Podcasts about Perkins Coie

Paralegals might not wear capes, but they're often the ones keeping your law firm running and making sure your clients are happy. Conrad and Gyi dive into the unsung, everyday heroes of your practice, your paralegals, and how the right team can make or break your client experience. We highlight a few key clips from a full-length interview Conrad had with Ryan McKeen and Marisa Rua from Para Era about building better paralegal training programs, hiring talent from unexpected industries like food service, and creating systems that let paralegals thrive.  Your paralegals are often the first face of your firm, the first voice clients hear, and the first impression that shapes your brand. Ryan and Marissa discuss how to turn that reality into a competitive advantage.

Michael DiSabato - Wexit / The Survivors of the OSU Abuse Scandal (Part 1)Michael DiSabato is one of the survivors of one of the most egregious breaches of trust in American history. He was a victim in the OSU Bath house scandal, something the Opperman Report has been covering for years. It is time for justice for the survivors and the families of those who never made it.wexit.orgBackground: (from Wikipedia)The Ohio State University abuse scandal centered on allegations of sexual abuse that occurred between 1978 and 1998, while Richard Strauss was employed as a physician by the Ohio State University (OSU) in the Athletics Department and in the Student Health Center. An independent investigation into the allegations was announced in April 2018 and was conducted by the law firm Perkins Coie.In July 2018, several former wrestlers accused former head coach Russ Hellickson and U.S. representative Jim Jordan, who was an assistant coach at OSU between 1987 and 1994, of knowing about Strauss's alleged abuse but failing to take action to stop it. Jordan has denied that he had any student-athlete report sexual abuse to him.The report, released in May 2019, concluded that Strauss abused at least 177 male student-patients and that OSU was aware of the abuse as early as 1979, but the abuse was not widely known outside of athletics or student health until 1996, when he was suspended from his duties. Strauss continued to abuse OSU students at an off-campus clinic until his retirement from the university in 1998. OSU was faulted in the report for failing to report Strauss's conduct to law enforcement.Previous Shows on this subject on PatreonSteve Snyder Rocky RatliffOpperman LivePrevious Shows on this subject on SpreakerSteve SnyderJim Jordan Bathhouse ScandalBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

Michael DiSabato - Wexit / The Survivors of the OSU Abuse Scandal (Part 2)Michael DiSabato is one of the survivors of one of the most egregious breaches of trust in American history. He was a victim in the OSU Bath house scandal, something the Opperman Report has been covering for years. It is time for justice for the survivors and the families of those who never made it.wexit.orgBackground: (from Wikipedia)The Ohio State University abuse scandal centered on allegations of sexual abuse that occurred between 1978 and 1998, while Richard Strauss was employed as a physician by the Ohio State University (OSU) in the Athletics Department and in the Student Health Center. An independent investigation into the allegations was announced in April 2018 and was conducted by the law firm Perkins Coie.In July 2018, several former wrestlers accused former head coach Russ Hellickson and U.S. representative Jim Jordan, who was an assistant coach at OSU between 1987 and 1994, of knowing about Strauss's alleged abuse but failing to take action to stop it. Jordan has denied that he had any student-athlete report sexual abuse to him.The report, released in May 2019, concluded that Strauss abused at least 177 male student-patients and that OSU was aware of the abuse as early as 1979, but the abuse was not widely known outside of athletics or student health until 1996, when he was suspended from his duties. Strauss continued to abuse OSU students at an off-campus clinic until his retirement from the university in 1998. OSU was faulted in the report for failing to report Strauss's conduct to law enforcement.Previous Shows on this subject on PatreonSteve Snyder Rocky RatliffOpperman LivePrevious Shows on this subject on SpreakerSteve SnyderJim Jordan Bathhouse ScandalBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

This Day in Legal History: Lincoln's Second InauguralOn March 4, 1865, Abraham Lincoln delivered his Second Inaugural Address as he began his second term as President of the United States. The speech came during the final weeks of the Civil War, when Union victory was increasingly likely but the country remained deeply divided. Instead of celebrating the nearing end of the war, Lincoln used the moment to reflect on the deeper causes of the conflict. He identified slavery as the central issue that had brought the nation into war, describing it as both a legal institution and a moral injustice embedded in American law for generations. Lincoln noted that both the North and South had participated in a system that allowed slavery to endure within the nation's constitutional framework.In one of the address's most striking passages, Lincoln suggested that the war itself might be understood as divine judgment for the nation's long tolerance of slavery. He observed that slavery had existed in the Americas for centuries and reflected on the possibility that the immense suffering of the war was a form of punishment for that history. Lincoln famously stated that if divine providence willed that the war continue “until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword,” then such judgment might still be just. This reflection framed the war not simply as a political conflict but as a reckoning with a deeply rooted legal and moral wrong.Lincoln's remarks also pointed toward the constitutional transformation already underway through the pending Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Congress had passed the amendment earlier in 1865, and it awaited ratification by the states. If adopted, it would permanently abolish slavery across the United States and fundamentally alter the constitutional order. Lincoln's speech emphasized that the war's conclusion would also mark a legal turning point, ending a constitutional system that had protected slavery. At the same time, he called for reconciliation in rebuilding the nation, urging the country to move forward “with malice toward none.” Only months later, the Civil War ended and the Thirteenth Amendment was ratified in December 1865, permanently outlawing slavery in the United States.The House Oversight Committee has asked several high-profile figures to testify about their connections to Jeffrey Epstein as part of a broader investigation into how the federal government handled the case. Those requested to appear include departing Goldman Sachs Chief Legal Officer Kathryn Ruemmler, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, and Apollo Global Management co-founder Leon Black.The request to Ruemmler comes shortly after she announced plans to step down from Goldman Sachs and after Justice Department records brought renewed attention to her past communications with Epstein. Emails show that she sought career advice from him while exploring a move from Latham & Watkins to Facebook in 2018 and referred to him in messages as “Uncle Jeffrey.” The correspondence also mentioned gifts she received from him. Reports previously revealed that the two had numerous meetings during the 2010s, years after Epstein had served a prison sentence related to prostitution offenses involving minors.The committee's inquiry focuses on whether Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell used relationships with influential individuals to gain protection or influence while operating their sex-trafficking scheme. Lawmakers are also examining the federal government's handling of the investigation and the circumstances surrounding Epstein's death in a Manhattan federal jail in 2019.Along with Ruemmler, Gates and Black received similar requests for testimony. Gates has indicated he is willing to cooperate and answer questions from the committee. Black, meanwhile, is also facing a proposed class action accusing Apollo and its leadership of misleading investors about their connections to Epstein, allegations the firm has publicly denied.Other individuals asked to appear include Epstein's former assistants, political adviser Doug Band, and Gateway co-founder Ted Waitt. The committee has already interviewed several prominent figures, including former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as it continues reviewing the scope of Epstein's network and the government's response to his crimes.Goldman's Departing CLO, Gates Asked To Testify On Epstein - Law360 UKThe Justice Department quickly reversed course in an ongoing legal fight over executive orders issued by President Donald Trump targeting several prominent law firms. Late Monday, government lawyers told a federal appeals court they planned to drop their appeal after multiple federal judges ruled the orders unconstitutional. But the next day the department asked the court for permission to withdraw that dismissal request and continue defending the orders.The executive orders targeted firms including Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey, and Jenner & Block. The measures sought to restrict the firms' security clearances, government contracts, and access to federal buildings, citing concerns about their clients and hiring practices. The firms challenged the orders in court, arguing they were unconstitutional retaliation against legal advocates.Federal judges consistently sided with the firms, with one ruling describing the order against Perkins Coie as an unprecedented attack on the legal system. After those rulings, the Justice Department initially appeared ready to abandon the appeal. Its sudden reversal, however, would allow the administration to continue fighting the cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.The law firms criticized the shift, saying the government offered no explanation for changing its position so quickly. They reiterated their commitment to challenging what they view as an unconstitutional attempt to punish law firms for representing disfavored clients. Civil liberties advocates echoed that criticism, arguing the orders represent a misuse of presidential power.The litigation highlights a broader dispute over the limits of executive authority and the independence of the legal profession. As the appeals process continues, the courts will ultimately decide whether the executive orders can survive constitutional scrutiny.BREAKING: DOJ Nixes Plan To Drop Law Firm EO Appeals In About-Face - Law360In quick reversal, DOJ seeks to continue Trump's battle with law firmsA trial beginning in Chicago will examine claims that baby formula made by Abbott Laboratories caused premature infants to develop a serious and potentially deadly intestinal condition known as necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). The case consolidates lawsuits from four families whose premature children were born in Chicago-area hospitals between 2012 and 2019 and later developed the disease. Although the infants survived, the lawsuits say several required surgery and continue to face long-term health complications.The case is part of a much larger wave of litigation against Abbott and Mead Johnson, the manufacturer of Enfamil. Nearly 1,000 lawsuits have been filed across the country alleging that the companies failed to warn doctors that cow's milk-based formulas used in hospitals may increase the risk of NEC in premature infants. Many of those cases are consolidated in federal court in Illinois, while others are pending in state courts.Abbott denies that its formulas cause the disease and maintains that the products are medically necessary when mothers cannot produce enough breast milk. The company and other researchers point to evidence suggesting that the higher risk of NEC is linked to the absence of breast milk rather than exposure to formula itself.Previous trials involving similar claims have produced mixed results. Some juries have awarded large verdicts to families, including multimillion-dollar judgments against both Abbott and Mead Johnson, though those decisions are currently under appeal. Other cases have resulted in defense wins or retrials, and several potential bellwether cases in federal court have been dismissed.The Chicago trial, which begins with jury selection, is expected to last several weeks and could influence how the remaining lawsuits move forward. With hundreds of similar claims still pending, the outcome may play an important role in shaping the broader litigation over infant formula and NEC.Abbott set to face trial over claims premature infant formula caused deadly disease | ReutersIn this week's column, I look at a new California proposal that attempts to sidestep the federal cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions by reclassifying vehicle sales taxes as licensing fees. The idea is simple: if the charge is treated as a property-style fee instead of a sales tax, it could fall into a category that allows taxpayers to make greater use of their federal SALT deduction. Supporters frame the proposal as middle-class tax relief and a way to reduce the amount of federal revenue flowing out of California. But while the policy is clever, its practical benefits would be limited and uneven.The proposal follows a familiar strategy used since the 2017 tax law capped SALT deductions: when one type of tax becomes less deductible, lawmakers try to redesign the tax structure so the revenue flows through a category that remains deductible. California's approach focuses on vehicle purchases, where sales taxes are currently difficult to deduct for many residents. By redefining those charges as licensing fees, lawmakers hope taxpayers could claim them alongside property taxes under the federal deduction cap.In practice, though, most lower-income taxpayers wouldn't benefit at all. Many households take the standard deduction rather than itemizing, especially after recent tax reforms increased its size. For those taxpayers, changing the label on a vehicle tax doesn't meaningfully change their federal tax bill. Even for many itemizers, the savings would likely be small.The proposal mainly helps a narrow band of higher-earning taxpayers—people with substantial state and property taxes who are still just below the federal SALT cap. For them, a vehicle purchase could generate a deductible amount that meaningfully lowers their federal tax liability. But that advantage grows with the price of the car and the taxpayer's marginal tax rate, which means the largest benefits flow to relatively affluent households.If the goal is truly middle-class relief, a more direct approach would likely work better. For example, a refundable state tax credit tied to vehicle purchases could help working families without depending on federal deduction rules or itemization. Another long-term option would be shifting some of California's tax burden from individuals to businesses, since certain business-level taxes remain deductible federally.California's proposal shows the creativity that the SALT deduction cap has sparked among state policymakers. The real question, however, is whether clever tax reclassification is the right tool—or whether more straightforward policies aimed directly at middle-income taxpayers would produce fairer and more predictable results.California SALT Deduction Proposal Is More Clever Than Helpful This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

I never thought I'd be covering court battles like this, but here I am, glued to the latest twists in the legal wars swirling around President Donald Trump. Just yesterday, on March 2, 2026, the Supreme Court heard arguments in United States v. Hemani, where the Trump administration is defending a federal law banning illegal drug users from owning guns. Justice Elena Kagan grilled lawyers with hypotheticals about ayahuasca ceremonies, and even Justice Amy Coney Barrett admitted she'd never heard of the drug, asking if it was real. The justices seemed skeptical of challenges to the law's constitutionality, drawing parallels to everyday drug use to test the limits of Second Amendment rights, as reported in SCOTUSblog's live coverage.But that's just one front. Trump's unilateral military strike on Iran has sparked a firestorm over war powers. The New York Times' Charlie Savage detailed how accusations are flying that Trump violated the Constitution by launching the operation without congressional approval. It's reignited the age-old debate on who controls America's war machine—presidents have done it before, but critics say this crosses a line, paving the way for broader Supreme Court scrutiny.Over in the D.C. Circuit, things got wild with those executive orders targeting law firms like Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, Perkins Coie, and Susman Godfrey. Trump hit them hard—terminating government contracts, yanking security clearances, barring access to federal buildings—because they represented his opponents, worked on voting rights, or challenged his 2020 election efforts. District judges, including Beryl Howell, called it chilling, a First Amendment nightmare that could scare lawyers from tough cases. The Justice Department stunned everyone by moving to dismiss the appeals on Monday, a huge win for the firms and the rule of law. But Tuesday, they flipped, filing to revive the fights without explanation. Democracy Docket reports the firms fired back, urging the court to reject the about-face. Pro-democracy watchers are alarmed—this isn't just about contracts; it's whether a president can weaponize government against his legal foes.Meanwhile, the Federal Circuit shot down the Trump team's plea to delay a tariff refund case by up to four months. After the Supreme Court's February 20 ruling that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act doesn't let presidents slap on tariffs willy-nilly, Trump vented on social media about rehearing it. Bloomberg's Zoe Tillman notes the administration argued complexity demands caution, but companies are pushing back, saying delays hurt. Trump responded by imposing 10 percent tariffs on all countries starting February 24 using other laws, per Holland & Knight analysis.Down in New York, a federal court in the Southern District smacked down Trump's bid to kill the city's Congestion Pricing program. Earthjustice, representing Riders Alliance and Sierra Club alongside the MTA, won summary judgment. U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman ruled Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy couldn't override the democratic process that approved the tolls, which have cleaned the air, sped up streets, boosted transit, and added millions to the economy despite Trump's "disaster" label.And that's not all—Lawfare's tracker logs 298 active cases challenging Trump actions, from national security to the Alien Enemies Act deportations. State courts are buzzing too, with oral arguments on ghost guns and DOJ voter data grabs. Whew, listeners, these past few days have been a legal whirlwind, testing the courts like never before.Thanks for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production—for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Jeff & Shannon expose Bannon's chummy Epstein alliance via unsealed texts coaching scandal PR, plus the orchestrated Russia Hoax via Perkins Coie & Clinton ops. Tune in at Rumble, YouTube, X and Red State Talk Radio now! Patriots, wake up and lock in—@intheMatrixxx and @shadygrooove deliver a scorching deep dive in Season 8, Episode 031, “Despite Epstein's Toxicity Steve Bannon Stood by Him; Planned Russia Hoax,” hammering home the unsealed texts where Bannon coaches the convicted Epstein on pushing back lies, crushing trafficking narratives, and rebuilding as a philanthropist while plotting media strategies and global moves, all tied to the engineered Russia collusion hoax fueled by Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS shells, and Clinton-linked operatives that spied, lied, and smeared Trump to derail his presidency. Pulling from fresh document drops, X intel, and timeline breakdowns, they spotlight Bannon's ongoing Epstein loyalty post-conviction, his advisory role in image rehab, connections to broader networks including Flynn's intel timeline, Cambridge seminars, and plants like Manafort/Page/Papadopoulos/Flynn inserted to frame the campaign, plus the hoax's origins in hidden funding and Five Eyes coordination. No spin, just receipts exposing the establishment's playbook. The truth is learned, never told—the constitution is your weapon—tune in at noon-0-five Eastern LIVE to stand with Trump! Ready for the next episode title, patriots? Drop it when you're set—let's keep exposing and building! If you'd like any extras like a "Where to Watch & Listen" section or tweaks, just say the word.

In this episode, Perkins Coie Partner Jane Rueger and Associate Attorney Jacob Neeley join Kaitlin Fallowfield to discuss a 14-page preview recently released by PJM Interconnection detailing its plans for the new rules for data centers seeking to bring their own generation to the grid.The grid operator has been trying to come up with a framework to manage data center load and create more accurate forecasting measures. In December 2025, FERC ordered PJM to write its rules for co-location to include three key services, which include both firm and non-firm capacity contracts, and interim network service contracts.The 14-page plan marked a preview of what PJM's future FERC filing will include, teasing the idea of a separate, albeit limited, expedited queue for large load additions.NPM is a leading data, intelligence & events company providing business development led coverage of the US & European power, storage & data center markets for the development, finance, M&A and corporate community.Download our mobile app.

This Day in Legal History: Opium is Prohibited in the USOn February 9, 1909, the United States took its first significant federal step toward regulating narcotics when Congress passed a law banning the importation of opium for non-medical purposes. The act, officially titled “An Act to Prohibit the Importation and Use of Opium for Other Than Medicinal Purposes,” marked the beginning of a century-long evolution in American drug policy. While opium had long been associated with addiction and social issues—particularly in Chinese immigrant communities—prior regulation had occurred mostly at the state and local levels. This federal statute aimed to curb both domestic consumption and the growing international trade in opium, which had become a concern for moral reformers, physicians, and public officials.The 1909 law was as much a product of racialized anxieties and diplomatic concerns as it was a health policy. U.S. officials were influenced by the growing global temperance movement and international agreements like those discussed at the International Opium Commission in Shanghai that same year. Domestically, the law paved the way for a broader federal role in drug control, leading to later landmark legislation such as the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914. It also helped define narcotics as a matter of federal concern rather than simply a moral or local issue.While the 1909 statute was limited in scope—it did not criminalize possession or use, only importation—it established the principle that Congress could regulate substances in the interest of public health and welfare. That principle would be expanded in later decades as the War on Drugs developed. The opium ban illustrates how early 20th-century American legal policy began to intertwine with international diplomacy, race, and evolving conceptions of public health.A landmark trial began this week in a California state court to determine whether Instagram and YouTube can be held liable for allegedly harming a young woman's mental health through addictive platform design. The plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman identified as K.G.M., claims that Meta (parent company of Instagram and Facebook) and Google (which owns YouTube) designed their platforms in a way that fostered addiction from a young age, contributing to her depression and suicidal ideation. Her legal team argues the companies were negligent, failed to provide warnings, and that the platforms substantially contributed to her psychological harm.A verdict in her favor could open the door for thousands of similar lawsuits currently pending against major tech firms like Meta, Google, Snap, and TikTok. Notably, Snap and TikTok settled with the plaintiff before trial, while Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is expected to testify. The defense plans to emphasize external influences in K.G.M.'s life and highlight efforts they've made around youth safety.The case challenges longstanding U.S. legal protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which generally shields internet companies from liability for user-generated content. However, if the jury accepts the argument that the harm stems from platform design rather than content, it could weaken those defenses. Parallel legal battles are underway, including over 2,300 federal lawsuits and a separate trial in New Mexico where Meta is accused of enabling child sexual exploitation.Instagram, YouTube addiction trial kicks off in Los Angeles | ReutersThe Trump administration has appealed a federal court ruling that requires the U.S. Department of Transportation to release frozen funding for the $16 billion Hudson Tunnel Project, which aims to upgrade vital rail infrastructure connecting New York and New Jersey. Judge Jeannette Vargas issued a preliminary injunction ordering the unfreezing of the funds after officials from both states warned that construction would cease due to lack of financing. The administration filed a notice of appeal two days later.The funding had been halted in September pending a review of the project's adherence to new federal restrictions on race- and sex-based criteria in contracting. According to a source, Trump recently proposed unfreezing the money if Democrats agreed to rename Washington Dulles Airport and New York's Penn Station after him—an offer that was widely condemned.The Hudson Tunnel, which was damaged during Hurricane Sandy in 2012, remains a critical piece of rail infrastructure, handling over 200,000 passengers and 425 trains each day. The Gateway Development Commission, which oversees the project, expressed readiness to resume work once funding is reinstated. Approximately $2 billion of the $15 billion federal allocation—approved under the Biden administration—has already been spent.Trump administration appeals ruling on releasing New York City tunnel funds | ReutersA divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the Trump administration's policy of mandating detention without bond for individuals arrested during immigration enforcement operations. The 2-1 decision is the first appellate ruling to affirm the policy, despite widespread opposition from hundreds of lower-court judges across the country who have deemed it unlawful. The ruling applies to Texas and Louisiana, states that hold the largest populations of immigration detainees.The policy relies on an expanded interpretation of the term “applicants for admission” under federal immigration law. Traditionally applied to individuals arriving at the border, the Department of Homeland Security argued in 2025 that it also applies to undocumented individuals already residing in the U.S. This interpretation was adopted by the Board of Immigration Appeals and made mandatory by immigration judges nationwide.The case before the court involved two Mexican nationals, Victor Buenrostro-Mendez and Jose Padron Covarrubias, who had previously persuaded lower courts they were wrongly denied bond hearings. The appeals court reversed those rulings, with Judge Edith Jones writing that the statute's plain text supported the administration's view. Judge Dana Douglas dissented, arguing that the interpretation stretched beyond what Congress intended in the 1996 immigration law.Other circuit courts are expected to weigh in on similar challenges, and the issue may ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court.US appeals court upholds Trump's immigration detention policy | ReutersA federal appeals court has denied the Trump administration's request to delay proceedings in its appeal to reinstate executive orders targeting four major U.S. law firms. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the cases—challenging orders against Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, and Susman Godfrey—will move forward and be combined with a related appeal involving attorney Mark Zaid's revoked government security clearance.The Justice Department had sought to postpone the law firm appeals until after the Zaid case was decided, a move that could have delayed resolution for months. But the court rejected that approach, siding with the law firms, which argued they deserved a timely judgment on whether the government unlawfully targeted them.Trump's executive orders accused the firms of using the legal system against him and criticized their diversity policies, directing the government to strip them of security access and limit their interactions with federal agencies. Four federal judges previously struck down the orders as unconstitutional, finding they violated free speech and due process rights. The administration is now appealing both those rulings and the one involving Zaid.Trump administration loses bid to delay appeals over law firm executive orders | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Treaty of Guadalupe HidalgoOn February 2, 1848, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed, officially ending the Mexican-American War and significantly altering the legal and territorial landscape of the United States. The treaty ceded vast swaths of land to the U.S., including present-day California, Arizona, New Mexico, and parts of several other western states—about half of Mexico's territory at the time. In exchange, the U.S. paid Mexico $15 million and assumed $3.25 million in claims by American citizens against Mexico. Legally, the treaty promised to protect the property rights and civil liberties of Mexican nationals living in the newly acquired territories, but these promises were inconsistently honored in practice.The treaty's ratification triggered significant legal and constitutional debates about the extension of slavery into new territories, setting the stage for the intensifying sectional conflicts that led to the Civil War. It also marked the beginning of long-standing disputes over land grants and water rights that would shape western property law. Moreover, the treaty's vague wording left many issues—such as tribal sovereignty and citizenship—unresolved, leading to future litigation and policy struggles.The treaty was signed in the town of Guadalupe Hidalgo, near Mexico City, and ratified by the U.S. Senate in March 1848. It remains a foundational document in U.S. legal history, frequently cited in discussions of land rights, citizenship, and the limits of treaty enforcement.Our first story today is a bit off topic.In today's digital world, every click, swipe, and login happens under a legal regime you didn't negotiate—Terms of Service, Privacy Policies, and community guidelines that quietly shape your rights and obligations online. These documents form a system of private lawmaking, where companies act as legislators, drafting rules users must follow, often with little recourse or transparency. You don't sign them, but courts often treat them as binding contracts. Clauses about arbitration, content ownership, surveillance, and data sharing carry real legal weight. Yet these terms can change overnight, unilaterally, and without notice.TOSTracker was created to bring transparency to this ecosystem. It's a non-commercial research tool that tracks and archives the evolution of digital contracts over time. With over 150 companies and nearly 250 historical versions of key documents thus far, TOSTracker offers timestamped, hash-verified, and citable records of how these texts change. It provides full version histories, detects redlines at the word and section level, and supports programmatic access through an API. Whether you're studying arbitration creep, GDPR compliance, or how moderation rules evolve, TOSTracker gives you the empirical backbone to do it.All content is normalized and archived via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, with cryptographic hashes ensuring document integrity. Importantly, it doesn't interpret the law—it captures the text and structure so you can. For legal researchers, privacy advocates, and anyone concerned with digital governance, this is a window into how private law is made, revised, and enforced online. It's not a product; it's a dataset, an archive, and a call to look more closely at the legal architecture of everyday tech.We're also actively seeking contributors to help expand the archive. If you come across a consumer-facing legal document—like a Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, community guidelines, or EULA—that isn't already tracked, you can submit it directly through the site. This includes documents behind logins, from smaller platforms, or covering underrepresented industries and regions. Submissions help close coverage gaps, diversify the dataset, and improve the foundation for legal research into how digital rights are defined and redefined over time. Your input directly supports transparency in an area where the law is often invisible.Check it out at tostracker.app if your research overlaps with digital contracts, user rights, or the evolving boundary between public law and platform governance.The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has sent warning letters to 42 major law firms over concerns that their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) hiring practices may be anticompetitive. The FTC emphasized that firm-wide agreements to meet diversity benchmarks—particularly those tied to programs like Diversity Lab's certification—could unlawfully restrict competition in the legal labor market by influencing hiring, compensation, or promotions. These letters arrive amid a broader rollback of DEI initiatives under President Donald Trump's administration, which has eliminated related programs in government and targeted private sector efforts.Firms such as Paul Weiss, WilmerHale, Perkins Coie, Skadden Arps, and Latham & Watkins—some of which had previously been challenged by Trump-era executive orders—are among those named. Some reached compromises with the White House, offering pro bono legal work in exchange for eased scrutiny, while others fought and won legal challenges against the orders. The FTC's scrutiny centers on participation in Diversity Lab's voluntary DEI certification, which encourages firms to ensure at least 30% of leadership candidates are from underrepresented groups. Though previously upheld in court as non-discriminatory, the FTC now frames such collective DEI practices as potentially violating competition law.US Federal Trade Commission warns law firms about DEI hiring | ReutersImmigrant rights groups filed a federal lawsuit in Boston challenging a new U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policy that allows agents to enter homes without judicial warrants. The suit, brought by the Greater Boston Latino Network and the Brazilian Worker Center, targets a May 2025 memo—recently revealed via a whistleblower complaint—that permits ICE officers to use administrative warrants instead of warrants signed by a federal judge. These administrative forms, issued internally by the Department of Homeland Security, were previously insufficient for home entries under longstanding practice.The plaintiffs argue that using such warrants for home arrests violates the Fourth Amendment, which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. Legal advocates claim the policy removes a crucial constitutional safeguard just as ICE ramps up enforcement tactics in states like Minnesota, where multiple recent actions have already been deemed unlawful by judges. The lawsuit comes after fatal incidents in Minneapolis during anti-ICE protests, intensifying scrutiny of federal immigration operations.ICE officials defend the policy, asserting that individuals subject to removal have already received due process. However, the lawsuit challenges that rationale, pointing out that due process does not override constitutional protections against warrantless home intrusions.Lawsuit challenges ICE ability to enter homes without warrants from US judges | ReutersFormer CNN anchor Don Lemon is facing federal charges over his role in covering a protest at a Minnesota church opposing President Trump's immigration crackdown. The protest, which disrupted a church service in St. Paul on January 18, was livestreamed by Lemon and targeted the church because one pastor was allegedly also an ICE official. Lemon was arrested by the FBI, spent a night in custody, and appeared in court where he confirmed he plans to plead not guilty. He and six others, including independent journalist Georgia Fort, were indicted under laws prohibiting obstruction of access to houses of worship—a legal framework typically used against abortion clinic protests.Free press advocates and constitutional lawyers are raising concerns about the charges, framing them as part of a broader pattern of the Trump administration targeting critics, including journalists. Lemon's attorneys argue this is a political prosecution meant to suppress press freedom and distract from ongoing crises. In the archived livestream, Lemon is seen documenting the protest rather than leading it, further fueling First Amendment concerns. The DOJ's case hinges on a controversial interpretation of laws rarely, if ever, used to prosecute journalists for protest coverage after the fact. Legal experts say there is no clear precedent for the charges, and press freedom groups are warning of escalating threats to constitutional protections.Ex-CNN journalist Don Lemon faces Minnesota protest charges | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode, Michael and Colin are joined by their Perkins Coie partner, Janice Ta, as they speak with Ben Burrus and Kevin Turpin of Weavix. Weavix is a company that combines real-time communication with AI-powered analysis of worker-interaction data to transform everyday conversations into actionable insights.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe world is continually paying the [CB]s more and more of their hard earned labor. In Germany the people are taxed 42%, almost half of their income. Fed inflation indicator reports no inflation, Truinflation reports inflation is at 1.2%.BoA and Citibank are in talks to offer 10% credit card. Trump says US will the crypto capital of the world. Globalism/[CB] system has failed, the power will return to the people. The patriots are sending a message, DOJ 2.0 is not like DOJ 1.0, same with the FBI, you commit a crime you will be arrested. The message is clear, the protection from these agencies are gone. Bondi arrest the Church rioters. Trump’s message at DAVOS is clear, the [DS] power and agenda is no more. Trump is now in control and the world will begin to move in a different direction, either you are on board or you will be left behind. The power belongs to the people.   Economy https://twitter.com/WallStreetMav/status/2014289396112011443?s=20 (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Fed’s Favorite Inflation Indicator Refuses To Show Any Signs Of Runaway ‘Trump Tariff’ Costs The Fed’s favorite inflation indicator – Core PCE – rose 0.2% MoM (as expected), which leave it up 2.8% YoY (as expected), slightly lower than September’s +2.9%…   Bear in mind that this morning’s third look at Q3 GDP printed a +2.9% YoY for Core PCE. Under the hood, the biggest driver of Core PCE remains Services costs – not tariff-driven Goods prices…   In fact, on a MoM basis, Non-durable goods prices saw deflation for the second month in a row…   Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/truflation/status/2014322072286302619?s=20 – Food – mostly Eggs – Household durables – particularly housekeeping supplies – Alcohol & tobacco – mostly alcoholic beverages Our number is derived by aggregating millions of real-time price data points every day to calculate a year-over-year CPI % rate. It is comparable but not identical to the survey-based official headline inflation released monthly by the BLS, which was 2.7% for December. Bank Of America, Citigroup May Launch Credit Cards With 10% Rate Two weeks after Trump shocked the world by demanding lenders cap credit card interest rates at 10% for one year, Bank of America and Citigroup are exploring options to do just that in an attempt to placate the president.  Bloomberg reports that both banks are mulling offering cards with a 10% rate cap as one potential solution.  Earlier this week, Trump said he would ask Congress to implement the proposal, giving the financial firms more clarity about what exact path he's pursuing. Bank executives have repeatedly decried the uniform cap, saying it'll cause lenders to have to pull credit lines for consumers.  Source: zerohedge.com Trump sues JPMorgan Chase and CEO Jamie Dimon for $5B over alleged ‘political’ debanking The lawsuit claims JPMorgan’s decision ‘came about as a result of political and social motivations’ to ‘distance itself’ Trump and his ‘conservative political views’  President Donald Trump is suing JPMorgan Chase and its CEO Jamie Dimon in a $5 billion lawsuit filed Thursday, accusing the financial institution of debanking him for political reasons. The president's attorney, Alejandro Brito, filed the lawsuit Thursday morning in Florida state court in Miami on behalf of the president and several of his hospitality companies.  “ Source: foxnews.com https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2013984082640658888?s=20  WEF Finance/Banking Panel – If Independent National Economies Continue Rising, Global Trade Drops and We Lose Control Globalism in its economic construct is a series of dependencies. If those dependencies are severed, if each country has the ability to feed, produce and innovate independently, then the entire dependency model around globalism collapses. Within the globalism model that was historically created there was a group of people, western nations, banks, finance and various government leaders, who controlled the organization and rules of the trade dependencies.  The action being taken for self-sufficiency, in combination with the approach promoted by President Trump that each nation state should generate their own needs, then the rules-based order that has existed for global trade will collapse. If nations are no longer dependent, they become sovereign – able to exist without the need for support from other nations and systems. If nations are indeed sovereign, then globalism is no longer needed and a threat of the unknown rises. How will nations engage with each other if there is no governing body of western elites to make the rules for engagement?  The need for control is a reaction to fear, and it is the fear of self-reliance that permeates the elitist class within the control structures.   If each nation of the world is operating according to its individual best interests, the position of Donald Trump, then what happens to the governing elite who set up the system of interdependencies. This is the core of their fear. If each nation can suddenly grow tea, what happens to the East India Tea Company.  Who then sets the price for the tea, and worse still an entire distribution system (ships, ports, exchanges, banks, etc.) becomes functionally obsolescent. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com  Political/Rights TWO-TIERED JUSTICE: Conservative Journalist Kaitlin Bennett Charged and Fined for Interviewing Democrats in Public — While Don Lemon Storms Churches With Zero Consequences The United States now operates under a blatantly two-tiered justice system, where conservative journalists are criminally charged for speech in public spaces, while left-wing media figures face zero consequences for harassing Americans and disrupting religious services. Conservative journalist Kaitlin Bennett revealed this week that she was charged with a federal crime and fined by the National Park Service in St. Augustine for the so-called offense of asking Democrats questions on public property. According to Bennett, federal agents targeted her while she was conducting on-the-street interviews, a form of journalism protected by the First Amendment. Despite being on public land, Bennett says she was cited and punished simply for engaging in political speech that the Left finds inconvenient. Bennett addressed the incident directly in a post on X, writing: https://twitter.com/KaitMarieox/status/2014174254799958148?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2014174254799958148%7Ctwgr%5Ef4a6650cd0c60d38edfea018c5665c2cc2fe5199%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Ftwo-tier-justice-conservative-journalist-kaitlin-bennett-charged%2F When asked by another local journalist exactly what “lawful order” Bennett had disobeyed, the ranger reportedly could not provide a straight answer. WATCH: Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2014322865848406370?s=20   Alexander Conejo Arias, fled on foot—abandoning his child. For the child's safety, one of our ICE officers remained with the child while the other officers apprehended Conejo Arias.   Parents are asked if they want to be removed with their children, or ICE will place the children with a safe person the parent designates. This is consistent with past administration's immigration enforcement. Parents can take control of their departure and receive a free flight and $2,600 with the CBP Home app. By using the CBP Home app illegal aliens reserve the chance to come back the right legal way. https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2014049440911303019?s=20   inflicting corporal injury on a spouse or cohabitant. An immigration judge issued him a final order of removal in 2019. In a dangerous attempt to evade arrest, this criminal illegal alien weaponized his vehicle and rammed law enforcement. Fearing for his life and safety, an agent fired defensive shots. The criminal illegal alien was not hit and attempted to flee on foot. He was successfully apprehended by law enforcement. The illegal alien was not injured, but a CBP officer was injured.  These dangerous attempts to evade arrest have surged since sanctuary politicians, including Governor Newsom, have encouraged illegal aliens to evade arrest and provided guides advising illegal aliens how to recognize ICE, block entry, and defy arrest. Our officers are now facing a 3,200% increase in vehicle attacks. This situation is evolving, and more information is forthcoming.   https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2014063905413177637?s=20  CNN Panelist Issues Retraction and Apology After Going Too Far in On-Air Trump Attack    footage of CNN's “Newsnight with Abby Phillip” was posted to social media platform X featuring 25-year-old leftist activist Cameron Kasky alongside panel mainstay Scott Jennings. A moment between the two went viral when Kasky casually declared that President Donald Trump had been involved in an international sex trafficking ring. Jennings wasn't going to let that remark go unchallenged by host John Berman. The topic of conversation had been Trump's interest in Greenland and the Nobel Peace Prize, but Kasky threw in a jab at Trump with an allusion to the president's relationship with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — an allusion Kasky's now trying to walk back. “I would love it if he was more transparent about the human sex trafficking network that he was a part of, but you can't win 'em all,” he blurted out. https://twitter.com/overton_news/status/2013455047288377517?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2013455047288377517%7Ctwgr%5E20edbbd712c7076d1aafdac2d1e39d7eb8307263%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Fcnn-panelist-issues-retraction-apology-going-far-air%2F   Berman asked Jennings a follow-up question about Greenland, but instead of addressing that, Jennings circled back to Kasky's remark. “You're gonna let that sit?” Jennings asked Berman. “Are we going to claim here on CNN that the president is part of a global sex trafficking ring or …?” After assuring Jennings that he would do the fact-checking, Berman asked Kasky to repeat what he'd said about the global sex-trafficking ring. “That Donald Trump was … probably … very involved with it,” the arrogant young man replied, with perhaps a touch less confidence. To Berman's credit, and the CNN legal team's, he immediately said, “Donald Trump has never been charged with any crimes in relation to Jeffrey Epstein.” https://twitter.com/camkasky/status/2013760245298864477?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2013760245298864477%7Ctwgr%5E20edbbd712c7076d1aafdac2d1e39d7eb8307263%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Fcnn-panelist-issues-retraction-apology-going-far-air%2F Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/2014189561002291385?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/brentdsadler/status/2014311942119137584?s=20  important as these agreements cover the entirety of the Chagos group of islands/features. Critical as future third party presence in those areas proximate Diego Garcia could in practical terms render those U.S. military facilities operationally impractical (ie useless). The current deal under consideration in the UK parliament in a rushed vote as soon as 2 February is ill advised. And it likely would break the decades long understanding with the U.S. government. See: Active U.S. treaties: https://state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Treaties-in-Force-2025-FINAL.pdf 1966 Foundational Understanding: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20603/volume-603-I-8737-English.pdf 1972 Understanding regarding new facilities on Diego Garcia: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20866/volume-866-I-8737-English.pdf 1976 Understanding and concurrence on new communications facilities on Diego Garcia and references as foundational the 1966 Understanding: https://treaties.fcdo.gov.uk/data/Library2/pdf/1976-TS0019.pdf?utm_source https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/2014150131247874267?s=20 The EU-Mercosur deal is a major free trade agreement between the European Union and the Mercosur bloc (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay). Negotiated for over 25 years, it aims to create one of the world’s largest free trade zones, covering more than 700 million people and reducing tariffs on goods like cars, machinery, pharmaceuticals, and agricultural products.  It includes commitments on sustainability, labor rights, and environmental protections, but critics argue these are insufficient to address issues like Amazon deforestation and unfair competition for European farmers. The agreement was politically finalized in 2019 but faced delays due to environmental concerns and opposition from countries like France and Austria. It was formally signed on January 17, 2026, after EU member states (with a qualified majority, despite opposition from five countries including France) greenlit it on January 9.  The Stupidity of Davos Explained Using an Example of Their Own Creation China is manufacturing a product to create a carbon credit certificate in response to the demand for carbon credits from all the world auto-makers.  Any nation that has a penalty or fine attached to their climate goals is a customer. Those are nations with fines or quotas associated with the production of gasoline powered engines if the auto company doesn't hit the legislated target for sales of electric vehicles. In essence, EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car companies buy Chinese car company carbon credits, to avoid the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN fines.  The Chinese then use the carbon credit revenue to subsidize even lower priced Chinese EVs to the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car markets, thereby undercutting the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car companies that also produce EVs. China brilliantly exploits the ridiculous pontificating climate scam and has an interest in perpetuating -even emphasizing- the need for the EU/AU/RU/ASEAN countries to keep pushing their climate agenda.  China even goes so far as to fund alarmism research about climate change because they are making money selling carbon credit certificates on the back end of the scam to the western fear mongers.  This is friggin' brilliant.   The climate change alarmists are helping China's economy by pushing ever escalating fear of climate change.  You just cannot make this stuff up. What does the outcome look like? Well, in this example we see hundreds of thousands of unsold BYDs piling up in countries that emphasize climate regulations with no restrictions on the import of EVs (which most don't even manufacture), which is almost every country.  Big Panda doesn't care about the car itself; they care about generating the carbon credit certificate to sell in the various carbon exchanges. Put this context to the recent announcement by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney about his new trade deal with China to accept 49,000 EVs this year. Prime Minister Carney bragged about getting the Chinese to agree to only super low prices for the Canadian market.  Mark Carney was very proud of his accomplishment to get much lower priced vehicles for Canadian EV purchasers.   No doubt Big Panda left the room laughing as soon as Carney made his grand announcement. 1. China sells EV's in Canada, creating credits available on the carbon exchange scheme. Europe et al will purchase the carbon credits because Bussels has fines against EU car companies. 2. With a foothold already established in Europe, China will then take the money generated by the carbon credit purchases and lower the prices of the Chinese EV cars sold in Canada. It's gets funnier. 3. Carney bragged about forcing China to only sell low price EV's as part of the trade agreement. The low price of the EV's in Canada will be subsidized by Europe. China doesn't pay or lose a dime. But wait…. 4. Carney can't do anything about the scheme he has just enmeshed Canada into, because Canada has a Carbon Credit exchange in law.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen tracking court battles like they're the Super Bowl, but here we are in mid-January 2026, and President Donald Trump's legal showdowns are dominating the dockets from Hawaii to the Supreme Court steps in Washington, D.C. Just this past week, as the Supreme Court wrapped up arguments in cases like Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish in Louisiana and Little v. Hecox, all eyes shifted to Trump's escalating clashes with federal agencies and old foes. On Friday, January 16, SCOTUSblog reported the justices huddled in private conference, voting on petitions that could add more Trump-related fireworks to their calendar.Take Trump v. Cook, heating up big time. President Trump tried firing Lisa Cook, a Democratic holdover on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, back in August 2025, calling her policies a mismatch for his America First agenda. U.S. District Judge Cobb in Washington blocked it, and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld her ruling 2-1. Now, the Trump administration, led by Solicitor General D. John Sauer, is begging the Supreme Court to intervene. Oral arguments hit Wednesday, January 21, at 10 a.m. in the Supreme Court building, with Paul Clement—former Solicitor General under George W. Bush—defending Cook. Sauer blasted the lower courts as meddling in presidential removal power, echoing fights in Trump v. Slaughter, where the Court already chewed over firing FTC Chair Lina Khan's allies like Alvaro Bedoya last December. Dykema's Last Month at the Supreme Court newsletter calls it a direct shot at the 1935 Humphrey's Executor precedent, questioning if Congress can shield multi-member agency heads from the president's axe.It's not just agency drama. E. Jean Carroll, the former Elle writer who won $5 million defaming her after a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990s, just urged the Supreme Court to swat down his latest petition. ABC News covered her filing this week, where she argues U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in New York got evidence rules spot-on—no reversal needed.And that's barely scratching the surface. The Court's January calendar, straight from supremecourt.gov, lists Trump v. Cook smack in the middle, following Wolford v. Lopez on Tuesday, January 20—a Second Amendment tussle over Hawaii's law banning guns on private property open to the public without the owner's okay. Axios predicts 2026 bombshells like Trump v. Barbara on his executive order gutting birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment, potentially stripping citizenship from kids of undocumented immigrants born on U.S. soil. Then there's Learning Resources v. Trump, challenging his national emergency tariffs on foreign goods—Axios says a loss could force $100 billion in refunds and crimp his trade wars.Over in lower courts, Just Security's litigation tracker logs fresh salvos: challenges to Executive Order 14164 jamming January 6 convicts into ADX Florence supermax in Colorado, and suits against orders targeting law firms like Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale for alleged anti-Trump bias. Lawfare's tracker flags national security spins on these executive actions. Even California Republicans appealed a Los Angeles panel's smackdown of their gerrymander claims against Governor Gavin Newsom's maps to the Supreme Court this week, per SCOTUStoday.These cases aren't just legal jargon—they're power plays reshaping the presidency, from Fed independence to gun rights and citizenship. As Trump posts fire on Truth Social about "evil, American-hating forces," the justices gear up for a term that could torch decades of precedent.Thanks for tuning in, listeners—come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen watching courtrooms turn into battlegrounds for America's future, but here we are in early January 2026, and President Donald Trump's legal wars are heating up like never before. Just days ago, on Tuesday, January 6, SCOTUSblog reminded us of that historic New York Times Company v. Sullivan case from 1964, where the Supreme Court protected the press from libel suits—timely now as tensions simmer between Trump and media outlets. But that's history; the real fireworks are exploding right now.Picture this: the Supreme Court is gearing up for its January 12 argument session in Washington, D.C., with seven massive cases, several straight from Trump's playbook. Axios reports that top of the list is Trump v. Barbara, where the justices could rule any moment on his executive order slashing birthright citizenship. Trump wants to deny U.S. citizenship to kids of undocumented immigrants born here, challenging over a century of 14th Amendment precedent. Businesses like Costco, Revlon, Bumble Bee Foods, and Ray-Ban makers are suing over another bombshell—Trump's tariffs. In Learning v. Trump, they're fighting his national emergency declaration that slapped billions in duties on imports without Congress's okay. Trump boasted on Truth Social it's the "most case ever," but a loss could mean refunding over $100 billion. Then there's Trump v. Slaughter, pitting Trump against Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook and FTC's Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Slaughter, whom he fired for clashing with his policies. The court will decide if he can boot independent agency heads, smashing 90-year-old protections.Just Security's litigation tracker paints an even wilder picture of chaos in lower courts. In D.C.'s federal district court, Taylor v. Trump challenges Executive Order 14164, where Attorney General Pam Bondi shuffled death row inmates to ADX Florence supermax under Trump's public safety push—plaintiffs scream due process violations. The National Association of the Deaf sued Trump, Chief of Staff Susan Wiles, and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt for axing ASL interpreters at White House briefings, claiming First and Fifth Amendment breaches. Law firms aren't safe either: Susman Godfrey out of Texas hit back at an executive order yanking their security clearances for opposing Trump; Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale face similar retaliation suits in D.D.C., alleging viewpoint discrimination. The American Bar Association sued over yanked grants from the Office on Violence Against Women, calling it payback for their stances. Even Rep. Eric Swalwell's in the mix with Swalwell v. Pute, targeting Trump's criminal arrest pushes.Politico says grand juries are Trump's new nightmare—refusing indictments left and right on his aggressive policies, from protester crackdowns to immigrant roundups. U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan blasted prosecutors for "rushed" cases with weak evidence. And in a wild international twist, CBS News covered ousted Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and wife Cilia Flores arraigned Monday in Manhattan's federal courthouse before Judge Alvin Hellerstein. Whisked by helicopter from Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center under heavy security, Maduro pled not guilty to narco-terrorism, cocaine smuggling, and weapons charges—facing life in prison—while insisting he's still Venezuela's president.The Supreme Court's emergency docket, like in 25A312, keeps deferring stays till January arguments, per their own filings. Lawfare's tracker logs non-stop national security suits against Trump's moves. It's a legal whirlwind, listeners, with the high court poised to reshape everything from guns in Wolford v. Lopez against Hawaii's private property ban, to conversion therapy fights in Miles v. Salazar.Thanks for tuning in, listeners—come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

We sit down with the General Manager for Olympic Athletic Club to learn all about how the gym industry has changed over the years and what makes this one so unique. We talk about the demand for amenities, their recent renovation, the importance of good talent, and much more. All of this along with your weekly business news roundup!Top Stories:1. The business of gymsPSBJ article2. Rad Power Bikes might shut downGeekWire article3. BECU merger & Perkins Coie mergerPSBJ article (BECU) & PSBJ article (Perkins Coie)4. Starbucks strike updateSeattle Times articleAbout guest Jean-Luc Pedanou - General Manager, Olympic Athletic Club:Jean-Luc has been the General Manager for about a year and a half. Prior to this he was the General Manager at an Equinox in Northern California and held leadership roles at The Bay Club in San Francisco. He has also worked in leadership at many fitness clubs in New York.About host Rachel Horgan:Rachel is an independent event producer, emcee and entrepreneur. She worked for the Business Journal for 5 years as their Director of Events interviewing business leaders on stage before launching the weekly podcast. She earned her communication degree from the University of San Diego. Contact:Email: info@theweeklyseattle.comInstagram: @theweeklyseattleWebsite: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theweeklyseattle.com

This Day in Legal History: Statute of MarlboroughOn November 18, 1267, the Statute of Marlborough was enacted during the reign of King Henry III of England. It is the oldest piece of English statute law still partially in force, with four of its original twenty-nine chapters remaining on the books. The statute emerged from a period of intense baronial conflict and civil unrest, notably the Second Barons' War, and was part of a broader effort to restore royal authority and stabilize governance through legal reform. It reinforced the crown's prerogatives while addressing grievances raised by rebellious nobles, making it a compromise between royal and feudal powers.Among its most enduring provisions were regulations on the practice of “distress,” which referred to the seizure of property to compel debt repayment or enforce court judgments. The statute restricted unlawful and excessive distresses, requiring them to occur only with legal justification and in the appropriate jurisdiction. These reforms curtailed private self-help remedies and emphasized formal court processes, laying foundational principles for due process and the centralization of judicial authority. It also addressed issues like wardship, waste of land, and the obligations of tenants—key concerns in the feudal legal structure.The Statute of Marlborough built upon earlier reforms such as the Provisions of Oxford and Westminster, but had a more lasting legal impact. Its survival into modern times speaks to the durability of certain legal concepts, especially those reinforcing procedural fairness. Some of its language has been modernized, but the essence of its rules remains intact in English law. The statute reflects an early attempt to systematize and limit both public and private power through legal mechanisms. Legal historians often point to it as a stepping stone on the path to the English common law tradition.The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case challenging the federal government's authority to limit asylum processing at official U.S.-Mexico border crossings under the now-rescinded “metering” policy. Originally implemented under President Trump and formalized in 2018, metering allowed border agents to stop asylum seekers before they crossed into the U.S. and decline to process their claims, even when they were physically present at ports of entry. The Biden administration repealed the policy in 2021, but Trump's return to office has revived interest in reestablishing it.At the core of the case is the legal meaning of the phrase “arrives in the United States,” with the Ninth Circuit ruling in 2024 that it includes people who reach official border entry points—even if still on the Mexican side. That ruling held that federal law requires asylum seekers at ports of entry to be inspected and allowed to apply, regardless of logistical constraints like capacity. The advocacy group Al Otro Lado, which brought the lawsuit in 2017, argues the metering policy illegally circumvented these obligations, leaving vulnerable migrants stranded in dangerous border conditions.Trump's Justice Department contends that “arrives in” means actual entry, not mere proximity—using analogies ranging from Normandy to football to make its point. The administration has also signaled that it intends to resume the policy if conditions warrant. The case, which will likely be decided by June, comes amid broader efforts to restrict asylum protections globally and may clarify the limits of executive power over humanitarian migration policy.Supreme Court to review US government power to limit asylum processing | ReutersA California judge has blocked a proposed class action lawsuit involving 6,000 Black workers at Tesla's Fremont factory who alleged systemic racial harassment, marking a significant legal win for the company. Judge Peter Borkon ruled that the case could not proceed as a class action because the plaintiffs' attorneys failed to secure testimony from at least 200 workers—raising doubts about whether the experiences of a smaller group could represent the broader workforce. This reverses a 2024 decision by another judge who had previously allowed the class to move forward.The original lawsuit, filed in 2017 by former worker Marcus Vaughn, alleged pervasive racism at the facility, including slurs, racist graffiti, and even nooses in work areas. Tesla has denied allowing harassment and said it takes disciplinary action against those who violate company policy. While this ruling narrows the scope of Vaughn's lawsuit, Tesla still faces other legal challenges, including a similar case from California's civil rights agency and a separate federal suit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Tesla has previously settled other race discrimination lawsuits brought by individual employees.Tesla wins bid to undo race bias class action by Black factory workers | ReutersAshurst and Perkins Coie have agreed to merge, forming a global law firm with 3,000 lawyers and $2.7 billion in revenue—placing it among the world's top 20 legal outfits by size. The merger, expected to close in late 2026 pending partner approval, will create Ashurst Perkins Coie, with 52 offices across 23 countries. The move is part of a broader trend of transatlantic law firm consolidation aimed at scaling up to serve cross-border clients more effectively.Leadership will be shared between Ashurst's global CEO Paul Jenkins and Perkins Coie's managing partner Bill Malley, who emphasized the merger's value for clients in technology, financial services, and energy. Talks began in early 2025, with both firms framing the deal as a long-term strategic alignment. Perkins Coie recently gained attention for its role in successfully challenging executive orders from President Trump's administration targeting the firm and others tied to his political adversaries. While the firms say they have no current plans to expand their office footprint, the combination signals a deepening of U.K.-U.S. legal market integration.Law firms Ashurst, Perkins Coie agree merger to create global top-20 outfit | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg this week looks at OpenAI's effort to expand the CHIPS Act tax credit into a broad-based AI infrastructure subsidy—and what it reveals about the government's evolving role in underwriting the AI economy. OpenAI has asked the federal government to stretch the Advanced Manufacturing Investment Credit—originally designed to revive U.S. semiconductor manufacturing—to cover the entire AI stack, from servers to steel. That request arrives as data centers' energy consumption and land use start imposing real costs on local grids, budgets, and communities, raising the question: who's actually footing the bill for AI?I argue that this isn't a bailout so much as a bid for taxpayer-backed central planning, with a venture-capital gloss. AI infrastructure projects like OpenAI's Stargate centers already benefit from layers of state and local tax breaks, discounted electricity, and favorable land deals. Adding a 35% federal credit on top creates a subsidy stack that warps local priorities—school districts lose tax revenue, utilities are forced to reroute energy, and residents pay more on their bills. The public impact is mounting, even as the private benefit remains largely proprietary and insulated.Rather than offering blank checks, Congress should condition federal support on clear benefit-sharing requirements: job thresholds, emissions transparency, energy sourcing obligations, and clawbacks for missed targets. I propose a framework that makes federal aid contingent on upfront impact disclosures, co-investment in the grid, and full accounting of overlapping subsidies. Industrial policy isn't inherently bad—but without enforceable terms, we're not funding a public-private partnership. We're subsidizing a corporate buildout dressed up as a national security imperative. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

JB White comes in hot on this Monday edition of the RattlerGator Report, fired up about the state of the military, the Democrats' celebratory response to Charlie Kirk's assassination, and the bombshell indictment of James Comey. He walks listeners through Trump's Florida RICO case, the judge's dismissal, and why an appeal could bring it roaring back, potentially with superseding indictments that reach all the way to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. With his signature mix of humor, grit, and righteous anger, JB breaks down how agency and vicarious liability could ensnare the DNC, Clinton campaign, Perkins Coie, and others in a massive conspiracy. Along the way, he calls out the rot in the military's upper ranks, reflects on his own political journey, and underscores why Democrats' lies are finally crumbling. This episode is both a rallying cry and a deep dive into the mechanics of accountability, served up with JB's no-nonsense style.

Law firm fires lawyer over Kirk comments and law school announces new scholarships. ----- Perkins Coie cut ties with an attorney over Charlie Kirk comments on social media. The remarks were measured and reasonable, but the firm is still fighting the Trump administration in court and -- seemingly -- does not want any distractions or mere appearance of bias. But is that a worthy excuse? A Pillsbury partner received a benchslapping over what the judge considered unchecked entitlement. A Biglaw partner? Entitled? No! Also, a law school responds to the new federal loan caps with guaranteed scholarships to cover the gap. Is this the start of a trend?

Law firm fires lawyer over Kirk comments and law school announces new scholarships. ----- Perkins Coie cut ties with an attorney over Charlie Kirk comments on social media. The remarks were measured and reasonable, but the firm is still fighting the Trump administration in court and -- seemingly -- does not want any distractions or mere appearance of bias. But is that a worthy excuse? A Pillsbury partner received a benchslapping over what the judge considered unchecked entitlement. A Biglaw partner? Entitled? No! Also, a law school responds to the new federal loan caps with guaranteed scholarships to cover the gap. Is this the start of a trend? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This Day in Legal History: Nuremberg Laws EnactedOn this day in legal history, September 15, 1935, Nazi Germany enacted the Nuremberg Laws, codifying one of the most infamous legal frameworks of racial discrimination and hate in modern history. Announced at the annual Nazi Party rally in Nuremberg, these laws included the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor, the Reich Citizenship Law, and later, the Law for the Protection of the Hereditary Health of the German People. Together, they stripped Jews of German citizenship, prohibited marriage and sexual relations between Jews and “Aryans,” and laid the groundwork for systematic persecution.The Reich Citizenship Law divided citizens into two classes: full citizens, who were of "German or related blood," and subjects, who were denied full political rights. Jews were relegated to the latter category. The Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor banned intermarriage and extramarital relations between Jews and Germans, criminalizing personal relationships based on ancestry. Violators could be imprisoned or sent to concentration camps.To enforce these laws, the Nazi regime devised elaborate charts and pseudoscientific metrics to assess Jewish ancestry, culminating in a 1936 chart issued by the Reich Health Office. This visual aid defined citizens by the number of Jewish grandparents they had, assigning labels like Mischling (mixed race) to those with partial Jewish heritage. Even one Jewish grandparent could strip a person of civil rights.The Law for the Protection of the Hereditary Health of the German People added a eugenic dimension, requiring couples to undergo genetic testing before marriage and barring those deemed "genetically unfit" from reproducing. These legal measures normalized state-sponsored racism and laid a legal foundation for the Holocaust.Big Law firm Perkins Coie terminated an attorney over a social media post that appeared to criticize conservative figure Charlie Kirk following his shooting death. The firm stated the post did not align with its values and that the lawyer's conduct fell significantly below professional expectations. The firing was made effective immediately. Kirk, 31, served as executive director of Turning Point USA and was a prominent supporter of Donald Trump. He was fatally shot while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University. Perkins Coie has a history of political entanglements, notably becoming one of the first law firms to sue Trump after his executive orders targeted firms representing political adversaries. These orders reportedly restricted access to federal facilities, revoked security clearances, and jeopardized client contracts. The firm was a particular focus for Trump due to its work during Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign, including hiring Fusion GPS to conduct research that led to the Steele dossier, which alleged ties between Trump's campaign and the Russian government.Perkins Coie Fires Attorney Over Social Media Post on Kirk ShootingU.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly extended a temporary block on the deportation of unaccompanied Guatemalan children with active immigration cases. The move halts a Trump-era effort that attempted to deport 76 minors without proper notice or legal process, including waking children in the early hours of August 31 to board planes. The judge's ruling followed a contentious September 10 hearing, where he criticized a Justice Department attorney for falsely claiming that all the children's parents had requested their return. A report from the Guatemalan Attorney General's Office later revealed that most parents couldn't be located, and many of those found did not want their children repatriated.The children in question mostly come from Guatemala's Indigenous, rural regions—Huehuetenango, San Marcos, Quiché, and Alta Verapaz—areas known for high poverty and malnutrition. Guatemalan officials emphasized that such a large-scale repatriation request was unprecedented. Some families reportedly mortgaged their homes to finance the children's migration, indicating the high stakes involved.US judge extends block on deportations of unaccompanied Guatemalan migrant children | ReutersU.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled that the Trump administration unlawfully directed the mass firing of around 25,000 federal probationary employees earlier this year. These workers, many of whom had served in their roles for less than a year, were dismissed under a directive from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in February. The mass terminations sparked lawsuits from unions, nonprofits, and the state of Washington, arguing the firings lacked legal justification.Judge Alsup found that the OPM's directive was unlawful and "pretextual," noting the terminations were falsely framed as performance-related. While he acknowledged that the workers had been harmed, he declined to order their reinstatement, citing recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings limiting judicial power over executive branch hiring and firing decisions. Specifically, the Supreme Court had previously paused a preliminary injunction in April that would have reinstated 17,000 employees.Despite not ordering reinstatement, Alsup mandated that 19 federal agencies, including Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Treasury, correct the employment records of affected workers by November 14. He also prohibited agencies from continuing to follow OPM's original directive. Union leaders praised the decision for confirming the firings were baseless and for requiring agencies to acknowledge the false rationale behind the terminations.Trump administration unlawfully directed mass US worker terminations, judge rules | ReutersThe University of California, Berkeley confirmed it had shared information on 160 students, faculty, and staff with the Trump administration, in response to a federal investigation into alleged antisemitism. The data was provided to the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights as part of an ongoing probe linked to pro-Palestinian protests on campus. The university stated that it acted under legal obligation while striving to protect individual privacy and notified those affected.This move comes amid a broader effort by the Trump administration to penalize universities accused of allowing antisemitic behavior, particularly during recent demonstrations opposing Israel's actions in Gaza. Critics argue that the administration is conflating political protest and advocacy for Palestinian rights with antisemitism, raising serious concerns about free speech, academic freedom, and due process.Trump has threatened to cut federal funding to institutions involved in such protests and attempted to deport foreign student demonstrators, though those efforts have faced legal challenges. The administration has already reached high-profile settlements with Columbia and Brown universities and is in ongoing talks with Harvard. A proposed $1 billion settlement with UCLA was publicly rejected by California Governor Gavin Newsom, who called it extortion.UC Berkeley shares information on dozens of students, staff with Trump administration | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Ashe in America and Abbey Blue Eyes deliver a heavy but thought-provoking episode of Culture of Change. They begin with the horrific Charlotte train stabbing of a Ukrainian refugee, dissecting CNN's coverage that tried to bury the story and frame outrage as “racist.” The hosts contrast this with how left-wing narratives like George Floyd's death were amplified, exposing media hypocrisy and narrative warfare. From there, they examine a chilling lawsuit against Character AI, where a chatbot allegedly encouraged a 14-year-old boy to take his own life, sparking a wider discussion on technology, mental health, and how children are being conditioned by digital escapism. The conversation then shifts to predictive programming and 9/11, with Ashe and Abbey exploring eerie “coincidences” in pop culture, from the Illuminati card game and The Matrix to The Simpsons and Back to the Future. They also dive into time travel theories, carbon-based transhumanism, and how technology could tie into biblical end-times. Wrapping up, the hosts connect Spygate to British intelligence, Perkins Coie, and the FBI, exposing how the same actors behind Russiagate tie back to 9/11. It's a dense, sobering episode blending media critique, cultural decay, and deep-dive conspiracy analysis.

Ashe in America and Alpha Warrior host a laid-back but fiery episode of Why We Vote, tackling breaking news and election integrity fights. They open with Ed Martin's call to free Tina Peters, praising her courage and highlighting Trump's pressure campaign on Colorado—including his decision to move Space Command to Alabama, citing mail-in ballot fraud. The hosts dig into Colorado's political landscape, exposing how uniparty players like former Perkins Coie attorneys are being placed in key state roles to obstruct transparency. They connect these moves to Trump's broader strategy, pointing out how funding cuts and federal investigations are hitting Colorado where it hurts. Beyond that, the episode unpacks debates over Second Amendment rights, National Guard deployments in blue states, and Democratic governors' fear that Trump will use the military to secure elections. With humor, sponsor shoutouts, and even a detour into alpaca farming at Willow Wind Farm, Ashe and Alpha balance lighthearted banter with serious analysis of the battles ahead for free and fair elections.

Many people still see Gen Z as “lazy” or “entitled.”What if the generation everyone underestimates is actually the one reshaping the future of law?In this episode, I'm joined by Natalie Thomas, Legal Business Analyst at Perkins Coie. From Oxford University to Tesco, and now helping launch the London office of a US law firm, her journey proves there's no single path into law.We talk about how Gen Z challenges hierarchy, embraces efficiency, and collaborates differently and why those skills might be exactly what the legal industry needs. Natalie also shares her unconventional route into law, the importance of mentorship and social mobility, and why diversity isn't just nice-to-have, but a business imperative.If you've ever wondered how the next generation will transform law firms, this conversation is the answer.---Pre register for the AI Skills Summit for Lawyers here:https://holly-cope.myflodesk.com/aiskillssummitpreregistration ---I've wasted hours drafting contracts in my business.I knew there had to be a better way.And then I found this.Aircounsel.An AI contract drafter built by lawyers, for lawyers.Aircounsel has been kind enough to sponsor this episode.And I'm excited to spread the word. It's the most sophisticated contract drafting software I've used.To get your free 7-day trial, go to the description of this episode.Give it a go and let me know how it changes your workflow.TRY Aircounsel here:https://lawyers.aircounsel.com/morethanalawyerDisclaimer: This is an affiliate link that will track podcast sign-ups.---FREE access to my How to Become Law Firms' Go-To Legal Tech Solution here:Covered In This 28-Page Blueprint:Where legal tech companies go wrong: Why thought leadership is non-negotiableHow to build a LinkedIn presence that converts visibility into authorityThe ultimate LinkedIn strategy for law firm lead generationYour podcast strategy to become a recognised voice in legal techand much more…Gain free access to your ultimate blueprint, learn how to become an authority:https://holly-cope.myflodesk.com/becomealegaltechleader Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hear how Sam Coren, of Perkins Coie, and Emma Jensen, of the Northwest Justice Project, helped transform a man's life through a successful bid for clemency that began when they were in law school. Want to hear about new Pursuing Justice releases? Subscribe to our monthly pro bono emails Explore our Pro Bono programs and resources Learn about our Pro Bono Memberships and Scholarships for qualified organizations and individuals Please note: CLE is not offered for listening to this podcast, and the views and opinions expressed within represent those of the speakers and not necessarily those of PLI.

Rachel's older sister joins the NY hotel "studio" to break down the top news stories and share some of her own about what it was like growing up with Rachel and what it's like being a high school teacher.Top Stories:1. Leadership changes: USAFacts, Rover, Perkins Coie, Kaiser PermanenteUSA Facts RoverPerkins CoieKaiser Permanente2. Live Nation eyes new venuePSBJ article3. Compass sues ZillowSeattle Times article4. Grocery store updates: Bartell Drugs, QFC, PCC, Whole FoodsBartell DrugsQFCPCCWhole FoodsAbout guest co-host Lindsay Fletcher - Teacher:Lindsay has been teaching for 17 years. She teaches English as a new language as well as Spanish to high schoolers. She is also a nationally board certified teacher. Lindsay lives in Brooklyn with her husband and two kids.About host Rachel Horgan:Rachel is an independent event producer, emcee and entrepreneur. She worked for the Business Journal for 5 years as their Director of Events interviewing business leaders on stage before launching the weekly podcast. She earned her communication degree from the University of San Diego. Contact:Email: info@theweeklyseattle.comInstagram: @theweeklyseattleWebsite: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theweeklyseattle.com⁠⁠

In a meticulously and persuasively reasoned 112-page legal opinion, DC Federal Court Judge Beryl Howell ruled that Donald Trump's Executive Order punishing the law firm Perkins Coie is unconstitutional.The case is over, as Judge Howell granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs - Perkins Coie (though the case likely will be appealed by Trump).In a particularly powerful passage, Judge Howell notes that Trump has put a "cringe-worthy twist" on the Shakespeare line, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." The judge wrote that Trump's approach in his unconstitutional Executive Order is, "Let's kill the lawyers I don't like".If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Colleges use advanced data tracking to fine-tune scholarship offers based on what they think you'll pay and to make you feel good about your price. Ben and Nathan explain how firms analyze digital behavior, like email click speed, to calculate offers. Wealthy students get merit aid, lower-income students get need-based aid, but both often pay the same price. The result is personalized pricing that favors schools. Later, they cover Yale Law Dean Heather Gerken's push to ditch rankings and focus on need-based aid. Ben suggests two fixes for law schools: eliminate student loans and scrap ABA requirements. The episode also covers the Perkins Coie ruling, another round of the Personal Statement Gong Show, and Tips from a Departing Demon. Study with our Free PlanDownload our iOS appWatch Episode 506 on YouTubeRegister for Parents' Night Vol. 30:30 – Law Schools Know What You'll PayBen and Nathan cover a NYTimes article that reveals how schools set tuition prices and financial aid. Law schools work with data firms that track every digital move, including email clicks, to determine how much you're willing to pay. They then personalize your financial aid offer accordingly. Out-of-state students are targeted with high sticker prices and bigger discounts, which still net higher profits for schools. Merit aid and need-based aid are distributed strategically so that students from different income levels often pay the same amount. This model lets law schools charge each student a different price, while making them all feel like they got a deal. Applying early signals price sensitivity and can help you get a better offer.EAB Sales Presentation32:07 – Abandon RankingsHeather Gerken, the Dean of Yale Law School, calls for moving away from law school rankings. Despite talk of supporting need-based aid, schools still spend ten times more on merit-based scholarships. The Trump administration's past proposal to cut loans for schools with high default rates could help stop these  “scammerships.” Ben argues that two reforms are key: end federal student loans and overhaul ABA accreditation requirements. But without new incentives, the tragedy of the commons suggests schools will keep playing the rankings game.57:28 – Big Law vs. Trump: Perkins DecisionIn a follow-up to the discussion on Episode 505, Ben and Nathan break down a new court ruling that found Trump's executive order, which attempted to penalize Perkins Coie, is unconstitutional. 59:43 – Personal Statement Gong ShowGabriella steps into the spotlight as the latest contestant in the Personal Statement Gong Show. Ben and Nathan read her personal statement and hit the gong the moment something goes wrong. The standing record to beat is ten lines, held by Greta.1:12:10 – Tips from a Departing DemonSam encourages students to follow the Demon's core advice: slow down, understand what you are reading, and solve each question. 1:16:15 – Index CalculationsThe Demon Scholarship Calculator is an estimate built on data from previous years. The proven way to go to law school for free is to improve your LSAT and keep your GPA high.1:18:54 - Word of the Week - Blithely“The government blithely describes the statements set out in Section 1 of EO 14230 as 'not seriously contested' and 'matters of public record.' This description is inaccurate.”

George Conway and Sarah Longwell discuss Ed Martin's nomination for US Attorney for DC being dropped, the 102 page opinion striking down the executive order targeting law firm Perkins Coie, more district courts block Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act while continuing to roadblock bringing Kilmar Abrego Garcia home, and Donald Trump's refusal to uphold the constitution. For a very limited time, shop the @hexclad Mother's Day Sale for up to 49% OFF sitewide and find your forever cookware at hexclad.com/ASKGEORGE ! #hexcladpartner Upgrade your wardrobe and save on @trueclassic at trueclassic.com/ASKGEORGE ! #trueclassicpod

What are the constitutional limits of executive power? On this week's Insider episode, Preet is joined by CAFE Contributor and Dean Emeritus of NYU Law School Trevor Morrison, while Joyce is out. In an excerpt from the show, Preet and Trevor discuss the Trump administration's ongoing resistance to court orders compelling the government to facilitate Kilmar Abrego García's return to the U.S. after he was wrongly deported to El Salvador. Also on the Insider docket: – A judge struck down President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm Perkins Coie; and – A court ruled the Trump administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members is unlawful. CAFE Insiders click HERE to listen to the full analysis. Not an Insider? Now more than ever, it's critical to stay tuned. To hear from reasoned voices in unreasonable times, become an Insider today. You'll get access to full episodes of the podcast and other exclusive content. Head to cafe.com/insider. Subscribe to our YouTube channel. This podcast is brought to you by CAFE and Vox Media Podcast Network.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Long established legal norms continue to be challenged by Trump's Justice Department, leading Andrew and Mary to emphasize how the courts have grown increasingly frustrated with the administration's tactics. They begin with last Thursday's ruling from Judge Rodriguez in Texas, that Trump was unjustified in using the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants. After a review of what that means for his ‘extraction' efforts, Andrew and Mary go deep on an assessment made public from the National Intelligence Council, that indicates despite Trump's presidential proclamation evoking the Alien Enemies Act, intelligence officials do not see a strong link between the Venezuelan government and Tren de Aragua. And lastly this week, they look at the latest judicial pushback on Trump's attempts to threaten law firms, after Judge Beryl Howell ruled against his targeting of Perkins Coie by executive order.Further reading: Here is the assessment from the National Intelligence Council on the relationship between the Maduro government and Tren de Aragua, courtesy of the New York Times.Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

Monday, May 5th, 2025Today, Donald Trump tells Kristen Welker that he doesn't know if he has an obligation to uphold the constitution; Trump's approval rating is collapsing in rural America; a federal judge has blocked Trump's bid to dissolve the Institute of Museum and Library Services; Harmeet Dhillon has canceled a Biden era program that ended human waste backing up into people's homes in Alabama; Judge Beryl Howell has issued a blistering ruling against Trump's actions against the law firm Perkins Coie; border agents are posted at Tucson maternity ward to quickly deport a migrant mom; Trump's DoJ is going to give a bunch of our taxpayer money to Ashli Babbit's family; Trump folds his lawsuit against Maine over trans athletes; United Airlines cancels Newark flights over FAA staffing; the Pentagon inspector general is expanding his investigation into Pete Hegseth over Signalgate; Mike Waltz accidentally reveals a third party app the government is using to archive Signal chat messages; the fate of Voice of America is up in the air again; Katie Ledecky breaks her own 10 year old world record for the 800 meter freestyle; a new Trump rule puts veterans' homes in foreclosure; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, DeleteMeGet 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to joindeleteme.com/DAILYBEANS and use promo code DAILYBEANS at checkout. MSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueGuest: Adam KlasfeldAll Rise NewsAll Rise News - BlueskyAdam Klasfeld | Just SecurityAdam Klasfeld (@klasfeldreports.com)Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) - TwitterDonald Trump hopes you won't notice his latest attempt to purge civil servants | All Rise NewsALLISON GILL AND ADAM KLASFELD - Live with Allison GillStories:Meet the Press: Inside Takes on the Latest Stories with Kristen Welker | NBC NewsTrump shut down program to end human waste backing into Alabama homes, calling it 'illegal DEI' | NBC NewsJudge temporarily blocks Trump administration from dismantling library services agency | AP NewsBorder agents posted at Tucson maternity ward to quickly deport migrant mom | Arizona Daily StarEmbattled Voice of America's fate uncertain after brief apparent reprieve | POLITICOUnited Airlines Cancels Newark Flights Over FAA Staffing | WSJUS reaches agreement to settle lawsuit brought over Ashli Babbitt's shooting during Capitol riot | abc 10NewsPhoto appears to show Mike Waltz using Signal-like app that can archive messages | NBC NewsWin for Maine as Trump officials agree to halt school funding freeze | Maine | The GuardianDonald Trump's Approval Rating Collapses With Rural Americans | NewsweekKatie Ledecky breaks 800m freestyle world record almost a decade after last setting it | WDSU NBC News 6 Good Trouble:⚠️ Do not let this get into the wrong hands ⚠️. Super c*** WH Faith Office Director Paula White is asking for prayers to be uploaded to a public Google drive : r/chaoticgoodDonald Trump hopes you won't notice his latest attempt to purge civil servants | All Rise NewsFrom The Good NewsDemocracy Sausage - WikipediaDemocracy Sausage .orgGuide to WorldPride 2025 | Washington DCJill Sobule - Wikipedia, Jill Sobule | YouTube  Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewrote , Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote,Dana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ 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?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Today's Headlines: Australia re-elects center-left Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, rejecting right-wing challenger Peter Dutton in a move echoing Canada's anti-Trump voter shift. In the U.S., the April jobs report beats expectations with 177,000 jobs added—though gains were dampened by federal layoffs. A federal judge strikes down Trump's retaliatory executive order against Perkins Coie, a law firm tied to Democrats, while Microsoft ditches a pro-Trump firm and hires one ready to challenge the administration in court. Meanwhile, Trump allies sue Chief Justice John Roberts in an attempt to give the president authority over the judiciary. Also, the Trump administration backs down in its feud with Maine, restoring $3 million in school funding after a clash over trans athlete policies. A new executive order strips NPR and PBS of federal funding, raising alarm over attacks on public media. The DOJ ends a decades-old desegregation order in Louisiana, claiming it's no longer needed—despite over 130 still in effect. Plans are underway for a massive military parade on Trump's birthday, and jury selection begins in the federal sex trafficking trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: CNN: Australia votes in national election seen as latest test of global anti-Trump sentiment WSJ: Employers Added 177,000 Jobs in April Despite Tariff Uncertainty CNN: Judge permanently blocks Trump's executive order targeting Democratic-tied law firm Perkins Coie  NY Times: Microsoft Drops Law Firm That Made a Deal With Trump From a Case  TPM: Trump Allies Sue John Roberts To Give White House Control Of Court System NY Times: Trump Administration Settles With Maine to Restore Frozen Funds Over Trans Athlete Feud  Ap News: Trump signs executive order directing federal funding cuts to PBS and NPR AP News: Justice Department ends school desegregation order in Louisiana AP News: Army plans for a potential parade on Trump's birthday call for 6,600 soldiers, AP learns ABC News: Sean 'Diddy' Combs rejects plea deal ahead of sex trafficking trial - ABC News  Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Fawcett breaks down the biggest stories of the day, including Zelensky's rejection of a peace deal framework proposed by the Trump administration, President Trump's comments regarding the Epstein documents and his legal battles with Perkins Coie, a law firm linked to past election controversies, Elon Musk's potential exit from Doge, and Senator Dick Durbin's retirement announcement.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In recent weeks, President Trump has embarked on a campaign of extortion against law firms, pushing major firms to either reach agreements with the White House or face executive orders in retribution. A number of major firms have chosen to negotiate—agreeing to deals that are already under pressure as the White House seeks to extract more. Four firms—Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey—have chosen to fight retaliatory executive orders in court and have secured temporary restraining orders against the administration. John Keker and Bob Van Nest joined the podcast to discuss these events. They're partners at the firm Keker, Van Nest & Peters, and—along with their fellow partner Elliot Peters—published an op-ed in the New York Times urging law firms to stand up for themselves. In conversation with Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic, they discussed why the Trump administration's efforts pose such a threat to the rule of law and shared their insights into the dynamics inside law firms right now, what pressures might move a firm to capitulate, and what the firms that have chosen to fight are risking in the process.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

OA1149 - Even as most of the Biglaw establishment falls to Trump's whims, lawyers from smaller firms are stepping up to do the most necessary work  on the most important issues of our times. We're here to tell you a little more about some of them! But first: The House passes the “No Rogue Rulings Act” and we rip into some fascist nonsense from MAGA legal “thinker” Mike Davis defending the President's absolute  right to call anyone a terrorist and send them to hell without a hearing. Also: DHS's “evidence”(?) in support of Mahmoud Kahlil's deportation,  SCOTUS ‘s surprise mid-episode ruling ordering the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from a Salvadoran gulag, and more on the truly inspirational lawyers who are aggressively pushing these fights forward. In today's footnote: can you sue ChatGPT for “hallucinating” terrible stories about you? One heavily-armed Georgia talk show host is gunning to find out. The “No Rogue Rulings Act”  (HR 1526)  Amicus brief filed in Korematsu Center et al in Perkins Coie v. DOJ (4/9/25) DHS “evidence” filed in Mahmoud Kahlil's deportation proceedings (4/10/25) U.S. Supreme Court's order in Noem v. Abrego Garcia (04/10/2025) Plaintiff's complaint in Walters v OpenAI   “SCOTUS must stop leftist judges' lawless sabotage of Trump agenda | Fox News, Mike Davis (3/31/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law! This content is CAN credentialed, which means you can report instances of harassment, abuse, or other harm on their hotline at (617) 249-4255, or on their website at creatoraccountabilitynetwork.org.

A.M. Edition for Mar. 28. Rescuers search through rubble in Bangkok and streams of wounded seek treatment in Myanmar's capital Naypyitaw following a magnitude 7.7 earthquake. Plus, President Trump broadens his retribution campaign against major law firms as Perkins Coie pushes back. And WSJ Brussels Bureau Chief Dan Michaels describes how European leaders are waking up to the reality that U.S. Vice President JD Vance's hostility toward them could be more than just a show. Luke Vargas hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're fired. Trump, by executive order, has moved to terminate federal contracts with law firm Perkins Coie for its role in promoting the 2016 Russiagate conspiracy and otherwise influencing elections—sparking fervorous debate in and across the aisle. Meanwhile, the administration invoked the emergency powers of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport members of the violent Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, provoking an activist judge to obstruct the law's use. Who rules: Congress or courts? The hosts sit down to discuss these ongoing legal battles in government, real battles abroad, and the absurd responses from the Left across the board. Plus, more media recommendations!

After engaging in a campaign of retribution against his enemies within the federal government, President Trump is turning to those outside of it.Michael S. Schmidt, an investigative reporter for The New York Times, explains what that retribution has looked like for a single law firm — and the impact it has had on the entire legal profession.Guest: Michael S. Schmidt, an investigative reporter for The New York Times, covering Washington.Background reading: The law firm Perkins Coie has sued the Trump administration over an executive order that would make it all but impossible for the firm to advocate for its clients.The president's use of government power to punish law firms is seen by some experts as undercutting a basic tenet: the right to a strong defense.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Photo: Maansi Srivastava for The New York Times Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

Today's Headlines: Donald Trump gave a speech at the Department of Justice, railing against the media, vowing "accountability" for his enemies, and bragging about firing James Comey and pardoning January 6 defendants. Attorney General Pam Bondi warns that anyone messing with Tesla better "watch out" because the DOJ is coming for them. Trump also invoked the rarely used Alien Enemies Act to deport five Venezuelan nationals he claimed were gang members, but a federal judge temporarily blocked their removal after the administration had already deported 250 other supposed gang members before the ruling took effect. Meanwhile, a judge put a hold on part of Trump's executive order targeting law firm Perkins Coie for its role in 2016 opposition research and Citibank revealed it was asked to freeze funds for nonprofits like Habitat for Humanity due to alleged criminal concerns tied to EPA grants. On the foreign policy beat, Trump ordered airstrikes against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen while increasing pressure on Iran over its nuclear program. And finally, Trump is set to chat with Vladimir Putin this week as Ukraine ceasefire talks continue. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode:  AP News: 'Scum,' 'crooked' elections and 'corrupt' media. What Trump said inside the Justice Department Yahoo: Trump's Attorney General to Tesla Vandals: 'We're Coming After You'  The Guardian: Judge blocks Trump from using 18th-century wartime act for deportations | US immigration AP News: Trump administration deports hundreds of immigrants even as a judge orders their removals be stopped  AP News: Judge temporarily blocks parts of Trump's executive order seeking to punish law firm Perkins Coie Yahoo: Citibank says FBI recommended that it freeze the accounts of climate grant recipients AP News: Trump has ordered airstrikes against rebels in Yemen. Here's why AP News: Trump and Putin will speak this week on Russia-Ukraine war, US envoy says  Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage alongside Bridget Schwartz and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Trump Administration is gutting the Justice Department's unit that oversees prosecutions of public officials accused of corruption.Emil Bove has fired the Chief of the Organized Crime and Drug Trafficking Task Force, and Todd Blanche has fired the Justice Department Pardon Attorney.Judge Beryl Howell has blocked sections of Donald Trump's executive order punishing the Perkins Coie law firm.The top ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee calls for the Department of Justice Inspector General to open an investigation into Ed Martin, interim US Attorney for the District of Columbia.Judge Dale Ho has canceled the hearing in the Eric Adams dismissal case after amicus Paul Clement recommended he dismiss the bribery charges with prejudice.Plus listener questions.Questions for the pod? Questions from Listeners Follow AG Substack|MuellershewroteBlueSky|@muellershewroteAndrew McCabe isn't on social media, but you can buy his book The ThreatThe Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and TrumpWe would like to know more about our listeners. Please participate in this brief surveyListener Survey and CommentsThis Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon and Supercast Supporters at the Justice Enforcers level and above:https://dailybeans.supercast.techOrhttps://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr when you subscribe on Apple Podcastshttps://apple.co/3YNpW3P

Get the brand new ReSIStance T-Shirt at politicon.com/merch Kimberly Atkins Stohr hosts #SistersInLaw to argue against deporting Mahmoud Khalil, explain habeas corpus and whether the government had the right to detain him, and outline his 1st Amendment rights as a green card holder.  Then, the #Sisters tear into Trump's executive order targeting law firm Perkins Coie, detail how their rights to association and speech are being violated, and celebrate the lawyers who have stepped up to defend them.  They also discuss the conversion therapy case going to the Supreme Court and what it means for LGBTQ rights at a time when Trump is attempting to subvert our democracy. Add the #Sisters & your other favorite Politicon podcast hosts on Bluesky Joyce's new book, Giving Up Is Unforgivable, is now available for pre order.  Check out Jill's New Politicon YouTube Show: Just The Facts Check out Kim's New Politicon Podcast: Justice By Design Get your #SistersInLaw MERCH at politicon.com/merch WEBSITE & TRANSCRIPT Email: SISTERSINLAW@POLITICON.COM or Thread to @sistersInLaw.podcast Get text updates from #SistersInLaw and Politicon.  Get More From The #Sisters: From Barb on The Contrarian Substack - Elon Musk's social insecurity Please Support This Week's Sponsors Laundry Sauce: Get 20% off your entire order @LaundrySauce with code SISTERS at https://laundrysauce.com/SISTERS #laundrysaucepod Blueland: For 15% off your order of green cleaning products, go to blueland.com/sisters OneSkin: Get 15% off OneSkin with the code: SISTERS at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod Thrive Causemetics: For 20% off incredible clean and cause-focused beauty products, go to thrivecausemetics.com/sisters Get More From The #SistersInLaw Joyce Vance: Bluesky | Twitter | University of Alabama Law | MSNBC | Civil Discourse Substack | Author of “Giving Up Is Unforgiveable” Jill Wine-Banks: Bluesky | Twitter | Facebook | Website | Author of The Watergate Girl: My Fight For Truth & Justice Against A Criminal President | Just The Facts YouTube Kimberly Atkins Stohr: Bluesky | Twitter | Boston Globe | WBUR | The Gavel Newsletter | Justice By Design Podcast Barb McQuade: Bluesky | Twitter | University of Michigan Law | Just Security | MSNBC | Attack From Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America

What are the real prospects for rebuilding Gaza? And what would it take to achieve lasting peace in the Middle East? Preet is joined by Dennis Ross, the former US Ambassador and peace negotiator; Karim Sadjadpour, an expert on Iran and the Arab world; and Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, a Gazan-American writer and analyst who grew up in Gaza City, and moved to the US as a teenager.  Plus, Preet addresses President Trump's controversial executive order targeting law firm Perkins Coie.  You can now watch this episode! Head to CAFE's Youtube channel and subscribe.  Show notes and a transcript of the episode are available on our website.  Have a question for Preet? Ask @PreetBharara on Threads, or Twitter with the hashtag #AskPreet. Email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 833-997-7338 to leave a voicemail. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Thursday, March 13th, 2025Today, Judge Beryl Howell has granted the law firm Perkins Coie a temporary restraining order blocking challenge sections of Trump's executive order; MSW media has partnered with national security counselors to file a FOIA request for the USAID destroyed document logs; House Republicans have passed a bill to fund the government, but Senate Democrats are divided; the Trump administration is still refusing to produce the head of OPM to testify under oath in court; a judge has blocked Trump's efforts to defund teacher training; Trump's OPM spokesperson posted fashion influencer videos from her government office; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, AG1New subscribers, go to drinkAG1.com/dailybeans to get a FREE $76 Welcome Kit, bottle of D3K2 AND 5 free travel packs in your first box when you sign up.Stories:Senate Democrats insist on voting on 30-day government funding bill | The HillUSAID order to delete classified records sparks flurry of litigation | The HillUS judge temporarily halts Trump plan to cut hundreds of millions of dollars for teacher training | AP NewsLegal profession 'watching in horror,' judge says in blocking Trump order against Perkins Coie | ReutersTrump official tasked with defending DOGE cuts posted fashion influencer videos from her office | CNN PoliticsGood Trouble:DOGE Privacy Act Requests - Jamie Raskin for Congress From The Good NewsAsk an axolotl son | IGEnchanted Fredericksburg RanchEmpty Chair Town Hall 3/23/2025 4-6:00 PM.TeslaTakedown - Action NetworkReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewroteDana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ 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?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

This week, Scott sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor and co-host emeritus Alan Rozenshtein and Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Lowering the Bar.” Last week, the Trump administration took aim at two leading law firms—Covington & Burling and Perkins Coie—by repealing lawyers' security clearances and setting limits on the extent to which government actors can contract with them, on the apparent grounds that they worked for Trump's perceived enemies. Is this legal? Will it be challenged? And what will the effect be on the legal industry?“Big Math on Campus.” The Trump administration recently announced its intent to withhold $400 million in government grants from Columbia University, on the grounds that it had not done enough to combat anti-semitism on campus—a measure it paired with an indication that it would repeal student visas from those who had expressed “pro-Hamas” views. Is this tack a proper or legally sustainable one? And what impact will it have on academic communities in the United States?“Nothing Is Certain but Death and Ta…Well, at Least Death.” After temporarily delaying tariffs on Canada and Mexico after 48 hours last month, President Trump assured everyone that they were definitely getting installed this month. But once again, after a few days, he rescinded many of them. Nonetheless, the uncertainty surrounding this administration's policies has markets spooked, triggering fears of a recession—something President Trump has indicated people may just have to live through. What are the real costs and benefits of Trump's oscillating trade policies?In object lessons, Alan went full nerd and prescribed himself a decade-long literary exile with “Gardens of the Moon,” the first in Steven Erikson's ten-book epic. Scott's old ass, meanwhile, threw its weight behind “My Old Ass,” a film about a young woman navigating family, love, and self-discovery—all with a little hallucinogenic assistance. And Natalie logrolled like a pro, plugging Quinta Jurecic's guest spot on The Ezra Klein Show, where Quinta delivers one of Natalie's all-time favorite “Quintaisms”—with all the necessary context baked right in.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor and co-host emeritus Alan Rozenshtein and Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Lowering the Bar.” Last week, the Trump administration took aim at two leading law firms—Covington & Burling and Perkins Coie—by repealing lawyers' security clearances and setting limits on the extent to which government actors can contract with them, on the apparent grounds that they worked for Trump's perceived enemies. Is this legal? Will it be challenged? And what will the effect be on the legal industry?“Big Math on Campus.” The Trump administration recently announced its intent to withhold $400 million in government grants from Columbia University, on the grounds that it had not done enough to combat anti-semitism on campus—a measure it paired with an indication that it would repeal student visas from those who had expressed “pro-Hamas” views. Is this tack a proper or legally sustainable one? And what impact will it have on academic communities in the United States?“Nothing Is Certain but Death and Ta…Well, at Least Death.” After temporarily delaying tariffs on Canada and Mexico after 48 hours last month, President Trump assured everyone that they were definitely getting installed this month. But once again, after a few days, he rescinded many of them. Nonetheless, the uncertainty surrounding this administration's policies has markets spooked, triggering fears of a recession—something President Trump has indicated people may just have to live through. What are the real costs and benefits of Trump's oscillating trade policies?In object lessons, Alan went full nerd and prescribed himself a decade-long literary exile with “Gardens of the Moon,” the first in Steven Erikson's ten-book epic. Scott's old ass, meanwhile, threw its weight behind “My Old Ass,” a film about a young woman navigating family, love, and self-discovery—all with a little hallucinogenic assistance. And Natalie logrolled like a pro, plugging Quinta Jurecic's guest spot on The Ezra Klein Show, where Quinta delivers one of Natalie's all-time favorite “Quintaisms”—with all the necessary context baked right in.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Has interim D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin violated lawyer ethics rules? And could the allegations against Martin impact his chances of Senate confirmation for the permanent role? In an excerpt from the Insider podcast, Preet Bharara and Joyce Vance break down the allegations against Martin in Senate Democrats' misconduct complaint submitted to the D.C. Bar.   In the full episode, Preet and Joyce discuss:  – How President Trump's comments about Elon Musk's role at DOGE might impact lawsuits challenging the department's actions; and – Trump's executive order targeting prestigious law firm Perkins Coie. CAFE Insiders click HERE to listen to the full analysis. To become a member of CAFE Insider head to cafe.com/insider. You'll get access to full episodes of the podcast and other exclusive content. Subscribe to our YouTube channel. This podcast is brought to you by CAFE and Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Tonight's rundown:  Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Monday, March 10, 2025. Stand Up for Your Country.  Talking Points Memo: An overview of what to expect this week for President Trump. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo joins the No Spin News to discuss a potential Ukraine-Russia ceasefire, why Xi Jinping held back under Biden, and his relationship with Donald Trump. Donald Trump signs an executive order suspending the security clearances of employees at Perkins Coie. Bill looks at the contrasting ICE policies of Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey and New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte. Did President Biden use an autopen to sign documents at the White House? Final Thought: Trump declares March as Irish American Heritage Month. In Case You Missed It: Read Bill's latest column, Party Animals Stand out from the crowd with our NEW Not Woke baseball cap for just $28.95! For a limited time, get Bill O'Reilly's bestselling The United States of Trump and a No Spin Mug for only $39.95. Get Bill's latest book, CONFRONTING THE PRESIDENTS, out NOW! Now's the time to get a Premium or Concierge Membership to BillOReilly.com, the only place for honest news analysis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Between President Donald Trump's executive order targeting Perkins Coie and interim D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin sending letters to Georgetown Law, it has been quite the week for weaponized government. Sarah Isgur and David French dive into these two headliners, as well as a First Amendment debate involving green card holders. The Agenda: —More Sarah lore: Combative hula-hooping —Perkins Coie and President Trump's executive orders —FIRE's response to the Trump administration's threat to deport anti-Israel protesters —Eugene Volokh's fact sheet on aliens and speech —Another letter —‘We're a Jesuit, school go to hell' —Smith & Wesson v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos —Justice Amy Coney Barrett vs. MAGA —EPA and San Francisco's sewage waste —Richard Glossip avoids death row ... again Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings, click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan's Soaps https://www.AlansArtisanSoaps.comUse coupon code TODD to save an additional 10% off the bundle price.Bioptimizers https://Bioptimizers.com/toddEnter promo code TODD to get 10% off any order.Bonefrog https://BonefrogCoffee.com/toddCelebrate St. Patrick's Day with an Irish Bag of coffee and a “Lucky” gift box from BoneFrog Coffee.  Use code TODD at checkout to receive 10% off your first purchase and 15% on subscriptions.Bulwark Capital Bulwark Capital Management (bulwarkcapitalmgmt.com)Don't miss the next live Webinar Thursday March 20th at 3:30pm pacific.  Sign up today by calling 866-779-RISK or go to KnowYourRiskRadio.com.Renue Healthcare https://Renue.Healthcare/ToddYour journey to a better life starts at Renue Healthcare. Visit Renue.Healthcare/Todd.Episode Links:President Trump says Nicolle Wallace and Rachel Maddow should be forced to resign for their disgusting comments about DJ Daniel:  "MSDNC is the worst. The good news is very few people watch them anymore."JUST IN: MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace politicizes young DJ's moment at Trump's speech, says she hopes he doesn't k*ll himself because of something like Jan 6.Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Orders Arrest of US Citizen for Political Speech; The arrest warrant against Magalhaes raises international concerns over judicial overreach and free speech.Trump DOJ Will Argue for Expanding Surveillance Power in ‘Tower Dumps' Case; Pam Bondi's DOJ is gearing up to carry out a major power grab…BREAKING: Trump revokes security clearances of Perkins Coie employees over 'lawfare,' DEI practices; "President Trump's Administration will not tolerate Perkins Coie LLP's unethical and discriminatory actions that threaten our elections, military strength, and national security."Ramadan starts tomorrow! Ramadan is the season of penance for our Islamic brothers and sisters. Do they ever take it seriously! I tell you that because Ash Wednesday is coming up – that's kind of like our Ramadan. @thegnewsroom.”Vatican: Ramadan is for Catholics ‘a school of inner transformation'; In a seemingly ecumenical appeal, the Vatican praised Islamic Ramadan as a means of ‘inner conversion' and emphasized a parallel with Christian Lent. The message follows Pope Francis' push for interfaith dialogue, which critics say downplays theological issues.

US Intelligence shows Russia and China are attempting to recruit disgruntled federal employees.The head of the FBI New York Field Office James Dennehy has been forced out as the GSA shutters FBI, DOJ and CIA facilities.The American Bar Association has received a request to open a disciplinary investigation into Emil Bove from Judiciary Committee Democrats.The Trump Administration goes after the law firm Perkins Coie and Georgetown law.Plus listener questions.Questions for the pod? Questions from Listeners Follow AG Substack|MuellershewroteBlueSky|@muellershewroteAndrew McCabe isn't on social media, but you can buy his book The ThreatThe Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and TrumpWe would like to know more about our listeners. Please participate in this brief surveyListener Survey and CommentsThis Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon and Supercast Supporters at the Justice Enforcers level and above:https://dailybeans.supercast.techOrhttps://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr when you subscribe on Apple Podcastshttps://apple.co/3YNpW3P

John Fawcett breaks down the biggest stories of the day, including President Trump's new approach to nuclear negotiations with Iran and modifications to tariffs on Mexico and Canada. John also discusses the implications of Trump's executive orders on trade and the ongoing controversies surrounding the DNC law firm Perkins Coie.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.