Podcast appearances and mentions of Sonia Sotomayor

June 30, 2026, 5pm; Despite today's Supreme Court ruling being a clear win for the pro-democracy side of the aisle, the ruling was much closer than it looks at first glance. For more from Nicolle, follow and download her podcast, “The Best People with Nicolle Wallace,” wherever you get your podcasts.To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

June 30, 2026, 4pm; The nation's highest court upheld the principle that almost everyone who is born on American soil is considered an American citizen.  In doing so, the court overturned Donald Trump's executive order, which would have eliminated birthright citizenship as we know it.  For more from Nicolle, follow and download her podcast, “The Best People with Nicolle Wallace,” wherever you get your podcasts.To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Kimberly Atkins Stohr hosts #SistersInLaw to discuss new developments regarding the Epstein Files Transparency Act following a lawsuit by Katie Phang and the future of the case as it heads to appeal.  Then, the #Sisters review Justice Alito's recent authorship of immigration rulings affecting TPS and asylum seekers, as well as the dissents by Justices Kagan and Sotomayor.  They also explain the power of dissents against impactful majority decisions, how they can be used as a tool for future change, and the constitutional implications of federal overreach in the states.Remember to send in audio questions to SistersInLaw@politicon.com for the #Sisters to answer on their new companion podcast, SistersInLaw Sidebar!  It airs Wednesdays wherever you normally get your podcasts!Get the brand new ReSIStance T-Shirt, Mini Tote, and other #SistersInLaw gear at politicon.com/merch! Additional #SistersInLaw ProjectsCheck out Jill's Politicon YouTube Show: Just The FactsCheck out Kim's Newsletter: The GavelJoyce's new book, Giving Up Is Unforgivable, is now available, and for a limited time, you have the exclusive opportunity to order a signed copy here. Barb is going on a book tour!  You can also pre-order Barb's new book, The Fix. Her first book, Attack From Within, is now in paperback. Add the #Sisters & your other favorite Politicon podcast hosts on BlueskyGet your #SistersInLaw MERCH at politicon.com/merchWEBSITE & TRANSCRIPTEmail: SISTERSINLAW@POLITICON.COM or Thread to @sistersInLaw.podcastGet text updates from #SistersInLaw and Politicon. Mentioned By The #SistersPre-order Barb's new book, The Fix, and get tickets for her upcoming book tour!Support This Week's SponsorsTumble: Machine Washable Rugs, Made Better. For a limited time only, our listeners get 10% off + freeshipping at tumbleliving.com/SISTERS #Tumble #adFlamingo:Our listeners get the Flamingo Starter Set for just $7 at https://www.shopflamingo.com/SISTERSLola Blankets:Get 40% off select Lola Blankets products at Lolablankets.com by using code SISTERS atcheckout. Experience the world's #1 blanket with Lola Blankets.Mill:Try Mill risk-free for 90 days and get $75 off at mill.com/SISTERS and use code SISTERS at checkout.ASPCA:To explore coverage, visit aspcapetinsurance.com/sistersThe ASPCA® is not an insurer and is not engaged in the business ofinsurance. For terms and conditions, visit: https://www.aspcapetinsurance.com/more-info/state-documents-and-sample-policies/. Products are underwritten by either Independence American Insurance Company (NAIC #26581), or United States Fire Insurance Company (NAIC #21113) and distributed by PTZ Insurance Agency Ltd.Get More From The #SistersInLawJoyce Vance: Bluesky | Twitter | University of Alabama Law | Civil Discourse Substack | MSNBC | Author of “Giving Up Is Unforgiveable”Jill Wine-Banks: Bluesky | Twitter | Facebook | Website | Author of The Watergate Girl: My Fight For Truth & Justice Against A Criminal President | Just The Facts YouTubeKimberly Atkins Stohr: Bluesky | Twitter | Boston Globe | WBUR | The Gavel Newsletter | Justice By Design PodcastBarb McQuade: barbaramcquade.com | Bluesky | Twitter | University of Michigan Law | Just Security | MSNBC | Attack From Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America | The Fix

June 25, 2026; 4pm: Nicolle Wallace and guests discuss the Supreme Court's decision to upend the asylum system as we know it. In a 6-3 decision, with the 3 liberal justices dissenting, the court decided to let Donald Trump functionally end temporary protected status for hundreds of thousands of refugees from Haiti and Syria. Later, Nicolle covers a major win for voting rights just ahead of the upcoming midterm elections. For more, follow us on Instagram @deadlinewh To listen to this show and other MS NOW podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. For more from Nicolle, follow and download her podcast, “The Best People with Nicolle Wallace,” wherever you get your podcasts.To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this exclusive Opinionpalooza extra, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern take stock of today's truly horrendous decisions handed down by a right-wing Supreme Court supermajority that's marching in perfect lockstep on immigration, gun rights, and almost everything else. Dahlia and Mark sort through the brutalizing, even lethal implications for asylum seekers and more than 1 million recipients of temporary protected status, or TPS. Later: Why Justice Alito's rejoinder to Justice Sotomayor's dissent wasn't just a crappy birthday present, but also the latest breach of decorum at the high court.This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!)This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this exclusive Opinionpalooza extra, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern take stock of today's truly horrendous decisions handed down by a right-wing Supreme Court supermajority that's marching in perfect lockstep on immigration, gun rights, and almost everything else. Dahlia and Mark sort through the brutalizing, even lethal implications for asylum seekers and more than 1 million recipients of temporary protected status, or TPS. Later: Why Justice Alito's rejoinder to Justice Sotomayor's dissent wasn't just a crappy birthday present, but also the latest breach of decorum at the high court.This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!)This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.Need to set up your Slate Plus feed? If you subscribed through Slate.com, check out our FAQ at slate.com/podcastfaqs for easy instructions. Members subscribed via Apple Podcasts get automatic access—no setup required. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this exclusive Opinionpalooza extra, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern take stock of today's truly horrendous decisions handed down by a right-wing Supreme Court supermajority that's marching in perfect lockstep on immigration, gun rights, and almost everything else. Dahlia and Mark sort through the brutalizing, even lethal implications for asylum seekers and more than 1 million recipients of temporary protected status, or TPS. Later: Why Justice Alito's rejoinder to Justice Sotomayor's dissent wasn't just a crappy birthday present, but also the latest breach of decorum at the high court.This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!)This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court is reshaping America in real time, and today's rulings may be just the beginning. With several major decisions appearing to favor President Trump and even bigger cases still on the docket, what does this moment mean for the future of presidential power, civil rights, and the Constitution? Justice Sonia Sotomayor even said in her dissent, "more people will die." Tonight, Don is joined by a panel of legal experts to break down what the Court decided today, what's still to come, and why the remaining rulings could have consequences for years to come. This episode is brought to you by Shopify. See less carts go abandoned and more sales go with Shopify and their Shop Pay button.Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial today at https://SHOPIFY.COM/lemon This episode is sponsored by FFRF. Visit https://ffrf.us/don or text DON 511511 to join or learn more. Because freedom belongs to all of us. Text Fees May Apply This episode is brought to you by Helix. Go to https://helixsleep.com/don for 20% off Sitewide and 25% off Luxe Mattresses and 30% off Elite Mattresses This episode is sponsored by Incogni. Go to https://incogni.com/donlemon and use code donlemon for 60% off. Incogni HELPS wipe yourself from the Internet — they can't harm you if they can't find you. Click the link below to claim your 60% off and get your personal data off the market! Erase yourself from the internet Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

   Josh Hawley just will not stop misleading voters about this SF Giants Pride Night story.  Hawley got a letter back from MLB commish Rob Manfred and immediately fibbed with a post about what the letter says.  It's unreal he's doing this.  Hawley was wrong, this was not an MLB issue.  It was a Giants issue and I'd be thrilled if he went on the attack and found out what the Giants did.  But baseball has done nothing wrong and actually has a fine policy in place.     A far left judge born in Trinidad and worked for Sonia Sotomayor is the latest to stop President Trump with a ruling.  This tiime, the court rules the government cannot use it's own data bases to verify is a person is a citizen or not and eligible to vote.  This is nuts.    A new AI generated song and video called "Keir Starmer is a wanker" has gone viral, we'll play it for you.  Vandals at the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool are being detained.   In sports, Lionel Messi does it again for Argentina, this player is the best of all time.   OU was picked 14th in the SEC pre season baseball poll and wins the national title.  The SEC is officially now a baseball conference, not football.  A Golf Channel analyst calls Long Island golf fans a "stain on the game," and he's right.  The Royals get a great outing from Michael Wacha in a win over the Rays, a Sportscenter legend is retiring and an up and coming music star has been charged with a felony after destroying his hotel room.

Should Conversion Therapy Be Protected Speech? What Chiles v. Salazar Means for Conversion Therapy Bans and the Future of the Profession In Chiles v. Salazar, the Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 that a therapist's talk therapy is protected speech, putting state conversion therapy bans at risk. Curt Widhalm, LMFT, and Katie Vernoy, LMFT break down what the March 31, 2026 decision actually says, what it does not say, and what it means for therapists who work with LGBTQ+ clients. The Court did not call conversion therapy safe, effective, or ethical, and it did not make the practice mandatory. It treated talk therapy as speech rather than regulable conduct, and sent Colorado's ban back to the lower courts for stricter First Amendment review. Curt and Katie walk through the strict scrutiny test at the center of the case, the Kagan and Sotomayor concurrence, and Justice Jackson's dissent, then sit with the harder question: what happens to the profession when the state can no longer set a guardrail on harmful practice before harm has occurred. Released during Pride Month, this is a candid, values-forward conversation about protecting LGBTQ+ clients and practicing affirming, anti-conversion-therapy care out loud. In this episode, we discuss: - What the Chiles v. Salazar ruling does, and does not, change about conversion therapy bans - Why the Court treated talk therapy as protected speech instead of medical treatment - How the strict scrutiny test decided the case - Where the concurrence and the dissent point the profession next - Concrete ways to signal affirming, anti-conversion-therapy care in your practice Full show notes and resources: mtsgpodcast.com Join the Modern Therapist Community Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/mtsgpodcast Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/therapyreimagined Modern Therapist's Survival Guide Creative Credits Voice Over by DW McCann: https://www.facebook.com/McCannDW/ Music by Crystal Grooms Mangano: https://groomsymusic.com/

A woman miscarries and is charged with murder. A new mother tests positive for a drug her hospital administers and loses custody of her newborn. Four women are convicted of horrific crimes against children they never touched, based on junk science and homophobia and spend nearly twenty years in prison before being exonerated. A queer teenager takes a photo of a child's diaper rash at work and is sentenced to 126 years. These cases are not aberrations. They are symptoms of a system that punishes women and queer people not for what they have done, but for who they are. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of all wrongly convicted women were convicted of crimes that never occurred at all. Valena Beety, co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project and award-winning legal scholar cited by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, reveals how ordinary tragedies—a child's sudden death, a husband who dies in his sleep—are transformed by prosecutors into murders that never happened. These “no crime” convictions disproportionately target women and queer people, whose identities are recast as evidence of guilt through bias, junk science, and entrenched stereotypes. Drawing on devastating real-life cases, Professor Beety exposes how prosecutorial overreach, flawed forensic science, and cultural panic converge—and how fetal personhood laws, the fall of Roe v. Wade, and anti-LGBTQ+ legislation have dramatically expanded the reach of criminal law. What emerges is a chilling portrait of a legal system that increasingly criminalizes pregnancy outcomes, motherhood, and queer identity itself. Guest: A wrongful convictions litigator and former federal prosecutor, Valena Beety is the McKinney Professor of Law at Indiana University-Bloomington Maurer School of Law and a co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project. Her coursebook The Wrongful Convictions Reader is used in classrooms nationwide to teach about wrongful convictions. Host: Dr. Christina Gessler is an academic writing coach and editor. She uses her Ph.D. in history to explore which stories we tell, and what happens to those we never tell. She is the creator, producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. Playlist for listeners: Reproductive Justice Stitching Freedom You're Doing It Wrong Witchcraft: A History In 13 Trials The Turnaway Study The Coroner's Silence Ghost in the Criminal Justice Machine Secrets of the Killing State Carceral Apartheid Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

A woman miscarries and is charged with murder. A new mother tests positive for a drug her hospital administers and loses custody of her newborn. Four women are convicted of horrific crimes against children they never touched, based on junk science and homophobia and spend nearly twenty years in prison before being exonerated. A queer teenager takes a photo of a child's diaper rash at work and is sentenced to 126 years. These cases are not aberrations. They are symptoms of a system that punishes women and queer people not for what they have done, but for who they are. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of all wrongly convicted women were convicted of crimes that never occurred at all. Valena Beety, co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project and award-winning legal scholar cited by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, reveals how ordinary tragedies—a child's sudden death, a husband who dies in his sleep—are transformed by prosecutors into murders that never happened. These “no crime” convictions disproportionately target women and queer people, whose identities are recast as evidence of guilt through bias, junk science, and entrenched stereotypes. Drawing on devastating real-life cases, Professor Beety exposes how prosecutorial overreach, flawed forensic science, and cultural panic converge—and how fetal personhood laws, the fall of Roe v. Wade, and anti-LGBTQ+ legislation have dramatically expanded the reach of criminal law. What emerges is a chilling portrait of a legal system that increasingly criminalizes pregnancy outcomes, motherhood, and queer identity itself. Guest: A wrongful convictions litigator and former federal prosecutor, Valena Beety is the McKinney Professor of Law at Indiana University-Bloomington Maurer School of Law and a co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project. Her coursebook The Wrongful Convictions Reader is used in classrooms nationwide to teach about wrongful convictions. Host: Dr. Christina Gessler is an academic writing coach and editor. She uses her Ph.D. in history to explore which stories we tell, and what happens to those we never tell. She is the creator, producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. Playlist for listeners: Reproductive Justice Stitching Freedom You're Doing It Wrong Witchcraft: A History In 13 Trials The Turnaway Study The Coroner's Silence Ghost in the Criminal Justice Machine Secrets of the Killing State Carceral Apartheid Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

A woman miscarries and is charged with murder. A new mother tests positive for a drug her hospital administers and loses custody of her newborn. Four women are convicted of horrific crimes against children they never touched, based on junk science and homophobia and spend nearly twenty years in prison before being exonerated. A queer teenager takes a photo of a child's diaper rash at work and is sentenced to 126 years. These cases are not aberrations. They are symptoms of a system that punishes women and queer people not for what they have done, but for who they are. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of all wrongly convicted women were convicted of crimes that never occurred at all. Valena Beety, co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project and award-winning legal scholar cited by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, reveals how ordinary tragedies—a child's sudden death, a husband who dies in his sleep—are transformed by prosecutors into murders that never happened. These “no crime” convictions disproportionately target women and queer people, whose identities are recast as evidence of guilt through bias, junk science, and entrenched stereotypes. Drawing on devastating real-life cases, Professor Beety exposes how prosecutorial overreach, flawed forensic science, and cultural panic converge—and how fetal personhood laws, the fall of Roe v. Wade, and anti-LGBTQ+ legislation have dramatically expanded the reach of criminal law. What emerges is a chilling portrait of a legal system that increasingly criminalizes pregnancy outcomes, motherhood, and queer identity itself. Guest: A wrongful convictions litigator and former federal prosecutor, Valena Beety is the McKinney Professor of Law at Indiana University-Bloomington Maurer School of Law and a co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project. Her coursebook The Wrongful Convictions Reader is used in classrooms nationwide to teach about wrongful convictions. Host: Dr. Christina Gessler is an academic writing coach and editor. She uses her Ph.D. in history to explore which stories we tell, and what happens to those we never tell. She is the creator, producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. Playlist for listeners: Reproductive Justice Stitching Freedom You're Doing It Wrong Witchcraft: A History In 13 Trials The Turnaway Study The Coroner's Silence Ghost in the Criminal Justice Machine Secrets of the Killing State Carceral Apartheid Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/medicine

A woman miscarries and is charged with murder. A new mother tests positive for a drug her hospital administers and loses custody of her newborn. Four women are convicted of horrific crimes against children they never touched, based on junk science and homophobia and spend nearly twenty years in prison before being exonerated. A queer teenager takes a photo of a child's diaper rash at work and is sentenced to 126 years. These cases are not aberrations. They are symptoms of a system that punishes women and queer people not for what they have done, but for who they are. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of all wrongly convicted women were convicted of crimes that never occurred at all. Valena Beety, co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project and award-winning legal scholar cited by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, reveals how ordinary tragedies—a child's sudden death, a husband who dies in his sleep—are transformed by prosecutors into murders that never happened. These “no crime” convictions disproportionately target women and queer people, whose identities are recast as evidence of guilt through bias, junk science, and entrenched stereotypes. Drawing on devastating real-life cases, Professor Beety exposes how prosecutorial overreach, flawed forensic science, and cultural panic converge—and how fetal personhood laws, the fall of Roe v. Wade, and anti-LGBTQ+ legislation have dramatically expanded the reach of criminal law. What emerges is a chilling portrait of a legal system that increasingly criminalizes pregnancy outcomes, motherhood, and queer identity itself. Guest: A wrongful convictions litigator and former federal prosecutor, Valena Beety is the McKinney Professor of Law at Indiana University-Bloomington Maurer School of Law and a co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project. Her coursebook The Wrongful Convictions Reader is used in classrooms nationwide to teach about wrongful convictions. Host: Dr. Christina Gessler is an academic writing coach and editor. She uses her Ph.D. in history to explore which stories we tell, and what happens to those we never tell. She is the creator, producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. Playlist for listeners: Reproductive Justice Stitching Freedom You're Doing It Wrong Witchcraft: A History In 13 Trials The Turnaway Study The Coroner's Silence Ghost in the Criminal Justice Machine Secrets of the Killing State Carceral Apartheid Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/academic-life

A woman miscarries and is charged with murder. A new mother tests positive for a drug her hospital administers and loses custody of her newborn. Four women are convicted of horrific crimes against children they never touched, based on junk science and homophobia and spend nearly twenty years in prison before being exonerated. A queer teenager takes a photo of a child's diaper rash at work and is sentenced to 126 years. These cases are not aberrations. They are symptoms of a system that punishes women and queer people not for what they have done, but for who they are. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of all wrongly convicted women were convicted of crimes that never occurred at all. Valena Beety, co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project and award-winning legal scholar cited by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, reveals how ordinary tragedies—a child's sudden death, a husband who dies in his sleep—are transformed by prosecutors into murders that never happened. These “no crime” convictions disproportionately target women and queer people, whose identities are recast as evidence of guilt through bias, junk science, and entrenched stereotypes. Drawing on devastating real-life cases, Professor Beety exposes how prosecutorial overreach, flawed forensic science, and cultural panic converge—and how fetal personhood laws, the fall of Roe v. Wade, and anti-LGBTQ+ legislation have dramatically expanded the reach of criminal law. What emerges is a chilling portrait of a legal system that increasingly criminalizes pregnancy outcomes, motherhood, and queer identity itself. Guest: A wrongful convictions litigator and former federal prosecutor, Valena Beety is the McKinney Professor of Law at Indiana University-Bloomington Maurer School of Law and a co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project. Her coursebook The Wrongful Convictions Reader is used in classrooms nationwide to teach about wrongful convictions. Host: Dr. Christina Gessler is an academic writing coach and editor. She uses her Ph.D. in history to explore which stories we tell, and what happens to those we never tell. She is the creator, producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. Playlist for listeners: Reproductive Justice Stitching Freedom You're Doing It Wrong Witchcraft: A History In 13 Trials The Turnaway Study The Coroner's Silence Ghost in the Criminal Justice Machine Secrets of the Killing State Carceral Apartheid Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/lgbtq-studies

A woman miscarries and is charged with murder. A new mother tests positive for a drug her hospital administers and loses custody of her newborn. Four women are convicted of horrific crimes against children they never touched, based on junk science and homophobia and spend nearly twenty years in prison before being exonerated. A queer teenager takes a photo of a child's diaper rash at work and is sentenced to 126 years. These cases are not aberrations. They are symptoms of a system that punishes women and queer people not for what they have done, but for who they are. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of all wrongly convicted women were convicted of crimes that never occurred at all. Valena Beety, co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project and award-winning legal scholar cited by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, reveals how ordinary tragedies—a child's sudden death, a husband who dies in his sleep—are transformed by prosecutors into murders that never happened. These “no crime” convictions disproportionately target women and queer people, whose identities are recast as evidence of guilt through bias, junk science, and entrenched stereotypes. Drawing on devastating real-life cases, Professor Beety exposes how prosecutorial overreach, flawed forensic science, and cultural panic converge—and how fetal personhood laws, the fall of Roe v. Wade, and anti-LGBTQ+ legislation have dramatically expanded the reach of criminal law. What emerges is a chilling portrait of a legal system that increasingly criminalizes pregnancy outcomes, motherhood, and queer identity itself. Guest: A wrongful convictions litigator and former federal prosecutor, Valena Beety is the McKinney Professor of Law at Indiana University-Bloomington Maurer School of Law and a co-founder of the Indiana Innocence Project. Her coursebook The Wrongful Convictions Reader is used in classrooms nationwide to teach about wrongful convictions. Host: Dr. Christina Gessler is an academic writing coach and editor. She uses her Ph.D. in history to explore which stories we tell, and what happens to those we never tell. She is the creator, producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. Playlist for listeners: Reproductive Justice Stitching Freedom You're Doing It Wrong Witchcraft: A History In 13 Trials The Turnaway Study The Coroner's Silence Ghost in the Criminal Justice Machine Secrets of the Killing State Carceral Apartheid Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

ESPECIAL DEL DÍA DEL PADRE

Join host Patrick Kelly as he sits down with industry legend Mayda Sotomayor-Kirk at the Seal Suite headquarters in Vero Beach. Discover Mayda's incredible immigrant story, her rise as a female leader in a male-dominated produce industry, and her pivotal role in shaping the global citrus market including the South African citrus program. This episode reminds us all why storytelling, resilience, and passion fuel the heart of fresh produce.

We open with the usual grab bag—the "foot fault" pun buried in a Justice Thomas opinion, reading Justice Alito's clerk-hiring tea leaves, and a detour into the metaphysics of conditional resignations and whether you can be confirmed to a vacancy that doesn't exist yet. Then to the merits: Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, a 9-0 judicial-estoppel case that lets us ask where the doctrine even came from (Tennessee, 1857, apparently), and Abouammo v. United States, the venue case about a former Twitter employee who fabricated a document while the FBI sat downstairs. The venue talk wanders, happily, into the Yellowstone "zone of death," a C.J. Box thriller, Jim Comey's second career as a novelist, and an extended appraisal of watch brands. Highlights[00:00:53] - Podcast update, SCOTUSblog partnership, and listener reviews[00:01:49] - Justice Thomas's "foot fault" joke[00:03:48] - Sam Bray citation discussion (Aldridge v. Regions Bank)[00:05:02] - Justice Alito retirement speculation and clerk rumors[00:17:23] - Vacation schedule and the upcoming opinion gap[00:21:03] - June 11 merits decisions overview[00:23:17] - Landor and the still-outstanding big case of the term[00:27:49] - Justice Sotomayor's statement respecting denial of cert on ineffective assistance[00:29:53] - Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction: bankruptcy and judicial estoppel[00:36:10] - The Fifth Circuit's rule on inadvertence and mistake[00:38:47] - Justice Jackson's majority opinion[00:40:29] - Justice Thomas's concurrence and the history of judicial estoppel[00:48:42] - Justice Sotomayor's concurrence and totality-of-the-circumstances approach[00:52:11] - Abouammo v. United States: Article III venue and criminal prosecution location[00:55:09] - Yellowstone's "zone of death" and vicinage problems[00:59:21] - The fake invoice, FBI investigation, and venue dispute[01:06:33] - Venue, personal jurisdiction, and extraterritorial conduct[01:10:22] - Statutory venue rules and unresolved constitutional questions[01:12:30] - Reprosecution after a venue reversal and double jeopardy

This Day in Legal History: Loving v. Virginia DecidedOn this day in 1967, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous opinion in Loving v. Virginia striking down Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924 and, with it, the anti-miscegenation statutes that sixteen states still had on the books. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the Court. The case had come up from a county courthouse in Caroline County, Virginia, where Richard Loving, a white bricklayer, and Mildred Jeter, a Black and Native American woman, had been arrested in their bedroom in the middle of the night in 1958 by a sheriff acting on an anonymous tip — they had been married in the District of Columbia and returned home to Virginia, where their marriage was a felony. The Lovings pleaded guilty, accepted suspended sentences on the condition that they leave the state for twenty-five years, and lived in exile in Washington until Mildred wrote a letter to Attorney General Robert Kennedy that landed eventually with the ACLU, which took the case.The Supreme Court's opinion did two things at once. It held that Virginia's statute violated the Equal Protection Clause because it drew an explicit racial classification with no legitimate state purpose beyond preserving “White Supremacy” — the Court used the phrase the Virginia statute itself had used — and it held that the statute violated the Due Process Clause because the freedom to marry is “one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.” That second holding, the marriage-as-fundamental-right strand, is the through-line that runs from Loving to Zablocki v. Redhail in 1978, to Turner v. Safley in 1987, to Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015 — every one of those decisions cites Loving and treats it as the foundational case. Whether the Court's substantive due process marriage doctrine survives the next decade is, as we discussed earlier this week, one of the open questions in American constitutional law. But Loving itself remains intact, and on June 12, 1967, the Court said something it had not said cleanly before: that the right to marry is the kind of liberty interest the Constitution actually protects.The Supreme Court on Thursday reversed the Second Circuit in FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd., holding 6-3 that the Investment Company Act of 1940 does not give private parties a cause of action to seek rescission of fund bylaws or other contractual terms. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the majority. The dispute came out of a campaign by Boaz Weinstein's Saba Capital against eleven closed-end funds — funds that, under Maryland's Control Share Acquisition Act, had adopted bylaws limiting the voting power of any shareholder who accumulated a disproportionate stake without the consent of other shareholders. Saba sued under Section 47(b) of the ICA, which makes contracts that violate the Act unenforceable, and the Second Circuit held that Section 47(b) implied a private right to rescind the bylaws.The Court told the Second Circuit to look harder at the modern implied-cause-of-action doctrine, which since Alexander v. Sandoval in 2001 has been hostile to inferring private rights of action that Congress did not write into the statute. The opinion reads as a continuation of that line: the ICA's enforcement structure is committed to the SEC, not to private plaintiffs, and Section 47(b) is a defense against contracts the SEC has already determined to be unlawful, not an offensive cause of action. The dissent, by Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson, argued that this is a misreading of Section 47(b)'s text and that the majority is gratuitously narrowing the enforcement of the federal securities laws. The practical impact is significant. Activist investors who had been pushing closed-end funds to convert to open-end form, or to alter investment strategies, lose a federal-court tool they had been using; the funds themselves and their independent directors gain a meaningful structural defense. Expect the next round of activist campaigns to move to state-court fiduciary-duty theories instead.US Supreme Court rules against private suits brought under key securities law | US NewsThe Court on Thursday also decided Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc., vacating the Fifth Circuit 9-0 in an opinion by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. The case is small in its facts and large in its doctrine. Thomas Keathley filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy in 2019 and failed to disclose, on his schedule of assets, a personal-injury claim he later brought against a construction company over a truck accident. The Fifth Circuit barred the personal-injury suit on judicial-estoppel grounds — the longstanding equitable doctrine that prevents a party from taking one position in one proceeding and a contradictory position in another — using a three-factor test under which a debtor's mere knowledge of the facts plus a motive to conceal was enough to bar the later claim.The Supreme Court said no.To determine whether the omission was inadvertent or mistaken for judicial-estoppel purposes, the Court held, the lower courts must look to the totality of the circumstances, not just to whether the debtor knew of the facts and had a motive. The doctrinal interest of the case lies in two concurrences. Justice Sotomayor, concurring, wrote that judicial estoppel should likely never apply in an open bankruptcy case at all — the trustee can simply amend the schedule and pursue the claim for the estate, which solves the problem judicial estoppel was invented to address. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Gorsuch, went further and questioned whether federal courts have any inherent authority to apply judicial estoppel as a freestanding doctrine, period — a position that, if it ever gets five votes, would unwind a doctrine that has been part of American practice since the 1850s. None of that is the holding. But the votes to revisit one of the duller corners of equitable estoppel are now visibly on the table.Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc. | SCOTUSblogThe third unanimous decision of the day was Abouammo v. United States, in which the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and vacated the obstruction-of-an-FBI-investigation conviction of Ahmad Abouammo, a former Twitter employee whose underlying case was one of the more striking Saudi-Arabia infiltration prosecutions of the last decade. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion. The facts are simple and the constitutional point cleaner than the facts. Abouammo, while working at Twitter's San Francisco office in 2014 and 2015, accessed and passed on confidential user information about Saudi dissidents to a Saudi official, in exchange for a $42,000 watch and $200,000 in wire transfers. The FBI eventually came to interview him at his home in Seattle, where he had moved by 2018, and during those interviews he created and emailed agents a fake invoice intended to make the wire transfers look like a legitimate consulting fee. The Justice Department charged the obstruction count along with foreign-agent and wire-fraud counts in the Northern District of California, and a San Francisco jury convicted him on all of them.The Supreme Court held that the obstruction count belonged in the Western District of Washington, not California, because the act of creating and sending the false invoice — the only act that supported the obstruction charge — happened entirely in Seattle. Article III's venue clause and the Sixth Amendment's vicinage requirement together do not let the government try a defendant in a state where no element of the charged offense occurred, no matter how convenient the prosecution. The obstruction conviction is vacated. The foreign-agent and wire-fraud convictions, which had different venue facts and were not before the Court, stand. Abouammo will not walk free. But the prosecution will need to decide whether to retry the obstruction count in Seattle, and the case is now a clean precedent that the venue clause has real teeth in a multi-district federal investigation.US Supreme Court overturns ex-Twitter employee's obstruction conviction in Saudi spy case | US News 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

The Mexico City duo performs songs from their latest album, WABI SABI.See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

In this episode of Let's Get Civical, Lizzie and Arden don't let technical trouble get in the way of discussing the infamous court case where Sonia Sotomayor saved baseball: Silverman v. MLB Player Relations Committee! Join them as they discuss the reason baseball players decided to strike, how it impacted the 1994 season, and why Sotomayor was the reason it got back on track! Follow us on socials: Let's Get Civical  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/letsgetcivical/Lizzie Stewart Instagram:  https://www.instagram.com/lizzie_the_rock_stewart/Arden Walentowski Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ardenjulianna/Love the show? Leave us a review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify!

En este episodio de Hombre de Barro, conversamos con Álvaro Sotomayor, quien comparte una historia marcada por la superación, la familia y la resiliencia.A través de esta conversación, Álvaro nos cuenta cómo enfrentó la separación de sus padres y el proceso de crecer junto a su madre y sus hermanos, aprendiendo desde muy joven el valor del esfuerzo, la unidad y la perseverancia en medio de las dificultades.Un episodio honesto e inspirador que nos recuerda cómo las pruebas de la vida también pueden formar carácter, propósito y fortaleza interior. ✨Acompáñanos en esta historia de lucha, crecimiento y esperanza.#HombreDeBarro r#HistoriasDeVida #Superación #Podcast

What if the most powerful immigration story you heard this week came from a picture book?Jacqueline Alcantara is a first-generation American and award-winning illustrator who has lived the experiences she draws. She's the author of Tíos and Primos — a children's book pulled from her own childhood of crossing language barriers to connect with family in Honduras — and the illustrator behind Just Shine, the #1 New York Times bestselling picture book written by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor about her mother's journey from Puerto Rico to the Bronx. Two books. Two immigrant stories. One illustrator who knows exactly what it feels like to stand in a room full of family and not quite have the words.Jackie joins host Lauren Clarke to talk about what picture books can do that policy debates simply can't. Plus, EIG partner Rob Taylor shares the latest news, including an update on the USCIS memo quietly reframing adjustment of status as discretionary — and what that means if you're currently in the green card process. Resource Links:http://jacquelinealcantara.com/tios-and-primos

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kfFOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nzTODAY's MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “SPLC Was PAYING the KKK — DOJ Drops Bombshell Indictment”YouTube: https://youtube.com/live/Xzya7MLiwdULocals: XXXThe Supreme Court just handed down DC v. R.W., reversing a DC Court of Appeals ruling that said a police officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop a driver who was slowly backing out of a parking lot at 2 AM — after two of his companions bolted on foot when a cop arrived. The Court ruled 7-2 that the officer's "totality of the circumstances" analysis was textbook Fourth Amendment law.The decision is straightforward, well-reasoned, and consistent with decades of precedent. What's not straightforward is Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's solo dissent — a performance so disconnected from the legal mainstream that even Justice Sotomayor refused to join it. Jackson accused her colleagues of "wordsmithing" the lower court, and argued that two people fleeing a parked car at 2 AM raise no suspicion whatsoever.I'll break down exactly what the Court held, why it's correct, and why Jackson's dissent reads like just another petulant diatribe. This is SCOTUS doing its job well — and one justice doing hers poorly.Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!Episode #1299.

  OA1262 - How are a car accident in California, a tax fraud case in Nevada, and two bus accidents in New York and Pennsylvania all connected to the Dobbs abortion case? Find out on this week's accidental too-deep dive into state sovereignty. Jenessa read a bunch of extra cases just to be thorough, and accidentally uncovered Kavanaugh planting the seeds that would grow into the “egregiously wrong” “rule” for ignoring stare decisis. But also mostly we'll talk about the weird world of state sovereignty, Clarence Thomas being obnoxious and ahistorical while accusing everyone else of being ahistorical, and Sotomayor getting some peace for a change to write a pleasant little 9-0 decision about some non-partisan procedural legal nerdery that benefits injured plaintiffs. Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979) Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, 587 U.S. 230 (2019) Listen to oral arguments on Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-1299; Timestamp for Kavanaugh dropping the “egregiously wrong” bomb: 50:47 Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. 83 (2020), Kavanaugh concurrence Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022) Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp., 607 U.S. ___ (2026) The “major questions doctrine” Kavanaugh inception timeline: U.S. Telecom Association v. F.C.C., 855 F.3d 381, 422-423 (D.C. Cir 2017), Kavanaugh dissent Repeal of the Clean Power Plan, 84 Fed. Reg. 32520, 32529 (proposed Jul. 8, 2019) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. pt. 60). West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, 597 U.S. 697 (2022) Additional sources: Episodes 1229 & 1230 for an in-depth explanation of immunities, including state and federal sovereign immunity: “The complicated web of immunities that makes accountability so difficult” Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793) U.S. Const. amend. XI Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890) Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!  

David Kerin is a former collegiate coach, USA Track and Field national team administrator, and performance consultant. David brings a refreshingly unconventional lens to some of the sport's most persistent challenges. His articles on '2D, 2.5, 3D Coaching' and 'Fixing the Right Problem' and most recently, developing a provisional patent for an innovative movement analysis system shows that he has never stopped asking the questions others overlook. Topics0:00 – Introduction — David's background as a collegiate coach, USA Track & Field national team development administrator, and current consultant working across multiple sports5:10 – Why Biomechanics? — What drew David deeper into the science of movement, why track and field's objectivity makes it the perfect laboratory, and the mentors who helped shape his thinking8:00 – Fixing the Right Problem — Why the flaw you see is never the root cause, and how to work backward through a performance sequence to find the real breakdown point13:00 – The High Jump Curve Problem — Why athletes drift instead of committing to the curve, the "lean is a byproduct" principle, and how poor curve mechanics have quietly reshaped the event17:00 – 2D Thinking vs. 3D Reality — Why coaches and scientists analyzing three-dimensional movement through a two-dimensional lens creates critical blind spots, and David's concept of "2.5D" as a practical stepping stone22:00 – The Third Dimension in Sprinting — Why foot orientation and lateral placement are being overlooked in sprint analysis, even at the elite level26:10 – US Athlete Development — The structural tensions in NCAA track and field, the cost of prioritizing recruitment over development, and how USA Track & Field's Talent Protection Program tried to bridge the post-collegiate gap38:25 – Whole, Part, and When to Intervene — When to isolate components vs. train the whole event, why stabilization matters more than early adaptation, and the danger of over-coaching innate movement patterns47:00 – Start Point Geometry in High Jump — The counterintuitive truth about why a tighter start point along the bar axis makes curve mechanics worse, not better51:27 – Dick Fosbury and a 50-Year Stagnation — Why Fosbury's 1968 technique still benchmarks elite collegiate high jumping today, and why high jumpers sustain career-ending injuries at a far greater rate than pole vaulters57:00 – Body Type, Force, and Career Longevity — What Jonathan Edwards, Mutaz Barshim, and Sotomayor reveal about the relationship between mass, force application, and how long a body can sustain elite performance1:03:12 – How to Reach David — David's open-source approach to mentorship and how coaches and athletes can get in touchContact David: dkerin@kerinperformanceinsights.comSupport the show

Mary and Andrew recognize it's been a doozy of a week. Starting with the continued fallout from the Supreme Court's Louisiana v. Callais decision, they focus on how much the 6-3 ruling has opened the floodgates for other states like Tennessee, South Carolina, Florida and Texas to pursue similar redistricting efforts. The Justices even allowed Alabama to move forward with re-drawing their congressional maps, despite prior determinations of intentional racial discrimination in the state. Mary and Andrew juxtapose this new landscape with last week's redistricting decision in Virginia, as Democrats submit an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court on that ruling. In addition, a Fulton County decision came in allowing the Justice Department to hold onto the 2020 ballots seized in the FBI's January raid. Plus, the co-hosts unpack the latest from Trump's retribution efforts as James Comey's criminal trial date is set. But in an uplifting end to a rough week, the pair highlight Senator Mark Kelly's argument before the DC Circuit in his case against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over his participation in a video reminding military members of their duty not to obey unlawful orders. This podcast is also available on YouTube at ms.now/mainjustice. Further reading: Here is the Just Security piece on Senator Mark Kelly's case: Lessons from the Pentagon's Empty Case Against Mark Kelly    Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Para el tercer episodio de la nueva temporada, El Sonido: Cancioneros viajó a la Ciudad de México para encontrarse con el dúo Sotomayor luego del lanzamiento de WABI SABI, su primer álbum en seis años. Después de un período en el que Paulina desarrolló su proyecto Pahua y Raúl exploró nuevas direcciones con Tonga Conga, el dúo regresa con un disco que cierra un ciclo abierto tras la pandemia y celebra diez años de trayectoria. En este episodio, Sotomayor abre su cancionero para compartir las canciones que marcaron su identidad sonora: desde el legado electrónico de Nortec Collective, hasta la revolución caribeña de Bomba Estéreo, y los ecos del house global de los noventa con Deep Dish y Everything But the Girl. El recorrido también nos lleva a una raíz más profunda con Aurita Castillo y su clásico “Chambacú”, expandiendo la idea de un sonido latinoamericano diverso, donde el Caribe y el Pacífico conviven. WABI SABI, compuesto en México y grabado en Puerto Rico junto a Eduardo Cabra, propone un viaje sonoro: un disco que comienza en México y termina en el Caribe. Puedes ver el video podcast en el canal de YouTube KEXP Podcasts, con subtítulos en inglés y español. Cancionero curado por Sotomayor: “Polaris” – Nortec Collective· “Pure Love” – Bomba Estéreo· “The Future of the Future” – Deep Dish & Everything But the Girl· “Chambacú” – Aurita Castillo y su conjunto· “La Peli” – Sotomayor Créditos: Host & Producer: Albina CabreraEditorial Editing: Dusty HenryAudio Mastering: Jackson LongVideographer: Omar Fernando Rios AlanizOriginal Podcast Music: Roberto Carlos Lange (Helado Negro) Support El Sonido: kexp.org/el-sonido In this episode, Sotomayor opens their cancionero to share the songs that shaped their sonic identity—from the electronic legacy of Nortec Collective, to the Caribbean-driven sound of Bomba Estéreo, and the global house echoes of the ’90s through Deep Dish and Everything But the Girl. The journey also reaches deeper roots with Aurita Castillo and her classic “Chambacú,” expanding the idea of a diverse Latin American sound shaped by both the Caribbean and the Pacific. WABI SABI, composed in Mexico and recorded in Puerto Rico alongside Eduardo Cabra, unfolds as a sonic journey, one that begins in Mexico and ends in the Caribbean. You can watch the full video podcast on the KEXP Podcasts YouTube channel, with subtitles available in English and Spanish. “Polaris” – Nortec Collective“Pure Love” – Bomba Estéreo“The Future of the Future” – Deep Dish & Everything But the Girl“Chambacú” – Aurita Castillo y su conjunto“La Peli” – Sotomayor Host & Producer: Albina CabreraEditorial Editing: Dusty HenryAudio Mastering: Jackson LongVideographer: Omar Fernando Rios AlanizOriginal Podcast Music: Roberto Carlos Lange (Helado Negro) Photo Credit: Feli Gutierres Support El Sonido: kexp.org/el-sonidoSupport the show: http://kexp.org/elsonidoSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Full show: https://kNOwBETTERHIPHOP.com Artists Played: Devin Morrison, conshus, The Commission Beer Chamber, AMiAM, SoyIsReal, Sotomayor, YoSoyMatt, The You In I, Little Barrie, Cain Culto, Xiuhtezcatl, Snow Tha Product, Ali Shaheed Muhammad, Loren Oden, Adrian Younge, Jazz Is Dead, Amos, TektheINTERN, Rubox, Mic Handz, Mic Geronimo, Tom Misch, Dysfunkshunal Familee, Grae Wulf, Napoleon Da Legend, Jazzy Soto, GAGLE, District Five, Saul Williams, ESHBEATS, The Stunt Man, OutKast, GOODie MOb, IMAKEMADBEATS

A deep dive into the latest Supreme Court news, a couple of unusual shadow docket rulings, and a cross-ideological merits decision that raises classic questions about federal power, preemption, and how much weight lower courts should give to context.We open with reporting on leaked internal Supreme Court memoranda related to the 2016 stay of the Clean Power Plan, including what the documents may reveal, why the leak itself is so unusual, and whether timing and incomplete records change the story. We also discuss Justice Sotomayor's public apology after comments about Justice Kavanaugh, and what that moment says about judicial professionalism and public exchange.From there, we turn to some shadow docket happenings: a one-line summary reversal in a Texas redistricting case and a Fourth Amendment summary reversal out of the D.C. courts. Finally, we move to the merits docket and consider Hencely v. Fluor Corporation (24-924), a case involving federal contractor preemption and a terrorist attack in Afghanistan, where the Court narrows a (possibly infamous) Scalia opinion.Key Topics[00:05:32] - NYT leak of Supreme Court memoranda on the Clean Power Plan stay[00:10:13] - Whether document leaks are better than source-based leaks[00:21:30] - Justice Sotomayor's remarks about Justice Kavanaugh and her apology[00:27:27] - Summary reversal in Abbott v. LULAC and Texas redistricting[00:35:18] - D.C. Fourth Amendment summary reversal and reasonable suspicion[00:47:04] - Hensley v. Fluor Corp.: military contractor liability and preemption[00:52:48] - Little v. Barreme, general law, and the limits of contractor immunity

Over the weekend, The New York Times revealed shocking new memos between Supreme Court justices showing how Chief Justice Roberts steamrolled his colleagues to use the emergency docket to overturn the Obama climate plan. This comes as the Roberts court has used the emergency docket to give President Trump dozens of victories just during his second term. Plus: Trump tries to push out Alito before Democrats take Senate control Justice Sotomayor issues a rare apology for comments she made towards Justice KavanaughThe Supreme Court has begun issuing $166 billion in tariff refunds (Though Trump is pressuring companies to not even apply for refunds they won in court) And Justice Thomas gets a little loose in remarks at UT Austin.

Sarah Isgur and David French push back against the New York Times ⁠reporting⁠ on the birth of the shadow docket, discuss Justice Sotomayor's apology after criticizing him in personal terms during a speech at the University of Kansas School of Law, and interview  Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt about ⁠McGirt v. Oklahoma⁠. The Agenda:–The birth of the shadow docket–Who leaked Dobbs?–Justice Sotomayor apologizes to Justice Kavanaugh–Justice Kagan's screaming tantrum–Justice Thomas's talk on the Declaration of Independence–We are the McGirt podcast Order Sarah's book here. Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Mollie Hemingway's explosive new book reveals that liberal Supreme Court justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor slow-walked their Dobbs dissent while conservative justices faced assassination threats — and sources say they're doing it again right now with a Voting Rights Act ruling that could flip 14 congressional seats before the midterms. Larry calls out Chief Justice John Roberts directly for enabling the politicization of the court and letting the liberal wing run the clock on a decision that's already been made. You can join AARP’s fight against fraud at https://action.aarp.org/fraudpledge SHOP OUR MERCH: https://store.townhallmedia.com/ BUY A LARRY MUG: https://store.townhallmedia.com/products/larry-mug Watch LARRY with Larry O'Connor LIVE — Monday-Thursday at 12PM Eastern on YouTube, Facebook, & Rumble! Find LARRY with Larry O'Connor wherever you get your podcasts! SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/7i8F7K4fqIDmqZSIHJNhMh?si=814ce2f8478944c0&nd=1&dlsi=e799ca22e81b456f APPLE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/larry/id1730596733 Become a Townhall VIP Member today and use promo code LARRY for 50% off: https://townhall.com/subscribe?tpcc=poddescription https://townhall.com/ https://rumble.com/c/c-5769468 https://www.facebook.com/townhallcom/ https://www.instagram.com/townhallmedia/ https://twitter.com/townhallcomBecome a Townhall VIP member with promo code "LARRY": https://townhall.com/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Melissa, Kate, and Leah break down an absolute boatload of beefs: Trump vs. Pope Leo, Sonia Sotomayor vs. Coach Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas vs. progressives, and Ketanji Brown Jackson vs. the shadow docket, before covering some of the week's other legal news, including the Harvard Crimson's reporting on conservative judges' ideological litmus tests for clerkships. Then, they break down the Court's opinion in Chevron v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, before previewing some upcoming oral arguments at One First Street, including the “crimmigration” case, Blanche v. Lau.Favorite things: Leah: RFK Jr. and the raccoon penis; Her talk with Steve Vladeck in DC on her upcoming paper, The Passive Vices, on Monday, April 20 at 12:45pm - RSVP here. Melissa: Lady Tremaine, Rachel Hochhauser; Lily Allen's West End Girl tour; Rumours, Fleetwood Mac  Kate: What I Want, MUNA; Playground, Richard Powers; Labor Dept. Investigates Texts Among Secretary's Family and Staff, Rebecca Davis O'Brien (NYT)  Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2026! 6/20/26 – New York City Learn more: http://crooked.com/eventsPreorder Melissa's book, The U.S. Constitution: A Comprehensive and Annotated Guide for the Modern ReaderPreorder a signed paperback of Leah's book, Lawless, here.Follow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

For the second week in a row, the 3WHH gang (minus one) were on the road, this time recording live in the corner of a hotel lobby before the annual meeting of the Philadelphia Society. The sound quality of this episode is . . . authentic. Yes, I'll go with that. John Yoo couldn't make the meeting, so we have a special guest, our old pal Glenn Ellmers. With John absent, we get our freak on about the Clean Air Act . . . actually we didn't do that. We did worse: We get down in the weeds of metaphysics, radical historicism, the theological-political problem (especially in the context of this week's feud between the President and the Pope), dishing on Laura Field's terrible book Furious Minds, contrasting Justice Sotomayor's jurisprudence of "feels" versus Justice Thomas's jurisprudence of principle—the principle of the Declaration of Independence. And finally, we take up the perennial question, what's the matter with kids today. And as such the exit music this week is "Kids," from moe:Kids will try to run you overKids will try to bring you downKids will never say they're sorryKids back then are older now

Robach and Holmes cover the latest news headlines and entertainment updates and give perspective on current events in their daily “Morning Run.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Robach and Holmes cover the latest news headlines and entertainment updates and give perspective on current events in their daily “Morning Run.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit claremontinstitute.substack.comIn this installment of our Trump v. Slaughter mini-series, Spencer and Ryan get to the heart of the Trump Administration's theory of executive power, and how it's derived from history and case law. Then they address the various counterarguments and lines of questioning from Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson, respectively. Each of the Court's three liberals reveals a different aspect of the Progressive judicial philosophy, and illuminates by contrast what the Trump Administration is trying to do. Next week: the other side gets its turn in the hot seat!

Robach and Holmes cover the latest news headlines and entertainment updates and give perspective on current events in their daily “Morning Run.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Robach and Holmes cover the latest news headlines and entertainment updates and give perspective on current events in their daily “Morning Run.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Shannon Bream reacts to the fallout from Justice Sonia Sotomayor's public apology after controversial remarks about Justice Brett Kavanaugh, noting that the Chief Justice may have intervened to avoid an escalating public dispute between justices. She also breaks down Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's Yale comments criticizing the Supreme Court's handling of emergency stays, explaining how the Court's interim docket functions and why it has become more active in recent years due to increased emergency litigation. The conversation then shifts to the Eric Swalwell controversy and how potential criminal allegations would be handled differently depending on state statutes of limitations, followed by broader discussion of congressional gridlock over funding battles between the House and Senate. The segment closes with speculation about a possible retirement of Justice Samuel Alito, with Bream noting factors such as his age, upcoming book release, and political timing concerns surrounding the Supreme Court balance. Hashtags: #ShannonBream #SupremeCourt #Sotomayor #KetanjiBrownJackson #EricSwalwell #Congress #GovernmentShutdown #SCOTUS #SamuelAlito #FoxNewsSunday #LegalNews #Politics

Sarah Isgur is one of the busiest people in legal media. She hosts the delightful Advisory Opinions podcast (on which I sometimes appear); serves as an editor of SCOTUSblog, the leading online outlet covering the Supreme Court; and appears regularly on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos. And now, as of yesterday, she's a first-time author.The thesis of Sarah's new book—Last Branch Standing: A Potentially Surprising, Occasionally Witty Journey Inside Today's Supreme Court—is deceptively simple: almost everything the media tells you about SCOTUS is wrong. The conventional 6-3 framing obscures far more than it reveals. And compared to Congress and the presidency, the Court is genuinely trying to do its job.In our wide-ranging conversation, we covered Sarah's unconventional path to legal media (she was inspired by Legally Blonde to apply to Harvard Law School, and was fired from the DOJ and CNN before reinventing herself at The Dispatch); her book's core argument, which will be controversial in some quarters; Justice Sotomayor's recent, pointed criticism of Justice Kavanaugh; and possible picks for the next Supreme Court justice and attorney general. Thanks to Sarah for joining me, and congratulations to her on the publication of Last Branch Standing—a must-read for anyone interested in the U.S. Supreme Court. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Sarah Isgur and David French revisit Stephen Colbert's favorite case, take a look at a rare biting word about Justice Brett Kavanaugh from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and dive into a circuit court extravaganza. –Sarah is on a book tour! –Sotomayor vs. Kavanaugh–Citizens United is not controversial–Is there a judicial pipeline?–The seals are ugly–Circuit Court Extravaganza: Bathtub gin, pronouns, and sparkling sports gambling Show Notes:–The case establishing corporate personhood–Home distilling ban struck down after 158 years–Seals of the Circuit Courts (and then some!)–Short Circuit's newsletter this week Order Sarah's book here. Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hour 2 centers on escalating geopolitical tension as U.S. operations tied to the Strait of Hormuz move forward following failed negotiations with Iran, driving oil spikes, market volatility, and speculation about broader military coordination. Discussion expands into strained relations with NATO allies and shifting U.S. foreign policy expectations, alongside criticism of Democratic figures pushing diplomacy-first approaches to Iran. The hour also features legal analysis with Hans von Spakovsky on White House construction litigation, Supreme Court case timing, and judicial tensions, plus commentary on public clashes within the court involving Sonia Sotomayor and Brett Kavanaugh. The closing segment, “In Other News,” shifts sharply into viral and cultural stories ranging from celebrity rehab updates to bizarre accidents, Gen Z entertainment trends, and social media behavior, blending global instability with lighter pop culture moments. Hashtags: #StraitOfHormuz #Iran #NATO #SupremeCourt #HansVonSpakovsky #Markets #InOtherNews #PopCulture #GenZ #Geopolitics

Hans von Spakovsky joins to discuss an appeals court reconsidering legal challenges to the White House ballroom project, arguing opponents likely lack standing and noting long-standing bipartisan demand for expanded state dinner space. He also previews upcoming U.S. Supreme Court rulings, including a fast-tracked case on ending Temporary Protected Status for migrants. The conversation closes with reaction to reported public criticism from Sonia Sotomayor toward Brett Kavanaugh, raising concerns about growing tension and breakdown of collegiality inside the court. Hashtags: #HansVonSpakovsky #SupremeCourt #WhiteHouseBallroom #Sotomayor #Kavanaugh #SCOTUS #LegalAnalysis #TPS #ImmigrationLaw

Hour 2 of A&G features... Workers of the world unite & American education Mailbag! Jack Armstrong checks in from Kansas! Military Analyst Mike Lyons talks to Joe Getty! Justice Sotomayor & our "digital body language" See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte says he sensed President Donald Trump's disappointment with European allies who were not helping at the start of the war with Iran, but he insists they are stepping up now, especially to safeguard the Strait of Hormuz, which is still effectively closed by Iran as they claim Israeli violations of the current ceasefire. General Rutte also says, 'Let me be clear: This alliance is not whistling past the graveyard as you would say in the United States'; U.S. House Democrats try to pass a War Powers Resolution to stop President Trump from waging war on Iran with Congressional authorization, but a Republican presiding over the brief House session does not recognize them to make the motion; IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva says the Iran war will mean the IMF will downgrade its forecast for the world economy; First Lady Melania Trump criticizes what she calls “lies linking me to the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein”, the late convicted sex offender; Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is asked by a University of Alabama Law School student about bridging political divides with other justices; Gov. Wes Moore (D-MD) takes part in Rev. Al Sharpton's National Action Network conference in New York City; NASA expresses confidence in the Artemis II moon mission capsule heat shield that will allow the crew of four to land back safely on Earth Friday night. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Photo courtesy National Indian Child Welfare Association The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Indian Child Welfare Act in 2023, according to reporting by SCOTUSblog, affirming the law's role in keeping Native children connected to their families and tribes. But nearly two years later, implementation challenges remain. Legal analysis from Cornell Law School says states are still working to fully carry out ICWA's requirements, including placement preferences and coordination with tribal governments. And according to the National Indian Child Welfare Association, tribal leaders say the law is critical to protecting Native children and preserving cultural identity, and are calling for stronger enforcement nationwide. D. John Sauer is sworn in by then-Attorney General Pam Bondi with President Donald Trump one year ago this week. In the U.S. Supreme Court showdown over the 14th Amendment last week, justices sharply questioned the Trump administration's lawyer for invoking Native American history to challenge the birthright citizenship of immigrants. KNBA's Rhonda McBride reports on why his argument faced resistance. In defending President Donald Trump's executive order against birthright citizenship, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer compared Indian tribes to foreign governments. He argued that the U.S. Constitution treats tribes as sovereign nations and that when the country was founded, tribal members and their children were not considered citizens, much like the children of foreign diplomats, a standard Sauer says should be applied to immigrants. Justice Sonia Sotomayor challenged Sauer's reasoning. “You're using some pretty obscure sources to get to this concept. The Indian Tribes were analogized to foreign diplomats. So what do we do with that?” Sauer replied, “I think with the Indian Tribes, we think that's a case that strongly supports us.” But Bob Anderson (Chippewa), an Indian Law Professor at Harvard, says that comparison does not hold. “The Indian law case just doesn't fit with anything that they're trying to do. And they were really trying to make it apply and I think they failed.” Bob Anderson took on the subsistence rights case of Katie John when he was an attorney for the Native American Rights Fund in 1985. (Photo: Rhonda McBride) Anderson says those doubts about Sauer's case appeared to cut across ideological lines. “It seemed to me that the conservative members of the court recognized that. I was surprised that they seemed to be so much in alignment with the opponents of the Trump administration.” Justice Neil Gorsuch, widely regarded as an expert on Indian Law, pressed Sauer on Native American citizenship. “Do you think they’re birthright citizens?” Sauer responded, “No. I think the clear understanding that everybody agrees in the congressional debates is that the children of tribal Indians are not birthright citizens.” Justice Gorsuch eventually got Sauer to agree that by today's standards, tribal Indians are birthright citizens, but then Sauer walked that back. “I’m not sure. I have to think through that.” Based on Sauer's arguments, Anderson says Native Americans should not worry about their citizenship status. “No, there’s no way that this case could affect the citizenship of Indian tribes, because Congress passed the separate law in 1924, automatically making all tribal members in the United States citizens as well as their children.” The 1924 law passed decades after the 14th Amendment – to close the loophole that had left Native Americans without automatic citizenship. The law, however, did not affect their tribal government-to-government status under the Constitution. AIHEC CEO Ahniwake Rose. (Courtesy Ahniwake Rose / LinkedIn) Leaders from tribal colleges and universities are calling on Congress to increase federal funding, saying current support falls short of what is needed. The American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) says tribal colleges receive significantly less funding per student than other public institutions, despite serving communities with high financial need. AIHEC President and CEO Ahniwake Rose says, “A flourishing tribal higher education sector strengthens the entire nation.” Leaders are urging lawmakers to fully fund tribal college programs, saying the federal government has a trust responsibility to support Native education. Get National Native News delivered to your inbox daily. Sign up for our daily newsletter today. Download our NV1 Android or iOs App for breaking news alerts. Check out today’s Native America Calling episode Tuesday, April 7, 2026 – Alutiiq Museum tells tale of Alaska Native children sent to Carlisle Indian Boarding School

It's Friday, April 3rd, A.D. 2026. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus Pakistani Christian legislator's bill would end forced conversions to Islam On March 31st, a Pakistani Christian lawmaker introduced a bill to criminalize forced religious conversions to Islam with penalties of up to five years in prison, reports Morning Star News. Falbous Christopher submitted the Punjab Protection of the Rights of Religious Minorities Bill 2026 in a renewed attempt to address a long-standing human rights challenge affecting Pakistan's religious minorities, particularly Christian and Hindu women and underage girls. No doubt his bill was inspired by stories like Maira Shahbaz, a 14-year-old Christian girl, who was abducted and forced to convert to Islam and marry a Muslim man in April 2020. Micah 6:8 urges us “to act justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.”  Abduction of girls, forced conversion to Islam, and forced marriages are out of keeping with all three. Trump: We'll be free from Iranian wickedness and nuclear blackmail On Wednesday night, President Donald Trump addressed the nation with an update on “Operation Epic Fury,” the United States war with Iran. TRUMP: “We are on track to complete all of America's military objectives shortly. We're going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We're going to bring them back to the stone ages, where they belong. In the meantime, discussions are ongoing. “Regime change was not our goal. We never said regime change. But regime change has occurred because of all of their original leaders' deaths. They're all dead. The new group is less radical and much more reasonable. “Yet, if during this period of time, no deal is made, we have our eyes on key targets. If there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric-generating plants very hard and probably simultaneously. We have not hit their oil, even though that's the easiest target of all, because it would not give them even a small chance of survival or rebuilding. “They have no anti-aircraft equipment. Their radar is 100% annihilated. We are unstoppable as a military force. The nuclear sites that we obliterated with the B2 Bombers have been hit so hard that it would take months to get near the nuclear dust. “We have all the cards. They have none. They were the bully of the Middle East, but they're the bully no longer. Tonight, every American can look forward to a day when we are finally free from the wickedness of Iranian aggression and the specter of nuclear blackmail.” War Secretary Hegseth quoted from imprecatory Psalms On March 25th, War Secretary Pete Hegseth quoted from the imprecatory Psalms and invoked divine wrath against the enemies of the United States during introductory remarks he made at the first monthly prayer service at the Pentagon since the outbreak of the war in Iran, reported The Christian Post. Hegseth read from a military chaplain's prayer used ahead of the January 3rd, 2026 operation to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro which he implied was equally relevant in the battle against the leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Listen. HEGSETH: "Almighty God, who trains our hands for war and our fingers for battle, You who stirred the nations from the north against Babylon of old, making her land a desolation where none dwell: behold now the wicked, who rise against Your justice and the peace of the righteous. "Snap the rod of the oppressor, frustrate the wicked plans of the ungodly. By the blast of Your anger, let the evil perish. Let their bulls go down to slaughter, for their day has come; the time of their punishment. Pour out Your wrath upon those who plot vain things and blow them away like chaff before the wind." Psalm 17:13 says, “Rise up, LORD, confront them, bring them down; with your sword. Rescue me from the wicked.” Constitution expert predicts Supreme Court will affirm birthright citizenship Appearing on The Human Events podcast, Mike Davis, the founder of the Article III Project, predicted that the U.S. Supreme Court appears likely to affirm “birthright citizenship” for illegal aliens.  Listen. DAVIS: “I worry this is a 7-2 case.” JACK PROSOBIEC: “Wow!” DAVIS: “I worry that the only two justices who will have the courage to follow the law here are Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Sam Alito. I worry that the Chief Justice [John Roberts] and the three Trump justices [Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett] will join the three leftists [Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson]  who will always vote against President Trump. “The law is so crystal clear here. We the people, the sovereign citizens of America, get to decide who comes, who goes, get to decide who our fellow citizens are. We certainly did not give that away after the Civil War. “The 14th Amendment, the birthright citizenship clause, was to correct an egregious wrong with the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision that held that the freed slaves are not citizens. We fixed that with the 14th Amendment. There is a Supreme Court case that has extended that to lawful and permanent residents of the United States. “There is no way that the proponents of the 14th Amendment ever agreed to give birthright citizenship to illegal aliens!” If the Supreme Court does affirm birthright citizenship for illegal aliens it would be a major blow to both President Donald Trump's agenda and the Constitution. President Trump, first president to hear oral arguments, walked out Remarkably, President Trump heard the oral arguments in that birthright citizenship case in person, becoming the first sitting U.S. president ever to do so. At 11:20am on Wednesday, President Trump expressed his fury in a one-sentence post on Truth Social. “We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow “Birthright” Citizenship!” The Western Journal reported that on the day he took office in January 2025, President Trump issued an executive order directing that only children born to parents “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States are citizens, quoting from the Fourteenth Amendment. NASA launches Artemis II to travel around the moon And finally, on Wednesday night at 6:35pm Eastern, NASA launched the long-awaited Artemis II mission from Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida. Listen. ANNOUNCER 1: “Here we go. 10-9-8-7 RS 25 engines lift 4-3-2-1. Booster ignition and lift off. The crew of Artemis II now bound for the moon. Humanity's next great voyage begins.” ANNOUNCER 2: “Good roll pitch.” ANNOUNCER 3: “Houston now controlling the flight of Integrity on the Artemis II mission around the moon.” The crew — NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Christina Koch and Victor Glover, as well as Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen — were the first people to launch toward the moon since the Apollo 17 mission in 1972, more than 50 years ago, reported NBC News. However, they will not land on the lunar surface. Rather, the 10-day mission is designed as a step toward a landing in 2028, building a base on the moon, and eventually, toward NASA's goal of establishing a long-term presence on the moon. Living on the moon will involve inhabiting shielded, pressurized modules or underground lava tubes to protect against radiation, extreme temperatures, and toxic lunar dust. Among other issues for those who colonize the moon: How would they get power? How would they breathe? and How would they get food? Watch a live stream from the cockpit of Artemis II through a special link in our transcript today at www.TheWorldview.com. Close And that's The Worldview on this Friday, April 3rd, in the year of our Lord 2026. Follow us on X or subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com.  Plus, you can get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.