Podcasts about Raimondo

For Part 3e of this deep dive we continue the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) decision that overruled Chevron (1984), Kagan's dissent continued from her p. 15 (Roman Numeral II) to her p. 24 at the top (Roman Numeral III) of that Slip Opinion. We go from p. 15 through to the top of her p. 24 stopping at Roman Numeral III of the Slip Opinion (603 U.S. _____ (2024) of Kagan's dissent. We will pick up the rest of p.15 of that dissent next time. Donate a gift to keep the podcast going on Venmo at-sign no space TheRepublicanProfessor or https://buymeacoffee.com/lucasj.mather Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

We're diving into the world of home infusion and specialty pharmacy with Kaila Raimondo, Head of US Markets for AlayaCare. AlayaCare is transforming how care is delivered outside the traditional four walls of a clinic or hospital, and Kaila brings a unique perspective—not just as an industry leader, but also as a former infusion patient. We talk about everything from solving complex logistical challenges with software, to improving the patient experience, to why nurses are the true face of your brand.

For Part 3d of this deep dive we continue the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) decision that overruled Chevron (1984), Kagan's dissent continued from her p. 12 to p. 15 (Roman Numeral II) of that Slip Opinion. We go from p. 12 to most of the way through p. 15 stopping at Roman Numeral II of the Slip Opinion (603 U.S. _____ (2024) of Kagan's dissent. We will pick up the rest of p.15 of that dissent next time. Donate a gift to keep the podcast going on Venmo at-sign no space TheRepublicanProfessor or https://buymeacoffee.com/lucasj.mather Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

This week on a Lively Experiment, with a new leadership team at the state Senate, what we can expect. Plus, Gina for President? Raimondo says she's considering it but there is much work to be done at the party level. Moderator Jim Hummel talks with former candidate for Lieutenant Governor, Aaron Guckian, URI Political Science Professor Emily Lynch and Democratic strategist, Rob Horowitz.

Melida Novak and Patricia Snyder of the Long Island Game Farm and Foundation for Wildlife Sustainability, Inc. as well a musician Fred Raimondo helping coordinate this season's Songbird Sessions join Heart of The East End Gianna Volpe on WLIW-FM ahead of 5/3 ribbon-cutting ceremony/celebration for their outdoor stage and reopened Woodland Trail.Listen to the playlist on Apple Music

Fan favorite, Attorney Anthony Raimondo, guests on this episode to discuss what's going on (and what isn't) with Trump, Musk, Doge, Immigration and more. Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow For full shownotes visit: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Fan favorite, Attorney Anthony Raimondo, guests on this episode to discuss what's going on (and what isn't) with Trump, Musk, Doge, Immigration and more. Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow For full shownotes visit: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For Part 3c of this deep dive we continue the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) decision that overruled Chevron (1984), Kagan's dissent continued from p. 9 of the Slip Opinion. We go from p. 9 to most of the way through p. 12 of the Slip Opinion (603 U.S. _____ (2024) of Kagan's dissent. We will pick up the rest of p.12 of that dissent next time. Donate a gift to keep the podcast going on Venmo at-sign no space TheRepublicanProfessor or https://buymeacoffee.com/lucasj.mather Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

On this episode of A Hard Look, we're discussing the implications of the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright; the case that overruled the infamous Chevron Doctrine. Since last summer, there has been meaningful legal developments within lower circuits. Professor of Law and legal scholar, Cary Coglianese, joins us to discuss what—if any—indications these decisions mean for a post-Loper Bright landscape.(*)* Editorial Note: At the time of recording, this episode referred to the article Professor Coglianese wrote with Professor Daniel E. Walters, “The Great Unsettling: Administrative Governance After Loper Bright,” as “forthcoming.” This article has since been published and is now available online at the adminstrativelawreview.org.The transcript of the episode can be found here or on our website. Show Notes:Listen to our pre-Loper Bright episode, where we interviewed Daniel M. Sullivan to discuss the critiques and weaknesses of Chevron doctrine, potential constitutional problems with judicial review of agency decisions, and what administrative law may look like after the decision. Read more:Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024)Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo on SCOTUS BlogLoper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and the Future of Agency Interpretations of Law by Congressional Research Service (Dec. 31, 2024)The Great Unsettling: Administrative Governance After Loper Bright by Cary Coglianese & Daniel E. Walters

For Part 3b of this deep dive we continue the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) decision that overruled Chevron (1984). We continue with with the Democrat's dissent written by Justice Kagan defending Chevron. We into the first few pages of Roman numeral I, to the top of page 9 of the Slip Opinion 603 U.S. _____ (2024) (Kagan's dissent), which we will continue to cover next time. Donate a gift to keep the podcast going on Venmo at-sign no space TheRepublicanProfessor or https://buymeacoffee.com/lucasj.mather Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

Un presidente e una vicepresidente rampolli delle più importanti famiglie del loro paese, minacce di morte e un ex presidente arrestato dalla giustizia internazionale. Con Raimondo Neironi, ricercatore all'Università di Cagliari ed esperto della regione. Il link per abbonarti al Post e ascoltare la puntata per intero. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For Part 3 of this deep dive we begin the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) decision that overruled Chevron (1984). We begin with the Democrat's dissent written by Justice Kagan defending Chevron. We get up to Roman numeral I, which we will cover next time. Donate a gift to keep the podcast going on Venmo at-sign no space TheRepublicanProfessor or https://buymeacoffee.com/lucasj.mather Warmly, Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D. The Republican Professor Podcast The Republican Professor Newsletter on Substack https://therepublicanprofessor.substack.com/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/podcast/ https://www.therepublicanprofessor.com/articles/ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRepublicanProfessor Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheRepublicanProfessor Twitter: @RepublicanProf Instagram: @the_republican_professor

President Trump is beginning his second non-consecutive term with a Republican-controlled House and Senate and the backing of major tech and corporate executives, while simultaneously contending with significant political polarization. These opposing factors raise a host of questions about what to expect from this administration's first 100 days in office.In the season five premiere of In the Public Interest, co-host Felicia Ellsworth speaks with WilmerHale Partner and Co-Chair of the Congressional Investigations Practice and the Crisis Management and Strategic Response Group Alyssa DaCunha, Senior Public Policy Advisor and Co-Chair of the firm's Public Policy and Legislative Affairs Practice Rob Lehman, and Partner and fellow Co-Chair of the Public Policy and Legislative Affairs Practice Jonathan Yarowsky. Together they share their forecast for the first 100 days of the administration, including what the administration's top priorities are expected to be, shifts in international relations and foreign policy, the state of congressional oversight and the impact of recent Supreme Court decisions on the functions of federal agencies. Related ResourcesVisit Our Post-Election Update CenterWilmerHale Launches Administrative Law Transition Task ForceChina Imposes Series of Measures to Counter US Export RestrictionsThe Future Of Agency Deference After Loper BrightIn That Case: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo

Philip Raimondo, Director of On Premise National Accounts for Proximo Spirits, shares his distinguished career in the beverage industry. With decades of experience dedicated to the art of hospitality, Philip shares invaluable insights on what it takes to foster exceptional service and build lasting relationships within the hospitality world

Hello, and welcome back to Bank Nerd Corner, the first Bank Nerd Corner of 2025. I'm Alex Johnson, joined as always by the brilliant Kiah Haslett, Banking and Fintech Editor at Bank Director.  Here's what we're unpacking this week. First up, the CFPB has sued the biggest names in banking—Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase—along with Early Warning Services (EWS), the backbone of Zelle, for allegedly dropping the ball on fraud protections. With over $870M lost to scams since 2017, we're asking: Are banks scapegoats for a bigger mess involving social media and telecoms? Ultimately, how much consumer protection is enough—and who pays the price? Next up, two cases—Loper Bright (aka Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo) and Jarkesy (aka SEC v. Jarkesy)—are shaking up regulatory agencies like the Fed and FDIC. Are we going to see a power shift or a regulatory takedown? If the Fed blinks first, do banks get to rewrite the rules—and does "too big to fail" become DIY? Then there's the disclosure debate. Can companies like Zelle or the FDIC "warn away" liability with fine print? If streamlined experiences make users vulnerable, will regulators demand clearer disclosures? Is it the end of seamless user experience...and trust as we know it? Finally, don't miss our 2025 predictions. Could Capital One acquiring Discover signal a regulatory shift favoring big bank M&A? Will a fintech actually grab a bank charter this year?  Oh hello, New Year; you're going to be wild!

This Day in Legal History: Charles I Placed on TrialOn January 6, 1649, the English Parliament took a momentous step by voting to place King Charles I on trial for high treason. This decision came in the wake of the English Civil War, a prolonged conflict between Royalists, loyal to the king, and Parliamentarians seeking to limit monarchical power. Leading up to the trial, the New Model Army, under Oliver Cromwell, orchestrated "Pride's Purge," expelling Members of Parliament likely to oppose the trial. The remaining assembly, known as the Rump Parliament, convened and authorized the creation of the High Court of Justice, an unprecedented legal body tasked with trying a sitting monarch.The trial marked a dramatic shift in the balance of power, challenging the divine right of kings—a cornerstone of monarchical rule. Charles I was accused of subverting the laws of England and waging war against his own people, charges that he denied, arguing that no court held legitimate authority to judge a king. Despite his defense, the court convicted Charles on January 27, 1649, sentencing him to death. His execution on January 30 sent shockwaves throughout Europe, signaling the emergence of parliamentary sovereignty and temporarily abolishing the monarchy in favor of the Commonwealth under Cromwell.This legal milestone not only altered the trajectory of English governance but also set a precedent for holding leaders accountable to the rule of law. The Supreme Court is expected to play a critical role in assessing the legality of anticipated Trump administration policies, particularly in immigration and administrative law. Immigration policies, such as ending birthright citizenship and mass deportations, are likely to be challenged in court, with outcomes depending on their framing, especially if tied to national security concerns, which the Court tends to view more favorably than economic justifications. The Court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limited agency power by ending Chevron deference, may have far-reaching implications for both the Biden and Trump administrations. While reducing agencies' regulatory authority aligns with Trump's deregulatory goals, it also empowers blue states and civil rights groups to challenge his policies under stricter judicial scrutiny.Challenges to agency head tenure protections and interpretations of outdated laws could also come before the Court. Trump's potential push to dismantle longstanding precedents like Humphrey's Executor v. United States could make federal agencies more directly accountable to the presidency, further politicizing their functions. Critics note that these shifts in judicial doctrine cut both ways, curbing regulatory power broadly regardless of the administration in power. This duality underscores a tension between conservative goals of limiting administrative overreach and the desire to expedite executive policy-making.Trump Likely to Test Supreme Court on Agency Powers, ImmigrationPresident Joe Biden has permanently barred offshore oil and gas drilling across over 625 million acres of US coastal waters, including the East and West Coasts, parts of the Gulf of Mexico, and sections of the Northern Bering Sea. Citing environmental risks and minimal energy gains, Biden stated the move balances conservation and energy security, ensuring that protecting coastlines and maintaining low energy prices are not mutually exclusive. The decision does not affect existing offshore leases or ongoing drilling in Alaska's Cook Inlet and the central and western Gulf of Mexico, which account for a significant portion of US energy production.Biden's action builds on temporary protections enacted by former President Trump for Florida's Gulf Coast and southeastern waters but makes them indefinite. While praised by environmental advocates and coastal communities, the oil industry criticized the move, arguing that it restricts domestic energy potential and undermines national security. Some politicians from both parties have supported these protections, emphasizing the risks demonstrated by disasters like the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill.Although Biden's decision relies on a federal law provision that may be difficult to reverse, legal challenges could arise if a future administration attempts to undo the protections. The debate underscores tensions between environmental stewardship and energy independence.Biden Bars Offshore Oil Drilling in US Atlantic and PacificBiden to ban offshore oil, gas drilling in vast areas ahead of Trump term | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Justice has urged the Supreme Court to deny President-elect Donald Trump's request to delay a law requiring TikTok's Chinese owner, ByteDance, to sell its U.S. assets by January 19 or face a nationwide ban. Trump argued for more time after his inauguration to seek a political resolution, while the DOJ countered that ByteDance has not demonstrated it is likely to succeed on the merits of its case. The government emphasized the national security risks of TikTok's data collection on 170 million American users, framing it as a tool for potential espionage.TikTok, however, has requested the Court block the law on First Amendment grounds, claiming it is being unfairly targeted for its content rather than its data practices, especially given Congress's lack of action against other Chinese-owned apps like Shein and Temu. If the law takes effect, new downloads of TikTok will be prohibited, and existing services will degrade over time as companies are barred from providing support. The Biden administration could extend the compliance deadline by 90 days if ByteDance shows significant progress toward divestment. This marks a shift in Trump's stance from 2020, when he sought to ban TikTok over similar concerns. The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on January 10.Justice Dept. urges Supreme Court to reject Trump request to delay TikTok ban law | ReutersDisney, Fox, and Warner Bros Discovery are appealing a court ruling that blocked the launch of their joint streaming service, Venu Sports, arguing it unfairly restricts competition and consumer choice. The district court previously halted Venu's debut after rival FuboTV sued, claiming the service violated antitrust laws by bundling sports content in a way that would harm competition and raise prices. The district court sided with Fubo, finding that the bundling practices could foreclose other sports-focused services and granted an injunction against Venu's launch.The media companies argue that the ruling denies consumers a lower-cost streaming option aimed at price-sensitive sports fans and protects Fubo from competition. They assert that Venu would increase consumer choice and lower prices. However, the Justice Department and several states have supported the injunction, stating that Venu's creation would consolidate market power among the companies—who control over half of U.S. sports rights—and hinder the emergence of competing sports-only platforms like Fubo.At the heart of the dispute is whether the bundling practices by Disney, Fox, and Warner Bros unfairly disadvantage distributors by tying access to desirable sports content with less popular programming. The appeals court will now decide if the injunction stands.Disney, Fox and Warner Bros to ask court to lift ban on launch of Venu Sports service | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this case, the court considered these issues: 1. Does the Magnuson-Stevens Act authorize the National Marine Fisheries Service to promulgate a rule that would require industry to pay for at-sea monitoring programs? 2. Should the Court overrule Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council or at least clarify whether statutory silence on controversial powers creates an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency? The case was decided on June 28, 2024. The Supreme Court held that the Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, and courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous. Chevron U-S-A Inc. v Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. is overruled. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion of the Court (which also decided the consolidated case, Relentless, Inc. v Department of Commerce). The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1946 requires courts to "decide all relevant questions of law" when reviewing agency actions. This means courts should use their own judgment to interpret laws, not defer to agencies' interpretations. The Chevron doctrine, established in the 1984 case Chevron U-S-A v Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., contradicts this principle. Chevron required courts to defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes if those interpretations were reasonable. Chevron was based on a flawed assumption that Congress intends to delegate interpretive authority to agencies whenever a law is ambiguous. This assumption doesn't reflect reality and goes against the traditional role of courts. Chevron has been difficult to apply consistently and has led to confusion in lower courts. It has also been gradually limited by subsequent Supreme Court decisions. Thus, Chevron should be overruled because it contradicts the APA, is based on faulty reasoning, has proven unworkable in practice, and hasn't created the kind of settled expectations that would justify keeping it in place. However, this decision does not necessarily overturn the specific outcomes of past cases that used Chevron. Those outcomes would need to be challenged separately. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch each filed concurring opinions. Justice Elena Kagan authored a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined, and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson joined as to No. 22-1219. Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of No. 22-451. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scotus-opinions/support

This Day in Legal History: Korematsu DecisionOn December 18, 1944, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered its controversial decision in Korematsu v. United States, upholding the forced relocation and internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. The case challenged Executive Order 9066, issued by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942, which authorized the removal of over 120,000 Japanese Americans from their homes to internment camps. Fred Korematsu, a U.S. citizen of Japanese descent, defied the order, arguing that it violated his constitutional rights.In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled that the internment was a valid exercise of wartime authority, emphasizing the need to protect national security over individual rights during a period of "emergency and peril." Writing for the majority, Justice Hugo Black stated that the internment was not based on racial prejudice but on military necessity, a justification many have since criticized as a flawed rationale.The dissenting justices, including Justice Murphy, condemned the decision as a blatant violation of constitutional rights and a form of racial discrimination. Justice Murphy called the internment camps "a legalization of racism," while Justice Jackson warned of the dangerous precedent the ruling could set.Though the decision has never been explicitly overturned, Korematsu has been widely discredited. In 1983, Korematsu's conviction was vacated by a federal court, acknowledging government misconduct in the case. In 2018, the Supreme Court criticized the decision in Trump v. Hawaii, stating it "was gravely wrong the day it was decided."The legacy of Korematsu remains a stark reminder of the fragility of civil liberties during times of fear and conflict, prompting ongoing discussions about justice, prejudice, and constitutional protections. It should inspire us to question how firmly we hold our principles when we don't hold fast to them in the face of consequence but instead abandon them entirely; when we preference a temporary assuaging of fear among the skittish masses above the rights of citizens. Korematsu remains a stain on U.S. history and carries continued resonance into the modern day, as we confront the consequences of electing a president, House, and Senate largely on the strength of their promise to intern ethnic minorities. Those that would seek to distance our actions today from 1944 would suggest that interned Japanese-Americans were largely citizens, and detained immigrants today are not – but this raises the question of who controls the bestowing of citizenship, the immigrant or the state?A federal judge, Michael Ponsor, faced ethical violations after criticizing Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito in a New York Times essay. Ponsor condemned Alito for displaying controversial flags outside his properties, including an upside-down American flag associated with Trump supporters during the January 6 Capitol riot. The critique spurred a judicial misconduct complaint by the conservative Article III Project, leading to an investigation.Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Albert Diaz ruled that Ponsor's essay undermined public confidence in judicial integrity and violated the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges by commenting on partisan issues. Though the essay did not reference a specific case, it coincided with debates about Alito's potential recusal from cases involving the January 6 riot and Trump's immunity bid. Ponsor apologized in a letter, acknowledging the ethical breach and committing to consulting judicial panels before future public writings.The controversy highlights tensions surrounding judicial impartiality and political commentary, particularly as it intersects with high-profile cases and public scrutiny. Just to check the box score here, that is one judicial misconduct violation for the judge that criticized the justice that flew insurrectionist flags at his home–none for the latter. Judge's criticism of US Supreme Court's Alito over flags is deemed improper | ReutersElon Musk has publicly opposed the Republican plan to temporarily fund the government, adding tension to Speaker Mike Johnson's efforts to secure a deal before Friday's shutdown deadline. The proposed legislation includes billions in disaster relief and agricultural funding, angering fiscal conservatives. Musk, tapped by President-elect Donald Trump to advise on government efficiency, criticized the bill on X, reflecting growing conservative discontent. Johnson acknowledged Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy's concerns but stressed the need for bipartisan cooperation given the narrow Republican majority.The funding dispute highlights ongoing GOP divisions that previously ousted Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Johnson faces an even slimmer majority due to recent election losses and Trump's appointment of three Republican representatives to his administration. This leaves the party with a precarious one-vote margin until special elections in April. Conservatives like Marjorie Taylor Greene have criticized the bill's added spending as unnecessary, predicting it will gain more Democratic than Republican support, risking further internal conflict.Johnson remains confident about retaining his position as Speaker despite challenges, emphasizing his focus on immediate legislative priorities, including the budget blueprint and border security measures.Trump Key Adviser Musk Comes Out Against Year-End Funding BillA special master has ordered TikTok Inc. to provide source code, financial data, and usage data for its apps, including CapCut and BytePlus Video Editor, in a trade secrets and copyright infringement case filed by Beijing Meishe Network Technology Co. The Chinese tech company alleges that TikTok misappropriated its video and audio editing source code, accusing a former Meishe engineer of trade theft before joining TikTok.The case, originally filed in Texas in 2021, was transferred to California in 2023. TikTok argued that discovery about its apps, including Faceu and Lemon8, was irrelevant because U.S. laws do not typically apply to conduct outside the country. However, the special master, Hon. Kendall J. Newman (Ret.), ruled that discovery was necessary since Meishe may recover damages for foreign infringement if it can show TikTok copied its code in the U.S. and used it abroad.TikTok has 30 days to comply with the order, which allows Meishe to pursue claims involving extraterritorial damages. Meanwhile, TikTok also faces a potential U.S. government ban unless its parent company, ByteDance Ltd., divests the app by January 19. On the same day, Newman partially granted TikTok's request to compel Meishe to disclose documents about its affiliate XAT, which allegedly developed the disputed source code.TikTok Must Turn Over Code, Financial Data in Trade Secrets SuitDemocratic state attorneys general (AGs) are preparing to defend environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives against expected challenges from the incoming Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress. They plan to leverage the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limits agency regulatory authority, to counter potential anti-ESG actions that lack explicit congressional approval. Minnesota AG Keith Ellison and Nevada AG Aaron Ford emphasized their readiness to use legal frameworks like the Administrative Procedure Act and Loper Bright to protect ESG-related policies.Concerns include possible rollbacks of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules facilitating ESG proposals, restrictions on corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, and curtailment of climate-related disclosures. The GOP's Project 2025 agenda calls for sweeping changes, including a task force to challenge ESG/DEI practices and reclassification of DEI as discriminatory. Ellison and Ford argue such measures risk undermining civil rights and shareholder freedoms.Democratic AGs have pledged to challenge these policies in court and defend existing ESG regulations, such as the SEC's climate disclosure rules. Meanwhile, Republican AGs are aligning with Trump's deregulatory agenda, with Tennessee AG Jonathan Skrmetti noting their support through briefs and interventions. Both sides are preparing for extensive legal battles over the regulatory future of ESG and DEI initiatives.Blue State AGs Prepare to Use Loper Bright Ruling to Defend ESG This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode, we have a recording of our latest labor webinar with Anthony Raimondo. Anthony gives us the latest legal updates and discusses the critical issues surrounding dairy workforce protection. Tune in as Anthony shares insights on mitigating risks, technological solutions, and strategies to ensure workforce safety and efficiency in the dairy industry. For questions about the topics covered in this episode, please contact Kyle Lutz at kyle@wudairies.com OR Anthony Raimondo at apr@49acresranch.com.

This week we are joined by super lawyer Anthony Raimondo to discuss another swashbuckling Western adventure: The story of the fatal clash of General Custer and the Sioux people of the plains led by Crazy Horse. Truly a clash on the civilizational level, neither player truly grasped what his role in history would eventually become. This week's episode was sponsored by Magic Mind. Get 20 percent off any purchase or new subscription by visiting our link at www.magicmind.com/historyh and use code HISTORYH20 Follow Anthony on twitter @49acrestofreedom and sub to his substack anthonyraimondo.substack.com Check out Patrick's work at www.cantgetfooledagain.com Don't forget to join our Telegram channel at T.me/historyhomos and to join our group chat at T.me/historyhomoschat For programming updates and news follow us across social media @historyhomospod and follow Scott @Scottlizardabrams and Patrick @cantgetfooledagainradio OR subscribe to our telegram channel t.me/historyhomos The video version of the show is available on Substack, Rokfin, bitchute, odysee and Rumble For weekly premium episodes or to contribute to the show subscribe to our channel at www.historyhomospod.substack.com You can donate to the show directly at paypal.me/historyhomos To order a History Homos T shirt (and recieve a free sticker) please send your shirt size and address to Historyhomos@gmail.com and please address all questions, comments and concerns there as well. Later homos --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/historyhomos/support

The Supreme Court’s most recent term was one of significance with respect to the separation of powers. The Court held that the President is immune from criminal prosecution for most official acts. The Court also overturned the Chevron doctrine in Loper Bright v. Raimondo and determined that administrative agencies typically cannot impose civil penalties against individuals without a jury trial in SEC v. Jarkesy. These cases followed not long after the Supreme Court’s express recognition of the major-questions doctrine in West Virginia v. EPA. Yet the Supreme Court also upheld the CFPB’s novel funding method in the face of an Appropriation Clause challenge, issued an important opinion bearing on facial challenges in Moody v. NetChoice, and rejected a petition asking that it reconsider the nondelegation doctrine. What is driving these decisions—originalism, history, or pragmatic concerns? What issues might be ripe for further development or reexamination—nondelegation, removal restrictions on officers, the major questions doctrine, or something else? And how should advocates think about separation of powers challenges moving forward, in the context of both strategic and corporate litigation?FeaturingMr. Russell Balikian, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLPMs. Zhonette Brown, General Counsel and Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties AllianceMr. Roman Martinez, Partner, Latham & Watkins LLPMr. Luke McCloud, Partner, Williams & ConnollyModerator: Hon. Daniel Bress, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Comcast said it plans to turn its cable networks, including CNBC and MSNBC, into a new, separate company. We'll get into why it could be a sign of what's to come in the media industry. And, the Joe Biden administration is shifting into overdrive trying to spend money intended to boost microchip manufacturing before President-elect Donald Trump returns to office. Plus, we’ll smile about breakthroughs in automatic braking technology and a new version of chess that’s pushing the game forward. Here’s everything we talked about today: “Comcast to Spin Off MSNBC, CNBC and Other Cable Networks” from The New York Times “It's Official! Comcast To Spin Off Cable Networks, Sees New Standalone Company A ‘Partner And Acquirer’ Of Media Assets” from Deadline “Raimondo's new mission: Leave no cash for Trump” from Politico “Automatic Braking Systems Save Lives. Now They’ll Need to Work at 62 MPH” from Wired “The Greatest Chess Player of All Time Is Bored With Chess” from The Wall Street Journal We love to hear from you. Email us at makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

Comcast said it plans to turn its cable networks, including CNBC and MSNBC, into a new, separate company. We'll get into why it could be a sign of what's to come in the media industry. And, the Joe Biden administration is shifting into overdrive trying to spend money intended to boost microchip manufacturing before President-elect Donald Trump returns to office. Plus, we’ll smile about breakthroughs in automatic braking technology and a new version of chess that’s pushing the game forward. Here’s everything we talked about today: “Comcast to Spin Off MSNBC, CNBC and Other Cable Networks” from The New York Times “It's Official! Comcast To Spin Off Cable Networks, Sees New Standalone Company A ‘Partner And Acquirer’ Of Media Assets” from Deadline “Raimondo's new mission: Leave no cash for Trump” from Politico “Automatic Braking Systems Save Lives. Now They’ll Need to Work at 62 MPH” from Wired “The Greatest Chess Player of All Time Is Bored With Chess” from The Wall Street Journal We love to hear from you. Email us at makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

Comcast said it plans to turn its cable networks, including CNBC and MSNBC, into a new, separate company. We'll get into why it could be a sign of what's to come in the media industry. And, the Joe Biden administration is shifting into overdrive trying to spend money intended to boost microchip manufacturing before President-elect Donald Trump returns to office. Plus, we’ll smile about breakthroughs in automatic braking technology and a new version of chess that’s pushing the game forward. Here’s everything we talked about today: “Comcast to Spin Off MSNBC, CNBC and Other Cable Networks” from The New York Times “It's Official! Comcast To Spin Off Cable Networks, Sees New Standalone Company A ‘Partner And Acquirer’ Of Media Assets” from Deadline “Raimondo's new mission: Leave no cash for Trump” from Politico “Automatic Braking Systems Save Lives. Now They’ll Need to Work at 62 MPH” from Wired “The Greatest Chess Player of All Time Is Bored With Chess” from The Wall Street Journal We love to hear from you. Email us at makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

Secretary Gina Raimondo has morphed the Commerce Department over the past four years into an agency focused on national security — enacting a massive, high-tech industrial policy aimed at beating China. And with two months left in her tenure, she is now racing to cement that legacy. On POLITICO Tech, Raimondo joins host Steven Overly to talk about her plans to dole out all microchip subsidies, today's global summit on AI safety and why she thinks her work will withstand a Republican-controlled Washington. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode we speak with Dr. Kevin Boston from the University of Arkansas at Monticello to discuss a recent landmark Supreme Court decision Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) that overturned a long-standing precedent for federal agency authority on interpreting intent of Congressional legislation.  Dr. Boston received a Ph.D. In Forest Engineering at Oregon State University (1996) and has a JD, from the Northwest School of Law at Lewis and Clark College (2016). Dr. Boston has been working in the field of forestry as a registered forester across the globe since the early 80s and has submitted an Amicus Curiae to the Supreme Court for Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center case from 2012-2013. For questions or comments, email us at timberuniversity@gmail.com.

This Day in Legal History: Lockerbie Bombing IndictmentsOn November 11, 1991, indictments were formally announced in the notorious Lockerbie bombing case, marking a significant milestone in international criminal justice. U.S. and U.K. prosecutors indicted two Libyan nationals—Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi and Lamin Khalifah Fhimah—in connection with the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. The attack took place on December 21, 1988, when the plane exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing all 259 people on board and 11 residents on the ground. This tragedy led to a complex, multi-year investigation involving multiple countries and was one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in the West prior to September 11, 2001.The indictments represented a significant moment in the use of international legal cooperation to address terrorism, as both the U.S. and U.K. sought justice for their citizens. The two men were accused of planting a bomb in the cargo hold, allegedly on behalf of Libyan intelligence services. However, for nearly a decade after the indictments, Libya resisted extradition requests, prompting years of diplomatic pressure and international sanctions.Finally, in 1999, Libya agreed to turn over Megrahi and Fhimah for trial in a specially created Scottish court seated in the Netherlands. This arrangement respected Libyan sovereignty while ensuring an impartial setting for the trial. After extensive proceedings, Megrahi was found guilty in 2001 of the murders, receiving a life sentence, while Fhimah was acquitted. The trial itself remains a significant example of international criminal law in action, setting a precedent for how nations can pursue justice in politically sensitive, cross-border terrorism cases. The Lockerbie bombing case also raised ongoing questions about evidence reliability and political influences in terrorism prosecutions, as Megrahi's conviction remained controversial, leading to a compassionate release in 2009 due to his terminal illness.This legal landmark underscored both the complexities of prosecuting international terrorism and the power of coordinated legal frameworks to address global threats.A New York judge, Justice Juan Merchan, will soon decide if President-elect Donald Trump's criminal conviction for falsifying business records related to hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels should be overturned. This decision follows a July U.S. Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity, which Trump's lawyers argue should apply to his case, asserting that the conviction should be dismissed. Merchan is also considering whether to proceed with sentencing Trump on Nov. 26, although legal experts believe this is unlikely before his Jan. 20 inauguration. If Merchan rules favorably on immunity or delays sentencing, Trump may assume the presidency without immediate legal encumbrances. Meanwhile, federal cases against Trump by Special Counsel Jack Smith are expected to be paused due to Justice Department policies against prosecuting sitting presidents. However, a separate Georgia state case remains unresolved. Trump, who maintains his innocence in all four cases, argues these prosecutions are politically motivated. Manhattan prosecutors counter that the Supreme Court's immunity decision doesn't apply since Trump's case involves non-official conduct, not covered by presidential immunity. Experts note that even if the conviction stands, Trump's team will likely seek to delay sentencing, which could potentially involve up to four years in prison, although fines or probation are more likely.Judge to decide whether Trump's hush money conviction can stand | ReutersDonald Trump's upcoming administration aims to drastically cut federal regulations, but recent Supreme Court rulings, including the end of Chevron deference, could complicate these efforts. Chevron deference, which previously allowed agencies flexibility in interpreting vague laws, was struck down in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Without this precedent, Trump's regulatory changes may face increased legal scrutiny, with courts more likely to question whether agencies are acting beyond Congress's intent. Despite these obstacles, Trump will likely have Senate support for his deregulation goals, especially as the ruling requires more specific legislative language—a challenge in a closely divided Congress.Lobbyists expect Trump's administration to focus on rolling back labor, environmental, and financial regulations. However, advocacy groups are poised to use the Supreme Court's ruling to defend Biden-era rules, arguing against the administration's authority under the revised legal framework. Trump may opt for informal guidance, like advisory memos or circulars, rather than formal rule-making, as these are harder to legally challenge. Corporate and industry groups generally support deregulation, though the ongoing legal and policy shifts could create near-term uncertainty. To establish lasting changes, Trump and Congress would need to pass new legislation, avoiding the “ping pong effect” of policies fluctuating with each administration change.Trump's Push to Deregulate Faces Challenges in Post-Chevron EraLaw firms saw a substantial profit increase of 11.2% in the third quarter of 2024, largely due to high lawyer productivity, strong billing rates, and controlled expenses, as reported by the Thomson Reuters Institute's Law Firm Financial Index. This index, which aggregates financial metrics from 195 large and midsize firms, recorded its second-highest score since inception, highlighting broad-based demand growth across multiple practice areas. Litigation demand rose by 4%, with gains also in corporate, real estate, labor, employment, and bankruptcy practices, while only intellectual property showed a slight decline.The report contrasts 2024's strong, diversified demand with the post-2021 demand slump, suggesting more stable long-term profitability for law firms. With Donald Trump's recent election win, firms anticipate additional work in areas such as regulation, compliance, antitrust, and energy. Although declining inflation may limit future billing rate increases, firms remain optimistic about the potential for new legal work stemming from significant regulatory changes expected in early 2025.Law firm profits soared in third quarter of 2024, report finds | ReutersThe National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has overturned a 40-year-old precedent, ruling that employers can no longer generally warn workers that unionization will harm their relationship with management. This ruling came from a case involving Starbucks, where the company allegedly made unlawful threats to employees during a union drive at its Seattle Roastery, warning them that unionizing could lead to reduced benefits and suggesting it would be futile. The board's decision revisits the 1985 Tri-Cast Inc. ruling, which had allowed employers to legally imply that unionizing would alter employees' direct relationships with management. Although the NLRB ultimately found that Starbucks' statements encouraging a "no" vote to maintain open communication with managers did not directly violate the law, it changed the standards for such statements going forward. The board's Democratic majority explained that the earlier precedent was incorrect in permitting nearly any statement that unionizing would affect the employee-manager relationship. This decision reinforces the NLRB's recent actions against Starbucks in its efforts to unionize over 500 locations nationwide, requiring the company to stop unlawful behavior and delete certain social media posts.NLRB Tosses 40-Year Stance on Manager Unionization Threats This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Last term, the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. This watershed ruling included the notable line, “Chevron is overruled.” The federal judiciary is now to review agencies’ interpretations of statutes that are “silent or ambiguous” without affording an agency deference.This decision is already affecting administrative law and the review of agency rulemaking. It is being widely cited by both litigants and courts. For example, in U.S. Sugar Corp. v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit recently held that the EPA misinterpreted the term “new” when it classified certain sources of hazardous air pollutants as “new” rather than “existing.” EPA’s determination to make those “existing” sources accountable for the rule’s stricter regulations for “new” sources was vacated. Join us for a discussion of how Loper Bright has already impacted this and other agency actions, and what else we might expect in a post-Chevron world. Featuring:Prof. Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of LawProf. Andrew Mergen, Emmett Visiting Assistant Clinical Professor of Law in Environmental Law, Harvard Law SchoolProf. Rob Percival, Robert F. Stanton Professor of Law, University of Maryland Carey School of LawModerator: Jonathan Brightbill, Former Acting Assistant Attorney General, United States Department of Justice; Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP--To register, click the link above.

Over the last few years, the United States has led the world in the fight against climate change by passing some of the most impactful and largest investments in infrastructure and related regulatory reforms ever. Together, the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law seek to deploy nearly $1 trillion in climate positive infrastructure investment over the next decade. At the same time, however, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued a series of decisions that together significantly curtail the authority of executive agencies charged with implementing and defending legislation passed by Congress and signed by the President. In its most recent term, the Court issued four such decisions including Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturns a 40-year precedent and ensures the courts will have a commanding voice over climate policy and regulation for the foreseeable future.In this episode, Chad Reed unpacks the details and implications of Loper Bright and related Court decisions with Kevin Poloncarz, a partner with Covington & Burling and one of the top climate change attorneys in the United States. Links:Supreme Court strikes down Chevron, curtailing power of federal agencies (SCOTUSblog, July 2024)CleanLaw – Suite of Supreme Court Decisions Undermine Administrative LawPalmaz VineyardsEpisode recorded September 12, 2024 Email your feedback to Chad, Gil, and Hilary at climatepositive@hasi.com or tweet them to @ClimatePosiPod.

Since taking office as the U.S. Secretary of Commerce under the Biden administration, Gina Raimondo has turned the second-tier agency into a center of national security, manufacturing, and job creation. Correspondent Lesley Stahl meets Raimondo - including in her home state of Rhode Island, where she previously served as governor - to talk about the international “chip war” after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the escalating trade tensions with China over U.S. restrictions on the sale of leading-edge semiconductors and U.S. jobs hanging in the balance. Raimondo also shares the path that brought her to lead President Joe Biden's Department of Commerce. Less than 100 miles from Britain's mainland lie the Channel Islands, British Crown dependencies, with a fraught and hotly debated history. 60 Minutes contributor Holly Williams visits the islands that were occupied by Germany for five years during World War II and where the Nazis operated two concentration camps. Williams speaks with historians, British government officials and longtime residents to find out what really happened. For 17 years, St. Mary's has had a 100% graduation rate and a 100% college acceptance rate. The all-girls private school has no entry tests, just high expectations and strict rules. Two of the high school seniors solved a mathematical puzzle that was thought to be impossible for 2,000 years. Bill Whitaker reports.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Since Vice President Harris proposed a federal ban on price gouging in the food and grocery industries, her campaign has offered up few details about what the policy would actually look like. That’s left room for wild speculation. We’ll get into it. And, we’ll debunk former President Trump’s claims that the Biden administration manipulated job data to influence the election. Plus, the future of V2X technology on our roadways and the National Women’s Soccer League’s historic move to do away with drafts. Here’s everything we talked about today: “And today Trump and his allies are being dishonest about jobs data” from The Washington Post “US job totals will likely be revised down by 818,000 as Trump cries fraud” from Politico “Commerce Sec. Raimondo on VP Harris: She’s pro-business, pro-worker, and opposed to price-fixing” from CNBC “FTC to investigate high grocery prices” from Marketplace “Harris's Price-Gouging Ban: Price Controls or No Quick Effect?” from The New York Times “DOT plans to implement V2X technology raise privacy concerns” from Marketplace “The U.S. Sports League That Just Scrapped the Draft—and Made Everyone a Free Agent” from The Wall Street Journal “National Women's Soccer League and its players agree to a new contract deal” from NPR Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap. The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern.

Since Vice President Harris proposed a federal ban on price gouging in the food and grocery industries, her campaign has offered up few details about what the policy would actually look like. That’s left room for wild speculation. We’ll get into it. And, we’ll debunk former President Trump’s claims that the Biden administration manipulated job data to influence the election. Plus, the future of V2X technology on our roadways and the National Women’s Soccer League’s historic move to do away with drafts. Here’s everything we talked about today: “And today Trump and his allies are being dishonest about jobs data” from The Washington Post “US job totals will likely be revised down by 818,000 as Trump cries fraud” from Politico “Commerce Sec. Raimondo on VP Harris: She’s pro-business, pro-worker, and opposed to price-fixing” from CNBC “FTC to investigate high grocery prices” from Marketplace “Harris's Price-Gouging Ban: Price Controls or No Quick Effect?” from The New York Times “DOT plans to implement V2X technology raise privacy concerns” from Marketplace “The U.S. Sports League That Just Scrapped the Draft—and Made Everyone a Free Agent” from The Wall Street Journal “National Women's Soccer League and its players agree to a new contract deal” from NPR Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap. The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern.

Join Jim and Greg as they discuss the third night of the Democratic National Convention and more. They comment on Bill Clinton's decline, the fictional Tim Walz highlighted at the DNC vs. the one with a real & disturbing record as governor, the Dems projecting the fantasy that they are the party of freedom, and Biden's commerce secretary giving a bizarre reaction to a lousy jobs report.First, after commenting on Clinton's speech that was underwhelming and way too long, they dissect the "strikingly shameless" portrayal of Tim Walz as an everyman and good neighbor instead of the far left politician who coddled rioters, threatened anyone reluctant to take a Covid vaccine, added a Covid snitch line, and has had a cozy relationship with China for decades.Next, they shake their heads as Democrat after Democrat pretended that they are the party of freedom and that Republicans are the party of federal intrusion into our lives. And yet, there's only a couple of "freedoms" that they really care about and got repeated over and over Wednesday night.Finally, they laugh as Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo accuses Donald Trump of issuing the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) report showing the government overestimated the number of jobs created over the past year by 818,000. When confronted with the truth, Raimondo claimed she was not aware of the report.

The Labor Department reveals it overestimated the number of jobs added by almost one-million, but Gina Raimondo denies it. Plus, Grace discusses the possibility of RFK dropping out and endorsing Trump and more analysis of the DNC. Visit the Howie Carr Radio Network website to access columns, podcasts, and other exclusive content.

Since Vice President Harris proposed a federal ban on price gouging in the food and grocery industries, her campaign has offered up few details about what the policy would actually look like. That’s left room for wild speculation. We’ll get into it. And, we’ll debunk former President Trump’s claims that the Biden administration manipulated job data to influence the election. Plus, the future of V2X technology on our roadways and the National Women’s Soccer League’s historic move to do away with drafts. Here’s everything we talked about today: “And today Trump and his allies are being dishonest about jobs data” from The Washington Post “US job totals will likely be revised down by 818,000 as Trump cries fraud” from Politico “Commerce Sec. Raimondo on VP Harris: She’s pro-business, pro-worker, and opposed to price-fixing” from CNBC “FTC to investigate high grocery prices” from Marketplace “Harris's Price-Gouging Ban: Price Controls or No Quick Effect?” from The New York Times “DOT plans to implement V2X technology raise privacy concerns” from Marketplace “The U.S. Sports League That Just Scrapped the Draft—and Made Everyone a Free Agent” from The Wall Street Journal “National Women's Soccer League and its players agree to a new contract deal” from NPR Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap. The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern.

The Chevron Doctrine, or Chevron Deference, was an established judicial principle. When the law was ambiguous, the courts would let the agency experts interpret it. After a Supreme Court case called Loper Bright v Raimondo, that is no longer the case. So what does that mean? What exactly has gone away? What happens next?Our guides to the wonkiest of  the wonk are Robin Kundis Craig and Mustafa Santiago Ali. CLICK HERE: Visit our website to donate to the podcast, sign up for our newsletter, get free educational materials, and more!

Ralph welcomes Dr. Feroze Sidhwa, an American trauma surgeon who worked at the European Hospital in Khan Younis. They'll discuss Dr. Sidhwa's experience on the ground in Gaza, as well as his letter (co-signed by 45 other American medical practitioners) to President Biden, VP Harris, and First Lady Dr. Jill Biden. Then, Ralph is joined by University of Chicago Booth School of Business Professor Luigi Zingales to look at why business schools are setting capitalism up to fail.Dr. Feroze Sidhwa is a trauma and critical care surgeon as well as a Northern California Veterans Affairs general surgeon, and he is Associate Professor of Surgery at the California Northstate University College of Medicine. Dr. Sidhwa served at the European Hospital in Khan Younis in March and April of this year, and he has done prior humanitarian work in Haiti, the West Bank, Ukraine, and Zimbabwe. Dr. Sidhwa and 45 other American doctors and nurses who have served in Gaza recently sent a letter exhorting President Biden, VP Harris, and First Lady Dr. Jill Biden to effect an immediate ceasefire. Gaza is definitely unique compared to anywhere else that I've been—the level of violence, the level of displacement, the level of deprivation of normal things that society provides.Dr. Feroze SidhwaThere's so much in this letter, listeners, that you need to know about because it's such heartfelt and professionally documented close observation. This short interview cannot do justice to the horrors that Dr. Sidhwa and others observed—and they were just there for a few weeks. Ralph NaderOne of the things that we tried to emphasize in the letter is that we don't have anything to say about the politics of the Israel-Palestine conflict…We, as physicians, that's not what we're talking about.  We're talking about our own participation in a massive unprecedented assault on a civilian population. By a military that we fund—we supply, literally every day. We provide the training. We provide all the diplomatic cover. The economic support. Everything is coming from the United States. And in the end, the Israelis have already decided what they're going to do. They have decided to destroy Gaza. If half the people there die, oh well, if all of the people there die, oh well. But we don't have to be involved in it.Dr. Feroze SidhwaI think the situation in Gaza has reached such a level, the political moment in the U.S. with Biden not running again, has reached a certain level, and then with Netanyahu's bonker address to Congress—when Nancy Pelosi is openly criticizing the Prime Minister of Israel, he's really screwed up.Dr. Feroze SidhwaLuigi Zingales is the Robert C. McCormack Distinguished Service Professor of Entrepreneurship and Finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. He co-developed the Financial Trust Index, which is designed to monitor the level of trust that Americans have toward their financial system. He is currently a faculty research fellow for the National Bureau of Economic Research, a research fellow for the Center for Economic Policy Research, a fellow of the European Governance Institute, and the director of Chicago Booth's Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State. Professor Zingales is the co-host (with Bethany McLean) of the podcast Capitalisn't, and co-author (with Raghuram G. Rajan) of the book Saving Capitalism from Capitalists. These days, there is a lot of attention in business school about the environment, about so-called social responsibility, about all these aspects…but business schools like to keep separate the social aspects from the business aspects. So, in many places now there are classes on social entrepreneurship—which is something very interesting where people try to use their entrepreneurial skills to promote an initiative that is good for society at large, even if it's not necessarily profitable. But then if you are not a social enterprise, then you have to be the most capital, profit-maximizing firms on the face of the earth. There is nothing in between.Professor Luigi ZingalesOne year there was a management conference, and I organized a session on corporate fraud. And I expected a lot of people to show up and listen to the panel. In fact, it was a fiasco. Almost nobody showed up, because they don't want to confront their own limitations and problems. They want to see the more glitzy and shiny aspects of success. And that's what attracts them to business school, and that's what we end up selling to them. So I think that we are in part responsible because we cater too much to their own demand. Professor Luigi ZingalesIn Case You Haven't Heard with Francesco DeSantisNews 7/31/241. On Monday, nine Israeli soldiers were arrested on suspicion of raping a Palestinian prisoner at the Sde Teiman detention facility. In response, the Middle East Eye reports “Dozens of people…including members of parliament and Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu, gathered outside Sde Teiman and stormed the…facility…[and] Hours later, some 1,200 rioters gathered outside the Beit Lid base, where the nine suspects were taken for questioning.” This piece quotes military chief of staff Herzi Halevi who described the riots as “bordering on anarchy” and said the rioters harmed the military. Yet, “Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich described the suspects as as ‘heroic warriors'…[and] National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, who oversees the prisons where Palestinians are detained, called [the suspects] the ‘best heroes' and described the arrests as ‘shameful'.” One of these soldiers has now been released, according to the Middle East Monitor.2. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu addressed Congress last week amid mass protests in Washington D.C. During his speech, Axios reports six spectators were arrested for “disrupting” the address. All six of these demonstrators are family members of the Israeli hostages. Capitol Police spokesperson Brianna Burch is quoted saying “demonstrating in the Congressional Buildings is against the law.”3. In the U.K., the new Labour government is sending mixed messages on their Middle East policy. Late last week, the government announced that they would drop the United Kingdom's opposition to the International Criminal Court's arrest warrant against Netanyahu, per CNN. Yet this week, Foreign Secretary David Lammy announced that despite campaign promises, “Labour will…delay recognition [of a Palestinian state] indefinitely, making it conditional on Israel feeling ‘safe and secure,'” as reported by British blog Stats for Lefties. Labour continues to face pressure from independent MPs like Jeremy Corbyn on this issue.4. This week, President Nicolas Maduro was reelected in Venezuela. Elon Musk was caught spreading misinformation implying that Maduro engaged in election fraud – sharing a video that he claimed showed ballot boxes being stolen, when in fact the ballot boxes in question were actually air conditioning units, per Mediaite. The National Lawyer's Guild International Committee however, which sent a delegation to monitor the election, “observed a transparent, fair voting process with scrupulous attention to legitimacy, access to the polls and pluralism.” The NLG statement went on to decry “Despite the soundness of the electoral process, the U.S. backed opposition, with support from an anti-Maduro western press has refused to accept the results, undermining the stability of Venezuela's democracy.”5. Forbes reports that Disney has reached a deal with the unionized workers at Disneyland, ratifying a three-year contract that includes “a $24 hourly minimum wage…wage increases, seniority increases, more flexible attendance and sick leave policies, and other benefits.” This deal thus averts the first strike at the Anaheim park in four decades. Last week, More Perfect Union reported that the 14,000 unionized Disneyland workers “authorized a strike by 99%.”6. Jacobin reports “SpaceX [has won] a First Battle in Its Assault on the NLRB.” In this piece, People's Policy Project founder Matt Bruenig lays out how “SpaceX...[winning] a preliminary injunction in a Texas federal district court against the National Labor Relations Board… moves us closer to a potential Supreme Court decision declaring the NLRB unconstitutional.” This is the latest installment in the corporatist war on administrative law, which has already scored major victories in the SEC v. Jarkesy and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo cases. Bruenig notes that “For now, the district court's decision simply prevents the NLRB from processing a fairly run-of-the-mill unfair labor practice charge against SpaceX. The real question is going to be what the Supreme Court does once this case makes it to their docket. But in the meantime…it is likely that other companies subject to NLRB proceedings will seek similar injunctions.”7. A storm is brewing within the Kamala Harris campaign over Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan. Democracy Now! Reports “some of the Democratic Party's biggest donors, including LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, are openly pushing Harris to fire…Khan, who has led Biden's antitrust efforts.” NBC notes that Hoffman is a billionaire megadonor and that other megadonors like Barry Diller are also calling for Khan's removal, and adds that “Khan's pro-consumer, pro-worker, anti-monopoly agenda has attracted no small amount of hate from powerful and monied interests.” On the other side, Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and the Service Employees International Union – a close labor ally of Harris – have defended Khan. This battle illustrates the cross-cutting interests Harris will have to navigate as the Democratic nominee, and possibly, as president. We urge the Vice President to back Khan, not the billionaire donor class.8. The Washington Post is out with a heartbreaking new report on the increase of homelessness among “Working Americans with decent-paying jobs who simply can't afford a place to live.” This report cites data showing that homelessness, already at record highs, is only getting worse – growing by 61% in Southeast Texas over the past year, 35% in Rhode Island, and 20% in northeast Tennessee. Throughout the country, rents have risen by over 32% in four years and overall homelessness by 12%.9. In another disturbing economic trend, a new academic working paper out of UCLA and USC analyzes how the “widespread legalization of sports gambling over the past five years has impacted consumer financial health.” The most-discussed findings of this paper have to do with debt, with a “roughly 28% increase in bankruptcies and an 8% increase in debt transferred to debt collectors,” along with substantial increases in auto loan delinquencies and use of debt consolidation loans. As the researchers put it “these results indicate that the ease of access to sports gambling is harming consumer financial health by increasing their level of debt.”10. Finally, for some good news, the White House issued a statement Monday celebrating that “As of today, over 600,000 Teamster workers and retirees have pensions protected from devastating cuts,” as part of Biden's signature American Rescue Plan. This announcement came after the administration acted to protect 70,000 worker pensions in New England, building on similar actions in Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Missouri, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania. As the Boston Globe explains “The [American Rescue Plan] set up a special financial assistance program that allows struggling multi-employer pension plans to apply for assistance from the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, a federal agency that protects the retirement incomes of workers in defined benefit pension plans.” The administration is paying particular attention to the protection of Teamsters, as that union's leadership has been flirting with an embrace of the GOP. Not one Republican voted for the American Rescue Plan.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Barbie doesn't have shit on John Roberts. Now that he's killed off Chevron deference, Roberts can be an aircraft safety inspector, biomedical researcher, highway planner, nutritionist, Atlantic herring fishing boat monitor ... the possibilities are endless! If you're not a 5-4 Premium member, you're not hearing every episode! To get first dibs on live show tickets, dig into our Premium episode catalog, join our Slack community, and more, subscribe at fivefourpod.com/support.5-4 is presented by Prologue Projects. Rachel Ward is our producer. Leon Neyfakh and Andrew Parsons provide editorial support. Our researcher is Jonathan DeBruin, and our website was designed by Peter Murphy. Our artwork is by Teddy Blanks at Chips NY, and our theme song is by Spatial Relations.Follow the show at @fivefourpod on most platforms. On Twitter, find Peter @The_Law_Boy and Rhiannon @AywaRhiannon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and Senior Editor at Lawfare, and Molly Reynolds, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Bridget Dooling, Assistant Professor of Law at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, and Nick Bednar, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School, about the Supreme Court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overruled the decades-long Chevron doctrine that required courts to defer to reasonable interpretations of their statutes.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

OA1050 Legal podcaster Charles Star (ALAB, Mic Dicta) joins to share his administrative law expertise as we consider the end of the Chevron doctrine and what comes next. Why is everyone so worked up about the overturning of a ruling reached by a conservative SCOTUS at the behest of Ronald Reagan, Neil Gorsuch's mom, and one of the worst polluters in world history? Why are immigration lawyers (including Matt) quietly celebrating the end of deference to administrative agencies? And how might a lesser-noticed decision from the last day of the Supreme Court's term fuel a new era of challenges to administrative regulations? Chevron v  Natural Resources Defense Council (1984) Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (6/28/24) Corner Post v. Board of Governors (7/1/24) If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Subscribe to Bad Faith on Patreon to instantly unlock this episode and our entire premium episode library: http://patreon.com/badfaithpodcast   Georgia State College of Law professor and host of Supreme Myths Eric Segall joins Bad Faith to talk about the impact of two recent SCOTUS rulings: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which ended Chevron deference and hobbled the authority of administrative agencies, and the Trump immunity case. What emerges, however, is a debate about what the left should do to address the ultra-conservative court and whether Biden is ultimately to blame for his unwillingness to take court reform seriously while Democrats controlled the House and Senate. Yet another spicy-yet-constructive debate for the books.   Subscribe to Bad Faith on YouTube to access our full video library. Find Bad Faith on Twitter (@badfaithpod) and Instagram (@badfaithpod).   Produced by Armand Aviram.   Theme by Nick Thorburn (@nickfromislands)    

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss the Supreme Court decisions on presidential immunity in Trump v. United States and the administrative state in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo as well as the future of Joe Biden's nomination to be re-elected president.   Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Supreme Court of the United States: Opinions of the Court – 2023, including Trump v. United States, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors, and SEC v. Jarkesy Matt Gluck, Hyemin Han, and Katherine Pompilio for Lawfare: The Supreme Court's Presidential Immunity Decision Perry Stein for The Washington Post: Justice Sotomayor dissent: ‘The President is now a king above the law' Gary J. Schmitt and Joseph M. Bessette for the American Enterprise Institute: The Hamilton-Madison Split over Executive Power Dan Pfeiffer for The Message Box: Why the Dem Panic over the Debate is Getting Worse ‘Will Rogers Today': Will Rogers on Politics Tim Miller for The Bulwark: Dear Dems: The Gaslighting Isn't Helping Matters Amy Howe for SCOTUSblog: Supreme Court strikes down Chevron, curtailing power of federal agencies and Mark Walsh: Consider the wild gray squirrel, Kagan rebukes her colleagues as court overrules Chevron Mark Sherman for AP: The Supreme Court rules for a North Dakota truck stop in a new blow to federal regulators How to Save a Country from The New Republic: The Administrative State Is Under Attack Congressional Research Service: The Major Questions Doctrine Eric Berger for Dorf on Law: Is Loper Bright a Big Deal? and Michael C. Dorf: Could Congress Reinstate Chevron? Tierney Sneed, Jeanne Sahadi, Tami Luhby, Brian Fung, Ella Nilsen, Jen Christensen, and Katie Lobosco for CNN: How the Supreme Court's blockbuster ‘Chevron' ruling puts countless regulations in jeopardy Here are this week's chatters: Emily: Paul Sabin of Yale University and City of New Haven: East Rock park  John: Dave McMenamin for ESPN: Lakers pick Bronny James in NBA draft; LeBron ‘emotional' David: City Cast DC and Ross Andersen for The Atlantic: The Search for America's Atlantis Listener chatter from Jen in Denver, Colorado: Brandy Zadrozny and Jon Schuppe for NBC News: Who tried to steal Graceland?   For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, David, John, and Emily talk about the joys of summer. See Merry Maids: 15 Fun Things to Make the Most of Summer 2024; NBC: Olympics Paris 2024; and epicurious: Summer. See also Produce bluebook: Nectarine Market Summary and Lemonada Media: Julia Gets Wise with Patti Smith.   In the latest Gabfest Reads, David talks with Sierra Greer about her new book, Annie Bot: A Novel. And Gabfest Reads now has its own site!   Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss the Supreme Court decisions on presidential immunity in Trump v. United States and the administrative state in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo as well as the future of Joe Biden's nomination to be re-elected president.   Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Supreme Court of the United States: Opinions of the Court – 2023, including Trump v. United States, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors, and SEC v. Jarkesy Matt Gluck, Hyemin Han, and Katherine Pompilio for Lawfare: The Supreme Court's Presidential Immunity Decision Perry Stein for The Washington Post: Justice Sotomayor dissent: ‘The President is now a king above the law' Gary J. Schmitt and Joseph M. Bessette for the American Enterprise Institute: The Hamilton-Madison Split over Executive Power Dan Pfeiffer for The Message Box: Why the Dem Panic over the Debate is Getting Worse ‘Will Rogers Today': Will Rogers on Politics Tim Miller for The Bulwark: Dear Dems: The Gaslighting Isn't Helping Matters Amy Howe for SCOTUSblog: Supreme Court strikes down Chevron, curtailing power of federal agencies and Mark Walsh: Consider the wild gray squirrel, Kagan rebukes her colleagues as court overrules Chevron Mark Sherman for AP: The Supreme Court rules for a North Dakota truck stop in a new blow to federal regulators How to Save a Country from The New Republic: The Administrative State Is Under Attack Congressional Research Service: The Major Questions Doctrine Eric Berger for Dorf on Law: Is Loper Bright a Big Deal? and Michael C. Dorf: Could Congress Reinstate Chevron? Tierney Sneed, Jeanne Sahadi, Tami Luhby, Brian Fung, Ella Nilsen, Jen Christensen, and Katie Lobosco for CNN: How the Supreme Court's blockbuster ‘Chevron' ruling puts countless regulations in jeopardy Here are this week's chatters: Emily: Paul Sabin of Yale University and City of New Haven: East Rock park  John: Dave McMenamin for ESPN: Lakers pick Bronny James in NBA draft; LeBron ‘emotional' David: City Cast DC and Ross Andersen for The Atlantic: The Search for America's Atlantis Listener chatter from Jen in Denver, Colorado: Brandy Zadrozny and Jon Schuppe for NBC News: Who tried to steal Graceland?   For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, David, John, and Emily talk about the joys of summer. See Merry Maids: 15 Fun Things to Make the Most of Summer 2024; NBC: Olympics Paris 2024; and epicurious: Summer. See also Produce bluebook: Nectarine Market Summary and Lemonada Media: Julia Gets Wise with Patti Smith.   In the latest Gabfest Reads, David talks with Sierra Greer about her new book, Annie Bot: A Novel. And Gabfest Reads now has its own site!   Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

If you have listened to any pundit or podcaster on the left over the last couple of days, you may believe that America has just become a monarchy and Trump was crowned king by the Supreme Court. In a dramatic speech, President Biden appeared very worried and breathlessly explained how this decision would pave the way for totalitarianism in America. Is that really true?On an exciting episode of the Sara Carter Show, a friend of the show and former AG for the beautiful state of Arizona Mark Brnovich joins the program to talk about the Trump immunity case. Sara and Brno also discuss the ruling on Chevron deference which could play a major role in finally destroying the deep state that has acted as a fourth branch of government in America for far too long.They end the conversation by discussing the latest developments in a rumor that President Biden may not appear on the 2024 ballot vs. President Trump.Thank you for being a part of the Sara Carter Show.Time Stamps:0:05 Will Trump be King?4:40 This is who we are dealing with9:42 Mark Brnovich joins the Sara Carter Show10:08 Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Chevron Deference14:48 I have investigated over-regulation17:05 Trump defeats weaponization23:12 This is actually a very reasonable decision26:54 Every revolution eats its own33:49 Biden investigated Border Patrol agents36:39 Illegals get free care40:01 The NYT emailed me44:49 The legacy media matters50:15 Will Dems dump Biden?60:18 A sense of angst among AmericansPlease visit our great sponsors:Goldcohttp://saralikesgold.comVisit today to see how you can qualify for a free 1oz Silver Ronald Reagan coin and get up to 10% instant match in free bonus sliver with a qualified account.  My Pillowhttps://mypillow.comUse code CARTER for $25 prices and free shipping on orders over $75.

To repent for his absence and abbreviated Ruminant, Jonah bequeaths listeners a special live episode, featuring American Enterprise Institute all-stars Chris Stirewalt and Yuval Levin. Together, the trio conducts a presidential debate post-mortem. Is it finally time for the Democratic Party to face the music? Have we reached the endgame of a nightmare political era? What is a golf handicap? Topics outside debate-gate include the Supreme Court verdict in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, George Washington's basement crypt in the Capitol, and the dangers of ultra-transparent governance. Show Notes: —Yuval Levin: American Covenant: How the Constitution Unified Our Nation-and Could Again —Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address The Remnant is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including Jonah's G-File newsletter, weekly livestreams, and other members-only content—click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

While most everyone was reacting to Thursday's Presidential debate, we had our eyes trained on the Supreme Court. It was again (surprise!) bad. SCOTUS determined that sleeping outside was illegal in Grants Pass v Johnson. They limited the scope by which insurrectionists could be charged for their actions on January 6, 2021 in Fischer v United States. The unelected robed leaders then laid a finishing blow in Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo, overturning the decades-long guidance of the longstanding Chevron doctrine and upending the ways in which government agencies can regulate the things they regulate like; clean air, water, firearms your retirement account and oh, medical care.   This term has signaled something especially troubling. While you can certainly be concerned about Trump or Biden being president once again, you should be more worried about how the justices at the Supreme Court have basically made themselves the end-all-be-all of every legislative matter, regardless who wins presidential contests. It should also come as no surprise who will benefit from these decisions (rich people with yachts).  Host Dahlia Lithwick speaks with Slate's Mark Joseph Stern and Professor Pam Karlan, co-director of Stanford law school's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic to go over Friday's rulings and to break down what it means that federal agencies will no longer be able to, you know, do anything reasonable. Listen to an interview with a doctor helping unhoused people in Grants Pass, OR. This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Want more Amicus? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

While most everyone was reacting to Thursday's Presidential debate, we had our eyes trained on the Supreme Court. It was again (surprise!) bad. SCOTUS determined that sleeping outside was illegal in Grants Pass v Johnson. They limited the scope by which insurrectionists could be charged for their actions on January 6, 2021 in Fischer v United States. The unelected robed leaders then laid a finishing blow in Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo, overturning the decades-long guidance of the longstanding Chevron doctrine and upending the ways in which government agencies can regulate the things they regulate like; clean air, water, firearms your retirement account and oh, medical care.   This term has signaled something especially troubling. While you can certainly be concerned about Trump or Biden being president once again, you should be more worried about how the justices at the Supreme Court have basically made themselves the end-all-be-all of every legislative matter, regardless who wins presidential contests. It should also come as no surprise who will benefit from these decisions (rich people with yachts).  Host Dahlia Lithwick speaks with Slate's Mark Joseph Stern and Professor Pam Karlan, co-director of Stanford law school's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic to go over Friday's rulings and to break down what it means that federal agencies will no longer be able to, you know, do anything reasonable. Listen to an interview with a doctor helping unhoused people in Grants Pass, OR. This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Want more Amicus? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger Picture The numbers are in, the Fed is now letting everyone know the inflation is coming down and the Fed is now prepping to cut the rates. Bank of America is now predicting 3000 gold. Bolivia has not removed the ban for Bitcoin. The [DS] is structure is being dismantled right before our eyes. The SC has been reversing what the [DS] had in place for a long time. [BO] plan to expose Biden has worked, the fake news was given permission to attack him. The narrative of a change change of batter is now being pushed. Now the media will continue to push every step of the way and they will try to force him out. 25th on deck. Ezra Cohen sends out a warning.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy Federal Reserve's preferred inflation gauge shows price pressures easing further  A measure of prices that is closely tracked by the Federal Reserve suggests that inflation pressures in the U.S. economy are continuing to ease. Friday's Commerce Department report showed that consumer prices were flat from April to May, the mildest such performance in more than four years. Measured from a year earlier, prices rose 2.6% last month, slightly less than in April. Excluding volatile food and energy prices, so-called core inflation rose 0.1% from April to May and 2.6% from 12 months earlier. Both figures were slight improvements on the previous month's data.  Rate cuts by the Fed, which most economists think could start in September, would lead eventually to lower borrowing rates for consumers and businesses. Source: apnews.com https://twitter.com/GRDecter/status/1806731303460733192   - Sticking with a bearish view in 2023 as the benchmark soared 24% The stock market is not the economy. Never forget. Bank of America Eyeballs $3,000 Gold Bank of America is eyeballing $3,000 gold. According to a report released by the big bank, gold prices could potentially hit $3,000 an ounce in the next 12 to 18 months as the Federal Reserve begins cutting interest rates and rising debt drives economic uncertainty. BofA commodity strategist Michael Widmer said he thinks the next bull run will be contingent on a pickup in investment demand. “If non-commercial demand picks up from current levels on the back of the Fed rate cut, the yellow metal could push higher again.” Source: goldseek.com https://twitter.com/BitcoinMagazine/status/1806677713417113859 Political/Rights BREAKING: Chevron is Gone — SCOTUS Rules Unelected Bureaucrats Do Not Have the Power to Create Laws  In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has overturned the long-standing Chevron doctrine, fundamentally altering the balance of power between the judiciary and federal agencies. The ruling, which came in the case of Loper Bright Enterprises et al. v. Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce, et al., marks a significant shift in the balance of power between the branches of government. The Chevron doctrine, established in the 1984 case Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, has long been a source of contention. It granted deference to federal agencies in interpreting ambiguous statutes, effectively allowing unelected bureaucrats to make laws through their regulatory actions. However, by a 6-3 majority, the SCOTUS has now declared that such power is unconstitutional and goes against the principles of democratic governance. “Justice Neil Gorsuch, the son of a former Environmental Protection Agency administrator, wrote separately to call Chevron Deference “a grave anom...

What's this? A bonus Opinionpalooza episode for one and all? That's right! The hits just keep coming from SCOTUS this week, and two big decisions landed Thursday that might easily get lost in the mix: Ohio v EPA and SEC v Jarkesy. Both cases shine a light on the conservative legal movement (and their billionaire funders') long game against administrative agencies. In Ohio v EPA, the Court struck down the EPA's Good Neighbor Rule, making it harder for the agency to regulate interstate ozone pollution. This decision split along ideological lines, and is part of a stealthy dismantling of the administrative state. SEC v Jarkesy severely hinders the agency's ability to enforce actions against securities fraud without federal court involvement, and the decision will affect many other agencies. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out how this power grab by the court disrupts Congress's ability to delegate authority effectively. Project 2025 just got a jump start at SCOTUS, and we have two more big administrative cases yet to come, the so-called Chevron cases: Loper Bright v Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v Department of Commerce. This is shaping up to be a good term for billionaires and a court apparently hungry to expand its power. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate's own Mark Joseph Stern (of course) and they are saved from any regulatory confusion by environmental and administrative law all-star, Lisa Heinzerling, the Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., Professor of Law at the Georgetown University Law Center, who served in the EPA under President Obama.  This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Want more Amicus? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices