Podcasts about Procedural

Speaker of Parliament Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin has called for a review of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025, citing procedural lapses during its passage on Friday

In this episode of FTR's Rail Market Update, host Joseph Towers covers: STB accepts revised UPNS merger application as “Complete”.Procedural merger timeline delayed until certain deficiencies are remedied by Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern.Update on weekly rail traffic The Rail Market Update is hosted by FTR's Senior Analyst, Rail, Joseph Towers.  As this information is presented, you are welcome to follow along and look at the graphs and indicators yourself by downloading the PDF of the presentation.Download the PDF: https://www.ftrintel.com/rail-podcastSupport the show

Illinois lawmakers have introduced House Bill 5723, dubbed the Illinois Epstein Files Investigation Act, to create a bipartisan state commission with subpoena power tasked with investigating any crimes tied to Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking network that involve Illinois — including offenses that happened in the state, targeted Illinois residents, or involved local institutions. Supporters, led by Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid and survivor advocates, argue that federal efforts have left unanswered questions and that Illinois has the authority to pursue accountability under state law. The proposed commission would be 10 members, appointed by the governor with state Senate approval, required to hold public meetings, issue periodic reports over five years, and refer potential criminal matters to the Illinois attorney general's office or a statewide grand jury for prosecution.Supporters say the bill would give the state “real teeth” — investigatory powers, subpoena authority, and the ability to pursue prosecutions where state law may have been violated — and help ensure survivors' experiences are examined with trauma-informed care. While advocates emphasize the importance of delving into records and holding accountable anyone who broke Illinois law, Republican lawmakers like House Minority Leader Tony McCombie acknowledged the gravity of Epstein's crimes but questioned whether a state commission can effectively parallel federal criminal probes. Procedural hurdles loom, as the bill was filed after a legislative deadline and may not advance until later sessions.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Illinois lawmakers push for Jeffrey Epstein probe with 'real teeth'Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Speed versus delay. That's the framework for understanding every pre-trial decision in Alex Murdaugh's retrial. The AG promised to retry aggressively and as soon as possible. The defense will engineer the opposite. And the wild card decisions made in chambers before a single witness is sworn may matter more than anything said in front of a jury.Tony Brueski breaks down why the clock is the real weapon. Wilson's office built the original case. His prosecutors know every witness, every weakness, every piece of evidence. If the trial happens under Wilson's leadership, the state brings its strongest possible team. If the defense can push proceedings past January 2027, a new attorney general inherits someone else's case during a leadership transition. Every month of delay favors Murdaugh.The judge assignment controls the trial's shape. Whoever presides interprets the Supreme Court's guidance on financial evidence — and that interpretation determines how much of the prosecution's narrative survives. The judge also controls the calendar, deciding how quickly motions are heard and whether continuances are granted. Procedural pacing is an invisible advantage that shapes the outcome before evidence is presented.The venue question carries its own weight. Colleton County's jury pool carries contamination from a convicted clerk who tampered with the last jury. The defense pushes to move it. The prosecution may want to stay because local jurors understand the Murdaugh family's century of influence in ways that outsiders might not. All four candidates for the next AG have committed to retrying. But inheriting a complex case mid-preparation is different from building one yourself. The transition itself creates uncertainty, and uncertainty is exactly what the defense wants.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #AlanWilson #SCSupremeCourt #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina #MurderTrial #AttorneyGeneral #MurdaughCase #HiddenKillers

  The meeting reviewed Kerry Lutz's five administrative petitions challenging app-directed parking signage and vendor practices across Florida and explained the legal and procedural theory underlying the campaign. Presenters described substantive claims, statutory remedies, procedural deadlines, and potential statewide compliance risks tied to federal funding and the MUTCD. Substantive legal theory: Lutz alleges many app-directed parking signs lack required regulatory text and display commercial logos, violating the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and Florida traffic statutes; noncompliant signs are characterized as public nuisances and therefore legally unenforceable and removable. The petitions also assert that app-based vendor practices siphon municipal funds through revenue splits and convenience fees, and seek rules capping vendor compensation at actual interchange costs and banning per-ticket private compensation or privatized citation issuance. Procedural strategy and leverage: The filings are Chapter 120 administrative petitions—declaratory statements (90‑day response) and rulemaking petitions (30‑day response)—designed to force timely agency action rather than prolonged inaction. Presenters emphasized that a 2018 constitutional change eliminated judicial deference, requiring de novo review by administrative law judges, which increases the likelihood agencies will be reversed on appeal if orders conflict with plain statutory or MUTCD text. Privacy and minors: Petitions raise privacy and parental-consent concerns, arguing that requiring drivers, including 16–17‑year‑old minors, to accept app terms and surrender location/payment data may bind minors without verified parental consent; the petitions request verifiable parental-consent mechanisms in the apps. Regulatory and funding implications: Presenters tied the sign noncompliance to a Florida Department of Transportation memo and federal highway funding rules to argue a potential statewide federal‑compliance risk. The approach was framed as a low‑cost procedural blueprint leveraging existing statutes to compel transparency and administrative change as municipal parking systems become more digital and automated. Find Kerry Here: https://kerrylutz.com Get the book here:  No Parking    

Isabelle Pérignon, a French national, is Director for Consumer Policy at the European Commission since October 2023. She was for four years (2019-2023) the Deputy Head of Cabinet of the former Commissioner for Justice. Before this position, she worked as Head of Unit for Procedural criminal law at the European Commission. Ms Pérignon was also a member of the Cabinet of several Commissioners, including Commissioner for Values and Transparency, Vera Jourova and former Commissioner for Home Affairs, Cécilia Malmström. Before joining the Commission in 2003, Isabelle Perignon was a solicitor specialising in EU law and was a member of the French and Belgian bars. She worked at Baker McKenzie law firm under the supervision of Ms Christine Lagarde. She holds a Master's Degree in European Legal Studies (LLM College of Europe) and a Masters in Business Studies.

The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: Our official dentist for Pratt on Texas is here – in studio! We visit with Dr. Silvia Zuñiga about the family of Pratt on Texas listeners that has developed since listeners have been going to her for dental care in Costa Rica going back to 2014.  https://prattontexas.com/dento-care/Our Lone Star story of the day is sponsored by Allied Compliance Services providing the best service in DOT, business and personal drug and alcohol testing since 1995.Texas Tech gets a procedural win in federal court in the case of the law school lefty who is alleged to have celebrated the murder of peaceful conservative activist Charlie Kirk.You know what you get with little Jimmy “the creep” Talarico as a Senator? You get more of terrible Obama from the open border to the soft on crime policies. Obama campaigns for Talarico in Austin.Interesting: Ex-Texas Lottery Director quietly indicted – then unindicted.We remember the great Bob Wills. He died this day in 1975.Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com

DEAR PAO: Consequences of non-observance of procedural due process on employee termination | May 8, 2026Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net Follow us: Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Check out our Podcasts: Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcher Tune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein #TheManilaTimes #KeepUpWithTheTimes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Court's latest Voting Rights Act decision, Louisiana v. Callais, narrows Section 2 in a way that could reshape redistricting, weaken majority-minority districts, and intensify the fight over how race and partisanship interact in elections. We unpack what the Court said, what it quietly overruled, and why the reasoning matters far beyond Louisiana.We walk through the statutory text, the long-running collision between the Voting Rights Act and the Court's racial gerrymandering cases, and the practical consequences for future election-law litigation. Along the way, we debate whether this is best understood as a textual decision, a constitutional avoidance move, or a major shift in how the Court treats political power and racial representation.The conversation also covers the Court's emergency procedural move after judgment, Justice Kagan's forceful dissent, and the broader question of whether the decision is likely to help one party more than the other in the short run. The result is a sharp, candid look at one of the term's most consequential rulingsKey Topics[00:00:20] - Introduction to the episode and SCOTUS Blog partnership update[00:03:06] - Brief Supreme Court news: mifepristone litigation and shadow-docket timing[00:05:20] - Louisiana v. Callais and why the case is a major Voting Rights Act decision[00:11:35] - Voting Rights Act history: Section 2, Section 5, and Shelby County[00:13:39] - The collision course between racial gerrymandering doctrine and Section 2[00:16:17] - Allen v. Milligan and how the Court shifted course[00:21:21] - Procedural background of the Louisiana map challenge[00:23:02] - Is the decision constitutional, statutory, or both?[00:24:28] - Section 2's text and the 1982 amendments[00:29:14] - The Court's reading of “less opportunity” and the role of partisanship[00:41:46] - How the majority treats Allen v. Milligan and prior precedent[00:43:06] - Constitutional avoidance and the Section 5 enforcement-power question[00:46:28] - The Court's “updated” Gingles framework and why that matters[00:52:29] - Likely effects on majority-minority districts and partisan gerrymandering[00:54:25] - Justice Kagan's dissent and the Court's broader democracy critique[00:56:04] - The post-judgment timing dispute and Justice Jackson's separate dissent[00:58:55] - Final assessment of the decision and its likely consequencesRelevant LinksRick Pildes's post on the decision: https://democracyproject.org/posts/supreme-court%E2%80%99s-gutting-of-voting-provision-was-long-time-comingTravis Crum Amicus Brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-109/373625/20250903201226237_2025.09.03%20Callais%20Crum%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf

The first deputies through the front door found Russ standing near the edge of the living room with a phone still pressed against his ear. The dispatcher's voice could be heard faintly through the receiver while officers stepped past him into the house. One deputy moved directly toward Betsy on the floor beside the couch while another stopped with Russ near the entry, keeping him back with a hand lightly against his arm. “What happened?” Russ looked past the deputy toward the living room before answering. “I came home and found her like that.” The deputy asked if anybody else was inside the house. Russ shook his head once and said no. His breathing still came fast between answers. Blood had dried in streaks across one hand and along the front of his pants where he had wiped his palm earlier without thinking about it. The deputy near Betsy crouched low beside the body, taking the room in piece by piece before touching anything. The living room stayed quiet except for radios, footsteps, and the dispatcher still talking faintly through Russ's phone. Betsy lay beside the couch where Russ had found her, one arm angled awkwardly near her side, blood spread beneath her into the carpet. The knife protruding from her neck remained untouched. A deputy leaned in close, checking for signs of life while another officer stood back near the hallway watching the rest of the house. Russ kept turning his head toward the floor beside the couch while questions continued around him. “What's your name?” “Russ Faria.” “How long were you gone tonight?” “A few hours.” “Where were you?” “With friends.” The deputy writing notes asked him to repeat the names slowly while he wrote them down one at a time. Russ rubbed both hands against his jeans between answers, leaving darker smears where blood still hadn't dried completely...Sources: https://allthatsinteresting.com/pam-hupphttps://time.com/6156033/the-thing-about-pam-renee-zellweger-true-story/https://www.stlmag.com/longform/pam-hupp/https://www.stlmag.com/news/defense-attorney-joel-schwartz-charles-bosworth-new-book-bone-deep-true-crime-betsy-faria-pam-hupp/https://people.com/pam-hupp-charge-refiled-betsy-faria-stabbing-death-8384298https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/crime/pam-hupp-may-not-be-tried-for-betsy-farias-murder-until-2028/63-fc0923af-96e0-409a-84d3-bc585dba3ef3https://fox2now.com/news/fox-files/pam-hupp-trial-delayed-but-unexpected-encounter-outside-highlights-day/https://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/Russell-Farias-wife-was-stabbed-55-times-but-was-he-the-killer-a-471968https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/pamela-hupp-murder-betsy-faria-dateline-podcast-1196738/https://crimereads.com/the-bizarre-self-incriminating-confession-of-pam-hupp/https://rsflawfirm.com/Firm-News/Russell-Faria-Acquitted-Of-Wife-s-Murder/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/kinda-murdery-true-crime-murder-stories--5496890/support.Zevon Odelberg is a true crime podcast host and disability advocate.  Zevon has cerebral palsy and he wants Kinda Murdery to be welcoming community for people with disabilities and for people living with challenges of any kind.  Life can be hard, but being together makes it better.

Shows don't have to be GREAT for them to be fun to watch! We are back (Jackie, too!) with the fun-to-watch The Hunting Party. A secret prison? Check. Psychological torture? Check. Unbelievable ability to kick ass? Check!Email us: KillerFunPodcast@gmail.comFollow us on Facebook: fb.me/KillerFunPodcastAll the Tweets, er, POSTS: https://x.com/KillerFunPodInstagram: killerfunpodcast

In this episode, Michael talks to Oliver Hartwich about his new satirical novella The Martian Audit, in which two alien auditors arrive in New Zealand to assess it for invasion, only to find themselves defeated not by weapons but by the country's regulation and bureaucracy. There are no villains, just a country full of friendly people trapped in systems that don't work, from leaky homes and hospital waiting rooms to view shafts you can't legally stop to admire.

1. Scope of Fraud The testimony describes large‑scale, systemic fraud within Minnesota’s Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP). Individual childcare centers allegedly billed hundreds of thousands to over $1 million annually, often with no real children present. 2. Organized and Long‑Running Scheme Fraud was not isolated or accidental; it showed characteristics of a loosely organized criminal enterprise operating for years (at least 2014–2019). Some perpetrators reportedly learned about the scheme before arriving in the U.S., indicating cross‑border knowledge of vulnerabilities in the system. 3. Common Fraud Methods Billing for nonexistent children and extended hours (e.g., multiple shifts, 7 days a week). Operating “paper” childcare centers that closed immediately once payments were stopped. Kickback arrangements involving parents, co‑owners, or employees. Reusing addresses and reopening under new business names after enforcement actions. 4. Evidence Gathered by Investigators Physical surveillance showed centers operating without children or staff. Electronic evidence (texts, phones, computers) revealed admissions of fraud and intent to profit. Investigations led to multiple felony convictions, including at least one federal case with prison time and restitution exceeding $1 million. 5. Overwhelming Volume of Fraud Investigators received so many credible tips that they had to prioritize only the highest‑dollar cases. Centers billing less than ~$700,000 often could not be addressed due to limited resources. 6. Internal Resistance and Obstruction According to the whistleblower, senior DHS officials discouraged, undermined, or obstructed investigations once fraud became large and visible. Actions alleged include: Attempts to alter or suppress information sent to the Legislative Auditor Harassment and intimidation of investigators Organizational changes that reduced investigators’ authority Procedural delays that significantly reduced investigative capacity 7. Retaliation Against Whistleblowers Investigators who pushed fraud cases reportedly faced: Threats and bullying Negative performance actions Loss of decision‑making power The whistleblower ultimately resigned, stating he would not be complicit. 8. Failure of Oversight The testimony suggests institutional tolerance of fraud, contrasting sharply with standards enforced in law enforcement agencies. The whistleblower emphasizes that minor theft would not have been tolerated in his prior roles, while millions in losses were allowed to continue at DHS. 9. Federal Intervention Federal agencies (FBI, IRS‑CI, HHS‑OIG) eventually became involved due to the scale and nature of suspected crimes. Raids, indictments, and convictions occurred after years of state‑level warnings. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast and Verdict with Ted Cruz Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send us Fan MailPerioperative anticoagulation management is a common and complex clinical challenge. In this episode of CLOT Conversations, Drs. James Douketis and Joseph Shaw discuss new ISTH guidance on surgical and procedural bleed risk stratification in anticoagulated patients.The discussion explores why updated guidance was needed, addressing inconsistencies in prior schemas, and introduces a more detailed, procedure-specific framework. The authors outline a three-tier classification—minimal, low/moderate, and high bleed risk—and its implications for anticoagulation management.The episode focuses on real-world application, including patient-specific factors, procedural variability, and interdisciplinary communication. It also highlights evidence gaps and ongoing research such as PAUSE2 and ACE-HIGH.https://www.jthjournal.org/article/S1538-7836(26)00055-3/abstract [Subscription required for full paper]Support the showhttps://thrombosiscanada.caTake a look at our healthcare professional and patient resources, videos and publications on thrombosis from the expert members of Thrombosis Canada

Adam talks about Emmy Allen's Stygian Library, the library that doesn't end. Will your players find the knowledge they're looking for? Can they evade the mysterious librarians and their super computer? The sister volume to Gardens of Ynn is full of ideas that may find a place in your Mage games. Just watch out for the ink blots. They stain.Show Notes Stygian Library overview (DriveThruRPG) - A strange old place, part haunted mansion, part endless library tucked outside the world. Coins and Scrolls - OSR procedural dungeon design basics Mage: The Ascension (White Wolf overview) - At its heart, Mage is all about the long road to Ascension. Nt just for one soul, but for all of humanity. Trouble is, nobody's pinned down exactly what that means or how you get there. Umbral Realms & High Umbra concepts - Folks also call it the Spirit World, the Shadow, or the Velvet Shadow, one of those places that's right there beside our world, even if you can't quite touch it. It runs alongside the everyday, separate but close, like a reflection in a dark window just waiting to be noticed. Procedural generation in RPGs (design concepts)- “Xandering” a dungeon means designing it like the old-school masters did (full of branching paths, secret routes, and meaningful choices) so players truly explore and shape their own adventure instead of being led down a straight, railroaded path. Ternary computing background (for Virtual Adept ideas) - A ternary (sometimes folks say trinary) computer is just a machine that counts a little different than most. Instead of using the usual on-or-off binary way of thinking, it works in threes. So where regular computers use bits, these use “trits,” giving them an extra option to work with each step of the way.

In this episode, hosts Jon Orr and Yvette Lehman unpack a tension that's been debated in math education for decades: conceptual understanding vs. procedural fluency.Yvette shares a powerful realization from her math classroom experience: in striving to teach conceptually, she may have unintentionally neglected opportunities for students to build automaticity and recall. Meanwhile, Jon highlights the importance of helping students move fluidly between visual models, strategies, and algorithms.Together, they explore:Why the “either/or” debate in math instruction is a false dichotomyHow different learners benefit from different approachesWhat happens when math teaching becomes too rigid in one directionThe role of tutoring, parents, and community partners in shaping math successWhy strong math instruction should leverage strengths while building other proficienciesHow educators can balance reasoning, understanding, and efficiencyThis conversation is a reminder that great math teaching isn't about choosing sides—it's about creating access, building flexibility, and meeting students where they are.

In this episode, Tony DeSantis, Executive Director of Procedural and Clinical Imaging Systems, AdventHealth, and Aynsley Miller, Strategic Account Executive, Insight Global Health, share how a clinician-led approach, strong partnership, and innovative workforce model enabled a seamless large-scale implementation while maintaining care continuity.This episode is sponsored by Insight Global Health.

In this week's episode, I answer questions I receive whenever I mention that STARFIELD is my favorite game of the 2020s. This coupon code will get you 50% off the audiobook of Half-Orc Paladin, Book #3 in the Half-Elven Thief series, (as excellently narrated by Leanne Woodward) at my Payhip store: HECTOR50 The coupon code is valid through April 20th, 2026. TRANSCRIPT 00:00:00 Introduction and Writing Updates Hello, everyone. Welcome to Episode 298 of The Pulp Writer Show. My name is Jonathan Moeller. Today is April 10th, 2026. Today I'm doing an FAQ about my experiences with Starfield, which is my favorite game of the 2020s. Before that, we will have Coupon of the Week and a progress update on my current writing, publishing, and audiobook projects. So let's start off with Coupon of the Week. This week's Coupon Code will get you 50% off the audiobook of Half-Orc Paladin, Book #3 in the Half-Elven Thief series (as excellently narrated by Leanne Woodward), at my Payhip store. That coupon code will be HECTOR50. And as always, the coupon code and the link to my Payhip store will be available in the show notes for this episode. And this coupon code will be valid through April 20th, 2026. So if you need a new audiobook for this spring, we have got you covered. Now for an update on my current writing, publishing, and audiobook projects. As of this recording, I am done with the first pass of editing through Blade of Wraiths and then starting on the second. It's taken a bit longer than I've wanted because I've had a lot of Real Life Stuff to do, but if all goes well, I'm hoping to have the book out in the second half of April, so hopefully not too much longer now. I'm also 19,000 words into Dragon-Mage, which will be the sixth book in the Rivah Half-Elven Thief series. Hopefully that will be out in May, if all goes well. No, that might slip to June, but I'm really hoping to get that one out in May. In audiobook news, Hollis McCarthy has started work on Cloak of Illusion, so hopefully if all goes well, we'll have that out to you in May sometime. In fact, I'm hoping that will come out concurrently with Dragon-Mage, because it's always nice when I can stack an ebook and an older audiobook in the series like that together. So that is where we're at with my current writing, publishing, and audiobook projects. 00:01:46 Main Topic: Starfield Now onto our main topic. This is ostensibly a podcast about writing and the business of writing, but I like video games, so we're going to talk about a video game this week. The reason for that is whenever I post about Starfield or share a screenshot from it, I frequently get a number of questions. I think it's because Starfield was an oddly divisive game when it came out. People have strong opinions about it and then have strong opinions about other people's strong opinions and I do not have these strong opinions myself. While I enjoy the game a great deal, if you don't like it, that's fine. There are lots and lots and lots of legitimate reasons to criticize Microsoft, which is the ultimate owner of Starfield. It's possible for two things to be simultaneously true that Microsoft has done a lot of sketchy things, and that Starfield is a good game that I enjoyed. I suspect it's a bit like enjoying a football game while at the same time knowing that the NFL is an unscrupulous cartel that could benefit from some thorough reforms. Despite that, I have to admit that I don't think it's super healthy to make gaming opinions, whether video games or sports games, a core part of your identity. A game in the end is just a fancy toy for amusement and idle moments. If God descended tomorrow and told me that Starfield would vanish from the face of the earth, I'd be rather disappointed, but my dinner would still taste just as good and my house would be just as warm. That said, I did enjoy the game quite a bit. Everybody needs a hobby and even I can't work every hour of every day. I wrote like a hundred novels in the last 10 years. Everyone has their own stresses in life, of course, but we seem to live in particularly stressful time these days, so a harmless hobby is a nice break from real life. The game's newest expansion came out a couple days ago on April 7th. And so with that in mind, I thought I would answer the most common questions I get whenever I post or talk about Starfield. Question: Did Starfield influence your Silent Order Science fiction series at all? No. But I'm always pleased when I get this question because it's easily answered. The final book of Silent Order came out on September the 4th, 2023, and Starfield came out on September 6th, 2023. I tried Starfield like the day after it came out, but I didn't actually start playing it in earnest until April of 2024, like I didn't actually finish the starter dungeon until April of 2024. So no, Starfield was not an influence on Silent Order. It would be fair to say that Silent Order was more influenced by James Bond, some H.P. Lovecraft, and Wing Commander: Privateer, which is actually our next question. Question: What initially drew your interest to Starfield? Part of the game reminded me a lot of Wing Commander: Privateer from the '90s, which was one of my favorite games back in the day. If you're not familiar with it, Wing Commander: Privateer was what's now called a "space trading sim" set in the Wing Commander universe. In all the previous Wing Commander games, you played as a Starfighter pilot fighting in the humans' war against the cat-like Kilrathi invaders. Your missions were assigned to you along with the specific ship you would fly for that mission. But in Privateer, you played a freelance captain with a rundown freighter. You can carry cargo, go bounty hunting, do mercenary work, trading, and just wander around the map following infinite procedurally generated missions from the Mission Board, the Merchants' Guild, and the Mercenaries' Guild. Eventually, you would have enough cash to upgrade your rundown ship to something better and configure it however you liked. There's a main plot, but you can totally ignore it and do whatever you want. I loved Privateer and I finished both it and the expansion. And of course, spent a lot of time doing the infinite procedurally generated quests. Starfield does the same thing, but with 30 years' worth of advancement of game design and technology improvements. In grand Bethesda game tradition, you don't even have to do any of the main plot lines. You can just wander around doing procedurally generated quests. It's like Privateer, but better and with ground-based quests as well. You can get out of your ship and walk around in a way you couldn't in Privateer. In Starfield, you can land at some random science outpost or industrial outpost and the inhabitants will have a quest for you. I've heard Starfield described as a "cozy game", since quite a few people enjoy just building their outposts and their ships and then decorating them like the science fiction version of Animal Crossing or Stardew Valley. In another sense, I suppose Starfield could be described as "cozy adventure". Granted, that might be a strange thing to say about missions where you machine gun space pirates, blow up their base, and then loot all their stuff, but Starfield is an excellent game for just puttering around. It's fun after a long day to play for an hour, take out some space pirates, upgrade your ship a little, maybe tinker with your outpost. And I do like, I have to admit, the main plot line and the various faction quests. Question: So the procedural generation stuff doesn't bother you? No. Procedural generation has been part of gaming forever and long before the civilizational blight that is modern LLM systems. Certainly there are points where the procedural generation of Starfield could be improved and it has been improved with patches, but I enjoy the randomness of it. Question: If you think Starfield is good, why did it have such mixed reviews? It did have some rough points at launch, like the lack of surface vehicles, the lack of city maps, and some weird choices for inventory management (among some other issues, though those were later patched or upgraded). I honestly think the game is better than the mixed reviews would indicate, and I also think the mixed reviews were a combination of different converging social factors, specifically, people's expectations of what they imagined the game would be versus what it actually was, its Xbox and PC exclusivity, and the unfortunate addiction to outrage culture in social media. As I mentioned before, I think it's obvious that we live in stressful times and for a variety of reasons that are beyond the scope of this episode, I think people are overall angrier and eager to lash out when a target presents itself, especially online. Additionally, I suspect a big part of the mixed reviews is that Microsoft has built up a lot of ill will since the launch of Windows 11 and Copilot, and Starfield is a convenient outlet for that. Like Outlook and Teams are widely hated software tools, probably some of the most hated software tools in the world, but your job forces you to use them and you can't do anything about it. It's more effective to criticize a consumer-facing business like video games than it is Outlook and Teams, since those tend to be sold in blocks of thousands of licenses to large institutional customers that don't particularly care what their employees think about Outlook or Teams. In fact, fun fact, while I was writing this episode, Outlook was causing problems on Artemis II, NASA's first manned mission to the moon in over 50 years. So there is yet another historical milestone for Outlook. Question: You've said repeatedly that you don't like multiverse stuff, yet Starfield's main plot revolves heavily around the multiverse. That's true. I don't really like multiverse stuff in fiction because it's hard to execute well without making the story pointless. If there are a billion parallel universes and somebody dies in one of them, so what? Just hop over one universe and find a new version of the dead guy. Multiverse and parallel universe plot lines are a bit like homemade lasagna or homemade spaghetti carbonara. It needs to be done by someone who really, really knows what they're doing, otherwise the end result is sad and unpleasant, indigestible, or outright disgusting. That said, multiverse as a game mechanic is actually the clever idea. Like we all know that if you really like a game, you're going to play it more than once. How many times have you replayed Skyrim? How many uncounted quintillions of times has the original Super Mario Brothers been replayed? Starfield rather cleverly builds that replaying into the game. You can start over in a new universe and play the game again, but this time your character has in- game foreknowledge of everything that's going to happen and that can affect the gameplay in fun ways. Question: Did you really lose 40 pounds while playing Starfield? Yes. Of course, the main factor was some lifestyle changes in terms of exercise and diet, but I did lose 40 pounds since starting to seriously play Starfield in April of 2024. The game was an excellent distraction instead of late night snacking, so I suppose I sublimated the snacking urge into blowing up space pirates. Question: Aren't you worried Starfield will influence or slow down your writing? Well, writers and other creatives draw inspiration from all sorts of places, but no, I'm not worried about that because Starfield draws so heavily on multiverse tropes and as I've mentioned a few times before, I don't really like multiverse stuff in fiction. In terms of productivity, I published a million new words in 2024 and again in 2025. Though in full disclosure, I will be surprised if I hit a million words in 2026 due to the amount of Real Life Stuff I will have to do this year, but admittedly that is Real Life Stuff unconnected to gaming or recreation and it's only April, so who can say how the rest of the year will play out? Question: Did playing Starfield so much take time away from reading? Probably not. In 2025, I read 69 books and by the end of March in 2026, I have read 15. Lots of people read more than I do, but 69 books in a year is still significantly higher than the American national average. In all honesty, I both read less and play fewer video games now than I did like 20, 25 years ago when I had way fewer responsibilities. Question: The expansion pack Shattered Space got mixed reviews, but you really enjoyed it. Why? I thought the concept was intriguing. "Religious leader builds machine to contact his conception of God and accidentally blows up half his capital city and creates a space time rift" is an interesting concept for both a game and for fiction. I also liked how the expansion pack went in depth into the crazy space cultists' home planet, which was a fun environment to play. Shattered Space is definitely Starfield on hard mode though. The game recommends it for Level 35 characters, but I think 50 might be better, if I'm honest. Question: If Starfield was a commercial failure, why do you play it? Well, "commercial success" and "I enjoyed this" don't necessarily overlap on the Venn Diagram, do they? Just because something is popular doesn't mean it is good and just because something is unpopular doesn't mean it is bad. That said, I don't think it's objectively correct to say Starfield is a commercial failure, regardless of one's opinion of the game. Microsoft is a ruthless corporate empire that has absolutely no qualms about cutting things that are liabilities, especially as more and more of its resources go into Copilot and LLM slop (though there are some indications that its AI focus is starting to loosen as reality begins to impose itself on the grand delusion of the AI powered future). Considering that in the two and a half years since Starfield came out, it's received a lot of patches, a lot of new free content, and two paid expansions, it's clear that the Lidless Eye of Microsoft has not turned towards Starfield in fiery wrath, especially since Microsoft laid off lots of people and shut down a bunch of its game studios during that time. People tend to focus on Steam rankings, but that's only a segment (if a very large segment) of the market. Various Starfield devs in interviews have said that the game is in the top 10 for played hours on Xbox Game Pass. Xbox Game Pass is really important to Microsoft, probably more important than the physical Xbox itself. So I don't think it's objectively true that Starfield is a commercial failure, though it definitely wasn't as successful as Skyrim or Fallout 4. Question: Baldur's Gate 3 (BG3) came out at about the same time as Starfield. Did you like Starfield better than Baldur's Gate 3? Yes. Question: What? Why? Everyone knows Baldur's Gate 3 is the better game. Baldur's Gate 3 is an excellent game. Well written, well designed, excellent voice acting, the works. That said, I also think Starfield is an excellent game and I just enjoyed it more. It's a matter of taste, I think, which is not quantifiable. BG3 is a big Larian/BioWare-style narrative RPG, which is kind of its own genre in the same way that a Bethesda RPG is also its own genre. I mentioned above that I enjoy the puttering around aspect of Starfield a great deal and BG3 doesn't offer as much space for that kind of puttering, some but not nearly as much. I have enjoyed that style of narrative RPG in the past. Dragon Age: Origins and Knights of the Old Republic were both excellent games I played back to back in 2009 or maybe 2008, back when I had more time for that kind of thing and I think they qualify as direct predecessors to Baldur's Gate 3. But these days, I like the freedom of puttering more, even if a game like BG3 offers an excellent interactive narrative. Additionally, I admit I got frustrated a lot with BG3 in a way I didn't with Starfield. In BG3, I kept frequently running into Total Party Kill situations, which is exasperating after you've sunk 20 or 30 minutes into a complicated combat encounter. So I think it's objectively and quantifiably true to say that Baldur's Gate 3 is significantly more popular than Starfield, but on the subjective level, I just enjoy Starfield more. Question: Do you like the soundtrack of Starfield? Oh yeah. It's some of my favorite writing music. For fun, go search on YouTube and watch the London Symphony Orchestra's concert of the Starfield soundtrack. The composer Inon Zur gets to conduct some of it. I'd say my favorite tracks are Into the Starfield, New Atlantis, The Safety of the Citizens, Freestar, The New Old Frontier (I think that plays in the Trackers' Alliance headquarters), Cydonia, Sublevels, Neon, and In Silent Orbit. The battle of music when you fight the Star Born is pretty great as well. I think it's called "Stars and Sacrifice", but I'm not 100% sure. I also quite liked the soundtrack for Baldur's Gate 3 as well, to return to an earlier question. Andrew Wincott totally deserved the BAFTA for "Raphael's Final Act." Question: If a Switch 2 port comes along of Starfield, will you buy it? I would wait for reviews, but honestly, I would be amazed if there was a Switch 2 port of Starfield. The Switch 2 is more powerful than its predecessor, but there's no denying that Starfield is a chunky, chunky game. Then again, I wouldn't have thought it was possible to get Cyberpunk 2077, Witcher 3, or Fallout 4 on the Switch, and apparently those are good ports, so I guess we'll see. Question: Favorite Quest in Starfield? The Mantis, Groundpounder, and the entire thing with the Terrormorphs. Also the whole freaky quest with the Crucible and the clones, that was some great '70s-style science fiction stuff. I enjoy any of the quests with Walter Stroud because he's a fun character, and also voiced by the actor who played Quark in Deep Space Nine in the '90s, back when I was playing Privateer. (Full circle moment!) Also fighting The Hunter for the last time is pretty great since he's such a smug Nietzschean jerk. One of the greatest moments in the game is how The Hunter is just chilling in a Spaceport bar and willing to have amiable conversations with you at the start of the game since he's killed alternate versions of you thousands of times before and isn't expecting trouble, so no reason not to have a civil chat over a drink. I also played through the new Trackers' Alliance plotline. If you get the premium edition of Starfield and its bonus 1,000 Creation Credits, I highly recommend you use them on the Trackers' Alliance expansion. It is a lot of fun. Question: Favorite ship in the game? The Razor Leaf and the Ecliptic Claymore. Also, this is a new addition, but I really like the Orchid you pick up from the fake Mantis Quest in the Trackers' Alliance Quest line. I think my favorite overall ship is the Shieldbreaker that you can buy on New Atlantis, but if you're going to buy a ship instead of stealing it, I think Walter's company Stroud-Ecklund (see above) has the best ships. Honestly, one of my favorite activities in Starfield is stealing ships from space pirates. It's always so much fun. Question: Favorite gun? The Magstorm hands down. Peace through superior firepower. The Magstorm is what I used for the final battle with The Hunter and then again for the final mission of Shattered Space. For stealth, the Hard Target with a suppressor and a scope. I've taken out entire pirate bases with the Hard Target and stealth mode. The one Starborn lady who sells stuff to you in New Universes has a really excellent stealth optimized version of the Hard Target in her inventory. I also really like the Urban Eagle pistol you get early in the Vanguard plotline, since it's usually the best gun in the game I found at that point. Conclusion I hope that explains why I enjoy Starfield and answers some of the questions people always seem to have whenever I mention it. I doubt anyone involved with Starfield will ever listen to this, but I would like to thank everyone who has worked on the game in any capacity: devs, artists, writers, composers, Q&A people, everyone. Thank you for all your hard work, which has given me a lot of enjoyment and mental escape during some very stressful times. So that's it for this week. I promise we will go back to writing related topics next week. Thank you for listening to The Pulp Writer Show. I hope you found the show useful. A reminder that you can listen to all the back episodes at https://thepulpwritershow.com. If you enjoyed the podcast, please leave your view on your podcasting platform of choice. Stay safe and stay healthy, and we'll see you all next week.  

Pelvic venous disease is often misattributed, until you recognize the venous “detours” driving symptoms. In this episode of the BackTable Podcast, Dr. Ally Baheti speaks with Dr. Deepak Sudheendra (360 Vascular Institute in Columbus, Ohio) about a symptom-first framework for evaluating and treating pelvic venous disease. --- Get the BackTable app https://www.backtable.com/app --- Timestamps 00:00 - Introduction01:40 - Becoming a Pelvic Vein Specialist04:39 - Sorting Causes of Pelvic Pain06:26 - Symptom Checklist Approach09:45 - Nutcracker Red Flags11:37 - Right Sided Symptoms and Detours15:57 - Conservative Care and Stent Counseling17:27 - Rule Out Superficial Venous Disease21:56 - Procedure Planning and Insurance Hurdles24:04 - IJ Access and Inflow Assessment25:18 - IVUS First Renal and Ovarian Evaluation28:07 - IVUS Iliac Compression Map29:44 - Leg Inflow Venography Setup31:15 - Iliac Stenting From IJ32:24 - Stent Sizing Pitfalls36:31 - Gonadal Vein Embolization42:13 - Internal Iliac Varices Caution43:29 - Post Procedure Meds Follow Up46:49 - Wrap Up --- More about this episode Iliac vein compression can manifest through three collateral pathways, contributing to leg heaviness and groin or hip pain, low back pain via the ascending lumbar system, and pelvic organ symptoms through cross-pelvic internal iliac collaterals. The discussion outlines a practical diagnostic approach grounded in clinical pattern recognition, including the significance of prior DVT as a post-thrombotic etiology, differentiation of flank versus low back pain, and the importance of excluding gynecologic pathology. Emphasis is placed on standing venous reflux ultrasound and pelvic ultrasound, with caution against overreliance on cross-sectional imaging for Nutcracker physiology. Procedural strategy centers on IVUS-guided evaluation, targeted iliac vein stenting (often unilateral) and thoughtful use of gonadal vein embolization, including sequencing considerations and avoidance of common pitfalls. The episode also reviews conservative management, follow-up imaging, and post-procedural antithrombotic and pain management protocols. --- BackTable Vascular & Interventional (VI) is the go-to podcast for interventional radiologists, vascular surgeons, and interventional cardiologists. Download the free BackTable app to get early access to new episodes, cases, and courses curated by physicians in your specialty. ► https://www.backtable.com/app

A lawsuit over a 2023 fall on Tombstone’s famous Allen Street boardwalk has finally come to a close, ending a long legal fight that became almost as much about procedural delays as the accident itself.Support the show: https://www.myheraldreview.com/site/forms/subscription_services/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Deroy is a nationally syndicated columnist and Fox News Contributor, and he addresses birthright citizenship, along with the reasons for Pam Bondi's firing.

A weekly magazine-style radio show featuring the voices and stories of Asians and Pacific Islanders from all corners of our community. The show is produced by a collective of media makers, deejays, and activists. Annie Lee moderates a panel with African and Asian Americans about the impacts of Birthright Citizenship and the need for Surviving Through Solidarity. Guests include: Lisa Holder, Ming Hsu Chen, Don Tamaki and Michael Harris.   Link to an APEX Episode on Wong Kim Ark from March 20, 2025 Show Transcript [00:00:00] Opening Music: Apex Express Asian Pacific expression. Community and cultural coverage, music and calendar, new visions and voices, coming to you with an Asian Pacific Islander point of view. It's time to get on board the Apex Express.   [00:00:40] Miko Lee: Welcome to Apex Express. I'm your host, Miko Lee, and tonight we will listen to a recent event, Birthright Citizenship, Surviving Through Solidarity that took place at Chinese for Affirmative Action. Just yesterday, on April 1st, the Supreme Court heard the case around birthright citizenship. This event that you're gonna listen to was highlighting Asian and African American solidarity. As you might know, the cases of dread Scott in 1857 and Wong Kim Ark in 1898 are linked as landmark Supreme Court cases that directly defined and redefined American citizenship specifically about race and birthright. While Dred Scott denied citizenship to people of African descent, Wong Kim Ark's case utilized the subsequent 14th Amendment to solidify birthright citizenship for children born to foreign nationals. I'm just noting that in this conversation, because it was a panel discussion that was live, there was some irregular use of microphones, so sometimes the audio can be a bit spotty. Please bear with us, and if you want to review the transcript, check out our website, kpfa.org, apex Express. And last year we also covered the story of Wong Kim Ark and have included this past show in our show notes. Now let's listen in to moderator Annie Lee, Lawyers Michael Harris and Don Tamaki, Lisa Holder of Equal Justice Society and Ming Chen of UC Law.   [00:02:20] Annie Lee: Everyone. My name is Annie Lee and I am the managing director of policy at Chinese for Affirmative Action. Welcome to CAA's office here in San Francisco, Chinatown. And thank you all for being here today for our discussion: Birthright Citizenship Surviving through Solidarity. CAA and Stop AAPI Hate are proud to co-sponsor this event because it matters to us. CAA has been around since 1969 and we are a community based organization that provides direct services to lingual working class Chinese immigrants. And we also try to improve their lives through policy and advocacy. And in 2020, we co-founded Stop AAPI Hate, which is the national leading aggregator of anti-Asian hate incidents. And we know at Stop AAPI Hate that anti-immigrant policies are anti-Asian hate. So why are we here right now? March marks two anniversaries of two Supreme Court cases. One is Dred Scott and the other is Wong Kim Ark. These are two seminal cases in US history. And next week on April 1st, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the lawsuits challenging Trump's birthright citizenship executive order. So we are here to talk about birthright citizenship because it's an issue that is near and dear to both the Black and Asian communities.   [00:03:46] Without further ado, I am so thrilled to welcome this panel of amazing folks. Let's start with Michael Harris. Michael Harris here on my right is a retired attorney. He, for many, many years led the juvenile justice division at the National Center for Youth Law, an incredible litigator and advocates, and I'm so proud that he's here. He's also on the Equal Justice Society Board. Next to Michael is Don Tamaki. Don is a lawyer at the firm Minami Tamaki, and you might know him because he was part of the legal team that successfully got reparations for Japanese Americans after decades of fighting that injustice. So thank you Don. Don and Lisa, actually, spend time together on the California Reparations Task Force. And so this is Lisa Holder next to Don. Lisa is the president of the Equal Justice Society, which is based in Oakland, an incredible legal organization that has been in many, many fights, including, they filed an amicus brief in support of birthright citizenship, and that brief discusses why this is an issue for the Black community. And last but not least, we have Professor Ming Chen, who is a law professor at UC Law, and she's also the faculty director of the RICE Program, which is Race, Immigration, Citizenship, and Equality. So thank you so much to my panel and let's dive in. So some of you know, but I am a former US history teacher, so I often worry that people don't adequately understand American history and I fear that people don't understand reconstruction and the 14th Amendment. So let's start with the origin of birthright citizenship. What is birthright citizenship and where did it come from and why does its origin matter for understanding what's happening today? So Ming, I'm gonna start with you because you're a law professor and then others chime in. Lisa, Michael, Don. 'cause I think you'll have more to add.   [00:05:45] Ming Chen: Great. Thank you so much Annie, and thank you to CAA for having us all. I'm really excited to be part of this conversation, which I think is going to be really the beginning of a series of conversations over the next few months. So you're starting in the right place, Annie, in asking us what birthright citizenship is, because that is the heart of what the common lawsuit will be about: who gets to be a citizen in the United States. And that's actually why I named my organization RICE. I think the emphasis is on the “C” [citizenship], because I do think it is something that brings together immigrant communities, as well as all of the different communities within the United States that have been expanding, over time. Getting to the, legal text I, I think it's important to remember first that birthright citizenship is bigger than the United States. Worldwide there are at least two ways of becoming a citizen. One is by birthright and the other is by naturalized citizenship. So we're talking about the birthright half. And the United States is not alone. It's among countries mostly in the Western hemisphere that have chosen to focus on the “jus soli” version of birthright citizenship, which is “soli” is soil. So it's birth by touching US soil. And the idea behind that theory was always meant to be an egalitarian one. It's one that is about the idea that anyone can become a citizen, right? In contrast to the older system that Europe and other countries use, “jus sanguinis,” which is to say that citizenship could only be inherited by blood and heritage. Right? So I think right from the very beginning, it tells us what the text and the history of our 14th amendment citizenship clause intended to accomplish, which was to have an egalitarian spirit, a fresh start, and a continual renewal of what it means to be an American.   [00:07:33] Lisa Holder: Just sort of continuing on the path that Ming just opened up for us, birthright citizenship is very much connected to the African American experience. Particularly because the genesis of that right, really was a reversal of the construct and the regime of the enslavement era, right? Everyone's aware that during that era, descendants of Africa were not considered humans, much less citizens. And the legal cases that were brought where people try to have their citizenship, and their humanity acknowledged, the courts universally said, no, you are not citizens and Black people have no rights that white people need to respect. Right. And so that was the case, law of the land until, after the Civil War, when we had the 13th, 14th, and 15th, amendments were lifted up and embedded into our laws. You also had the Civil Rights Act of 1866 where that body of law was overturned and enshrined into our constitution was a new law that said that freed people are citizens and they do have rights that everyone needs to respect and rights to equality. You know, we know that there have been problems executing that [laughs] but at least enshrined in our laws and enshrined in our constitution that is where the birthright citizenship, constitutional law came from. It came out of that experience.    [00:09:21] Michael Harris: I just want to add a couple things to that. I mean, it's very distinguished scholars, they're hitting it really hard. Two things, universality and so I wanna talk about that first. I got one more coming forward. It's universal. Birthright citizenship is universal. And what I mean by that is everybody gets to be a citizen who's born here in the United States. Period. It's universal, applies to everybody. It doesn't matter if you're Black or white or Asian, none of that matters. That's really important. The other thing is it's that this criteria is not something that's subjective, nobody gets to decide. It's automatic. If you're born here, you automatically have citizenship. Those two things being automatic and being universal I think are really important. And this, we'll talk about this more as we go through the conversation, but those two things are what makes birthright citizenship so powerful and why they keep coming to try and take it down because it's universal so everybody gets it and it's automatic. Nobody can take it away. So let's, we'll I'll just leave it there for now, but we'll come back to that.   [00:10:33] Annie Lee: Don, this one's for you. So the 14th Amendment passes in 1868. Like Lisa said, it's to reverse Dred Scott, where the Justice Taney wrote that Black people had no rights, which the white man was bound to respect. And so they had to repudiate that through the 14th amendments, they have universal and automatic birthright citizenship with very, very few exceptions for like diplomats kids. Okay, that's like so, so narrow. So 14th Amendment passes in 1868, but it takes another 30 years for a Chinese American man named Wong Kim Ark to establish that birthright citizenship actually applied to the children of immigrants. So Don, can you tell us Wong Kim Ark's story, who was he, what happened to him and why did the federal rural government make him this test case?   [00:11:22] Don Tamaki: Just a couple words about context. I mean, one of the remarkable things about the case is it occurred during especially California's ultra racist, ultra virulent racist period. It's a contradiction in that regard. So just taking you back to the origins of where this racial pathology comes from, of course we focus, tend to focus on Asian American history, but actually you have to begin with Black history and indigenous history in the country. So in 1619, the first enslaved people were brought to America. And you know, 12 million people were kidnapped off the west coast of Africa. 2 million died during the middle passage. 400,000 were dropped off in America, and the million other millions ended up in the Caribbean, in the Brazil in Haiti, Jamaica, et cetera. And from there, slavery in America continued for 246 years. Two and a half centuries. Civil war happened in 1865. It concluded, and for another 100 years, Jim Crow exclusion infected America. And San Francisco, by the way, was heavily Jim Crow until the 1960s and into the 1970s. The vestiges of that exclusion and discrimination directly are rooted in the Black American experience.   [00:12:52] Michael Harris: And it's still present here today. That's why we have a Chinatown. That's why we have a Japantown in San Francisco because of what Don just did.    [00:13:00] Don Tamaki: Redlining and racial covenants.    [00:13:02] Michael Harris: That's right.    [00:13:03] Don Tamaki: Exclusions, redevelopment, and so on. So people think of California as being like a enlightened state. Well, California did enter the union in 1850 before the Civil War. 1849 enslavers came to California and they brought their human property with them. So there were probably at least 1500 enslaved people in California. 1865 Civil War ended, but Democrats in 1868 rose to power saying they would vote against any law that would have any equality between , Black Californians, indigenous people, and Chinese folks. And beginning toward late 1800s, that's when the bulk of Asian American immigration began. First Chinese American coming during the gold rush, and then Japanese Americans have followed and so on. And so, Jim Crow seeped into all that. Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in 1882. California was known as a strong Klan state by the end of the 1800s with strong Ku Klux Klan chapters in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Oakland, Riverside, San Jose, Anaheim and so on. And so this was a toxic stew that Chinese immigrated into and other groups too. So unsurprisingly, tons of anti-Asian legislation policies, exclusion, follow. So Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco in 1873 to Chinese parents who lived and operated a business here. His parents continued to reside and remain in the United States until 1890, and then they departed for China. Probably no doubt because of the inhospitable conditions here. And racial terror was part of that, including the race riots here in Chinatown. And now that I mention it between 1865 to 1935, 352 people were lynched in California. Eight of those were Black Californians, but the rest were indigenous, Chinese, and persons of Mexican descent.   [00:15:18] So that was the environment. Wong Kim Ark continued to live in California into his twenties, reportedly working as a cook in San Francisco. And at the age of 21 he actually made two trips to China. He made a trip to China when he was 17 to visit his parents. Stayed there a year, came back without incident worked, came back here, worked till he was 21, then went back to China to visit his parents at that point. And when he attempted to reenter the United States, he was denied entry and detained with a threat of deportation upon the sole ground that he was not a citizen of the United States. Of course he was born here. So the issue was you know, birthright citizenship was the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment did it apply to Wong Kim Ark. And the interesting thing is about the case is that the court ruled in his favor. All persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. And those words are now, today becomes crucial. And people, I think we on the panel will talk about the implications of that language subject to the jurisdiction thereof. And it established this principle that basically was reaffirmed repeatedly throughout our history for this 100 year plus period. To get to your last question, why did the court do this? I think scholars smarter than me can explain this, but I'll give you some clues. The court ruled in Wong Kim Ark's favor despite the virulent context of the era, because that's what the plain and expansive language of the 14th Amendment says.   [00:17:02] All persons didn't say formally enslaved, didn't say Black Americans. It said all persons. That's what the plain expensive language of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 says: all persons and as Lisa referred to. And the congressional record of the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1862, where legislators are debating these issues they clearly understood, and the record shows that if you include this expansive language, it will apply to groups like Chinese and Asians. And so with that understood it was adopted and ratified in 1868, 14th Amendment, and it was reaffirmed in other legislation like the Immigration Act of 1940. They just assumed that if you're born in this country, you're an American citizen. It was applied throughout the turbulent history involving my community, Japanese Americans. As you recall, 1942, 125,000 people were rounded up and put in concentration camps and the first generation were ineligible to become citizens. They were given identity cards marking them as enemy aliens. 2000 people died in those camps, but people were born in those camps. And the government, despite the fact that we were at war with Japan, understood that if you're born in this country. And even if your parents were quote, “enemy aliens,” you're gonna be classified as American citizens. And maybe lastly, the court ruled in favor of Wong Kim Ark because the 14th Amendment was trying to repair the harm done by Dred Scott v. Sandford, which was to provide human beings who've been here for two and a half centuries, the right to become an American citizen with all the benefits that go with that, like voting for instance. And recognizing that if you don't have those rights, you don't have anything, you are you, you're nothing. And for Japanese Americans, for instance, who are born in those camps, can you imagine if they didn't have birthright citizenship? They're not part of Japan. They're not part of America. Where are they? They're stateless. They have no home. They have no rights. And so it would create another underclass of people who have no rights for, and for which the 14th Amendment was trying to remedy which was you know, to provide a pathway. And so I guess you could say that's why, that's the incongruity of why Wong Kim Ark came out that way. In my opinion.   [00:19:59] Ming Chen: Maybe what I could add to the conversation is not just sort of who is included but who is not included. Because I think that's actually a much more small and specific group than the current dialogue would have you believe. So in the very language of the 14th Amendment, this idea of subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It refers to three exceptions and only three exceptions. One is for Native Americans, and that is because as of 1924 there wasn't a need to grant citizenship through the 14th Amendment because there were other provisions to grant citizenship to Native Americans. The second exception is for those who are children of diplomats. And the reason for that is because they have citizenship in their home country and their parents are only on a temporary post to the United States with the understanding that they're here in the United States in service to their home country. And I think that actually points to the limited meaning of the third exception, which is the one that I have to say, I have a really hard time understanding is part of the debate now. Because I think up until now, you know, this debate renews itself a couple times every year. Every time there's a new census, every time there's redistricting on all of the anniversaries, and usually the fight is about subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But the third exception, which has come into the dialogue, is about the language of accepting children of invading armies. And that is one that I have not thought we needed to argue about. It really becomes a touch point as Don mentions this history with internment and the children of a group of enemy aliens. I think that gives it a whole new historical read.   [00:21:48] But one of the reasons that this argument, I guess I should first explain the argument because it may not be obvious to you as it was not obvious to me the first time I heard it, which was about 18 months ago. And so the argument is that the children of invading armies referring mostly to the children of immigrants coming across the US Mexico border should not be considered birthright citizens. So that's kind of what the public debate, what the insinuation is behind some of the current effort to chip away at Wong Kim Ark through the executive order. There have been many efforts to chip away through legislation. I don't know how frequently it's been attempted through constitutional amendment, which is what it would actually require. That's a very, very high bar that's almost never met. I think most people haven't really made a serious, serious effort there. But what I think is kind of stunning to me in the sort of momentum behind the current moment is that Judge Ho who himself is a birthright citizen. Took up this language and this argument about the children of invading armies after previously saying that he agreed with this interpretation that children of undocumented immigrants, children of temporary visas all of these different legal statuses in addition to all of these racial groups, would immediately be citizens. And the argument he tried to make is that it wouldn't include the group at the border because historically it wouldn't have included enemy aliens or invading aliens either. And I think that what is so surprising to me is that a) that there is meant to be this historical analog between what would've been happening at the time of the Civil War and what is happening now at the US Mexico border. We are not having a civil war. We are not in active military conflict at the US Mexico border. I'll set aside other US military conflicts and how we wanna use that terminology. But I think that's really important because I, I feel like it's almost a trick, you know, to turn what is a media frame that's meant to be like clickbait, right? The idea that there is an invasion at the border, right. That we're being flooded with people who don't belong here. And to try to turn that into a legal argument saying this is actually an invading army and that takes this group outside of the 14th Amendment.    [00:24:19] Michael Harris: That's, I was gonna ask you a follow up question because we haven't been invaded that many times by armies I mean, maybe the War for Independence when the British sent ships over and took over Boston for a while. I could see how if they had kids, I mean, that's a stretch, that might apply to this. But I think the rhetorical device, they're touching on where they speak of people who come into the United States without proper documentation as an invading army or an invading whatever. They use that terminology quite often. Is that enough to bootstrap into this exception?    [00:24:59] Ming Chen: I, not to me, [audience and panel laughter] I think not to serious legal scholars and jurists. I mean, and you know, I'm not trying to be inflammatory by saying that. I think there are a lot of people who are pretty far away from me on a legal and political spectrum who would also say that this argument is pretty unprecedented. To try to say that that would be enough to bootstrap it into the actual text of the constitution or the spirit of Wong Kim Ark. So I think it's going really, really far. And I think too far, and I hope that if that becomes a line of discussion during the oral argument, that it would be cut off pretty quickly.   [00:25:38] Annie Lee: Well, let me punt it to Lisa then. If it's pretty clear based on the text, based on the legislative history, based on, just everything in the last 125 years that has said very clearly that birthright citizenship is universal and automatic. Why is Trump doing this? Like, what is being attempted legally, but also politically? And Lisa, you take a stab at this first and then others can chime in.    [00:26:04] Lisa Holder: Yeah. You know, why is Trump doing this? [audience and panel laughter] There's many layers, you know? And it, this is a strategic play and you have to sort of think about this in a layered way. Like there's a long term strategic play. There's a short term strategic play, there's a procedural strategic play, but that sort of bootstraps and brings in a much more moral and narrative rhetorical play. Procedural play. The short term strategic play has a lot to do with the midterm elections. Right, right. And also limiting people of color's ability to pick people who look like them as their representatives. Right. Because all of a sudden you're not only putting into question people's citizenship based on birth and turning this into a lineage thing where you have to bring me proof that your parents or their parents were born here or something like that, or were naturalized. So you're starting to put into question in a practical measure, people's access to the franchise, people's access to the voting booth. Right. And you're also starting to create a chain effect. So people are actually afraid to go to the voting booth. Right. And then you couple that with moving the migration of ICE. Now ICE is in the airports. Guaranteed by November, ICE will be in the voting booth, right? So you create this chilling effect. And then in terms of having representation that looks like you having people of color represent you in the US House of Representatives, your state representative. When you put birthright into question in this way, you're also gonna be able to challenge people who are running for office, people of color, running for office and say, well, you can't really run because you need to prove. And that is a rhetorical issue that we have seen being used already with both Harris and Obama, you know, because they were brown, Black people. Their birthright citizenship was, they were manipulating that rhetoric and that narrative.   [00:28:25] So this is not coming out of the outta left field. It's iterative and it's a it's rhetoric that has been, you know, percolating up for a long time. This is just a culminating moment. The long term strategy is really about white supremacy. We know that, you know, all of the social science shows that in 20 years this, the country will be a majority minority country, right? And people of color will have a huge amount of power in terms of, you know, in terms of the vote, right? Because of that, switch to majority minority and white people will be in the minority. And so, this is about, from a long term perspective, ensuring that certain people maintain their power as an electoral block. Right? So that's sort of like a long term electoral politics play. And then finally, the procedural issues are what's outstanding, okay? As Ming mentioned, if you are going to use procedure to overturn a constitutional amendment that is a, an astronomical feat to accomplish, right? Because you need two thirds of all of the representatives in Congress, and then on top of that, you need 75% of the states to ratify that process. So overturning a constitutional amendment is virtually impossible. But what we have here is trying to do the same thing. One person trying to do the same thing using the powers of the executive office. It is unprecedented. It is absurd. It has no legal viability, but it is a political moment where this man sees an opportunity because of the bias that we see in the judicial branch, in the court system. And that is being leveraged for the executive to to do something that is unprecedented and that is actually procedurally impossible, right? For one person by just signing a document all of a sudden disenfranchising 13 million people. That is not the democratic process. It's quite the opposite.   [00:30:38] Michael Harris: I just wanted to add to that. The Senate and the House of Representatives are both very narrowly controlled by the Republicans, and so it's really important to Trump to maintain that control. He'll only be able to continue doing these outrageous things by virtue of getting a rubber stamp from Congress. And so either house going the other way would put a stop sign in front of him and make it much more difficult for him to do all those things. All this money he's spending he would not be able to do that if Congress was actually active in doing it's job. Cause under the Constitution, spending is supposed to be controlled by the Congress, not by the Executive. So everything's upside down, but that's only working because Congress is allowing him to do that and not trying to stop him. If the Democrats are able to take over the Senate or the House where there's only a three or four seat margin right now that would make it much, much, much harder for him to pull these things off. And so anything he can do to get an advantage in that way I think is also part of what they're trying to do and trying to pull off.   [00:31:48] Ming Chen: One other thought, and you know, I'm trying very hard to not be professorly in the sense of using jargon or highfalutin terms, but I'm just curious, has anyone in this room heard the term perpetual foreigner before? A few of you have, I mean, I think it's really pertinent here. The first time I heard of this idea was when I started to learn from other Asian American law professors when I was still in college. I think that idea was that for certain groups of people, including Asian Americans, it doesn't matter whether you are actually a citizen by law or how many generations you've lived in the United States, right? So I'm a birthright citizen like Wong Kim Ark, but I think the first time I heard about it was, you know, this idea of Asian Americans not being able to be Americans socially in terms of belonging regardless of whether they are themselves, the child of citizens or immigrants and if they're the sixth generation children, right. I remember taking a Chinatown tour with David and is that where we are about six generations out for a lot of the descendants. So even if you were in the sixth generation that if you look Asian, that you will still be seen as being foreign. And so I think that idea has animated a lot of the work that I do. Like why it is that a lot of the work I do on race centers Asian Americans and then a lot of the work I do on immigrants centers, the naturalization process.   [00:33:16] But I think it's also important to recognize the breadth of that idea. Again, this idea of trying to blur the line between actuality, like what is real and what sounds like a fancy argument. Right. And I think what Lisa said, you know, her brief reference to the challenges against Barack Obama and Kamala Harris when they were running for a highest offices. You know, I think again, there's not, it's not a coincidence. I mean, to me that's the perpetual foreigner at work again. Because it's the idea that not only that Black people cannot possibly be the leader of this country, right? Sort of the, the figurehead of this country, but that for Barack Obama, the child of one international student on a lawful, probably f visa at the time, or that for Kamala Harris, the child of two lawful immigrants, that they cannot be birthright citizens that would be eligible for president. So there's a lot of commonality in that argument. And I think, you know, people forget, I think people assume that if you're talking about groups who are not Asian right, or who are not Latinx, that we're not talking about foreignness, we're only talking about race. And certainly we are talking about race, but we're not talking about it exclusively.   [00:34:33] Michael Harris: And then in addition to all of that is just the straight up racism of it. And that's supported by this notion of white supremacy. And what I mean when I say that, Lisa has touched on this already, is that there is a hierarchy of racial groups. And we're not all created equal. There's a hierarchy and the top group is, you already know, I don't have to say it, is the whites [laughter], and then below that are the other people like us who look different. And the reason there's, they're able to put these groups out there and get people to buy into that belief system is because we look different. And so this is why the perpetual thing is perpetual it's because we still look different. And that is a key part of the white supremacy. They still want to buy into this notion that white people are superior. And the only way they can make that work is by saying that people who look different are inferior.   [00:35:34] Annie Lee: I love this discussion because it's so real. And what you are saying essentially is you're talking about belonging and you're talking about power. Like who gets to belong in America? And then that is necessarily connected with who has power in America, who deserves to have power in America. But I know that we all belong in America and that we have power. So I wanna shift this conversation now to what can we do? And so beyond the courts everybody tune in next week. But beyond the courts, what is the role of community organizing, state and local policy advocacy? Public education in defending birthright citizenship and fighting against the attack on birthright citizenship is one sliver of everything that he has done. So many executive orders that came out on day one. So how, how do we, as everyday people fight white supremacy? What can we do when they are redistricting and trying to take away our franchise right before the midterm elections? What do we do when they're using courts that they've already packed with their federal society judges? And so what, what can an average regular person do? And Don I'm gonna go to you first.    [00:36:47] Don Tamaki: Let me say something in a very far less intellectual way than my colleagues here. This is a very old playbook. The playbook of demagoguery is very old. He said the old is humanity. And there are three elements to that playbook. One, appeal to prejudice, however, that is, race, skin, color, religion, whatever. Secondly, fear monger and scapegoat. And thirdly trafficking, conspiracy theories, fake news, false information, erasure of history. That's how you control the culture. And it worked in 1619. It worked in 1882. It worked in Germany in 1933. And it works today, you know, 2016, 2020. You know, when Chinese were blamed as spreaders of the Chinese virus. Asian Americans, when Mexicans were characterized as drug dealers and rapists when Jews and immigrants were portrayed as replacing good white people. This dehumanizing [of] people where one more Black man killed during an encounter with law enforcement barely evokes a shrug because it is so normal. It is so normal, folks, and so it works. And so, you have the candidate Trump running for office and say to a national audience that, to the people of Springfield, Ohio, that Haitian immigrants are eating your dogs and cats and getting away with it. Or the images of the Obamas transposed on cartoon apes. And this is really Jim Crow stuff. This is Antebellum stuff. And it's a recycling of the same playbook. And so the first part of organizing is being aware of what's going on. This is not a new thing. Okay, it's just a racial pathology that churns in one form or another, and it has an origin. It predates us. And so I, I think part of that is educating ourselves how everything is interconnected.   [00:38:58] And since we're talking about Black Asian solidarity, I'll just say a couple things. I mean, the civil rights movement had three triumphs that we all should remember. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of '65 began the dismantling of Jim Crow, which I, as I said, was a hundred year phenomenon following the end of the Civil War and the Immigration of Act of 1965. The third act. It ended as, you know, racist quotas. It prioritized family ties and skills and it greatly increased Asian immigration. As a result, the majority of AAPIs today are post 1965 Americans whose very presence here was made possible by the Black Civil Rights Movement. How many of us know that, you know? I mean, everybody focuses not everybody, but people tend to focus on their own peculiar predicament as if it's unique to our own situation. And in fact, it's all, quite connected. So I think part of this organizing process is realizing, you know, it's Martin Luther King, the oft quoted statement where he says we may have come on different ships, but we're in the same boat now. And especially in connection with what's happening and, and you're seeing it in different parts of the country where sure, immigrants are being targeted in Minneapolis, but then you have thousands of Minneapolitans that, you know, ordinary people, business folks, teachers, laborers, protesting in Sub-Zero weather against what, what happened? And, and yeah. You know what, can we do protest work? I hope everybody's out there on March 28th, you know, this Saturday on the No Kings March.    [00:40:51] Michael Harris: Not just protesting, running them out of town.    [00:40:55] Don Tamaki: Well, [audience and panel laughter] Gregory Bovino, Gregory Bovino, who was the leading charge? Gone. Kristi Noem. Gone.    [00:41:03] Michael Harris: Yes, right.    [00:41:05] Don Tamaki: 2000 ICE agents in Minneapolis reduced to much smaller numbers. That's right. Their plans then launching Ohio trashed. You know, so that's why you, so boycotts, boycotts work. Ask Elon Musk. Ask Target. Local elections, Michael mentioned the midterm elections. It is if we don't, if Democrats don't get back the House, the country's cooked. So, I mean, everybody should be involved one way or the other in that. Raising money, you know, we are part of a, a fundraising group called CAPA21, and there are other groups out there, but those are, those things are crucial to funnel money toward swing elections and critical races. The education part I think is essential. If you consider the velocity change in terms of the civil rights movement, Japanese American redress and reparations was a 20 year movement. And it was full of education of the public. Civil rights movement, same thing. The philosophy of change on marriage equality or LGBTQ rights and all those things happened because they became normal. They were, they started out as ideas that people thought were preposterous. You know, that'll never change.    [00:42:26] Michael Harris: Right.    [00:42:26] Don Tamaki: And Jim Crow will never end. And San Francisco can segregate Asian Americans within Japantown and Chinatown. It, it will never change. But that idea of change, which were thought preposterous happens. But it requires civic engagement. So just examples.   [00:42:46] Michael Harris: I want to amplify two things that Don said. One is there will be a march this Saturday a No Kings March, and it's really, really important for people to show up for that march. ‘Cause the one thing that's devastating to a government is to have its people out there visible on the streets saying what the government is doing is wrong. Because you can spin certain things, you can lie about certain things, but bodies in the streets you can't lie about. It's there and it's real. So that's one thing that's really important, really. But I would encourage all of you if you can, if you are able, please join us and come out on Saturday. The other thing I want to add to the Don's excellent list is there's a few groups in the Bay Area and in San Francisco that does postcards. And their strategy is they identify particular jurisdictions where it's a very close race and it'll be pivotal if a Democrat can win over a Republican, say in a House or maybe even like the Texas Senator race. That one's probably gonna be very close too. And they send postcards to people encouraging them to vote. Don't sit it out. And those extra votes can be the difference between winning and losing. And that might flip the House might flip the Senate. So those are some other additional items.    [00:44:11] Ming Chen: I think at a much more basic level, it's just like telling, telling your story, telling the story of America. Because, you know, when we talk about all these rhetorical tricks, I mean, I think what it means is that that narrative is gaining a lot of power. And so I think you have to reclaim the narrative, right? You have to tell the counter story which happens to be the real story of what's happening. This is something that I actually haven't talked about this publicly, but my daughter she's like on the brink of being 13, not yet a teenager. It made me really sad that she came back from her well-funded, pretty liberal public school about a month ago crying because she said that in her Mandarin Chinese class, there was a child who was saying that Asian people eat dogs. And then writing swastikas on the chalkboard and singing Nazi songs making fun of the women in the room, I guess they're girls in the room saying that they're all lesbian without knowing anything about them. And it just made me really profoundly sad because I'd like to think that a lot of ignorant narrative is because people don't know better, right? I mean, as an educator, I hope that education will simply solve it. And it made me really sad to hear that again. You know, I'm, I'm on the brink of Berkeley. I basically live in Berkeley, right? So one of the most densely populated PhD overeducated people in America. And to be three generations in and to still have this story being told in the classrooms was really distressing to me. And even more distressing that it isn't just the like Chinese people that eat dogs as being a stereotype from those who are not educated, but it's something she might have heard on TV from the highest offices in the land, right? Something she might've heard the vice president say, for example. And so I just think it's so important and doesn't take education, doesn't take a law degree, right? To be able to tell that story. And so I was really, really proud that my daughter you know, did file a complaint with the principal that she came home and told us about it. And you know, her two parents who are civil rights and immigration lawyers, [laughter] but also that she's been like talking to her classmates right, about the fact that that's not true. That's not right. She's been comforting the other kids in the classroom who don't share the same background that she does. And I feel like that kind of work is just as important.    [00:46:45] Michael Harris: I want to add something to that. We have to take note of the fact that a lot of these types of comments really vile, racist things and not just about Asians, it's also some of the things about Black people, young people are saying. Part of it is because it's very easy to say things like that online because you can do it anonymously and not have to, you know, stand up and back up your comments, so to speak. And another part of it is our culture. We gotta be real about this. When I was growing up, I'm sure you were told this too, as the country became more educated and got more exposed to people of color and more people got higher education, all this crazy stereotypical racist stuff would go away because people would know better. That's what they told me the whole time I was growing up and now we know that's not true [audience laughter] because the reverse is happening. It's growing because some people are making money by putting stuff like that online and selling t-shirts and hats and stuff like that. Or starting, you know, whatever they start. There's this guy, Alex Jones, who made millions of dollars doing that kind of stuff. So some people are making money off of it. Other people are just buying into that ideological tip and are using that to gain power and influence and clicks. So we just have to be aware that this is a current going on in our society right now. And it's happening and it's growing and we, we need to be aware of it and start thinking about ways how we can put it to rest. Cause it's, it's happening.    [00:48:30] Annie Lee: Thank you so much. I do wanna give our audience some time to ask any questions that you all might have. So if you have a burning question to ask our illustrious panel now is your opportunity.   [00:48:45] Audience member: I was wondering how does this with, with the rhetoric of, of Washington pushing for IDs for voting how will that impact on people's presence at the voting booths and validating their ability to vote?   [00:49:04] Michael Harris: I think what you're referring to is the Safeguard [SAVE America] Act is now in Congress, and if it's passed and signed by the president, then it'll become law. And what it will require is anyone who wants to vote will have to have a photo ID. And even if you registered, you have to prove you're a citizen. So those two steps are, I think, designed to suppress the vote of people of color. I mean, I think it's very straightforward. This has been what Republicans have been trying to do for ever since the case that Don just mentioned passed and they were able to start doing this stuff. And I agree. It goes back to the notion that in 20 years, America's going to be a majority minority country. There's gonna be more people of color than white people. And I think that I'm just gonna come out and say that freaks them out. It really freaks 'em out. I think a lot of them have lived their whole lifetime where only white people were in charge, running stuff, and they can envision a future not too far off where that might not be the case anymore. And that's scary. It shouldn't be. I mean, we're all the same. It's all gonna be, you know, and there's Black Republicans and Black Democrats and there's Asian Republican. I don't know why they're so freaked out about it, but but they are freaked out about it. And a lot of this is to suppress the vote so that they can continue to stay in power and will not have to give up the power that they would lose otherwise.   [00:50:35] Lisa Holder: Yeah, I mean, it's always been about limiting the franchise, right? And since the time that it expanded beyond white males with property, there's been a battle to keep it as limited as possible. You know? And when you think about what happened after the Civil War, after the 13th, 14th, and particularly the 15th Amendment were passed and African Americans were allowed to vote, you had a 100 year backlash. Where 10,000 African Americans were murdered and lynched. Most of those were people who were trying to mobilize their communities to enter into the franchise and exercise the right to vote. That's the retrenchment that we're seeing being reiterated right now. Right. And we know that during that period, there were all kinds of hoops that, for instance, Black people had to jump through because of those Black Codes where you had to, for instance, prove that you can read this particular statement. Right. Or, you know, just like all kinds of random hoops that you had to jump through. And so when we see these barriers, these gatekeepers, like, oh, you have to have an ID. If this birthright citizenship goes through, no, no, no you can't bring in your birth certificate. You know, we need some proof of your parent, of your lineage. Right. And it's really is combined with that narrative and that rhetorical aspect, that Ming was articulating because although in fact we are America. America looks like us, Americans look like us. The alternative narrative where white predominance is the point is always going to be pushed where no, no, no, we are different. We are not normal and we are not America. And so that's, that's the narrative piece that all of this leads to. And that's why this story of storytelling that Ming talked about is so important. And also it is so important to just constantly push back to resist, to vote. To run for office when you look like an American.   [00:52:45] Audience member: My question is, if the executive order passes, what can we do to resist? Because one of the things is it will also disenfranchise women because it's about proving your identity that matches your birth certificate. Right. And there are really so many people that will not have their names to match their identities. And so what can people do to, to, to counter if that should happen?   [00:53:11] Don Tamaki: The legislative answer? Well, there'll be court challenges, no doubt    [00:53:15] Audience member: but, but before, let's say the midterm election.   [00:53:18] Michael Harris: Call your representative, fax 'em, email 'em, get your friends to do that, because it's pending in Congress right now.   [00:53:25] Don Tamaki: But elections have consequences is the point. And it people who says, well my vote doesn't count, doesn't matter. Everybody, both parties the same. Elections have consequences. I, I guess the only other thing to remember, I keep, you know, repeating this, the solidarity and connectedness bears repeating because the story keeps recycling. It's very recycled story about voter suppression. You know, the Civil War ended in 1865, 12 years of reconstruction. Lincoln is assassinated shortly after during the beginning of reconstruction and thereafter, you know, a deal was struck in the contested election of 1876. Federal troops are withdrawn from the south and then the voter suppression comes in literacy tests, poll taxes.   [00:54:19] Annie Lee: Mm-hmm. Grandfather clauses.   [00:54:21] Don Tamaki: Yeah. I mean in Virginia. During reconstruction 140,000 formerly enslaved people registered to vote after the collapse of reconstruction it was reduced to 21,000. California had you know, poll taxes. Other states had literacy tests and whatever, and it's now repeating because folks don't like the results of an election. The answer is not to, you know, broaden your net and appeal to upfront (?) policy. The answer is to suppress voting, stop people from voting. And so again, it's a matter of awareness I think we have to realize the game plan. And it makes it so important about who is voted into the dials and levers of the controls that run the country. So that's critical.    [00:55:13] Ming Chen: I can jump onto that. go vote. But I think it's also, you know, it's early enough to say, get your documents in order. Right? Go and be ready to vote in a way that won't draw question, right? So you don't have to wait for the lawsuit. And I will say for that, as someone who spends most of my days working with 20 something year olds who move all over the country, a lot of it is about sort of get your ducks in order, right? So if you don't have a driver's license with the current address that matches your name, you can fix that now. So many people who don't have a normal ID because they never learn how to drive, right? So make sure you go get that document. You mentioned marriage, Anna, and I remember I moved to New York at the same time that I got married and trying to get my name on the document when I was it, you know, it's like this endless loop, right? Because you're getting a new ID because of your address. If you don't have that, you can't get your social security card, if you don't have that you can't validate the marriage certificate, right? There's just this endless loop. And you have to get all of that in order, right? So I think maybe there needs to be two parts to our voter mobilization this year, right? It's get yourself ready, sort of like arm up and then vote so that your vote will actually end up counting.    [00:56:33] Miko Lee: Please check out our website, kpfa.org/program/apexexpress to find out more about our show and our guests tonight. We thank all of you listeners out there. Keep resisting, keep organizing, keep creating, and sharing your visions with the world because your voices are important. Apex Express is produced by Ayame Keane-Lee, Anuj Vaidya, Cheryl Truong, Isabel Li, Jalena Keane-Lee, Miko Lee, Miata Tan, Preti Mangala-Shekar and Swati Rayasam. Tonight's show was produced by me Miko Lee, and edited by Ayame Keane-Lee. Have a great night.   The post APEX Express – 4.2.26 – Surviving Through Solidarity. appeared first on KPFA.

Former CEC TN Seshan was feared, formidable & famously outspoken. He was never partisan. In contrast, Gyanesh Kumar has a cavalier disdain, even disrespect, toward the Opposition. Gyanesh Kumar's actions represent a systematic erosion of constitutional guarantees. Gyanesh Kumar is not guilty of only administrative excess. He has been a constitutional failure. The Republic cannot function with a compromised umpire. Elections cannot be credible if the referee is in question, bent on demolishing the level playing field. And democracy cannot survive if the voter is treated as a suspect. Kumar's tenure has raised too many questions, triggered too many doubts, and crossed too many lines. The cost of inaction is simply too high. Therefore, constitutionally and unequivocally, CEC Gyanesh Kumar must go. Watch this week's column for ThePrint by Sagarika Ghose, TMC MP, Rajya Sabha   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To Read: https://theprint.in/opinion/cec-gyanesh-kumar-is-a-constitutional-failure-damage-is-not-procedural-it-is-existential/2884544/

​ ⁨@WhiteStoneName⁩  Can Fish Learn about Water? & Religion & Epistemology & Mediums https://www.youtube.com/live/er1Vw_gzD6E?si=kYV3IauKyZZjn352  ⁨@Freerilian⁩  This Little Zine and Chill: Cyberpunk Islam edition https://www.youtube.com/live/1FQC3y2TIo4?si=CM6QkJ9_VUd2cmlb Studying Islam can Open your Eyes to how W.E.I.R.D the West Is https://youtu.be/ZjLiGXBsh5U?si=XlQUvPSNIt1reh8Q ​ ⁨@ISGAPInternational⁩  Flegg Lecture 2015: Professor Christine Hayes, "What is Divine about Divine Law" https://youtu.be/KJsGtCcCd_g?si=0KAuebkc_LMdiCsl How does the Eastern Church meet the Western Church among Normies in America? Nathan Jacobs https://youtu.be/fIMY0ZJFXSw?si=yQBlxeWrhEdOAZtx  What is the TLC? ("This little corner of the Internet" also know as "the corner" https://youtu.be/Y3vqSjywot8?si=IVS3bnriwje5syPO TLC Search tool: https://tlc.ghost.tel/ The Best Flotilla List we've got right now: https://thislittlecorner.net/channels https://www.livingstonescrc.com/give Vanderklips channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX0jIcadtoxELSwehCh5QTg Bridges of Meaning Discord Link: https://discord.gg/dydqNawY https://www.meetup.com/sacramento-estuary/ My Substack https://paulvanderklay.substack.com/ Estuary Hub Link  https://www.estuaryhub.com/ For the audio podcast mirror on Podbean http://paulvanderklay.podbean.com/ To listen to this on ITunes https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/paul-vanderklays-podcast/id1394314333  If you need the RSS feed for your podcast player https://paulvanderklay.podbean.com/feed/  All Amazon links here are part of the Amazon Affiliate Program. Amazon pays a small commission at no additional cost to you if you buy through one of the product links here.  https://paypal.me/paulvanderklay Also on Odysee: https://odysee.com/@paulvanderklay https://www.patreon.com/paulvanderklay Paul's Church Content at Living Stones Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh7bdktIALZ9Nq41oVCvW-A To support Paul's work by supporting his church give here. https://tithe.ly/give?c=2160640 https://www.livingstonescrc.com/give  

Today - A new report from the Arizona Attorney General says Tombstone’s troubled K-9 program showed serious procedural problems, but no criminal wrongdoing.Support the show: https://www.myheraldreview.com/site/forms/subscription_services/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Procedural Supervision with Drs. Zoe Brown and Sarah Chehab

Thanks for listening! To hire me as your private tutor, visit my website.

00:00 All right, let's go to the WRD Talkline with Tato Robert in Mills River. Robert, what's going on with you this afternoon? Robert, pull the phone away from your mouth a little bit. Pull the phone away from your mouth a little bit. 00:30 All right, go ahead. 00:34 You want to hear a little thing, I'm sorry, Robert, I am terribly sorry. You're to have to call back. just, could not understand a word you were saying there. Well, Canada, all these people that were, and I always noticed, do you ever notice these people that are so against Donald Trump when they want to move? None of them ever moved to Mexico. Did you ever notice that? They don't move to Mexico. They always talk about going to Canada or Ellen DeGeneres. She went over to England. 01:02 But now I hear she's coming back. Rosie O'Donnell went over to Ireland. uh She was so miserable over there. She's looking at coming back. 01:13 Listen, if you are a Democrat and you are miserable in the United States, understand something. You're going to be miserable everywhere you go. I remember there was a Adam Sandler skit over on Saturday Night Live and he was talking about what an Italian, it was like one of those Italian tours, was like, 01:41 I'm going to tell you what these Italian tours will not do for you. They will not make you a better person. If you are miserable where you are, you're going to be just as miserable in Italy. It was a very, very funny, but that's it. It's not the country that's making them miserable. It's not Donald Trump that's making them miserable. They're just miserable. That's who they are. 02:08 So they're be just, and I haven't seen anybody that moved to Canada and went, we love it here, it's awesome. No, because it's not. Because Canada's got some real problems. Their economy is in the toilet. So they had a chance in Canada to sign a $40 billion deal with Japan for oil. $40 billion. 02:38 but they blew it. And I'll tell you how coming up in just a second. So where did Japan go for their oil? Well, they went to the Oval Office and President Trump has just signed a deal with Japan. It is a $56 billion energy deal with the United States, bypassing 03:02 Canada's oil and gas. 03:06 Completely by, we are now. 03:10 Japan's largest source for energy in a $56 billion deal. Now, you had old Mark Carney up in Canada. He blew that deal because he was talking about the low-risk oil and natural gas. are low-risk producers of oil. We are low-risk producers of natural gas. We're reliable. can produce. We're in jurisdictions where 03:39 what we produce will go to market uh... and we can deliver it uh... to market and that that is a contribution in the world which is lost in effect in the oil case fifteen percent potential we are no risk as far as carbon is concerned well that didn't get you that forty billion dollar deal with japan did so japan had originally gone to true dough for a deal they're looking at your dough ah 04:10 So Trudeau, not even making this up, he tried to talk them literally out of the deal. 04:23 Trudeau in Canada wanted them to look into alternative forms of energy. 04:32 Instead of getting their energy from Trudeau, from Canada, Trudeau said, hey, you guys ever think about windmills? You guys ever think about solar or anything like that? You guys ever think about that? So way to go, Canada. You just blew a $50 billion deal. We got a $50 billion deal. Charlie, some people aren't happy. 05:02 unless they're miserable. You're exactly right. 05:07 I used to teach a class in Sunday school where I would ask everybody in the class, I'd say, right, I'd say, don't want you to raise your hand. 05:20 But I want to know, and just answer me silently because I already know the answer, answer me silently who in here has a chemical addiction? 05:32 Who in here has a chemical addiction? 05:36 and you'd see them. You'd see them, they'd get nervous. 05:41 They started looking around, looking around, who in here ...

Procedural pressures are boiling over, in the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee and out on the open House and Senate chamber floors. We dive into the details with House Majority Leader Jason Monks, Senate Minority Leader Melissa Wintrow, Senate Education chairman Dave Lent, and Division of Financial Management administrator Lori Wolff to get a progress report on the legislative session.

Issue Preclusion: The Systemic Power of Finality in Civil ProcedureIn this episode, we dissect the intricate doctrines of claim and issue preclusion—principles that dictate when a lawsuit truly ends and how judgments shape future litigation. Understanding these systemic rules is vital not only for exam success but also for navigating the complex landscape of modern mass litigation.Main Topics Covered:The fundamental distinction between claim preclusion (res judicata) and issue preclusion (collateral estoppel)How final judgments achieve systemic finality and the importance of the power of finalityThe five key elements ensuring proper application of issue preclusionThe constitutional and procedural limits on binding non-partiesThe role of courts' respect for judgments across different jurisdictions via the Full Faith and Credit ClauseHow doctrines adapt to mass litigation, such as class actionsKey Insights:Finality as systemic power: Judgments are more than mere resolutions—they possess a systemic authority that shapes future rights, reinforcing legal stability at the cost of occasional injustices.Claim preclusion is broad: It bars relitigation of claims arising from the same core facts if there's a final, on-the-merits judgment between the same parties.Transactional test: Modern courts favor a pragmatic approach—claims are considered identical if they stem from the same operative nucleus of fact, preventing strategic claim splitting.Issue preclusion's surgical precision: It prevents relitigation of specific issues actually litigated and essential to a final judgment, but only if those issues were actually decided and were appealable.Procedural safeguards matter: Default judgments, settlement agreements, and defaulted claims often escape issue preclusion because they're not actually litigated or decided.Inter-jurisdictional respect: The Full Faith and Credit Clause ensures judgments from one state or federal court are recognized and enforced across jurisdictions, with application of the originating jurisdiction's preclusion law.Non-party preclusion and due process: Strict mutuality rules have evolved into a more flexible framework allowing certain non-parties to be bound when fairness, representation, or statutory schemes justify it—foremost among them, class actions and statutory proceedings like bankruptcy.Practical Application:Approach complex fact patterns systematically: always start with claim preclusion, then move to issue preclusion if needed.Verify the finality, on-the-merits status, identity of parties, and whether the issue was actually litigated and essential.Always consider whether non-party preclusion applies under the six Taylor exceptions.Recognize the profound systemic importance: judgments are not just personal disputes—they shape real-world rights and systemic authority, often overriding individual participation for societal stability.Resources:Restatement (Second) of JudgmentsBernhard v. Bank of America (California case establishing non-mutual issue preclusion)[Full Faith and Credit Clause - U.S. Constitution](https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-4/)[28 U.S.C. Section 1738](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1738)Taylor v. Sturgell (Supreme Court case on non-party preclusion)Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 13 (Joinder and Counterclaims)Connect with the Experts:Legal Professor on Civil ProcedureCivil Procedure PodcastMaster these doctrines with a structured, methodical approach, and you'll confidently navigate the systemic power of finality in civil litigation—crucial for both exams and real-world practice.

Illinois lawmakers have introduced House Bill 5723, dubbed the Illinois Epstein Files Investigation Act, to create a bipartisan state commission with subpoena power tasked with investigating any crimes tied to Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking network that involve Illinois — including offenses that happened in the state, targeted Illinois residents, or involved local institutions. Supporters, led by Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid and survivor advocates, argue that federal efforts have left unanswered questions and that Illinois has the authority to pursue accountability under state law. The proposed commission would be 10 members, appointed by the governor with state Senate approval, required to hold public meetings, issue periodic reports over five years, and refer potential criminal matters to the Illinois attorney general's office or a statewide grand jury for prosecution.Supporters say the bill would give the state “real teeth” — investigatory powers, subpoena authority, and the ability to pursue prosecutions where state law may have been violated — and help ensure survivors' experiences are examined with trauma-informed care. While advocates emphasize the importance of delving into records and holding accountable anyone who broke Illinois law, Republican lawmakers like House Minority Leader Tony McCombie acknowledged the gravity of Epstein's crimes but questioned whether a state commission can effectively parallel federal criminal probes. Procedural hurdles loom, as the bill was filed after a legislative deadline and may not advance until later sessions.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Illinois lawmakers push for Jeffrey Epstein probe with 'real teeth'

Illinois lawmakers have introduced House Bill 5723, dubbed the Illinois Epstein Files Investigation Act, to create a bipartisan state commission with subpoena power tasked with investigating any crimes tied to Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking network that involve Illinois — including offenses that happened in the state, targeted Illinois residents, or involved local institutions. Supporters, led by Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid and survivor advocates, argue that federal efforts have left unanswered questions and that Illinois has the authority to pursue accountability under state law. The proposed commission would be 10 members, appointed by the governor with state Senate approval, required to hold public meetings, issue periodic reports over five years, and refer potential criminal matters to the Illinois attorney general's office or a statewide grand jury for prosecution.Supporters say the bill would give the state “real teeth” — investigatory powers, subpoena authority, and the ability to pursue prosecutions where state law may have been violated — and help ensure survivors' experiences are examined with trauma-informed care. While advocates emphasize the importance of delving into records and holding accountable anyone who broke Illinois law, Republican lawmakers like House Minority Leader Tony McCombie acknowledged the gravity of Epstein's crimes but questioned whether a state commission can effectively parallel federal criminal probes. Procedural hurdles loom, as the bill was filed after a legislative deadline and may not advance until later sessions.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Illinois lawmakers push for Jeffrey Epstein probe with 'real teeth'Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Illinois lawmakers have introduced House Bill 5723, dubbed the Illinois Epstein Files Investigation Act, to create a bipartisan state commission with subpoena power tasked with investigating any crimes tied to Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking network that involve Illinois — including offenses that happened in the state, targeted Illinois residents, or involved local institutions. Supporters, led by Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid and survivor advocates, argue that federal efforts have left unanswered questions and that Illinois has the authority to pursue accountability under state law. The proposed commission would be 10 members, appointed by the governor with state Senate approval, required to hold public meetings, issue periodic reports over five years, and refer potential criminal matters to the Illinois attorney general's office or a statewide grand jury for prosecution.Supporters say the bill would give the state “real teeth” — investigatory powers, subpoena authority, and the ability to pursue prosecutions where state law may have been violated — and help ensure survivors' experiences are examined with trauma-informed care. While advocates emphasize the importance of delving into records and holding accountable anyone who broke Illinois law, Republican lawmakers like House Minority Leader Tony McCombie acknowledged the gravity of Epstein's crimes but questioned whether a state commission can effectively parallel federal criminal probes. Procedural hurdles loom, as the bill was filed after a legislative deadline and may not advance until later sessions.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Illinois lawmakers push for Jeffrey Epstein probe with 'real teeth'Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jonathan Adler reports that following the tariff decision, the administration must now use specific statutes with procedural strings, limiting the president's ability to adjust trade penalties on a whim. 8.

Join Digital Education Committee Vice-Chair and podcast host Tina Baykaner, MD, MPH, along with this week's guest contributors, Jackson J. Liang, DO and Edward P. Gerstenfeld, MD, MS, FHRS for this week's episode. This study evaluates the relationship between hospital ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation volume and post-procedural complications, examining whether institutional procedural experience influences patient outcomes. The authors analyze complication rates across centers with varying VT ablation volumes to assess potential volume–outcome associations. Findings from this work provide important insights into procedural risk, quality metrics, and the potential impact of case volume on VT ablation safety.    Learning Objectives Describe the relationship between hospital VT ablation procedural volume and post-procedural complication rates. Identify patient, procedural, and institutional factors that may contribute to complications following ventricular tachycardia ablation. Discuss how volume–outcome findings can inform quality improvement initiatives, referral patterns, and procedural planning for VT ablation programs.    Article Authors Agam Bansal, Anirudh Nandan, Jakub Sroubek, Justin Lee, Koji Higuchi, Ayman Hussein, Shady Nakhla, Mina Chung, Niraj Varma, Walid Saliba, Mandeep Bhargava, Tyler Taigen, Mohamed Kanj, Oussama Wazni, and Pasquale Santangeli Podcast Contributors Tina Baykaner, MD, MPH Jackson J. Liang, DO Edward P. Gerstenfeld, MD, MS, FHRS   All relevant financial relationships have been mitigated. Host and Contributor Disclosure(s): T. Baykaner•Honoraria/Speaking/Consulting: Volta Medical, Medtronic, Pacemate, Johnson and Johnson, Abbot Medical, Boston Scientific •Research: NIH   E. Gerstenfeld •Speaking/Teaching/Consulting: Medtronic, Adiago Medical, Biosense Webster, Inc., Abbott, Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical, Varian Medical Systems •Research: Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical •Board Membership: American College of Cardiology Foundation   J. Liang •Speaking/Teaching/Consulting: Biotronik, Abbott, Bionsense Webster, Inc.   Staff Disclosure(s) (note: HRS staff are NOT in control of educational content. Disclosures are provided solely for full transparency to the learner): S. Sailor: No relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies to disclose.

Send me feedback!Many people are slamming Rep. Massie as the lone GOP 'no' on HR 7147 (DHS funding). But his vote was a strategic play to block Senate earmarks funding orgs tied to gender-affirming care for kids. Procedural chess, not betrayal. Full breakdownSUPPORT THE SHOWGet a 10% discount by using the code LibertyDad at Black Guns Matter shop.OR, use the referral linkFIND ME ELSEWHERELinktreeSHOW NOTESDHS Appropriations bill (HR 7147)Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (HR 7148)Economic Policy Innovation CenterSupport the show

On November 11, 2013, a motorcyclist riding in a remote stretch of the Mojave Desert came across something that did not belong to the landscape. The area lay north of Victorville, not far from Interstate 15 but far enough that engine noise fades and the wind carries most of the sound. The ground was hard and pale, broken by scrub and scattered rock. In that dirt, the rider saw what appeared to be a human skull. He stopped. He called authorities. Deputies from the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department responded. The location was isolated but accessible by dirt road. The initial discovery was small — a skull partially exposed in desert soil — but the scene widened quickly. Deputies secured the area and began a systematic search. Within hours, investigators realized the find was not a single set of remains. Two burial sites were identified. They were shallow. The soil was loose compared to the surrounding terrain, disturbed and then pressed back down. The graves would later be referred to in reports as Grave A and Grave B. In total, four sets of human remains were recovered.  On November 15, 2013, San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon addressed the media. He confirmed that the remains recovered in the desert had been identified as belonging to Joseph McStay, age 40; his wife, Summer McStay, age 43; and their two sons, Gianni, age 4, and Joseph Jr., age 3. The McStay family had been missing since February 4, 2010. For nearly four years, their case had lived in a different category — disappearance, possible voluntary departure, international travel theory, Mexico speculation. The discovery in Victorville ended that ambiguity. The McStays had not relocated. They had not started over. They had not walked across a border and vanished into another country. They had been killed.Sources: https://coronadotimes.com/event/down-to-the-bone-caitlin-rother-and-the-mcstay-family-murders/https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/judge-unseals-court-records-in-mcstay-murder-case/509-5297be95-2f41-4ce7-931e-8c3dc98e0918https://allthatsinteresting.com/mcstay-family-murdershttps://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/missing-mcstay-family-cross-mexico/story?id=10042816https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/mcstay-family-murder-trial-charles-merritt-closing-arguments-jury/159073/https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-mcstay-family-deaths-20190120-story.htmlhttps://www.sbsun.com/2019/03/11/key-prosecution-evidence-flopped-in-mcstay-family-murder-case-defense-contends/https://www.sbsun.com/2019/03/11/key-prosecution-evidence-flopped-in-mcstay-family-murder-case-defense-contends/https://abc7.com/post/mcstay-murders-merritt-attorneys-poke-holes-in-timeline/5190475/https://www.cnn.com/2014/07/01/justice/mcstay-case-five-questionshttps://press.wbd.com/us/media-release/investigation-discovery/go-inside-controversial-and-shocking-trial-charles-chase-merritt-mcstay-familyBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/kinda-murdery--5496890/support.

Job boards have been connecting candidates with employers for over thirty years, but the relationship that made them work is fundamentally breaking down. Candidates are getting frustrated by applying for roles that may already be filled or have been taken off the market, while employers are receiving hundreds of identical, AI-generated applications they can't meaningfully evaluate. The Job Boards sitting between them are trapped in business models that reward volume over quality, which only makes the problem worse. The result is a trust crisis that threatens the entire ecosystem. When neither side believes the process is fair, the whole system starts to unravel. So what would it actually take for job boards to rebuild that trust and stay relevant? My guest this week is Lou Goodman, a job board strategy expert who recently partnered with Jobiqo to produce a major new report on the future of job boards. In our conversation, she explains why the industry is stuck repeating the same patterns, what job boards can learn from other platform businesses, and whether evolution or extinction is the more likely outcome. In the interview, we discuss: Why job boards still matter in today's market The trust crisis threatening the ecosystem. How AI is amplifying weaknesses rather than fixing them Procedural justice and why fairness matters more than outcomes The shift from quantity to quality Where job boards can add value in the process Why short-term fixes become long-term patterns Lessons from other two-sided platform businesses What is the future for job boards? Follow this podcast on Apple Podcasts. Follow this podcast on Spotify.

In this episode, Asim and Sujoy head to the cinema to break down Mardaani 3, talking Rani Mukerji's screen presence, the evolution of the franchise, and why Bollywood struggles to make female-led star vehicles like this anymore.They dig into the film's procedural grit vs masala instincts, the villain problem, the pacing, and whether the third instalment sticks the landing — plus where Mardaani ranks compared to the earlier films. This is a slightly looser, hangout-style episode while Amrita's away — expect honest takes, film nerdery, and a few laughs along the way. Support us on Patreon for a longer, exclusive and video version of this episode → https://www.patreon.com/khandaanpodcast Timestamps 00:00 – Intro & why this is a boys-only episode04:30 – Why Mardaani still feels different12:15 – Rani Mukerji's star power & hero entry22:40 – Procedural crime vs masala thrills32:10 – Villains, performances & what works41:30 – The climax: payoff or missed opportunity?52:45 – Ranking the Mardaani films01:03:30 – Final thoughts & should there be a Mardani 4?

Episode Description Most managers don't avoid tough conversations because they're hard. They avoid them because they're awkward. In this episode of Dental Drill Bits, Dana and Sandy tackle the real-world issues that show up in nearly every dental practice: sloppy scrubs, chronic tardiness, missed clock-ins, appearance concerns, and employees who seemed perfect in the interview but show up very differently on the job. The problem isn't the people. It's the lack of clear expectations. Sandy shares decades of experience helping doctors and managers shift these conversations away from emotion and back to policy, systems, and consistency. Together, they walk through how strong onboarding, written policies, documentation, and leadership modeling prevent most of these issues before they ever escalate. You'll learn how to: Address uncomfortable topics without damaging relationships Keep conversations focused on business standards, not personal judgment Know when to observe, when to remind, and when behavior becomes a performance issue Use documentation to protect the practice and fairly support employees Build a culture where professionalism is expected, not policed If you've ever delayed a conversation hoping the problem would fix itself, this episode will give you the language, confidence, and structure to lead clearly and compassionately—starting from day one. What You'll Learn • Why unclear expectations turn small issues into awkward conversations • How onboarding sets the tone for accountability • Why employees often forget policies—and how to reset them • How to lead correction conversations without emotion or defensiveness • When and how to reference policies effectively • Why consistency matters more than confrontation • How clear expectations protect both leaders and teams Episode Sponsors Identity Dental Marketing Looking to stand out in a crowded market? Identity Dental Marketing builds brands that convert.

My co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 171 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is the president of the German Patent and Trademark Office Eva Schewior! But before we jump into this very interesting interview, I have news for you: The US Supreme Court has taken up an important patent law case concerning so-called “skinny labels” for generic drugs. Specifically, the highest US court is reviewing a case in which Amarin accuses generic drug manufacturer Hikma of inciting doctors to use the cholesterol drug Vascepa in violation of patents by providing a limited package insert. In two landmark decisions, the UPC Court of Appeal clarified the criteria for inventive step and essentially confirmed the EPO’s typical “problem-solution” approach (Amgen v Sanofi and Meril v Edwards). However, experts are not entirely sure whether the Court of Appeal’s decisions, particularly those relating to the determination of the closest prior art, deviate from EPO practice. As a result of Brexit, mutual recognition of trademark use between the EU and the UK will cease to apply from January 1, 2026. Use of a trademark only in the UK will then no longer count as use of an EU trademark for the purpose of maintaining rights – and conversely, EU use will no longer count for British trademarks. Bayer is attacking several mRNA vaccine manufacturers in the US (Pfizer, BioNTech, Moderna, and J&J separately). The core allegation: patent infringements relating to old (Monsanto) patents on mRNA stabilization; Bayer is seeking damages, not sales bans. DISCO Pharmaceuticals from Cologne signs an exclusive license agreement with Amgen (potentially up to USD 618 million plus royalties) for novel cancer therapies targeting surface structures. Relevant from an IP perspective: license scope, milestones, data/know-how allocation. And now let's jump into the interview with Eva Schewior! The German IP System in Transition: Key Insights from DPMA President Eva Schewior In an in-depth conversation on the IP Fridays podcast, Eva Schewior, President of the German Patent and Trademark Office (DPMA), outlined how Germany's IP system is responding to rising demand, technological change, and a fundamentally altered European patent landscape. The interview offers valuable insights for innovators, companies, and IP professionals navigating patent, trademark, and design protection in Europe. Sustained Demand and Procedural Efficiency Despite the introduction of the Unitary Patent system, national German IP rights continue to see strong and growing demand. According to Schewior, application numbers at the DPMA have been increasing for years, which she views as a strong vote of confidence in the quality and reliability of German IP rights. At the same time, this success creates pressure on examination capacity. The average duration of patent proceedings at the DPMA is currently around three years and two months from filing to grant, provided applicants request examination early and avoid extensions. Internationally, this timeframe remains competitive. Nevertheless, shortening procedures remains a strategic priority. Search requests alone have risen by almost 50% over the past decade, yet the DPMA still delivers search reports on time in around 90% of cases. To better reflect applicant needs, the DPMA distinguishes between two main user groups: applicants seeking a rapid grant, often as a basis for international filings, and applicants primarily interested in a fast, high-quality initial assessment through search or first examination. Future procedural adjustments are being considered to better serve both groups. The Role of Artificial Intelligence Artificial intelligence already plays a practical role at the DPMA, particularly in patent search, classification, and the translation of Asian patent literature. Schewior emphasized that the office is closely monitoring rapid developments in AI to assess where these tools can further improve efficiency. However, she made clear that AI will remain a supporting technology. In public administration, and especially in IP examination, final decisions must always be taken and reviewed by humans. AI is seen as a way to relieve examiners of routine tasks so they can focus on substantive examination and quality. Maintaining and Monitoring Examination Quality Quality assurance is a central pillar of the DPMA's work. Schewior reported consistently positive feedback from users, but stressed that maintaining quality is a continuous task. The office applies systematic double checks for grants and refusals and uses internal quality management tools to randomly review searches and first office actions during ongoing proceedings. External feedback is equally important. The DPMA's User Advisory Board, which includes patent attorneys, startups, and patent information centers, plays a key role in identifying issues and suggesting improvements. Several of its recommendations have already been implemented. Trademark Filings and Bad-Faith Applications The trademark side of the DPMA has experienced particularly strong growth. In 2025, the office received around 95,000 trademark applications, an increase of approximately 18% compared to the previous year. Much of this growth came from abroad, especially from China. While new trademark types such as sound marks, multimedia marks, and holograms have so far seen only moderate uptake, word marks and figurative marks remain dominant. A growing challenge, however, is the rise in bad-faith trademark filings. The DPMA has responded by intensively training examiners to identify and handle such cases. Procedural reforms following EU trademark law modernization have also shifted competencies. Applicants can now choose whether to bring revocation and invalidity actions before the courts or directly before the DPMA. While courts may act faster, proceedings before the DPMA involve significantly lower financial risk, as each party generally bears its own costs. Accelerated Examination as a Practical Tool Despite rising filing numbers, the DPMA aims to avoid significant delays in trademark proceedings. Organizational restructuring within the trademark department is intended to balance workloads across teams. Schewior highlighted the option of accelerated trademark examination, available for a relatively modest additional fee. In practice, this can lead to registration within a matter of weeks, without affecting priority, since the filing date remains decisive. New Protection for Geographical Indications A major recent development is the extension of EU-wide protection for geographical indications to craft and industrial products. Since late 2025, the DPMA acts as the national authority for German applications in this area. The first application has already been filed, notably for a traditional German product. Under the new system, applications undergo a national examination phase at the DPMA before being forwarded to the EUIPO for final decision. Products eligible for protection must originate from a specific region and derive their quality or reputation from that origin, with at least one production step taking place there. The EU estimates that around 40 German products may qualify. Outreach, SMEs, and Education Schewior underlined the DPMA's statutory duty to inform the public about IP rights, with a particular focus on small and medium-sized enterprises. The office has significantly expanded its presence on platforms such as LinkedIn and YouTube, offering accessible and practical IP content. Studies show that fewer than 10% of European SMEs use IP rights, despite evidence that IP-owning companies generate higher revenues. To address this gap, the DPMA is expanding outreach formats, strengthening cooperation with educational institutions, and publishing new empirical studies, including a forthcoming analysis of patenting behavior among innovative German startups conducted with WIPO. Strategic Challenges Ahead Looking forward, Schewior identified several key challenges: insufficient awareness of IP protection among SMEs and startups, a tendency in some sectors to rely solely on trade secrets, and the growing problem of product and trademark piracy linked to organized crime. From an institutional perspective, the DPMA must remain attractive and competitive in a European system offering multiple routes to protection. This requires legally robust decisions, efficient procedures, qualified staff, and continuous investment in IT and training. Careers at the DPMA Finally, Schewior highlighted recruitment as a strategic priority. The DPMA recently hired around 50 new patent examiners and continues to seek experts in fields such as electrical engineering, e-mobility, IT, and aerospace, as well as IT specialists, lawyers, and staff in many other functions. She emphasized the DPMA's role as Europe's largest national patent office and a globally significant, stable, and family-friendly employer at the forefront of technological development. German and European Patents as Complementary Options In her closing remarks, Schewior addressed the post-UPC patent landscape. Rather than competing, German and European patent systems complement each other. For many SMEs, a German patent alone may be sufficient, particularly where Germany is the core market. At the same time, the possibility of holding both a European patent and a national German patent offers strategic resilience, as national protection can survive even if a European patent is revoked. Her key message was clear: the range of options has never been broader, but making informed strategic choices is more important than ever. If you would like, I can also adapt this article for a specialist legal audience, condense it for a magazine format, or rework it as a thought-leadership piece for LinkedIn or your website. Rolf Claessen: Today's interview guest is Eva Schewior. If you don't know her yet, she is the President of the German Patent and Trademark Office. Thank you very much for being here. Eva Schewior: I'm very happy that you're having me today. Thank you, Mr. Claessen. Rolf Claessen: Shortening the length of procedures has been a stated goal since you took office. What is the current situation, and which measures are in place to achieve this goal? Eva Schewior: First of all, I'm very glad that German IP rights are in high demand. Even though applicants in Europe have multiple options today to obtain protection for their innovations, we have seen increasing application numbers for years at my office, even after the introduction of the Unitary Patent system. I see this as very positive feedback for our work. It is clear, however, that the high number of applications leads to a constantly increasing workload. At the same time, we want to remain attractive for our applicants. This means we must offer not only high-quality IP rights but also reasonable durations of proceedings. Ensuring this remains a central and permanent objective of our strategy. The average duration of proceedings from filing to grant is currently about three years and two months, provided that applicants file an examination request within the first four months after application and do not request extensions of time limits. In other cases, the average duration of proceedings is admittedly longer. With these three years and two months, we do not have to shy away from international comparison. Nonetheless, we strive to get better. In the last few years, we were able to improve the number of concluded proceedings or to keep them at a high level. In some areas, we were even able to shorten durations of proceedings a bit, though not yet to the extent that we would have wished for. Our efforts are often overtaken by the increasing demand for our services. Just to give you an example, in the last ten to fifteen years, search requests increased by nearly fifty percent. Despite this, we managed to deliver search reports in ninety percent of all cases in time, so that customers have enough time left to take a decision on a subsequent application. I have to admit that we are not equally successful with the first official communication containing the first results of our examination. Here, our applicants need a bit more patience due to longer durations of proceedings. But I think I do not have to explain to your expert audience that longer processing times depend on various reasons, which are in no way solely to be found on our side as an examination office. To further reduce the length of proceedings, we need targeted measures. To identify them, we have analyzed the needs of our applicants. It has been shown that there are two main interests in patent procedures. About three quarters of our applicants have a very strong interest in obtaining a patent. They mainly expect us to make fast decisions on their applications. Here we find applicants who want to have their invention protected within Germany but often also wish for subsequent protection outside Germany. The remaining quarter consists of applicants that are solely interested in a fast and high-quality first assessment of the application by means of a search or a first official examination. We observe that these applicants use our services before they subsequently apply outside Germany. This latter group has little interest in continuing the procedure before my office here in Germany. We are currently considering how we can act in the best interest of both groups. What I can certainly say is that we will continue to address this topic. And of course, in general, it can be said that if we want to shorten the duration of proceedings, we need motivated and highly skilled patent examiners. Therefore, we are currently recruiting many young colleagues for our offices in Munich and Jena, and we want to make our procedures more efficient by using new technical options, thus taking workload from patent examiners and enabling them to concentrate on their core tasks and on speedy examination. Rolf Claessen: Thank you very much. I also feel that the German Patent and Trademark Office has become quite popular, especially with the start of the UPC. Some applicants seem to find that it is a very clever option to also file national patents in Germany. Eva Schewior: I think you're perfectly right, and I think we will come to this point later. Rolf Claessen: In 2023, you mentioned artificial intelligence as an important tool for supporting patent examiners. What has happened regarding AI since then? Eva Schewior: Of course, we are already successfully using AI at our office. For instance, in the field of patent search, we use AI-based tools that make our examiners' work easier. We also use AI quite successfully for classification and for the translation of Asian patent literature into English. In the meantime, we have seen a rapid development of AI in the market. I think it is strategically imperative to get an overview and to make realistic assessments of what AI is capable of doing to make our procedures more efficient. Therefore, we are observing the market to find out where AI can perform tasks so that we enable examiners to concentrate on their core business. There are many ideas right now in our office where artificial intelligence can help us tackle challenges, for instance demographic change, which certainly also affects our office, and maintaining our quality standards. We will strategically promote new tools in this field to cope with these challenges. But this much is also clear: humans will always stay in our focus. Especially in public administration, I consider it a fundamental principle that in the end, decisions must be taken and reviewed by humans. AI may help us reach our goals in a more efficient way, but it can never replace patent or trademark examiners. Rolf Claessen: You have made quality improvements in patent examination a priority and have already implemented a number of measures. How would you describe the current situation? Eva Schewior: I often receive positive feedback from different sides that our users are very satisfied with the quality of our examination, and I'm very glad about that. But maintaining this quality standard is a permanent task, and we must not become careless here. For years, for instance, we have established double checks for all grants and rejections. In addition, we have introduced a quality management tool that enables us, even during the examination process, to randomly check the quality of first office communications and searches. This helps us detect critical trends and take appropriate countermeasures at a very early stage. What is also very important when it comes to patent quality is to actively ask our customers for their feedback. We do this in different ways. Just to give you an example, we have a User Advisory Board, which is a panel of external experts implemented a couple of years ago. Discussing questions of quality is regularly on the agenda of this board. We carefully listen to criticism, ideas, and suggestions, and we have already implemented some of them for the benefit of the office and our users. Rolf Claessen: The German Patent and Trademark Office, as the largest patent and trademark office in Europe, records very high numbers of trademark applications. What are you currently especially concerned with in the trademark area? Eva Schewior: In 2025, we saw around ninety-five thousand trademark applications. This is an increase of eighteen percent compared to the previous year, and I have to say that this took us by surprise. Especially applications from outside Germany, and above all from China, have risen significantly. It is of course challenging to cope with such a sudden increase on an organizational level. Another challenge is dealing with trademark applications filed in bad faith, which we are currently seeing more and more of. We have thoroughly trained our trademark examiners on how to identify and handle such applications. As regards the new types of trademarks, the rush has been moderate so far. Sound marks, multimedia marks, or holograms are apparently not yet common solutions for the majority of applicants. The key focus remains on word marks and combined word and figurative marks. Nevertheless, I believe that the new trademark types are a meaningful supplement and may play a greater role as digitization advances. The most significant changes, however, concern procedures. Applicants can now choose whether to file revocation or invalidity actions with the courts or with our office. While courts may proceed somewhat faster, the financial risk is higher. Before the DPMA, each party generally bears its own costs, apart from exceptional cases. Rolf Claessen: How does this dynamic filing development impact the duration of trademark proceedings? Eva Schewior: This is indeed a major organizational challenge. For a long time, our trademark department managed to keep durations of proceedings very short, especially with regard to registration. Despite the recent increases in applications, especially in 2025, we hope to avoid a significant extension of processing times. We have restructured the organization of the trademark department to distribute applications more equally among teams. Applicants should also be aware that it is possible to request accelerated examination for a relatively moderate fee of two hundred euros. This often leads to registration within a very short time. The filing date, of course, always determines priority. Rolf Claessen: Since December 2025, the EU grants protection not only for agricultural products but also for craft and industrial products through geographical indications. Has your office already received applications? Eva Schewior: Yes, we have received our first application, and interestingly it concerns garden gnomes. Protected geographical indications are an important topic because they help maintain traditional know-how in regions and secure local jobs. The DPMA is the competent authority for Germany. Applications go through a national examination phase at our office before being forwarded to the EUIPO, which takes the final decision on EU-wide registration. Eligible products must originate from a specific region and derive their quality, reputation, or characteristics from that origin, with at least one production step taking place there. Rolf Claessen: The DPMA has expanded its outreach activities, including social media. What else is planned? Eva Schewior: Raising awareness of IP rights, especially among small and medium-sized enterprises, is part of our statutory duty. We currently use LinkedIn and YouTube to communicate IP topics in an understandable and engaging way. We also plan dedicated LinkedIn channels, for example for SMEs. Studies show that fewer than ten percent of European SMEs use IP rights, even though those that do earn significantly more on average. In 2026, we will further expand outreach activities, cooperate more closely with universities and educational institutions, and publish new studies, including one on the patenting behavior of innovative German start-ups conducted together with WIPO. Rolf Claessen: Where do you see the biggest future challenges in IP? Eva Schewior: Germany depends on innovation, but awareness of IP protection is still insufficient, particularly among SMEs and start-ups. Some companies deliberately avoid IP rights and rely on trade secrets, which I consider risky. Another growing concern is the increase in product and trademark piracy, often linked to organized crime. For our office, remaining attractive and competitive is crucial. Applicants have many options in Europe, so we need fast procedures, legally robust decisions, qualified staff, and modern IT systems. Rolf Claessen: The DPMA is currently recruiting. Which areas are you focusing on? Eva Schewior: Our focus is on patent examination and IT. We recently hired fifty new patent examiners and are particularly looking for experts in fields such as electrical engineering, e-mobility, IT, and aerospace. We are Europe's largest national patent office and offer meaningful, secure jobs with fair compensation and strong development opportunities. Rolf Claessen: Is there a final message you would like to share with our listeners? Eva Schewior: The Unitary Patent system has created many new options. German and European patent systems do not compete; they complement each other. For many SMEs, a German patent may already be sufficient, especially where Germany is the core market. Holding both European and national patents can also be a strategic advantage. My key message is: be aware of the options, stay informed, and choose your IP strategy deliberately. Rolf Claessen: Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays. Eva Schewior: Thank you for having me. It was a pleasure.

America is going through a LOT. Our hearts are with the people of Minnesota and we're taking a short break to talk about TV that helps us calm down: THE PITT, INDUSTRY, THE TRAITORS, the fantastic MEL BROOKS DOCUMENTARY, THE NIGHT MANAGER to name a few. Andy comments on the QUEER EYE/Karamo kerfuffle, Diane praises Lisa F--ing Rinna to the skies. So much packed into this half hour!

Send us a textWelcome to you heard it here last, where we talk about news you've already heard.Don't worry, there is nothing wrong with your podcast and you don't have to change the dial. This isn't Morning Drive on FM 103 The Wave, it's just Malcolm from the Finding Atoria Podcast stepping in this morning.Say Hello Malcom,[Kick to Malcolm]You know ever since we started chatting, I felt like we had our own Berry White and Isaac Hayes thing going on, so hopefully the listeners can sit back, relax and enjoy.So here is the deal, we are going to break down some recent RPG news and give our opinions, ideas, and feelings on the topic.Our first story comes to us from EN World and its there Most Anticipated RPG of 2026 Fan Vote.https://www.enworld.org/threads/its-time-to-vote-for-your-most-anticipated-ttrpg-of-2026.716726/By now the voting is likely done, but I thought it would be interesting to throw out our votes and get the debate rolling.Malcom, what are your three most anticipated RPG's for 2026?[Kick to Malcolm][Here are my Three, in no particular order; Toon, 2nd Edition from Steve Jackson Games. Procedural from Occupied Hex Games and the mind of Rob Kerkovich. Sisterhood: Nuns with Guns from Parable Games.]https://www.enworld.org/threads/james-ohlen-shifts-from-archetype-entertainment-head-to-creative-consultant-for-tabletop-rpgs-at-wizards.716766/Next up is the announcement that James Ohlen is leaving Archetype Entertainment a Wizards of the Coast video game company and he is being replaced by Blizzard Veteran Paul Della Bitta. This comes as Archetype Entertainment is moving into the final phase of bringing Exodus to release in 2027. But Ohlen isn't leaving Wizards. He is sticking around as a consultant to focus on Table Top Roleplaying Games. This whole thing smells like the fishing docks at low tide to me. What are your thoughts Malcolm?[Kick to Malcolm]And there you have it, all the news, you've already heard.

Welcome back to the Bar Exam Toolbox podcast! In this episode, we explain the legal requirements for marriage formation in the United States. We also cover common law marriage as an exception to the procedural requirements and use hypothetical scenarios to illustrate how these rules apply in practice.   In this episode, we discuss: Defining marriage and legal precedents Procedural and substantive requirements for getting married Common law marriage Two hypotheticals from previous California bar exams Resources: "Listen and Learn" series (https://barexamtoolbox.com/bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-archive-by-topic/bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-explaining-individual-mee-and-california-bar-essay-questions/#listen-learn) California Bar Examination – Essay Questions and Selected Answers, July 2002 (https://juraxbar.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/July-2002-CBX.pdf) California Bar Examination – Essay Questions and Selected Answers, February 2008 (https://nwculaw.edu/pdf/bar/February%202008%20Essays%20and%20Sample%20Answers.pdf) Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (https://red.library.usd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3390&context=sdlrev) Loving v. Virginia (https://www.oyez.org/cases/1966/395) Obergefell v. Hodges (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/576/644/) Podcast Episode 41: Tackling an MEE Family Law and Conflicts of Law Essay Question (https://barexamtoolbox.com/podcast-episode-41-tackling-an-mee-family-law-and-conflicts-of-law-essay-question/) Download the Transcript (https://barexamtoolbox.com/episode-341-listen-and-learn-marriage-formation-and-requirements-family-law/) If you enjoy the podcast, we'd love a nice review and/or rating on Apple Podcasts (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-pass-bar-exam-less-stress/id1370651486) or your favorite listening app. And feel free to reach out to us directly. You can always reach us via the contact form on the Bar Exam Toolbox website (https://barexamtoolbox.com/contact-us/). Finally, if you don't want to miss anything, you can sign up for podcast updates (https://barexamtoolbox.com/get-bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-updates/)! Thanks for listening! Alison & Lee

In this episode we discuss Maddy's medical credentials, all the classic medical archetypes, the hit piece by Ashley Tisdale that's rocking the nation, the irksome nature of Hil Duff singing about bj's, having a "face for medicine", the freakishness of a man with a full head of hair, how nurses are the backbone of society, doctors salaries in the 90s, wanting a doc with a perma-iced coffee in hand, the fear of having your jeans cut off in front of your co-workers and SO MUCH MORE!!! Thanks for listening and we'll catch you on the flip-phone!

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of Tea with Dr. D, host James Q. Del Rosso, DO, is joined by Gary Goldenberg, MD, for an in-depth discussion on integrating procedural dermatology, particularly regenerative treatments for hair loss, into a busy private practice. Together, they explore considerations for patient selection and the clinical value these procedures bring to aesthetic and medical dermatology settings. The conversation begins with an overview of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), including its evolution in the US and the growing body of evidence supporting its role in androgenetic alopecia, telogen effluvium, alopecia areata, and scarring alopecia. Dr Goldenberg outlines PRP as a regenerative therapy rather than a hair-specific treatment, describing how growth factors help stimulate dormant follicles and prolong the anagen phase. He reviews the preparation process, ideal candidates, contraindications, and why early intervention yields the best outcomes. Procedural videos throughout the episode illustrate PRP techniques, from multi-needle mesotherapy devices to targeted injections with a 30-gauge needle, and demonstrate approaches to analgesia and treatment tailoring by pattern of loss. The discussion extends to the role of exosomes in regenerative dermatology. Dr Goldenberg explains their mechanism, the distinction between human- and plant-derived products, and his rationale for combining exosomes with PRP when feasible. Additional videos highlight injection and microneedling-based delivery methods, offering insight into how these modalities complement each other in alopecia. Tune in to the full episode for expert guidance

In this week’s Crime Roundup, Sheryl McCollum and Joshua Schiffer Break down the federal hearing surrounding Luigi Mangione, the suspect accused of assassinating UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December of 2024. What began as a five-day manhunt has become a master class in what not to do, with missed warrants, coached testimony, and evidence on the verge of being thrown out. Sheryl and Joshua examine how procedural missteps could weaken a potential death penalty case and why “get a warrant” isn't just good advice; it's the foundation of justice. They then turned their attention to Massachusetts, where the trial of Brian Walshe, who is accused of killing and dismembering his wife, reveals how arrogance, lies, and a trail of Google searches can expose a killer's truth. Highlights: • (0:00) Welcome to Crime Roundup with Sheryl McCollum and Joshua Schiffer • (0:15) "99 percent of the time, you need a warrant... it won’t hurt your case if you get one and don’t need it.” • (4:00) Coached testimony and the danger of tailoring officer statements for admissibility • (7:30) What happens when training, procedure, and pressure collide in the courtroom • (9:00) How early media leaks and “pre-trial publicity” can poison a case before it begins • (10:30) The potential collapse of key evidence and its impact on death penalty eligibility • (12:15) The rules of criminal procedure and what it means when they don’t apply equally • (17:15) The defense’s dream scenario: getting the weapon suppressed because of a“bad stop” • (17:45) The Brian Walshe trail and the anatomy of a cover-up • (19:30) Walshe’s “woke up and she was dead” defense and why it’s collapsing in court • (21:45) The digital trail: how Google searches reveal motive, method, and mindset • (23:00) Closing thoughts: why “get a warrant” isn’t optional, it’s the rule of law About the Hosts Joshua Schiffer is a veteran trial attorney and one of the Southeast’s most respected legal voices. He is a founding partner at ChancoSchiffer P.C., where he has litigated high-stakes criminal, civil rights, and personal injury cases for over two decades. Known for his bold courtroom presence and ability to clearly explain complex legal issues, Schiffer is a frequent media contributor and a fearless advocate for accountability. Sheryl “Mac” McCollum is an active crime scene investigator for a Metro Atlanta Police Department and the director of the Cold Case Investigative Research Institute, which partners with colleges and universities nationwide. With more than 4 decades of experience, she has worked on thousands of cold cases using her investigative system, The Last 24/361, which integrates evidence, media, and advanced forensic testing. Her work on high-profile cases, including The Boston Strangler, Natalie Holloway, Tupac Shakur and the Moore’s Ford Bridge lynching, earned her an Emmy Award for CSI: Atlanta and induction into the National Law Enforcement Hall of Fame in 2023. Preorder Sheryl’s upcoming book, Swans Don’t Swim in a Sewer: Lessons in Life,Justice, and Joy from a Forensic Scientist, releasing May 2026 from Simon and Schuster. https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Swans-Dont-Swim-in-a-Sewer/Sheryl-Mac-McCollum/9798895652824 Stay Connected Subscribe using your favorite podcast platform and leave a review to support the show. Have acase or topic you’d like Sheryl and Joshua to cover? Email coldcase2004@gmail.comFollow the Hosts: • Sheryl on X: @ColdCaseTips • Facebook: @sheryl.mccollum • Joshua on X and Instagram: @lawyerschiffSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Join the clubrightbrainresetters.comGet 20% off your first orderhttps://addednutrition.comIn this episode, Stephen Martin discusses nine signs of dyslexia that are often overlooked. He explores how dyslexia affects memory, creativity, and sleep, providing insights into the unique challenges faced by individuals with dyslexia. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding these signs to better support those who may be struggling with dyslexia.TakeawaysFatigue from reading and writing is common in dyslexia.Left and right confusion can be a daily struggle.Rote memory often fails without visual or emotional connections.Procedural memory issues can make following steps difficult.Creativity in dyslexia may manifest in unique problem-solving ways.Pronunciation challenges can lead to anxiety in social situations.Verbal working memory chaos can disrupt conversations.Dyslexics often excel in divergent thinking and creativity.Sleep issues are prevalent among dyslexics, affecting daily life.Awareness of these signs can help others understand dyslexia better.Dyslexia, signs of dyslexia, memory challenges, creativity, sleep issues, left-right confusion, verbal working memory, divergent thinking, fatigue, procedural memory, ADHD, adults with dyslexia, support for adults.If you want to find out more visit:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠truthaboutdyslexia.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join our Facebook Group⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠facebook.com/groups/adultdyslexia⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Show Notes: The Ethics of TriageEpisode Summary:In this episode of the Emergency Management Network, hosts Todd DeVoe and Dan Scott dive into the ethical dimensions of triage decision-making in emergency management. When resources are scarce and lives hang in the balance, how do practitioners decide who receives what—and when? They explore the moral, operational, and community implications of triage: from the utilitarian drive to save the most lives to justice, equity, and the dignity of every individual. The discussion moves beyond clinical mass-casualty triage into the broader realm of emergency management: how we allocate responders, infrastructure support, and logistics under constraint.Topics Covered:* The concept of triage in disasters: not just medical, but resource and operational prioritization.* Ethical frameworks in triage: utilitarianism (greatest good), justice/fairness, respect for persons.* Application for emergency management: when first responders, shelters, infrastructure, and logistics compete for scarce resources.* Procedural and decision-making ethics: transparency, criteria, fairness, documentation, moral burden.* Scenarios and case reflections: mass-casualty incidents, pandemic strains, infrastructure failures, evacuation dilemmas.* Practical guidance: building ethical triage protocols in EM, training for moral stress, community engagement, and after-action review of ethical decisions.* Questions for reflection: How do you build trust when triage decisions must be made under pressure? How do you integrate equity and fairness? How do you support decision-makers facing moral injury?Quotable Moment:“Triage isn't just who goes first — it's who we decide we can't help right now, and that decision carries ethical weight for the entire system.” This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit emnetwork.substack.com/subscribe