and lectures, talk to scholars and confidants, and explore his past, all in an attempt to answer: what does Clarence Thomas think Clarence Thomas is doing? Voices in the episode include: • Juan Williams — Senior Political Analyst at Fox News • Corey Robin — Professor of Political Science at Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center • Angela Onwuachi-Willig — Dean of Boston University School of Law • Stephen F. Smith — Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School Learn more: • 1993: Graham v. Collins • 1994: Holder v. Hall • 1999: Chicago v. Morales • 2003: Grutter v. Bollinger • 2022: Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College • 2022: Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina • “The Enigma of Clarence Thomas” by Corey Robin • “Black Conservatives, Center Stage” by Juan Williams • “Just Another Brother on the SCT?: What Justice Clarence Thomas Teaches Us About the Influence of Racial Identity” by Angela Onwuachi-Willig • “Clarence X?: The Black Nationalist Behind Justice Thomas's Constitutionalism” by Stephen F. Smith • “My Grandfather's Son” by Justice Clarence Thomas Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

Host Julia Longoria is back with a new season of More Perfect, from WNYC Studios. We're taught the Supreme Court was designed to be above the fray of politics. But at a time when partisanship seeps into every pore of American life, are the nine justices living up to that promise? More Perfect is a guide to the current moment on the Court. The show brings the highest court of the land down to earth, telling the human dramas at the Court that shape so many aspects of American life — from our religious freedom to our artistic expression, from our reproductive choices to our voice in democracy. In the season trailer, Julia returns to the place where she first fell in love with SCOTUS: high school. Subscribe to the podcast here. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow the show on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

More than 30 years ago, a Native American man named Al Smith was fired for ingesting peyote at a religious ceremony. When his battle made it to the Supreme Court, the decision set off a thorny debate over when religious people get to sidestep the law — a debate we're still having today. Voices in the episode include: • Garrett Epps — Professor of Practice at the University of Oregon Law School • Ka'ila Farrell-Smith — Al Smith's daughter, visual artist • Jane Farrell — Al Smith's widow, retired early childhood specialist • Galen Black — Al Smith's former coworker • Steven C. Moore — senior staff attorney at the Native American Rights Fund • Craig J. Dorsay — lawyer who argued Al Smith's case before the Supreme Court • Dan Mach — director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief Learn more: • 1963: Sherbert v. Verner • 1990: Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith • 2022: 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis • Peyote vs the State: Religious Freedom On Trial, Garrett Epps • Factsheet: Religious Freedom Restoration Act Of 1993, The Bridge Initiative at Georgetown University • Our History, the Klamath Tribes   Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

To kick off the new season, host Julia Longoria returns to high school, where she first fell in love with the Supreme Court. She was a star on her high school's nationally-ranked “Constitution team” (read: nerd Super Bowl). For Julia, the Court represented a place where two sides of an issue could be discussed and debated. A lot has changed since then — and public perception around the Court is polarized, to say the least. Which is why we're taking a cue from high schoolers: this season on More Perfect, we're questioning everything. Learn more: • The We the People, The Citizen, and the Constitution Program Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project in collaboration with the Legal Information Institute at Cornell. Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in a case that will consider a 1995 law that shields social media companies from liability. Gonzalez v. Google could allow people to sue tech companies that use algorithms to sort through their content. Plus, we check in with Alexander Martin, The Record's UK editor, about his takeaways from the Munich Security Conference.

Audio of Justice Ginsburg's dissenting opinion in the first Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin in 2013 known as Fisher I.   Access this SCOTUS opinion and other helpful case information at Oyez.org.      

The original Fisher v. University of Texas case from 2013 known as Fisher I.   Access this Supreme Court opinion and other essential case information on Oyez.org.   Music by Epidemic Sound

Today I'll be reading the 2003 opinion of the Court in Virginia v. Black, a case that asked the Supreme Court whether a Virginia law prohibiting the burning of a cross with the intent of intimidating any person or group violated the First Amendment. I'm reading this opinion in light of a new case that the Court has agreed to hear later this term – Counterman v. Colorado - asking: in order to establish that a statement is a "true threat" which we already know is not protected by the First Amendment, must the government show that the speaker subjectively knew or intended the threatening nature of the statement; or, is it enough to show that an objective "reasonable person" would regard the statement as a threat of violence? In this opinion, the Court addresses what makes a threat a true threat - which is why I thought that those of you who are interested in the yet-to-be-scheduled Counterman v. Colorado might like to hear it.   Access this SCOTUS opinion and other essential case information on Oyez.org. Music by Epidemic Sound

Audio of the Supreme Court case San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon (1959) Majority Opinion (Labor Unions, Federal Preemption, National Labor Relations Board) In light of last week's oral arguments in Glacier Northwest v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, today I'll be reading San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, the 1959 Supreme Court Case that first established the Garmon preemption; in other words, when state court action is preempted by federal labor law.   Access this SCOTUS opinion and other essential case information at Oyez.org.   Music by Epidemic Sound  

Earlier this week, a leaked draft opinion from the Supreme Court suggested that after nearly 50 years, the court intends to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide. Almost as soon as abortions became legal, opponents began organizing efforts to repeal the law. Eighteen states now have so-called "trigger laws" that will ban abortions the moment that Roe v. Wade is overturned or pre-"Roe" era bans that remain on the books, ready once again, to fall into place.We'll look back at the longstanding efforts by legal, political and religious groups - on both sides of the debate - that have led to this moment. And we'll discuss what comes next. In participating regions, you'll also hear a local news segment to help you make sense of what's going on in your community.Email us at considerthis@npr.org. Audio in the podcast from Supreme Court arguments of Roe v. Wade was obtained from Oyez.org multimedia archive.